politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest round of Lord Ashcroft’s marginals’ polling find
Aggregate shares from latest @LordAshcroft polling of 11 marginals
CON 33
LAB 39
LD 6
UKIP 16
GRN 5
A swing of 5% to LAB from CON
Comments
-
Corby is a fascinating poll.0
-
Fill yer boots on Pudsey being a Tory hold0
-
7/4 now was 9/4 earlierTheScreamingEagles said:Fill yer boots on Pudsey being a Tory hold
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/uk-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=12145640 -
Lab heading for a 20-30 seat majority?0
-
Pudsey? The wasteland that exists between Leeds and Bradford? I know it has been a while since I was last there but Pudsey is tory?TheScreamingEagles said:Fill yer boots on Pudsey being a Tory hold
0 -
Since 2010, has been a Tory seat prior to 1997.Beverley_C said:
Pudsey? The wasteland that exists between Leeds and Bradford? I know it has been a while since I was last there but Pudsey is tory?TheScreamingEagles said:Fill yer boots on Pudsey being a Tory hold
People forget, in parts of West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire, the Tories do and have done very well oop North.
Tories Northern Problem? My arse.
0 -
I don't buy this idea that the marginals will swing more to Labour than the national swing though.0
-
Anti-Labour tactical voting is the key. The UK plainly can't afford another spree of Labourite delinquency in these testing times.0
-
Seems pretty standard to me, Labour romped it on a 12% swing in 2012 when they were polling over 40% in the national polls. Now the swing is back down to a level that reflects current polling.SouthamObserver said:Corby is a fascinating poll.
0 -
Yeah. Probably a bit higher.GIN1138 said:Lab heading for a 20-30 seat majority?
Perfect storm for the Tories. 2010 LDs switchers to Lab and Con to Kipper switchers are handing seats to Labour.0 -
Whilst I am very grateful to Lord Ashcroft for this, I just have this nagging doubt at the back of my mind because of the volatility of his weekly national polling.0
-
But without the by-election we would be saying that Labour has dipped slightly and that the Tories have been massively hurt by UKIP. That seems to be the general national narrative. What Corby shows is that this is far too simplistic.Artist said:
Seems pretty standard to me, Labour romped it on a 12% swing in 2012 when they were polling over 40% in the national polls. Now the swing is back down to a level that reflects current polling.SouthamObserver said:Corby is a fascinating poll.
0 -
Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.0
-
Anecdotal: Pudsey constituency is certainly no "wasteland". The former Labour incumbent Paul Truswell was a very highly regarded MP before he stood down due to health issues. If you look back pre 1997 it was an easy Tory hold... anyway judging by the horrendous traffic it doesn't seem to be doing too badly economically speaking, also nearby constituencies have had a very high level of immigration and it is very definitely a middle class area which I would guess is less ethnically diverse than other nearby constituencies. I'd guess its more prosperous than say Keighley too.TheScreamingEagles said:
Since 2010, has been a Tory seat prior to 1997.Beverley_C said:
Pudsey? The wasteland that exists between Leeds and Bradford? I know it has been a while since I was last there but Pudsey is tory?TheScreamingEagles said:Fill yer boots on Pudsey being a Tory hold
People forget, in parts of West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire, the Tories do and have done very well oop North.
Tories Northern Problem? My arse.
I'd expect UKIP to hurt Labour disproportionately more than perhaps Conservative here and thought it could well be very close back at the end of June. There are however a large number of Lib Dems who will break disproportionately to Labour, but at the same time Labour will lose it's own vote to UKIP... I think !
Ashcroft's poll seems to back up my assessment of the constituency.
TLDR 7-4 Tories is still value.0 -
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
The Euros were huge for London Labour - I've taken £20 for Ealing Central and Acton off the back of that and Antifrank's analysis into 8-11 now but still OK.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
0 -
London really is very different to elsewhere though.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
0 -
Election Forecast UK @Election4castUK 2m2 minutes ago
Here is what happens when we (accidentally) constrain all parties (including other) to get the same national vote. http://img.ly/A99B0 -
Labour's woes in Scotland if they are as seems to be indicated by every single subsample in every single poll ever make any Most Seats prediction tricky.
What won't happen though is all those Scottish seats turning true Tory Blue.
I think this just increases the chance of NOM even more.0 -
Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.0 -
The story so far:
The Red Liberals and the Purple Tories are all that matters.0 -
Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.0
-
What are the '3rd tier' marginals in London that might (just) swing Labour if Brentford is a reasonable guide? Some individual seat bets worth looking at?Pulpstar said:
London really is very different to elsewhere though.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
0 -
Agreed, but who is the Tory deus ex machina ?Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
0 -
Defenestrating Cameron won't help; replacing him with a more right-wing UKIP-friendly leader would boost Labour more in the centre (where vote switching effectively counts double) than it would help them recover their right flank.Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
The Tory centrist strategy remains correct [regardless of your views of the specific policies]. Given the prevailing headwinds of economic gloom, and the more-or-less instant loss of half the Lib Dem vote to Labour back in 2010, it's pretty astonishing that the Tories are as close as they are. Thanks be to Ed.0 -
I had a look at this a few months ago. The odds are out of date, of course:Lennon said:
What are the '3rd tier' marginals in London that might (just) swing Labour if Brentford is a reasonable guide? Some individual seat bets worth looking at?Pulpstar said:
London really is very different to elsewhere though.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/strange-town-london-2015.html0 -
It's so tempting to reduce it to this, partly because of the symmetry, but Con-Lab and Lab-Con switchers are also vital, as ever.___Bobajob___ said:The story so far:
The Red Liberals and the Purple Tories are all that matters.0 -
In answer to my own question - Ilford North, Battersea, and Finchley and Golders Green would all go Labour on a Tory to Lab swing of 6.5% or greater. Ashcroft found 6.5% in Enfield North, and 8% in Brentford.Lennon said:
What are the '3rd tier' marginals in London that might (just) swing Labour if Brentford is a reasonable guide? Some individual seat bets worth looking at?Pulpstar said:
London really is very different to elsewhere though.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
0 -
However any votes that the Tories gain from UKIP that way will be lost by votes elsewhere as the most accurate pollster on this barometer, Ipsos Mori has shown that David Cameron is more liked than his party.Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.0 -
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
0 -
The biggest swing of the day is that of Moniker himself. Gone from forecasting a Lab GE return of 25% (yet running a mile when you offered him the chance to bet on it) to a Tory defeat.MonikerDiCanio said:
Agreed, but who is the Tory deus ex machina ?Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
They must have put something in the San Pellegrino this morning.
0 -
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
I would suggest it's identity politics, Labour are the foreign ethnic vote and London is just reflecting demographic changes due to our immigration policy.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
Such is FPP. The Tories had their chance to consign the system to the history books.Norm said:Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
They campaigned to retain it.
0 -
Why add the Con and UKIP shares of the vote, you could add Labour + Alliance in the 80s and get them over 50%...Norm said:Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
Except it's a terrible (And frankly patronising) piece of logic to do so - because Alliance voters were not Labour on holiday, and UKIP voters are choosing UKIP, not the Tories.
Labour + Lib Dems got over 50% in the last election. Didn't mean a thing.0 -
Actually, since I'm having an orgy of gauche self-quoting, I can post to a thread (nominally about UKIP) where I had a go at this problem too:Tissue_Price said:Indeed. Some take the Independent.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-latest-election-round-what-have-we_16.html
"with the sort of precision that you could find only in a saloon bar, I set out a cariacature of the previous coalition of each party.
Labour: unionised workers, public sector workers, lower paid workers, the workless, those from ethnic minorities, professionals who are progressive values-driven.
Conservatives: professionals (other than those who are progressive values-driven), higher paid workers, the self-employed, home owners, the elderly, the battlers.
Lib Dems: localists, professionals who are progressive values-driven, protest voters.
UKIP have put together a coalition built on very different lines, comprising those intellectually hostile to the EU, the socially conservative, those hostile to immigration, those in low paid work and protest voters. These cut across former party boundaries.
Labour is vulnerable to losing lower paid workers and some of the workless, while other parts of its coalition, such as those from ethnic minorities or progressive values-driven professionals, are most unlikely to be tempted to vote purple next year. In some geographical areas, this barely affects the Labour vote. We saw that Labour had a very good performance in London in May, reflecting the fact that Labour's vote here largely comes from the UKIP-resistant part of Labour's coalition. Its vote similarly held up well in the Core Cities. Because of the shape of their coalition, they are likely to lose little of their vote in university towns to the Kippers (helping to explain the short prices on Labour in Bristol West, Leeds North West and Cambridge).
But in areas where Labour's vote is much more drawn from those in lower paid work, UKIP appear to have undermined Labour's efforts. They lost control of both North East Lincolnshire and Thurrock. Labour also seem unclear how to identify the categories of voters that they have lost with any precision: in Swindon they won the popular vote but went backwards in seat count. Labour is likely to lose disproportionately high shares of its coalition in less urban and less well-educated workforces."0 -
No, but it is full of ethnic minorities who vote 60% Labour.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
All of which potentially suggests that the 7/2 in Finchley and the 11/4 in Ilford North (and possibly the 5/2 in Battersea although I'm less comfortable about this seat given demographics) might well be worth a trading punt if you think that London swings more than the rest of the country as Ashcroft appears to be finding.Lennon said:
In answer to my own question - Ilford North, Battersea, and Finchley and Golders Green would all go Labour on a Tory to Lab swing of 6.5% or greater. Ashcroft found 6.5% in Enfield North, and 8% in Brentford.Lennon said:
What are the '3rd tier' marginals in London that might (just) swing Labour if Brentford is a reasonable guide? Some individual seat bets worth looking at?Pulpstar said:
London really is very different to elsewhere though.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
0 -
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
0 -
Not only that, but, having campaigned for it, they then tell UKIP supporters that the system will hurt them if they vote their true preference so they should back the Tories instead.___Bobajob___ said:
Such is FPP. The Tories had their chance to consign the system to the history books.Norm said:Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
They campaigned to retain it.0 -
Not at all. Looking at the aggregate score Table 3, then we have:___Bobajob___ said:The story so far:
The Red Liberals and the Purple Tories are all that matters.
Red Liberals +150 Labour voters [this is net of the voters the Tories gain from the Lib Dems]
Purple Tories -180 Conservative voters [this is net of the voters that Labour lose to UKIP]
Traditional Swing Voters +51 Labour voters & -51 Conservative voters [remember these count double]
The Greenies -32 Labour voters
The total number of voters that make up the Con-Lab swing is 464. So the percentage from each voter type is:
Red Liberals 32%
Purple Tories 39%
Swing Floaters 22%
Greenies 7%
The contribution from the "Plato-type" swing floaters is pretty large, but that's not why they are important. They're important because - unlike the Red Liberals and the Purple Tories - the pollsters do not agree on which way they will swing. The latest YouGov has the net movement of swingers at near zero. Some recent polls have had substantial net swings from Labour to Tories in this group.
These are the voters who are most likely to change their mind and thus they constitute the most likely source of change from the polling status quo. It is how they vote that will decide the election. Everything else looks like it will be a lot harder to shift.0 -
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
@antifrank - "with the sort of precision that you could find only in a saloon bar, I set out a cariacature of the previous coalition of each party.
That’s rather good - you must have been supping a non-alcoholic beverage at the time. ; )
0 -
Interesting about the Democrats. I thought they were losing white voters of whatever class - and certainly men.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
0 -
They certainly aren't, it is the Republicans fault of not opposing AA or immigration that they have failed to fully pick them up.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
The relative youth of London's electorate is also a big help to Labour.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
0 -
They are, welcome to block voting.SouthamObserver said:
Interesting about the Democrats. I thought they were losing white voters of whatever class - and certainly men.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
I find it unbelievable that people read the Metro or the Standard on the tube. It is a precious opportunity actually to read something of consequence, whatever that may be (I make no judgement on any genre).SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
Especially so as most people will be surfing the internet all day at work anyway so nothing those papers contain will be at all new (or interesting, I would argue).0 -
Well, the Democrats have the advantage of a much more emphatic two-party system.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
But in the South, the Republicans have picked up the WWC vote via "values based" (God) targeting.
The Republicans used to sit in the middle of the US spectrum with the racist Southern Democrats on their right and the urban progressives on their left. It was a peculiar coalition, to say the least. LBJ blew it up with the Civil Rights Act but it still took 30-40 years for those Southern states to turn reliably Republican (of course this was quite a lot to do with incumbency).
You might draw a [non-racist] parallel with the Scotland Act 1998. It can take a long time for voting habits to shift in response to the changed priorities of the dominant parties.0 -
I thought we had a million-billion Monte-Carlo runs that showed 0% chance of a Labour victory? Or was that yesterday?
Good luck with the pact with UKIP though. That's bound to work.0 -
Why?GIN1138 said:I don't buy this idea that the marginals will swing more to Labour than the national swing though.
Could it be you are in denial?
0 -
There's a big regional split: they're losing whites in the south in big numbers, but they're doing just fine in places like the rustbelt. They won Ohio and Michigan quite comfortably, and those places haven't had demographic changes really. (You're right there's an emerging gender split, however.)SouthamObserver said:
Interesting about the Democrats. I thought they were losing white voters of whatever class - and certainly men.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.0 -
I actually think this poll is good for the Tories. Better than the last marginal poll which showed a much larger swing towards Labour than national polls. Much is made of Labour's ground game in the marginals but if the swing is just +1 or +2 compared to the national swing before the campaigns start then the Cons have a good chance of pulling votes in their favour, especially given that UKIP voters seem more predisposed to a Tory government and to Dave as PM.0
-
Good analysis from antifrank. Who or what are "professionals who are progressive values-driven". Would these be concentrated in the public sector?0
-
on topic:
If the Cons make a pact with UKIP it will, simply, be the end of them. You can't align yourself with a NOTA party as you are an "A". It would be ludicrous.
As has been pointed out also, you lose the centre at the expense of people 79.7% of whom would return to the fold anyway and who want stability and dependency from their political parties (hence why they are Cons to start with).
Cam/Crosbie would have to be out of their minds even to contemplate anything like that.0 -
" ... as most people will be surfing the internet all day at work ..."
We were talking on here about poor productivity in the UK ....0 -
Would they not be the Polly Toynbee’s of this world?Itajai said:Good analysis from antifrank. Who or what are "professionals who are progressive values-driven".
0 -
Centrist swing voters tend to be pragmatic and dirven by outcomes rather than ideology. They would put up with a more Eurosceptic leader if they thought that:Tissue_Price said:
Defenestrating Cameron won't help; replacing him with a more right-wing UKIP-friendly leader would boost Labour more in the centre (where vote switching effectively counts double) than it would help them recover their right flank.Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
The Tory centrist strategy remains correct [regardless of your views of the specific policies]. Given the prevailing headwinds of economic gloom, and the more-or-less instant loss of half the Lib Dem vote to Labour back in 2010, it's pretty astonishing that the Tories are as close as they are. Thanks be to Ed.
1. He or she would govern more competently than Cameron
2. He or she is not driven by the Europe issue
3. The change is a one-off and not a descent into civil war within the Tories, making them incapable of governing effectively.
I'm far from convinced that any of those conditions can be adequately met but that's a little beside the point. The point being that moving from the centre will not necessarily let Ed back in as there are other factors to consider.0 -
Strongly agree. The South is now very differently politically to the rest of the US. Whites in the deep south now vote Republican to a similar extent that African Americans vote Democratic.Tissue_Price said:
Well, the Democrats have the advantage of a much more emphatic two-party system.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
What was that figure being bandied about the other day re Labour membership being x% from London? 48%?FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
But in the South, the Republicans have picked up the WWC vote via "values based" (God) targeting.
The Republicans used to sit in the middle of the US spectrum with the racist Southern Democrats on their right and the urban progressives on their left. It was a peculiar coalition, to say the least. LBJ blew it up with the Civil Rights Act but it still took 30-40 years for those Southern states to turn reliably Republican (of course this was quite a lot to do with incumbency).
You might draw a [non-racist] parallel with the Scotland Act 1998. It can take a long time for voting habits to shift in response to the changed priorities of the dominant parties.
Personally, I don't think religion plays as much of a role here. It's more a matter of cultural identity, of which religion is one part.0 -
There is a part of me that thinks that this may be a good election for the Tories to lose and that 5 years of Ed could kill Labour for ever.Norm said:Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
There is another part of me that thinks that the reasons why that may be the case won't make it worth the benefit.
There's also a third part that's aware that people who wish to lose elections for tactical reasons usually have cause to rue that desire later.0 -
Really you should compare the swing with the national Lab Con difference from the time when the LA marginals were polled. If he did his poll two weeks ago for example (and I think there is sometimes a delay in publishing data), then comparison with today's gap is erroneous.MaxPB said:I actually think this poll is good for the Tories. Better than the last marginal poll which showed a much larger swing towards Labour than national polls. Much is made of Labour's ground game in the marginals but if the swing is just +1 or +2 compared to the national swing before the campaigns start then the Cons have a good chance of pulling votes in their favour, especially given that UKIP voters seem more predisposed to a Tory government and to Dave as PM.
0 -
Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?0
-
Yes, if (1), (2) & (3) could have been met about a year ago, then perhaps the Tories would be doing better. But they weren't because such a candidate didn't and doesn't exist. The best person to edge the Tories subtly right to counter UKIP is Cameron.david_herdson said:
Centrist swing voters tend to be pragmatic and dirven by outcomes rather than ideology. They would put up with a more Eurosceptic leader if they thought that:Tissue_Price said:
Defenestrating Cameron won't help; replacing him with a more right-wing UKIP-friendly leader would boost Labour more in the centre (where vote switching effectively counts double) than it would help them recover their right flank.Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
The Tory centrist strategy remains correct [regardless of your views of the specific policies]. Given the prevailing headwinds of economic gloom, and the more-or-less instant loss of half the Lib Dem vote to Labour back in 2010, it's pretty astonishing that the Tories are as close as they are. Thanks be to Ed.
1. He or she would govern more competently than Cameron
2. He or she is not driven by the Europe issue
3. The change is a one-off and not a descent into civil war within the Tories, making them incapable of governing effectively.
I'm far from convinced that any of those conditions can be adequately met but that's a little beside the point. The point being that moving from the centre will not necessarily let Ed back in as there are other factors to consider.0 -
WTI crude below $80 a barrel.
I have a feeling the site will be £50 richer at year end.0 -
Cameron's determination to have one last go at getting a deal from the floating economic corpse that is the EU should ensure a few more loyalists go over to UKIP.0
-
For a while I have thought that Eddie George (was it him?) saying the winners of 2010 would be out of power for a generation may have the right concept but the wrong election. In many ways 2015 looks worse to win than 2010.david_herdson said:
There is a part of me that thinks that this may be a good election for the Tories to lose and that 5 years of Ed could kill Labour for ever.Norm said:Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
There is another part of me that thinks that the reasons why that may be the case won't make it worth the benefit.
There's also a third part that's aware that people who wish to lose elections for tactical reasons usually have cause to rue that desire later.0 -
Back it. If it loses, content yourself with the value. If you can find, say, 100 such bets over your life, and have £50 on each, you'll end up a few thousand up.Lennon said:Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?
0 -
Lennon check your inbox - if you post it here it'll be smashed into.Lennon said:Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?
0 -
Thanks. Have done.Pulpstar said:
Lennon check your inbox - if you post it here it'll be smashed into.Lennon said:Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?
0 -
There has always been a regional divide due to settlement patterns, Puritan Yankees, Cavalier Southerners, Quaker Pennsylvania and hillbilly Northern Irish. David Hackett Fisher wrote a good book on it.Socrates said:
Strongly agree. The South is now very differently politically to the rest of the US. Whites in the deep south now vote Republican to a similar extent that African Americans vote Democratic.Tissue_Price said:
Well, the Democrats have the advantage of a much more emphatic two-party system.Socrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
But in the South, the Republicans have picked up the WWC vote via "values based" (God) targeting.
The Republicans used to sit in the middle of the US spectrum with the racist Southern Democrats on their right and the urban progressives on their left. It was a peculiar coalition, to say the least. LBJ blew it up with the Civil Rights Act but it still took 30-40 years for those Southern states to turn reliably Republican (of course this was quite a lot to do with incumbency).
You might draw a [non-racist] parallel with the Scotland Act 1998. It can take a long time for voting habits to shift in response to the changed priorities of the dominant parties.
Personally, I don't think religion plays as much of a role here. It's more a matter of cultural identity, of which religion is one part.0 -
The best person is probably Boris, not because of the Euroscepticism (is he one?) but because he counters UKIP is a different way. But Boris isn't available so of those who could, I agree, Cameron is the best (and only) option.Tissue_Price said:
Yes, if (1), (2) & (3) could have been met about a year ago, then perhaps the Tories would be doing better. But they weren't because such a candidate didn't and doesn't exist. The best person to edge the Tories subtly right to counter UKIP is Cameron.david_herdson said:
Centrist swing voters tend to be pragmatic and dirven by outcomes rather than ideology. They would put up with a more Eurosceptic leader if they thought that:Tissue_Price said:
Defenestrating Cameron won't help; replacing him with a more right-wing UKIP-friendly leader would boost Labour more in the centre (where vote switching effectively counts double) than it would help them recover their right flank.Bob__Sykes said:Cameron is toast. No other conclusion is possible. Doomed, doomed, doomed.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
The Tory centrist strategy remains correct [regardless of your views of the specific policies]. Given the prevailing headwinds of economic gloom, and the more-or-less instant loss of half the Lib Dem vote to Labour back in 2010, it's pretty astonishing that the Tories are as close as they are. Thanks be to Ed.
1. He or she would govern more competently than Cameron
2. He or she is not driven by the Europe issue
3. The change is a one-off and not a descent into civil war within the Tories, making them incapable of governing effectively.
I'm far from convinced that any of those conditions can be adequately met but that's a little beside the point. The point being that moving from the centre will not necessarily let Ed back in as there are other factors to consider.
The crucial question will be the extent to which he does once free of the coalition i.e. when campaigning as Tory leader, not governing as PM.0 -
On the subject of renegotiation of freedom of movement, I don't think that this is just a kneejerk reaction to UKIP (or at least, not October's kneejerk reaction to UKIP). I recall something from the summer, which I posted about at the time:
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/1535/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-at-ge15-the-result-in-watford-is-set-once-again-to-be-the-m/p2
"Everyone's favourite EU comissioner, Viviane Reding, is making a speech today setting out her wishes for the development of EU justice policy:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-481_en.htm
She is doing this in the form of "three messages to the European Council" - ie national governments. Most interesting to me is a passage near the end, picked out in the summary also:
"The right of Europeans to move freely and reside and work wherever they want in our Union must be protected, including against possible abuse or fraudulent claims. Abuse must be fought because it weakens free movement. And the principle of free movement must be defended vigorously. I have said it before, and I will say it again: EU citizens' right to free movement is not up for negotiation. All four freedoms – of people, goods, services and capital – go together, no one has a right to pick and choose. All four freedoms enable our economies to grow and give citizens the chance to acquire skills and find work. All four freedoms need to be protected for citizens to feel secure – and to be assured that this Union is not only about markets, but about people and their rights. That it is made for them."
I wonder who that passage might be aimed at? I wonder which other Luxembourg politicians in the EPP feel strongly about this stuff?"
At the time, I was told that this was just motherhood and apple pie. But it now seems that noises may already have been being made behind the scenes.0 -
Tissue Price makes a good point about a UKIP friendly Tory leader benefiting Labour but there's also the other possibility that in a UKIP Tory marginal there's a possibility of Lib Dem and Labour voters voting for the Tory to keep out UKIP. Though in the past wild horses wouldn't have persuaded me to vote Tory.In a contest where UKIP were the alternative I'd change the habit of a lifetime0
-
Probably unsurprising but Labour do Best when UKIP do worst and when there is a lot of liberal votes.
Although the headline is (5% swing Conservative to Labour) it is more like
8% swing Lib Dems to Labour
4% swing Lib Dems to Conservatives
11% swing Conservative to UKIP
5% swing Labour to UKIP
There is also one area where UKIP are doing very badly. This is GOOD news for UKIP.
This reflects a) LDs won't vote UKIP and b) There is a key element of the population that will always vote Labour - I'll leave it to the reader to work out what the key element is.0 -
Let's be honest, they would usually be the white collar public sector (or ancillary companies such as The Guardian) workers of this world. Progressive values driven professionals is how they would see themselves. In reality such progressive values 9 times out of 10 tend to align themselves with the holder's material advancement.SimonStClare said:
Would they not be the Polly Toynbee’s of this world?Itajai said:Good analysis from antifrank. Who or what are "professionals who are progressive values-driven".
0 -
I haven't looked closely at the figures but find it of no surprise that the biggest swing against the Tories happens to be in London where UKIP are weakest....
It makes a nonsense of the 'Vote UKIP get Labour' drivel!0 -
You now find plenty of such professionals in private sector professional services firms.Luckyguy1983 said:
Let's be honest, they would usually be the white collar public sector (or ancillary companies such as The Guardian) workers of this world. Progressive values driven professionals is how they would see themselves. In reality such progressive values 9 times out of 10 tend to align themselves with the holder's material advancement.SimonStClare said:
Would they not be the Polly Toynbee’s of this world?Itajai said:Good analysis from antifrank. Who or what are "professionals who are progressive values-driven".
0 -
Vetogasm lasted for about 3 or 4 weeks IIRC.
A similar bit of muscular politics if well timed could give the Tories an edge with soft-Kippers.taffys said:Cameron's determination to have one last go at getting a deal from the floating economic corpse that is the EU should ensure a few more loyalists go over to UKIP.
0 -
Labour doing well in two increasingly grotty parts of London, where the demographic is unlikely to be UKIP inclined.The rest is uninspiring.
Plenty of evidence of Vote Nige, Get Ed
It's about the Tories and UKIP honing their constituency message.
A sensible collaboration = Labour wipeout, especially with SNP gains in Scotland.0 -
Regarding those who are currently saying they'll vote UKIP, it is of course true that they are by no means all former Conservative voters: Labour (and even the LibDems) are also losing voters to them, although to date the effect on the Tories has been larger and in that sense UKIP help Labour.
However, what we don't know is how those very different sub-groups of UKIP support will behave when it comes to the election. Broadly speaking, there are three scenarios we can consider:
(1) They stay with UKIP, or perhaps UKIP pick up even more voters from the two main parties.
(2) They partially drift back to their former party allegiances as the election comes into focus. This is the scenario which most observers have expected, and it may still occur, at least to some extent. If so, the net effect on the election may be a slight boost to the Tories compared with current polling, simply because there are more ex-Tory voters amongst those currently saying they'll vote UKIP. It won't be a very big effect, though, unless the UKIP vote share unwinds to a large degree, which is looking less likely now than it did a few weeks ago (thanks, Douglas).
(3) same as (2), but the drift back is not symmetrical. If either Labour or the Conservatives can successfully attract back a disproprotionate number of their former voters compared with the number the other main party can attract back, victory beckons.
I think it will be very hard for Labour to get the advantage in any such asymmetry, essentially because they haven't got any policies to do so and if they did, they'd alienate the ex-LibDem group who are even more important to them.
Can the Conservatives get the advantage here? In principle it should be possible - the Tory-to-UKIP switchers should be responsive both on the EU and immigration issues, and perhaps on the economy as well. At the moment, though, those message are not being heeded. The outcome of the election hinges on whether or not that remains the case.0 -
http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2014/oct/16/colorado-cannabis-laws-pot-smoking-tourism
his group has come from Texas for a weekend organised by Spiro, a luxury cannabis tour operator, and its package includes a visit to a spa, dinner, a trip to a farm and a weed-infused cooking class. Some of them will buy and smoke, some are just curious, but they’re all here for the pot.
•My 420 Tours has packages from $1,295pp, including two nights’ accommodation. Spirotours has half-day tours from $399pp
$1295 for a 2 day tour in a country where you can speak the language and so forth o_O ?!
OK !0 -
That may be the answer...Pulpstar said:
Lennon check your inbox - if you post it here it'll be smashed into.Lennon said:Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?
He places the bet, the posts it.
It gets smashed into (say to 10/1) and then he either closes out or sells it to someone on here at 12/1 and books the profit...
0 -
This definitely had an effect, but I think it is overstated. The populations of Utah and Connecticut have very similar ethnic stock, for example. For me, the main cultural differences are more down to the legacy of slave plantation-based society in the south.FalseFlag said:
There has always been a regional divide due to settlement patterns, Puritan Yankees, Cavalier Southerners, Quaker Pennsylvania and hillbilly Northern Irish. David Hackett Fisher wrote a good book on it.Socrates said:
Strongly agree. The South is now very differently politically to the rest of the US. Whites in the deep south now vote Republican to a similar extent that African Americans vote Democratic.Tissue_Price said:
SNIPSocrates said:
Except the Democrats are still the party of the white working class, and are becoming more so. Labour aren't.Tissue_Price said:
I know, SO, I know. I was indulging in lazy shorthand for what antifrank has termed "professionals who are progressive values-driven". And of course the ethnic vote in London is a factor too in Labour's resilience there. It's becoming the equivalent of a Democratic stronghold.SouthamObserver said:
The Metro and the Standard.Tissue_Price said:
Indeed. Some take the Independent.SouthamObserver said:
London is not full of liberal, middle class, Guardian readers, honestly.Tissue_Price said:
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.FrankBooth said:Big swing in London. If that's where the recovery is strongest and the Tories aren't holding up they have problems. New York elected an unashamedly left wing mayor too. You could see in Boris' pleading yesterday about foreign buyers how concerned they are. The dice now seem loaded against the sort of responsible middle class types who were the bedrock of previous Tory wins.
Personally, I don't think religion plays as much of a role here. It's more a matter of cultural identity, of which religion is one part.0 -
There are several in this batch where it clearly isn't.manofkent2014 said:I haven't looked closely at the figures but find it of no surprise that the biggest swing against the Tories happens to be in London where UKIP are weakest....
It makes a nonsense of the 'Vote UKIP get Labour' drivel!
A keep Labour out coalition beckons in certain areas.
0 -
And it seems that Jean-Claude Juncker was aware that something was in the air. Here are his five priorities:
http://juncker.epp.eu/my-priorities
Note number 5:
"My red line in such talks would be the integrity of the single market and its four freedoms; and the possibility to have more Europe within the Eurozone to strengthen the single currency shared so far by 18 and soon by 19 Member States."0 -
''The outcome of the election hinges on whether or not that remains the case. ''
Are you accusing Cameron of brinkmanship? if he's going to come out with proposals to get back UKIP voters, he is cutting it very fine.
That said, last nights yougov wasn't a disaster. For the tories to be on 31 when UKIP is on 19 shows there is potentially a bucket of votes up for grabs.0 -
But such people are often a lot more right wing economically. Exceptionally so if they're in financial services. The Cameroon misdiagnosis from the get-go was treating such upper middle class London swing voters as representative of the overall country's swing voters.antifrank said:
You now find plenty of such professionals in private sector professional services firms.Luckyguy1983 said:
Let's be honest, they would usually be the white collar public sector (or ancillary companies such as The Guardian) workers of this world. Progressive values driven professionals is how they would see themselves. In reality such progressive values 9 times out of 10 tend to align themselves with the holder's material advancement.SimonStClare said:
Would they not be the Polly Toynbee’s of this world?Itajai said:Good analysis from antifrank. Who or what are "professionals who are progressive values-driven".
0 -
I had my biggest laugh of the week this morning. Mrs Harriet Harman himself, the dull Jack Dromey on auntie Beeb tearing to shreds the Home Office statistical model for crime figures that the Labour Government introduced under Jackie Smith.
As he pointed out the 'crime figures' Tory Home office ministers are waving around as proof of the dramatic falls in crime in decades does not include the Fraud and Cyber crime figures, the pursuit of such crimes having been hived off to a separate agency, which is the biggest growth area in the crime industry. When those figures are included crime is up!.
Add to that $exual violence is up and hate crimes were up and poor Jack could barely control himself
Meanwhile in other news Cameron is in Rochester obfuscating about Immigration. Go figure0 -
Now that's an idea... :-)Charles said:
That may be the answer...Pulpstar said:
Lennon check your inbox - if you post it here it'll be smashed into.Lennon said:Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?
He places the bet, the posts it.
It gets smashed into (say to 10/1) and then he either closes out or sells it to someone on here at 12/1 and books the profit...0 -
I'd broadly agree with you there. IIRC Labour voters tend to have a lower average turn-out, hence the Party's traditionally strong GOTV machine.
I've a couple of questions in my head about it all.
What's the likelihood of Labour's polling drawing back a % of Kippers, who don't actually TO on the day? After the experience in SIndy, I'm intrigued by the whole TO vs registered to vote phenomenon. Are Kipper activists as well organised as Labour GOTV machine? They've certainly got a better handle on the local issues than some Lab-Safe-Seaters.
Kippers have caught the mood of the nation as Yes did, but Yes didn't get their vote out as they expected. Will the high % of DNV hamper UKIP beyond the pollster weightings?
Maybe some Kippers here can add their 2p re strategy?Richard_Nabavi said:Regarding those who are currently saying they'll vote UKIP, it is of course true that they are by no means all former Conservative voters: Labour (and even the LibDems) are also losing voters to them, although to date the effect on the Tories has been larger and in that sense UKIP help Labour.
However, what we don't know is how those very sub-groups of UKIP support will behave when it comes to the election. Broadly speaking, there are three scenarios we can consider:
(1) They stay with UKIP, or perhaps UKIP pick up even more voters from the two main parties.
(2) They partially drift back to their former party allegiances as the election comes into focus. This is the scenario which most observers have expected, and it may still occur, at least to some extent. If so, the net effect on the election may be a slight boost to the Tories compared with current polling, simply because there are more ex-Tory voters amongst those currently saying they'll vote UKIP. It won't be a very big effect, though, unless the UKIP vote share unwinds to a large degree, which is looking less likely now than it did a few weeks ago (thanks, Douglas).
(3) same as (2), but the drift back is not symmetrical. If either Labour or the Conservatives can successfully attract back a disproprotionate number of their former voters compared with the number the other main party can attract back, victory beckons.
I think it will be very hard for Labour to get the advantage in any such asymmetry, essentially because they haven't got any policies to do so and if they did, they'd alienate the ex-LibDem group who are even more important to them.
Can the Conservatives get the advantage here? In principle it should be possible - the Tory-to-UKIP switchers should be responsive both on the EU and immigration issues, and perhaps on the economy as well. At the moment, though, those message are not being heeded. The outcome of the election hinges on whether or not that remains the case.0 -
Just back it!Lennon said:Hmm... I think that I've found a 25/1 punt that should be significantly shorter, but which I still think is going to lose and is unlikely to shorten in the market so I don't see a way of trading out of. Any thoughts as to how one might play it before I put it up as a suggestion?
0 -
Two weeks to go before the new areas of Qualified Majority Voting in Brussels comes to fruition and the UK loses vetoes over tens of areas:
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs
Rules concerning the Armaments Agency
Freedom to establish a business
Self-employment access rights
Freedom, security and justice – cooperation and evaluation
Border checks
Asylum
Immigration
Crime prevention incentives
Eurojust
Police cooperation
Europol
Transport
European Central Bank
Culture
Structural and Cohension Funds
Organisation of the Council of the European Union
European Court of Justice
Freedom of movement for workers
Social security
Criminal judicial cooperation
Criminal law
President of the European Council election
Foreign Affairs High Representative election
Funding the Common Foreign and Security Policy
Common defense policy
Withdrawal of a member state
General economic interest services
Diplomatic and consular protection
Citizens initiative regulations
Intellectual property
Eurozone external representation
Sport
Space
Energy
Tourism
Civil protection
Administrative cooperation
Emergency international aid
Humanitarian aid
Response to natural disasters or terrorism
Economic and Social Committee
Committee of the Regions
Economic and Social Committee
The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
0 -
The likelihood of movement away from UKIP is almost certainly more likely to favour the Tories than Labour or Lib Dems (who are often ex Labour)
Whilst some will complain about immigration, it will be nothing compared to the threat of wealth taxes, unemployment, anti-business etc when the big day comes.
That will leave some of those with the most to lose most sliding back into Tory ranks. It will be those who have nothing to lose that will remain most loyal to the Kippers, and they are Labour demographics.
The money will back the path of least risk and disruption.
Low interest rates, excellent employment numbers and an aversion to extra taxes remain trump cards next May.0 -
We will no longer have a budget veto?manofkent2014 said:Two weeks to go before the new areas of Qualified Majority Voting in Brussels comes to fruition and the UK loses vetoes over tens of areas:
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs
Rules concerning the Armaments Agency
Freedom to establish a business
Self-employment access rights
Freedom, security and justice – cooperation and evaluation
Border checks
Asylum
Immigration
Crime prevention incentives
Eurojust
Police cooperation
Europol
Transport
European Central Bank
Culture
Structural and Cohension Funds
Organisation of the Council of the European Union
European Court of Justice
Freedom of movement for workers
Social security
Criminal judicial cooperation
Criminal law
President of the European Council election
Foreign Affairs High Representative election
Funding the Common Foreign and Security Policy
Common defense policy
Withdrawal of a member state
General economic interest services
Diplomatic and consular protection
Citizens initiative regulations
Intellectual property
Eurozone external representation
Sport
Space
Energy
Tourism
Civil protection
Administrative cooperation
Emergency international aid
Humanitarian aid
Response to natural disasters or terrorism
Economic and Social Committee
Committee of the Regions
Economic and Social Committee
The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.0 -
Reading some of Douglas Carswell's tweets today, the tories have made themselves a very capable and tough enemy there.
0 -
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?RobD said:
We will no longer have a budget veto?manofkent2014 said:Two weeks to go before the new areas of Qualified Majority Voting in Brussels comes to fruition and the UK loses vetoes over tens of areas:
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs
Rules concerning the Armaments Agency
Freedom to establish a business
Self-employment access rights
Freedom, security and justice – cooperation and evaluation
Border checks
Asylum
Immigration
Crime prevention incentives
Eurojust
Police cooperation
Europol
Transport
European Central Bank
Culture
Structural and Cohension Funds
Organisation of the Council of the European Union
European Court of Justice
Freedom of movement for workers
Social security
Criminal judicial cooperation
Criminal law
President of the European Council election
Foreign Affairs High Representative election
Funding the Common Foreign and Security Policy
Common defense policy
Withdrawal of a member state
General economic interest services
Diplomatic and consular protection
Citizens initiative regulations
Intellectual property
Eurozone external representation
Sport
Space
Energy
Tourism
Civil protection
Administrative cooperation
Emergency international aid
Humanitarian aid
Response to natural disasters or terrorism
Economic and Social Committee
Committee of the Regions
Economic and Social Committee
The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.0
