politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB doing better against the Tories in key marginals than i

But isn't it within the margin of error?

TheScreamingEagles said:

But isn't it within the margin of error?

No.

Or yes if you think the true picture is decent for Ed, which is in itself obviously very good for Labour.

To my mind it reinforces something along the lines of Lab 37 Con 33.5 UKIP 14 LD 8

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Dave needs to find someway of co-opting that UKIP vote.

If (and it's a big if) that UKIP vote drifts to the tories in the run-up to the GE, then those seats look a whole lot more holdable.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Hmm, not sure that Mike is right. This looks entirely consistent with national polling, with the possible exception of Southampton Itchen.

Also, do we actually know that the 'local voting intention' question is a better predictor of the final result than the standard question? It seems to be an article of faith that it should be, but has anyone actually tested the hypothesis?

I would cautiously say yes-ish. I can't remember the details of the research, but a number of pollsters go to a local voting intention question (I believe ICM do) saying that it works better.

And yet, overall in these seats, people prefer DC to EM by about 58-32. Food for thought.

I am sure it is me but the swings here do not look significantly out of line with what the current polling is telling us (on average, not last night's Yougov obviously).

The last ICM had a 7% Labour lead. Possibly an outlier but that is a 7% swing from the last election. Unless I am getting this wrong only Plymouth is showing a larger swing than that and then only marginally. On a more normal Labour lead of 5% a few more of these seats would be in line with what the polling is telling us but several would not.

The tories have a long way to go. They need to get a lead and then get that lead back to something like they had when they won these seats in the first place. Well, that's a shocker.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Avery will be most disappointed if it comes off!

O/T but on a day on which we read of the awful death of a US journalist it is worth pondering on these words from the Archbishop of Mosul:-

"Our sufferings today are the prelude of those you, Europeans and Western Christians, will also suffer in the near future," says Amel Nona, 47, Chaldean archbishop of Mosul exiled in Erbil. The message is unequivocal: the only way to end the Christian exodus from the places that witnessed its origins in the pre-Islamic age is to respond to violence with violence, to force with force. Nona is a wounded, pain-stricken man, but not resigned. "I lost my diocese. The physical setting of my apostolate has been occupied by Islamic radicals who want us converted or dead. But my community is still alive." He is very glad to meet Western media. "Please, try to understand us," he exclaims. "Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider again our reality in the Middle East, because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles. You think all men are equal," Archbishop Amel Nona continues, "but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values. If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your home."

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Is this an Old Trafford draw type tip?

TheScreamingEagles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Seldom wrong Shadsy? Cant be a bet then

Clearly you have no idea of what the word Seldom means.

His heart is Itchen4Rowena isn't it?

I should have trademarked that campaign slogan...

MikeSmithson said:

CopperSulphate said:

Looks like we're going to have to put with with PM Ed for five years.

That should see my time out. Born under LAB in 1946 - died under LAB in ....

Oh don't say that!

Unless youre suggesting Lab will rule for a a looong time

Neil said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Seldom wrong Shadsy? Cant be a bet then

Clearly you have no idea of what the word Seldom means.

His heart is Itchen4Rowena isn't it?

I should have trademarked that campaign slogan...

You should have.

Cyclefree said:

O/T but on a day on which we read of the awful death of a US journalist it is worth pondering on these words from the Archbishop of Mosul:-

"Our sufferings today are the prelude of those you, Europeans and Western Christians, will also suffer in the near future," says Amel Nona, 47, Chaldean archbishop of Mosul exiled in Erbil. The message is unequivocal: the only way to end the Christian exodus from the places that witnessed its origins in the pre-Islamic age is to respond to violence with violence, to force with force. Nona is a wounded, pain-stricken man, but not resigned. "I lost my diocese. The physical setting of my apostolate has been occupied by Islamic radicals who want us converted or dead. But my community is still alive." He is very glad to meet Western media. "Please, try to understand us," he exclaims. "Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider again our reality in the Middle East, because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles. You think all men are equal," Archbishop Amel Nona continues, "but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values. If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your home."

Sounds true enough.

The irony will be when ISIS start bombing/beheading whatever they are going to do in the UK, it will probably be in London, where the people who are most sympathetic to them live

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Seldom wrong Shadsy? Cant be a bet then

Clearly you have no idea of what the word Seldom means.

Oh clearly!

You think laying 16/1 about something which is now 5/2 doesn't equal being wrong... I could say you clearly have no idea about the nuances of betting

duc*nt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt

*edited to avoid setting off the spam trap

Now here's a possibly interesting little detail in the poll.

Looking at the four-Labour held seats which were previously polled in May, here are the changes in the Labour lead (local voting intention question) since then:

Birmingham Edgbaston +8
Hampstead & Kilburn +6
Bolton West 0
Southampton Itchen -8

And here is the change in the net economic optimism 'for me and my family' (i.e. Well - Badly):

Birmingham Edgbaston -13
Hampstead & Kilburn -5
Bolton West +7
Southampton Itchen +12

Now, it's only four data points, and they are subject to considerable random error, and we might be talking about difference in the samples rather than differences in the constituencies, but does this perhaps give a clue that the economic outlook does indeed have an effect on VI?

Edit: Actually it is also consistent with the reverse hypothesis, which is that voting intention affects economic optimism.

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Seldom wrong Shadsy? Cant be a bet then

Clearly you have no idea of what the word Seldom means.

Oh clearly!

You think laying 16/1 about something which is now 5/2 doesn't equal being wrong... I could say you clearly have no idea about the nuances of betting

duc*nt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt

*edited to avoid setting off the spam trap

Whatever, I don't do Latin

In any case, scanning oddschecker to catch out a bookie that hasn't updated their markets the instant a poll comes out is hardly shrewd, and if you personally know the guy that makes the odds its pretty low tbh

CopperSulphate said:

Looks like we're going to have to put with with PM Ed for five years.

Forty weeks is a very long time in politics.

Wheeler lost his seat. Osamor is the newcomer. The other 5 were incumbent re-elected. All Grassroots Alliance candidates were ahead of Labour First/Progress candidates apart from Reeves.

Neil said:

isam said:

The irony will be when ISIS start bombing/beheading whatever they are going to do in the UK, it will probably be in London, where the people who are most sympathetic to them live

The people who are most sympathetic to ISIS have left London and are fighting for them in Syria and Iraq! Obviously they are a tiny, tiny minority of Londoners. The vast majority of Londoners abhor their actions.

Who said any different?

These boys don't seem to have the courage of their convictions.. just want to bash up London Jews

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/07/flag-isis-jihadi-islamic-state-flown-poplar-east-london?CMP=twt_fd

When Gordon Brown pulled out of the election that never was in Sept 2007, he reportedly did so after seeing that Labour were doing worse in the marginal seats, than they were doing nationally.

It would be very interesting to know what the marginals were reading then, to what they are now.

A fundamental point, also visible in the close marginals in the previous poll, is that the first-term incumbency bonus isn't happening. There are different theories about why that's the case - FWIW my impression is that the new Tories often parachuted in from the A-list and it simply didn't occur to them to spend much time on nourishing local roots as well as doing the fun stuff in Westminster.

Well i was told when i was 40 that my life expectancy was 50 (i would have died under Brown). Born under MacMillan.

Now hoping to make it through Cameron to Ed and beyond

isam said:

FPT

@Charles

"LOL! I'm glad you clarified the point in brackets... otherwise I might have misunderstood...

There was a very good article (forget who) the other day asking why people are so keen to watch/share this kind of video. I have no desire to see it, or any of the other barbarities ISIS are inflicting on people.

What I do find extraordinary is why people who grew up in Britain are willing to do this sort of thing. I can just about rationalise why someone might fall prey to a twisted ideology and decide to head off to the Middle East to fight for the caliphate. But to turn around and start beheading and crucifying people? Extraordinary. I think we should consider, very seriously, cancelling their passports - they have decided that their first loyalty is not to the UK. Fine. Let them live with that decision."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was it this from Douglas Murray?

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2014/08/when-it-comes-to-jihad-porn-abstinence-is-best/

I completely agree with you. I have said time and time again why I think we are in this mess and who should have been listened to. But dogma's dogma, and people would rather argue over minute details than admit they were wrong.

That's the one.

DavidL said:

I fundamentally disagree with the archbishop. The question is do we fight militant Islam by reverting to their standards and savagery or do we fight them by adhering to our own?

I vote the latter.

It is why I am extremely intolerant of us tolerating different cultures in this country which are not consistent with our own values. If Islamic people want to come and live in this country fine. But their women will be respected and have rights. They will dress as they want, go where they want and speak to who they want (I could get more graphic here).

If that is unacceptable to the Islamic community they have the choice. Go and live with the savages or stay here and accept our principles are better.

We are at risk because we have compromised our values. We must stop this although turning the clock back is always more difficult.

If you can be bothered, and can read without prejudice, have a look at Enoch Powell's Birmingham speech of 1968 and "The Road To National Suicide" from 1977

He foresaw what is happening now a long time ago. He knew it was a controversial thing to say openly, but thought it was for the greater good that he did.

He also said "Of all silly sayings, one of the silliest is 'you cant turn the clock back'. Of course you can turn the clock back and we often do. If a clock is showing the wrong time, we turn it back"

NickPalmer said:

A fundamental point, also visible in the close marginals in the previous poll, is that the first-term incumbency bonus isn't happening. There are different theories about why that's the case - FWIW my impression is that the new Tories often parachuted in from the A-list and it simply didn't occur to them to spend much time on nourishing local roots as well as doing the fun stuff in Westminster.

That doesn’t say much for the senior members of their local organisations. Surely they should be demanding some consituency action.

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Seldom wrong Shadsy? Cant be a bet then

The demographics of Southampton Itchen have changed massively since the last election. The area is full of posh waterside flats now, 11/4 is massive, the tories should be slightly odds on for this one.

DavidL said:

I fundamentally disagree with the archbishop. The question is do we fight militant Islam by reverting to their standards and savagery or do we fight them by adhering to our own?

I vote the latter.

It is why I am extremely intolerant of us tolerating different cultures in this country which are not consistent with our own values. If Islamic people want to come and live in this country fine. But their women will be respected and have rights. They will dress as they want, go where they want and speak to who they want (I could get more graphic here).

If that is unacceptable to the Islamic community they have the choice. Go and live with the savages or stay here and accept our principles are better.

We are at risk because we have compromised our values. We must stop this although turning the clock back is always more difficult.

That is precisely what the Archbishop is saying: by letting in people into this country with a fundamentally different and hostile culture we are weakening ourselves. And if we don't defeat IS now we will find ourselves fighting it much closer to home.

We could make a start by challenging the anti-Semitism which too many in the Islamic community exhibit, as stated by Muslim commentators themselves - see, for instance, Kenan Malik who has written bravely on this topic. The silence of British politicians on this, given events in recent days, is not encouraging. Why has Ed Milliband not spoken up about the disgraceful behaviour of his junior Treasury spokeswoman?

OldKingCole said:

NickPalmer said:

A fundamental point, also visible in the close marginals in the previous poll, is that the first-term incumbency bonus isn't happening. There are different theories about why that's the case - FWIW my impression is that the new Tories often parachuted in from the A-list and it simply didn't occur to them to spend much time on nourishing local roots as well as doing the fun stuff in Westminster.

That doesn’t say much for the senior members of their local organisations. Surely they should be demanding some constituency action.

In our case they were somewhat cowed and/or cheesed off, and in many cases just dropped out. That's why there basically hasn't been any regular Tory doorstep canvassing: the old school have put their feet up and new members haven't come through. Anecdotally this is also the case in other places.

@Sean_F

"The key for the Conservatives is to get back c.50% of the UKIP vote."

If that really is the key then the Conservatives are doomed, because they won't get 50% of the UKIP vote back, it has gone for the foreseeable future. They will get some back and I think it depends where that vote is. If it is in the marginals, as I strongly suspect it might be, then that will be useful. Whether it will be useful enough I would not like to guess.

hamiltonace said:

Spoke with my son in Edinburgh this morning. He was woken for the 5th time by someone trying to get him to vote Yes and told them to f**k off. His flat has 4 young male Scottish voters and it appears he will be the only one voting and that if I take him to the polls.

There is a certain weariness in Scotland about this whole referendum and while the turnout may be high it may not be as high as predicted especially amongst the young who have given up voting anyway.

Only the NO's are weary as they have no hope for the future only more of the same. People for YES are still motivated and have hope for a decent future.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Mr. L, the problem is we aren't fighting for our own values. When it comes to freedom of speech we backed down over the Danish cartoons, Jesus and Mo was censored, and we have a de facto blasphemy law in place.

We need to start standing up for freedom of speech and state overtly it matters more than religious sensitivity.

Instead we have a dereliction of duty from political leaders and cowardice from the media. Meanwhile, two supermarkets have been subject to the mob because of Gaza [a special sort of logic there].

malcolmg said:

hamiltonace said:

Spoke with my son in Edinburgh this morning. He was woken for the 5th time by someone trying to get him to vote Yes and told them to f**k off. His flat has 4 young male Scottish voters and it appears he will be the only one voting and that if I take him to the polls.

There is a certain weariness in Scotland about this whole referendum and while the turnout may be high it may not be as high as predicted especially amongst the young who have given up voting anyway.

Only the NO's are weary as they have no hope for the future only more of the same. People for YES are still motivated and have hope for a decent future.

Hmm...Going canvassing in Dundee again tomorrow. If you or Yes had any insight as to why the majority oppose you you might have had a better chance of winning.

Well if the polls are correct voters approve of labour's open door immigration policy, and are keen to vote them in again to carry on with it.

malcolmg said:

hamiltonace said:

Spoke with my son in Edinburgh this morning. He was woken for the 5th time by someone trying to get him to vote Yes and told them to f**k off. His flat has 4 young male Scottish voters and it appears he will be the only one voting and that if I take him to the polls.

There is a certain weariness in Scotland about this whole referendum and while the turnout may be high it may not be as high as predicted especially amongst the young who have given up voting anyway.

Only the NO's are weary as they have no hope for the future only more of the same. People for YES are still motivated and have hope for a decent future.

That's the sort of simplistic - not to say simple minded sloganeering that counts for analysis in the Yes camp that's going to make Scotland a very uncomfortable place after September 18 what ever the outcome of the referendum.

Do you really hold such a low opinion of over half your compatriots?

Well, I must admit that I was aiming for a paragraph on the interest rate with my afternoon posts. Sorry that I failed with that.

I guess 0.5 was kinda obvious -

Still - Team PB - First with the news!!!

Farage finally enters the fray. Finally.

UKIP calls for PM to strip UK ISIS fighters of their citizenship.

OblitusSumMe said:

What is different about Stroud?

The previous Labour incumbent David Drew is standing again - I believe is is quite well regarded and did well to hang on in 2005 in what is not natural Labour territory

CarlottaVance said:

Do you really hold such a low opinion of over half your compatriots?

The entire Yes machine regards No voters as less than Scottish

The scars the separatists have inflicted on the country will take generations to heal.

currystar said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Tories to take Itchen 11/4 with Shadsy.

Seldom wrong Shadsy? Cant be a bet then

The demographics of Southampton Itchen have changed massively since the last election. The area is full of posh waterside flats now, 11/4 is massive, the tories should be slightly odds on for this one.

Labour does better in backward areas where they thrive on ignorance and desperation. Successful professionals are not the left's friends.

Hammond refers to 'moderate Jihadists' in Radio 4 interview this morning (Breitbart).

Epic fail.

taffys said:

Farage finally enters the fray. Finally.

UKIP calls for PM to strip UK ISIS fighters of their citizenship.

Strip Islamic State Jihadists of British citizenship

http://www.ukip.org/strip_islamic_state_jihadists_of_british_citizenship

taffys said:

Hammond refers to 'moderate Jihadists' in Radio 4 interview this morning (Breitbart).

Epic fail.

It wasn't anything of the sort. Listen to the interview.

Richard_Nabavi said:

taffys said:

Hammond refers to 'moderate Jihadists' in Radio 4 interview this morning (Breitbart).

Epic fail.

It wasn't anything of the sort. Listen to the interview.

Can using the phrase "moderate jihadists" ever be justified?

Morris_Dancer said:

Clever line by Farage.

Is it? It sounds bloody silly to me. Is he really suggesting the PM should arbitrarily and without any legal process have powers to remove British citizenship?

It would be up to the courts, not the PM, to take decisions like that, and then only if parliament had granted powers to do so (which AFAIK they haven't).

Clever line by Farage.

Many do oppose this on infringement of human rights basis. We had an interesting debate about it on here recently.

AndyJS said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

taffys said:

Hammond refers to 'moderate Jihadists' in Radio 4 interview this morning (Breitbart).

Epic fail.

It wasn't anything of the sort. Listen to the interview.

Can using the phrase "moderate jihadists" ever be justified?

As I said, listen to the interview. What he actually said was something like 'moderate Jihadists, if I can use that phrase', in the context of an answer where he was discussing the fact that ISIS are much more extreme and violent even than other Islamist groups.

Pulpstar said:

taffys said:

Farage finally enters the fray. Finally.

UKIP calls for PM to strip UK ISIS fighters of their citizenship.

Well the Islamic State is producing it's own passports. And the fact that they are prepared to go off, kill and be killed for IS shows to my mind that they think of themselves more as IS individuals rather than British.

A decent call.

There *might* be a problem with the passports thing. That would mean we recognise the IS state - if we recognise their passport, then surely we acknowledge they are a state? That's not something we should be considering at this stage.

I also dislike making people stateless.

It sounds bloody silly to me.

I'm no lawyer, but it would almost certainly mean repealing all sorts of legislation, and mean we would have to get out of the ECHR.