politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s Ashcroft phone poll sees LAB move to 6%
The latest Lord Ashcroft phone poll has just been published and the numbers have a more familiar ring to them. UKIP is down from the dizzy heights of 19% that they chalked up in the immediate aftermath of their EP14 success. The LDs are up from the miserable 6% they were on at the end of May.
Comments
-
First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?0 -
First !
(Edit : Nearly)0 -
I think there's a word missing in the headline!!0
-
That's a poor poll for the Blues, especially with UKIP showing further signs of decline.0
-
There's also fascinating focus group research done by Ashcroft as well:
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/06/lord-ashcroft-labour-lead-by-six-points-in-my-latest-national-poll.html
Words associated with parties:
Tories - out of touch, sensible, aggressive
Labour - weak, confused, dull
Ukip - dangerous, hope0 -
Kippers smoked?TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?0 -
Putting Ashcroft's latest [unwashed] chicken entrails into my computational black box, and I can present an update to...
OblitusSumMe's Four to Forgo Forgetting
Kingswood is still forecast as a Labour GAIN.
Pendle is now forecast as a Labour GAIN.
Vale of Glamorgan is now forecast as a Labour GAIN.
Harlow is now forecast as a Labour GAIN.
The Lib Dems come fifth in Kingswood and Vale of Glamorgan.
Weird Ed becomes PM of a majority Labour government.0 -
Thanks Mike
FPT - another poll that shows Labour on the rise. Hmm
0 -
They'll be back for breakfast.ToryJim said:
Kippers smoked?TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?0 -
Does anyone have any idea why the focus group chose Simon Cowell to represent the Kippers???0
-
We would clearly expect UKIP to fall back a little bit as their election triumph recedes into the past.TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?
However, they subsided only gently last year, and I would expect them to receive a boost leading up to the General Election. One of the big unknowns about next year is what UKIP will achieve, so it's bound to interest the papers and generate a healthy level of coverage.0 -
It explains why quite clearly in the link.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/06/lord-ashcroft-labour-lead-by-six-points-in-my-latest-national-poll.html0 -
Depends on OFCOM, if they get categorised as a major party for the General ElectionOblitusSumMe said:
We would clearly expect UKIP to fall back a little bit as their election triumph recedes into the past.TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?
However, they subsided only gently last year, and I would expect them to receive a boost leading up to the General Election. One of the big unknowns about next year is what UKIP will achieve, so it's bound to interest the papers and generate a healthy level of coverage.0 -
@JohnRentoul: Important analysis by Peter Kellner suggests Lib Dem collapse removes most of the pro-Lab bias in electoral system http://t.co/E6UXeq8GrR0
-
If true, that's excellent news for our democracy, and ironically [or is that paradoxically?] something the LibDems should be cheering. A brave and noble sacrifice...Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Important analysis by Peter Kellner suggests Lib Dem collapse removes most of the pro-Lab bias in electoral system http://t.co/E6UXeq8GrR
0 -
I'm sceptical of aspects of that analysis. Peter Kellner suggests that Labour supporters returning to the Lib Dems would result in fewer Labour seats. It seems more likely to me that it would result in fewer Conservative seats.Anorak said:
If true, that's excellent news for our democracy, and ironically [or is that paradoxically?] something the LibDems should be cheering. A brave and noble sacrifice...Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Important analysis by Peter Kellner suggests Lib Dem collapse removes most of the pro-Lab bias in electoral system http://t.co/E6UXeq8GrR
0 -
That matters for the BBC and other broadcasters, but the newspapers aren't covered by OFCOM rules, and the broadcast media tend to follow the newspaper agenda.TheScreamingEagles said:
Depends on OFCOM, if they get categorised as a major party for the General ElectionOblitusSumMe said:
We would clearly expect UKIP to fall back a little bit as their election triumph recedes into the past.TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?
However, they subsided only gently last year, and I would expect them to receive a boost leading up to the General Election. One of the big unknowns about next year is what UKIP will achieve, so it's bound to interest the papers and generate a healthy level of coverage.0 -
Basically he says that, if he makes lots of assumptions and puts his fingers in the air, and plucks out a few adjustments at random, he gets different answers from UNS.Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Important analysis by Peter Kellner suggests Lib Dem collapse removes most of the pro-Lab bias in electoral system http://t.co/E6UXeq8GrR
I don't think we should take it too seriously, except that I think he is right in what he says in the last paragraph:
But if my adjustments should be treated with caution, so should figures generated by uniform swing calculators. In particular, Labour would be unwise to assume that they can win more seats than the Tories with fewer votes. To be certain of leading the largest contingent of MPs in the next parliament, Ed Miliband needs his party to win the popular vote.
0 -
Germany 2.18
Portugal 3.75
Draw 3.6
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/football/market?id=1.112173628&exp=e0 -
Agree Mr Nabavi.0
-
0
-
'the blues are up the red team is up a bit more.'
Arf - Tis this kind of detailed 'technical analysis' that makes PB, second to none. ; )0 -
The BBC actually have their own BBC trust guidelines separate from OFCOM, although they run on very similar criteria, so their's a minute but non-zero chance they classify UKIP differnetly.OblitusSumMe said:
That matters for the BBC and other broadcasters, but the newspapers aren't covered by OFCOM rules, and the broadcast media tend to follow the newspaper agenda.TheScreamingEagles said:
Depends on OFCOM, if they get categorised as a major party for the General ElectionOblitusSumMe said:
We would clearly expect UKIP to fall back a little bit as their election triumph recedes into the past.TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?
However, they subsided only gently last year, and I would expect them to receive a boost leading up to the General Election. One of the big unknowns about next year is what UKIP will achieve, so it's bound to interest the papers and generate a healthy level of coverage.0 -
From the polls we've had so far today it should be safe to assume Labour will have their lead back with ICM.0
-
Kippers De Lux will appear in all over the country quite soon. Will be appearing at the Goose Fair so I hear.Anorak said:
They'll be back for breakfast.ToryJim said:
Kippers smoked?TheScreamingEagles said:First - Interesting that both this and today's populus sees Con + Lab up and UKIP falling.
Did we hit peak Kipper last month?0 -
The one big difference that stands out from this poll compared to the previous one is that 33% of 2010 Lib Dem voters said they would vote Labour, compared with 14% last week. The balance is made up by fewer 2010 Lib Dems telling Ashcroft that they will vote Tory, UKIP, or don't know.
Maybe Mr Smithson is right and it is these voters who will determine the next election. If that is the case then the sample size for this poll is a mere 92 Lib Dem 2010 voters in the unweighted base, giving a minimum margin of error of +/-10%
I suppose the problem with trying to form a >1000 sample poll of only 2010 Lib Dems is that you would struggle to work out the other demographic weightings to apply, but if you could manage to do that it would be incredibly useful.0 -
If the exit poll shows Con 34, Labour 33 there's going to be lots of fun from angry people demanding to know why we got the wrong Prime Minister.0
-
With small sub-sets like this you've got to look at data over a lot of polls and here the message is very clear. 2010 LDs have switched much more to LAB than other parties. This, and First Past The Post, is what keeps LAB hopes alive.OblitusSumMe said:The one big difference that stands out from this poll compared to the previous one is that 33% of 2010 Lib Dem voters said they would vote Labour, compared with 14% last week. The balance is made up by fewer 2010 Lib Dems telling Ashcroft that they will vote Tory, UKIP, or don't know.
Maybe Mr Smithson is right and it is these voters who will determine the next election. If that is the case then the sample size for this poll is a mere 92 Lib Dem 2010 voters in the unweighted base, giving a minimum margin of error of +/-10%
I suppose the problem with trying to form a >1000 sample poll of only 2010 Lib Dems is that you would struggle to work out the other demographic weightings to apply, but if you could manage to do that it would be incredibly useful.
0 -
Portugal are very very lucky there0
-
Labour's "definite" voters from 2010 Labour votes are pretty poor so far as I can work out for a main opposition party.MikeSmithson said:
With small sub-sets like this you've got to look at data over a lot of polls and here the message is very clear. 2010 LDs have switched much more to LAB than other parties. This, and First Past The Post, is what keeps LAB hopes alive.OblitusSumMe said:The one big difference that stands out from this poll compared to the previous one is that 33% of 2010 Lib Dem voters said they would vote Labour, compared with 14% last week. The balance is made up by fewer 2010 Lib Dems telling Ashcroft that they will vote Tory, UKIP, or don't know.
Maybe Mr Smithson is right and it is these voters who will determine the next election. If that is the case then the sample size for this poll is a mere 92 Lib Dem 2010 voters in the unweighted base, giving a minimum margin of error of +/-10%
I suppose the problem with trying to form a >1000 sample poll of only 2010 Lib Dems is that you would struggle to work out the other demographic weightings to apply, but if you could manage to do that it would be incredibly useful.
The topline 10/10 to vote for Lib Dems in the Populus is the other figure that struck me as I went through the tables. 57%... dire for a party on such a low score.0 -
FPT
Depends. There's the range they ought to be (but if they hit that range the banks collapse) and then there's the excessive but not immediately catastrophic range which we've had for a while and then there's the nudging into catastrophic range we've been getting into recently (partly as a result of help to buy and other alternative sources of mortgage finance that have come along since the TBTF trading casinos stopped being banks and partly as a result of BRIC's oligarchs cash buying).BobaFett said:Moving away from this tiresome topic, house prices now appear to be falling. I can't decide whether this is bad news for the government or otherwise. Thoughts?
So prices falling back into the not immediately catastrophic range is good news for the government, prices falling lower than that would be bad for them, prices rising above that range would be bad for them as well.
0 -
The fact the Tories campaigned so heavily for the status quo during the AV referendum and lost boundary reform should help soften the blow.Pulpstar said:If the exit poll shows Con 34, Labour 33 there's going to be lots of fun from angry people demanding to know why we got the wrong Prime Minister.
0 -
No question about that, but because the sub-sample is so small it takes a large number of polls until you have enough data to conclude whether the behaviour of this sub-sample has changed.MikeSmithson said:
With small sub-sets like this you've got to look at data over a lot of polls and here the message is very clear. 2010 LDs have switched much more to LAB than other parties. This, and First Past The Post, is what keeps LAB hopes alive.OblitusSumMe said:The one big difference that stands out from this poll compared to the previous one is that 33% of 2010 Lib Dem voters said they would vote Labour, compared with 14% last week. The balance is made up by fewer 2010 Lib Dems telling Ashcroft that they will vote Tory, UKIP, or don't know.
Maybe Mr Smithson is right and it is these voters who will determine the next election. If that is the case then the sample size for this poll is a mere 92 Lib Dem 2010 voters in the unweighted base, giving a minimum margin of error of +/-10%
I suppose the problem with trying to form a >1000 sample poll of only 2010 Lib Dems is that you would struggle to work out the other demographic weightings to apply, but if you could manage to do that it would be incredibly useful.
If it does change, it will be profitable to identify that change as early as possible.
This sort of differential behaviour of different subgroups will tend to make the polls more variable, because you're effectively polling several discrete populations rather than one homogenous population.0 -
Did we miss this ICM poll on the economy and related issues?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/16/insecure-britain-poll-economic-recovery-immigration
(No voting intention as far as I can see).
The thing which jumps out is the incoherence of the results. For example, although it's not quite clear what the options offered were, the results for 'What lies behind economic anxiety' are just bizarre.0 -
Analysing the 2005 election, Electoral Calculus concluded that:antifrank said:
I'm sceptical of aspects of that analysis. Peter Kellner suggests that Labour supporters returning to the Lib Dems would result in fewer Labour seats. It seems more likely to me that it would result in fewer Conservative seats.Anorak said:
If true, that's excellent news for our democracy, and ironically [or is that paradoxically?] something the LibDems should be cheering. A brave and noble sacrifice...Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Important analysis by Peter Kellner suggests Lib Dem collapse removes most of the pro-Lab bias in electoral system http://t.co/E6UXeq8GrR
Tactical voting by Labour supporters cost the Conservatives 10 seats.
Tactical voting by LD supporters cost the Conservatives 16 seats.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/conlabgap.html
If Labour supporters are no longer voting LD then that could be a 10 seat gain for the Conservatives.0 -
2-0 Germany.0
-
Red Card - Pepe.0
-
-
Red card!0
-
Hare kare by Portugal - how professional footballers come to headbutt an opponent on the field of play is beyond me.0
-
Tony Blair innit ?BobaFett said:Hare kare by Portugal - how professional footballers come to headbutt an opponent on the field of play is beyond me.
0 -
Isn't it Boris Johnson's special move?Alanbrooke said:
Tony Blair innit ?BobaFett said:Hare kare by Portugal - how professional footballers come to headbutt an opponent on the field of play is beyond me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOivzoRc0I80 -
3-0. Germany.0
-
I knew I'd catch a Blairite :-)Jonathan said:
Isn't it Boris Johnson's special move?Alanbrooke said:
Tony Blair innit ?BobaFett said:Hare kare by Portugal - how professional footballers come to headbutt an opponent on the field of play is beyond me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOivzoRc0I8
3-0 now0 -
Didn't think Portugal would be this bad. Nightmare start for the Iberian teams.0
-
Hmm didn't expect such a one sided game, and certainly Portugal imploding wasn't on the script.0
-
Will the Germans score many goals ?
Nein !
0 -
You can still get 5 on England with Betfair:
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/market?id=1.114094778&exp=e0 -
Good evening, everyone.
Glad the Germans are putting the Portuguese to the sword.0 -
I think the portuguese are putting themselves to the sword.Morris_Dancer said:Good evening, everyone.
Glad the Germans are putting the Portuguese to the sword.0 -
Apologies for anyone who followed me in backing Portugal to win today.
To recover my losses, I've backed Germany to win 5nil and 6 nil at 8/1 and 14/1 respectively.0 -
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/16/how-lib-dem-prospects-affect-arithmetic-ve-day/
Waiting with interest for Mike's comments on this. May be it is not a "truth universally acknowledged" that the Tories need a 4 pt lead to get equal with labour afterall0 -
Right so Adrian Chiles has just spent all the time banging on about one incident and going spare about it. Good grief.0
-
Okay I'll give those a go.TheScreamingEagles said:Apologies for anyone who followed me in backing Portugal to win today.
To recover my losses, I've backed Germany to win 5nil and 6 nil at 8/1 and 14/1 respectively.0 -
Talking of the Germans putting things to the sword, the telegraph reports Juncker is getting the top EU job, and very soon.
Massive humiliation for Cameron if that's the case.0 -
Does it allow Cam to say - EU isn't listening - def need a referendum - I may not support staying in unless they shape up ?taffys said:Talking of the Germans putting things to the sword, the telegraph reports Juncker is getting the top EU job, and very soon.
Massive humiliation for Cameron if that's the case.0 -
I'm surprised you can still get 6 with Betfair for Germany scoring 6+ goals.0
-
Can anyone else understand a word Cannavaro is saying, I really can't follow him at all.0
-
Kippers gutted.0
-
0
-
199-7 and everyone is watching the Germans beat up the Portuguese.
What happened to the Tebbit test?0 -
Test match boiling up at last 7 down0
-
If England win at Lords and Germany score 6+ it'll be quite a profitable evening for me.0
-
If only the ECB/TCCB hadn't sold the rights to Sky...0
-
Eheu Stodgiostodge said:
Absurd comment as usual.TGOHF said:
Decline of the country under Labour 1997-2010.
If the cricket was on mainstream television and the World Cup was on Sky, it would be slightly different.
Blame the Conservative Governments of 1979 to 1997. Now that's an absurd comment.
Soon you will be arguing for a Lib Dem Councillor on the Test Match commentary team.
0 -
"It's my human right to have an affordable house, faiw ewectrwicity pwices and faiwness in test match cwicket tv coverage with 50% female commentators "
0 -
201-8.
Lancastrian swing not Lib Dem spin.0 -
Cricket is dull isn't it...0
-
Not at allScrapheap_as_was said:Cricket is dull isn't it...
0 -
I like the way we had to put up with about 2 days of boring play to get this.Scrapheap_as_was said:Cricket is dull isn't it...
0 -
Come on England. I took the 5-1 available just recently0
-
Aim
at
the
stumps0 -
To be fair, having listened to the ranting of Adrian Chiles, I'd even put up with a Conservative Councillor on the ITV World Cup team.AveryLP said:Eheu Stodgio
Soon you will be arguing for a Lib Dem Councillor on the Test Match commentary team.
Can we grind out an unlikely win at Lords or is that too unlikely ?
0 -
Turn over to the cricket.Scrapheap_as_was said:Aim
at
the
stumps
The Germans don't need your advice.
0 -
12 balls left - close but no cigar do we think?0
-
Quite. While right and proper in itself, it should be borne in mind that this sort of prosecution is in any case happening in Scotland routinely - for instance there have been convictions for football-related abuse. So this is a bit of a spin by the BBC, not least because the content is minimal - all that the story actually says is someone - perhaps a third party, perhaps a Better Tgether campaign member - made a complaint to the polis; and that quite separately the prosecution service has made the obvious generic statement.dr_spyn said:first they came for the cyber nats.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27877694
It can be seen as part of what is obviously a concerted 'anti-cybernat' campaign by all the unionists, linked to their orchestrated blaming of the indy types for causing resentment and division - itself a big joke given the entire rationale of the No campaign's Project Fear. The problem is that a 'cybernat' is by definition anyone who disagrees with them and says so on the net because they aren't being allowed to do so in the same media and don't want to pay for the privilege (TV licence, newspaper price, etc.). Apart from this being very dodgy democracy in principle (with huge implications for sites such as PB), and giving the relevant websites plenty of publicity, it will, I hope, prompt an equally severe look at those who dished out lots more, and worse, from the unionist side - including, in great contrast to the affair of Ms Rowling, serving politicians and newspaper journalists and their editors (e.g. publishing what came very close to incitement against pro-indy campaigners, including NAMES and [edit: almost] ADDRESSES).
0 -
Odds must be on a draw but there is still more hope for England at Lords than than in Belo Horizonte or wherever.stodge said:
To be fair, having listened to the ranting of Adrian Chiles, I'd even put up with a Conservative Councillor on the ITV World Cup team.AveryLP said:Eheu Stodgio
Soon you will be arguing for a Lib Dem Councillor on the Test Match commentary team.
Can we grind out an unlikely win at Lords or is that too unlikely ?
0 -
No doubt about it televised cricket belongs on the BBC.What on earth is the point of having an Establishment if it does not represent the supremacy of cricket to all other sports in the nation's TV broadcasts?I refuse to have Murdoch in the house.0
-
Well, if we replaced the whole World Cup panel with a political panel, who would it be ? Lord Mandelson has, I believe, knowledge of things Brazilian - there must be some Conservative who would like to spend a couple of weeks on Copacabana Beach though the modern young Tory is such a soulless, humourless specimen.
As for a Lib Dem, it could only be Lembit.
0 -
Can I send you a PM - had a quick question about JISAs...Scrapheap_as_was said:Cricket is dull isn't it...
0 -
4-00
-
Not needed
0 -
Yes yes yes yes yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!0
-
201-9
5 balls to go.
Now Broad, save one for Morley and Outwood.0
