politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Survation poll on Heywood and Middleton has a comfortable L

HYUFD said:

Danny565 Though of course if Cameron got Major's total he would also be clearly ahead

But a huge proportion of those who voted for Major are dead.

Danny565 said:

Hmph. Even as someone who was called a "deficit denier" on PB a few weeks ago, I agree with all 3 of the suggestions for cuts made on Newsnight (cuts to public-sector pay, pensions and Trident).

As you might expect 2 out of 3 for me.

kle4 said:

Speedy said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well the morning thread was going to be about Scotland....

Now, what is a boy to do?

How about coalitions?
At these numbers it is likely there can be no coalition between the largest parties and the LD, so how can they get a governing majority and with whom?

I guess that 'rainbow coalition' idea from 2010 will have to be dusted off. SNP-Lab-LD? That'd be fun given Lab losing seats to one and taking off seats from the other.

I'm guessing Lab on 327 though

If there's a coalition involving the SNP, what happens when its MPs refuse to vote on England matters in areas which are devolved to Scotland? That is its current stance.

HYUFD said:

Speedy But with no mandate at all, any case with the UKIP factor and the low LD vote I think UNS is much more variable than the headline figure. If Labour lacks a majority and is behind on popular vote the LDs and UKIP could well prop up the Tories

No chance for that, the constituency polls show that the least movement from LD to Tories are in LD seats so they will hold quite a few more than UNS predicts at Tory expense, also I can't see how the LD will prob a government along with UKIP and I can't see UKIP willing to prop Cameron or Cameron willing to accept their support.

However if the LD drop below 5% then UNS becomes much closer to reality for their position.

First time posting, long time lurker ^^

Cross-over is far from sufficient. If the figures are anything like this in 2015 then Labour are home and dry.

That said, I actually think on this occasion it is not a case of a post-conference bounce that will vanish; there has been a significant change in perception, or perhaps realisation, that Ed really is not Prime Ministerial material. Add to that the inevitability that the polls will tighten dramatically over the coming months and I would not be surprised if the Conservatives get a lot more votes than Labour in 2015 now.

I just don't think that'll be enough for them and still expect Labour to be the largest party by some margin.

Speedy said:

Lets make a scenario:
On electoral calculus with this poll we have LAB 316, CON 296, LD 11, SNP 6, PC 3.
Practically the LD are going to hold an extra 10 seats from the Tories and UKIP are probably going to elect 10 MP's too all of them from the Tories, also the SNP is going to gain a few LD and Labour seats lets say 3 from each , so the eventual number would be LAB 313, CON 276, LD 18, SNP 12, UKIP 10, PC 3.

Now lets try to form a long term stable coalition with these numbers.

Easy initially: Lab/Lib equals 331. But it'd be 1974-9 all over again. Ed would go rapidly into bye election loss territory virtually everywhere, and it would be a zoo quite quickly as his Left becomes grumpy as reality hits and Ed Balls points out ( well vaguely ) fiscal reality and Unite go ballistic.

Oldies to get real and compulsory voting law so the grey vote is not overriding issue

NIN22 said:

First time posting, long time lurker ^^

Cross-over is far from sufficient. If the figures are anything like this in 2015 then Labour are home and dry.

That said, I actually think on this occasion it is not a case of a post-conference bounce that will vanish; there has been a significant change in perception, or perhaps realisation, that Ed really is not Prime Ministerial material. Add to that the inevitability that the polls will tighten dramatically over the coming months and I would not be surprised if the Conservatives get a lot more votes than Labour in 2015 now.

I just don't think that'll be enough for them and still expect Labour to be the largest party by some margin.

Welcome

Plato said:

Daniel Hannan seems to feel quite sad for the LDs blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100288545/nick-clegg-has-undone-50-years-of-liberal-recovery/

You’d forgotten about the Liberal Democrats, hadn’t you? You vaguely assumed that they must already have held their annual get-together somewhere, and that you had missed it. Once a fixed, if minor, part of the political calendar, the Lib Dem Conference has now become one of those conventions of interest only to devotees, like a Star Trek Society AGM.

“What’s the point of the Liberal Democrats?” other politicians used to ask, theatrically. Nowadays, they don’t bother. What’s the point?

The Lib Dems have lost their way, their purpose and their soul. They used to be the party of democratic radicalism, but Nick Clegg’s petulant U-turns – rejecting parliamentary recall and trying to blame others, refusing a referendum on Lords reform and thereby killing the measure, opposing the vote on the EU despite his promises – made clear to voters that he disdained them. Naturally enough, the appeal of the Lib Dems as a protest party has been taken over by UKIP.

The Lib Dems spent 50 years clambering back from their post-war nadir. From just 6 MPs through the 1950s, they grew to 9 in 1964, 14 in 1974, 23 in 1983, 46 in 1997 and 57 in 2010. Nick Clegg had taken his party back to a strength not seen since Lloyd George’s day.

This bit was OUCH.

Edmund Burke, perhaps the greatest of all the Whigs, had hard things to say about pulling down in half an hour what prudence, deliberation and foresight had built up in a hundred years. But even that great Irish seer, prophetic as he was, could not have foreseen the determined thoroughness with which Cleggie would pull down his party. He would have stared in horrified disbelief as a man elected on the basis of sanctimonious assurances that he would be more honest than his rivals promptly set about breaking all his cledges. (A cledge, regular readers will remember, is not just an unfulfilled promise; it is a commitment made in deliberately bad faith.)

He's just feeling smug - this is something the big two have dreamed about ever since the LDs started really hitting their majority sizes, and the argument 'what are the LDs for?' is the same as the big two have ever used and by changing a few specific details could I'm sure have been rolled out at any time in recent decades, it just hits home harder given the parlous state of the LD polling.

TheScreamingEagles said:

One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?

Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.

hunchman/speedy I think a Tory LD coalition again now looks the most feasible, Clegg is hardly going to back up Miliband and Balls when they have no majority and are behind on popular vote and have trashed everything the Coalition has done. UKIP could agree not to vote against the government on a confidence vote in return for an EU referendum enshrined in law. Don't forget shy Tories either, especially after indyref

AndyJS said:

It looks like Ed isn't going to win a majority. If he's not ahead now there's not much chance of him being ahead in 7 months' time. I'd bet quite a large sum that he won't reach 326 seats.

I'm betting the house on it. I closed out all my Labour majority positions last night. Now all in on hung parliament, and building up a nice pot on Con majority as well.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I've got writer's block

Here

http://io9.com/5844988/the-10-types-of-writers-block-and-how-to-overcome-them

bigjohnowls said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I've got writer's block

Here

http://io9.com/5844988/the-10-types-of-writers-block-and-how-to-overcome-them

Of course 7. never applies

UKiP analysis from the Fabian Society:

" Ukip’s “rising tide” already poses a “very serious” threat to Labour’s hopes in 22 key marginal constituencies the party hopes to win, while the Tories are under serious threat in only 11 key seats.

In total, there are 59 seats where a surge in Ukip support has the potential to seriously impair Labour’s prospects, including 39 Conservative-Labour marginals. Although Mr Farage’s party could potentially damage Tory prospects in 67 seats, only 13 of these are Tory-held seats on Labour’s target list."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-is-serious-threat-to-ed-milibands-chances-of-a-labour-victory-at-the-next-general-election-former-aide-warns-9770790.html

Peter_the_Punter said:

@kle4

"I would not guess UKIP could get more than 5 seats...."

None of the spread betting firms have put up odds yet, but if you think that I'd be happy to be a buyer at 6 - say £50 per seat. Every seat under 6 I give you £50.

Yes?

I'm afraid I could not afford to reciprocate at such a level should I be proven wrong (and I did just call the Indy ref wrong by 8 points), eg. for every seat over 5, I give you £50.

I am a mere novice at such a bet, but for the fun times how about £20 for every seat under 6, and in return £20 for every seat over 5 up to a max of 10 seats (about all I could afford to risk)?

TheScreamingEagles said:

I've got writer's block

RUN MY THREAD!

Thanks to those of you welcoming me. I'm not sure what the etiquette is on replying just to say thanks for the welcome, so I'll post my thoughts on the implications of that Middleton poll as well so that this isn't marked as spam:

One thing that tends to be ignored re: UKIP I think is the implications for elections beyond 2015.

If UKIP win seats in 2015 (looks like they'll get at least one - Clacton - and stand a very good chance in 3 others at least - Boston, South Thanet, Rochester - and an ok chance in a handful of other seats) AND establish themselves in a dozen or more constituencies as the second party (and thus the main opposition in those constituencies) then 4 party politics really is here to stay.

Places like Middleton may never be realistic goals for them, but polls like this certainly indicate that in a number constituencies they're going to be second in 2015 and will then be in with a shot of getting those seats in 2020 (or earlier, if we end up with some sort of minority or other unstable gov after the election).

On the SNAFU blog there is a picture of a young Christian girl murdered by ISIL - don't ordinary Muslims realise how dangerous their support of ISIL is to their own safety from a world who has begun to hate them.

Casino_Royale said:

FrankBooth said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?

Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.

Where are you thinking?

Sorry, didn't explain that very well. I mean Labour will disproportionately put on votes in seats that they already hold, particularly in urban areas, such that the Conservatives won't need the full 2010 GE lead of 7% over Labour to win. This is in contrast to Blair, who was highly efficient with his votes in marginal seats.

I expect Cameron will turn out to be surprisingly efficient too.

I'm not sure Labour will do that well with their own seats. Remember one of Ed's biggest problems is he doesn't even convince all his own supporters. Many may stay at home.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I've got writer's block

I've made a nice 4-way line-graph for the ELBOW averages over the last seven weeks.

bigjohnowls said:

I think Trident will have to go too

Did your knuckles drag when you posted that? Trident E5 will go in 2040: So what? You really need to keep up with defence, development and obfuscation young pup....

Absolutely agree with you Surbiton...... but quietly does a wee dance around the kitchen.

surbiton said:

Let me recap my Crossover rules: At least, 3 successive polls showing a lead for a party which previously were not in the lead.

FrankBooth said:

Casino_Royale said:

FrankBooth said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

One Labour chap has just asked me, should he be worried that Labour are only gaining votes where they already have MPs?

Yes. Have thought that for a long time. They will gain the most votes where it doesn't matter. Hence the 7% lead in the national polls is bogus.

Where are you thinking?

Sorry, didn't explain that very well. I mean Labour will disproportionately put on votes in seats that they already hold, particularly in urban areas, such that the Conservatives won't need the full 2010 GE lead of 7% over Labour to win. This is in contrast to Blair, who was highly efficient with his votes in marginal seats.

I expect Cameron will turn out to be surprisingly efficient too.

I'm not sure Labour will do that well with their own seats. Remember one of Ed's biggest problems is he doesn't even convince all his own supporters. Many may stay at home.

Doubtful I think Ed is indeed pretty Crap but in a close election lots of LAB voters will be extremely keen to stick with LAB to try to get rid of the Tories.

FrankBooth said:

Trident really is absurd. I could understand an independent nuclear deterrent, but it isn't.

Agreed. It is essentially a cash donation to the American military industrial complex. We can't afford it.

Luckyguy1983 - the structural deficit is £25 billion

anotherDave said:

UKiP analysis from the Fabian Society:

" Ukip’s “rising tide” already poses a “very serious” threat to Labour’s hopes in 22 key marginal constituencies the party hopes to win, while the Tories are under serious threat in only 11 key seats.

In total, there are 59 seats where a surge in Ukip support has the potential to seriously impair Labour’s prospects, including 39 Conservative-Labour marginals. Although Mr Farage’s party could potentially damage Tory prospects in 67 seats, only 13 of these are Tory-held seats on Labour’s target list."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-is-serious-threat-to-ed-milibands-chances-of-a-labour-victory-at-the-next-general-election-former-aide-warns-9770790.html

The Fabian Society is rubbish as usual with its analysis.

Peter_the_Punter said:

kle4 said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

@kle4

"I would not guess UKIP could get more than 5 seats...."

None of the spread betting firms have put up odds yet, but if you think that I'd be happy to be a buyer at 6 - say £50 per seat. Every seat under 6 I give you £50.

Yes?

I'm afraid I could not afford to reciprocate at such a level should I be proven wrong (and I did just call the Indy ref wrong by 8 points), eg. for every seat over 5, I give you £50.

I am a mere novice at such a bet, but for the fun times how about £20 for every seat under 6, and in return £20 for every seat over 5 up to a max of 10 seats (about all I could afford to risk)?

Yes, that effectively sets the stop-loss at £100 both ways, which seems fair enough and not a million miles out from what the fixed odds bookies are touting.

The address is arklebar@gmail.com and I'll get back to you tomorrow.

Cheers.

A deal then.

I think I saw somewhere recently - no source to hand, so it may be rubbish - that 48% of Labour party members are found in London. If that is true (or anything like), it explains a lot about the current direction of the Labour party.

Llandaff North (Cardiff) result:
LAB - 50.1% (+2.7)
IND - 23.4% (+0.2)
UKIP - 11.4% (+11.4)
CON - 7.6% (+1.7)
LDEM - 7.5% (-6.8)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBumQHPAeU

Again, you just don't get it. Same old tired Labour policies and tactics, they simple don't have anything new to say. I mean, that's it, that is all Labour have in defence of that Cameron speech yesterday, the Tories will put up VAT? As if that was going to vaporise the whole policy content and Cameron's clear intent to appeal to aspirational striver's? Did Labour even get past their own prejudices and listen to the full content of that speech? Or, did it just fail to compute entirely, leaving a sad looking error threat flashing up a VAT increase?

bigjohnowls said:

fitalass said:

Dan Hodges is right, Labour still don't get it. Poor Stella Creasy is now spinning Labour's big response to Cameron's speech, panicky claims that the Tories will raise VAT after the GE. Oh wait, haven't we heard that one from Ed Balls before...

He was right wasnt he went up from 17.5 to 20 didnt it?

GeoffM said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Here's one of my 'cuts' -I floated this yesterday but no-one took me up (I'll stop soon).

Abolish vehicle excise duty.
Add it on to fuel duty.
Use the redundant facility for administering VED to repatriate all the administrative jobs that are currently being done in India for the nationalised banks.
Thus saving money now, and going forward. Saving people's time and effort. And not losing any jobs.

Why not use the redundant facility to quietly move civil service functions from Scotland to England? It'd save us a couple of things to worry about come the next IndyRef.

Thanks for getting on board -interesting suggestion, but I don't think there will be another one. Certainly they won't allow one for another 18 years or so. Switching the jobs would cause unemployment in Scotland, which for the time being would still negatively affect the wider economy and tax base.

Lack of support for Britain by the Government in terms of its own economic activity in these desperate economic times amounts to nothing more or less than deliberate betrayal. Planes trains, automobiles, and everything in between is made abroad. This simply has to stop.

GeoffM said:

bigjohnowls said:

FrankBooth said:

Really disappointed with Newsnight. Special piece on spending cuts yet nothing on the possibility of tax rises. And people accuse the BBC of being left wing. Unbelievable.

Think it was trying to show that £38bn plus Daves promised tax cuts of £7bn means £45BN cuts is a massive challenge.

Do all 3 of the below and still nowhere near enough

8% cut in all public sector workers pay inc army, police maths teachers.

Scrap Trdent

Cut Pensions and other oldie benefits

Selling off the BBC and privatising the NHS and the education system would net us some decent money up front, save a fortune on-going, and improve services immensely. Triple result!

It's only socialism that's holding us back.

I hope Tories stand on this Manifesto

UKIP salvage something:

Britain Elects @britainelects · 56s 57 seconds ago
Westoe (South Tyneside):
UKIP GAIN from Independent.

The most interesting thing today was BenM's tirade against EdM.

A PM EdM will make Francois Hollande look respected and popular in comparison.

What do they teach on that Oxford PPE course ?

Gains at locals always preferred to Holds. Well done UKIP.

At that's for tonight, goodnight.