Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Predicting the election: What the leading academic teams ar

SystemSystem Posts: 12,651
edited March 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Predicting the election: What the leading academic teams are saying

We got a name check from YouGov polling head Jo Twyman, at the opening of today’s conference at the LSE when different academic groups made their predictions.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    Even more gutted I couldn't go to this event now.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited March 2015
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    Also, one word or two? Pick the answer and stick with it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Oh look, it's all remarkably close to my competition entry.
  • TookieTBookieTookieTBookie Posts: 10
    That's one heck of a range, especially on the LD seats - 10-48. It would indeed be a psephological wankfest if Stegmaier & Williams came to pass
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,854
    No Baxter on that table?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Burnap and heavy friends are remarkably optimistic about Jim Murphy's efforts.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    63 seat spread on the Cons , 51 on the Lab side.

    Lowest Lab on 261 more likely to be breached than the 312 upper limit I'd suggest.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,741
    Updated part-ELBOW for the week so far (with, I believe, just Opinium and Sunday YG left to come):

    Labour and Tories lead one another by a massive...... 0.0% (just like two Sundays ago!)
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    One forecaster thinks 9 SNP
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    No-one's predicting a majority, then.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Burnap and heavy friends are remarkably optimistic about Jim Murphy's efforts.

    Sloan and Southern are clearly not well placed to understanding Scotland.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    Anorak said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    Also, one word or two? Pick the answer and stick with it.
    Urban Dictionary has it as one word
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Did someone say "wonk-fest" ?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,792
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    No, but you wish you had!

    Some of these guys have been smoking that waccy baccy, no? Con 233? It would win me shedloads, but not in my wildest dreams do I imagine it likely.

    Hanretty looks pretty plausible, apart from its UKIP prediction. I have them down for three minimum, but that wouldn't alter the overall pattern of results much.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    Were you with the 2nd forecaster!!!!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Anorak said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Burnap and heavy friends are remarkably optimistic about Jim Murphy's efforts.

    Sloan and Southern are clearly not well placed to understanding Scotland.
    LOL!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    I'd check their forecasts from last time tbh
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,942
    edited March 2015
    ARSE is so far out from all the other predictions do we put it down as another PB embarrassment like Angus Reid or merely an outlier?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    bigjohnowls said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    Were you with the 2nd forecaster!!!!
    Well they have the Lib Dems on 48
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    TGOHF said:

    63 seat spread on the Cons , 51 on the Lab side.

    Lowest Lab on 261 more likely to be breached than the 312 upper limit I'd suggest.

    They all show net Labour gains, even though many of them have an extinction level event for Scottish Labour.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    Consider the alternative, of course.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    I wonder what Stegmaier & Williams methodology is..

    Lab/SNP looks like the only viable government from all but the bottom two forecasts.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    edited March 2015
    I'm dropping Mike a text that I and a few other PBers would like to offer odds to the chaps predicting

    9 SNP, 48 Lib Dems and 233 Tories

    Please form an orderly queue if you'd like to join in
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Pulpstar said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    I'd check their forecasts from last time tbh
    Last time was of course particularly tricky because of the Cleggasm, but see here:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/05/
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,942
    FPT.TGOHF

    "Rupert Murdoch ✔ @rupertmurdoch
    Thanks for 2 mentions, Ed Miliband. Only met once for all of 2 minutes when you embarrassed me with over the top flattery."

    Extraordinary. Who but a fetid vulgarian would send a tweet like that?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Roger said:

    ARSE is so far out from all the other predictions do we put it down as another PB embarrassment like Angus Reid or merely an outlier?

    How about you wait and see how the election goes before calling a particular forecast an embarrassment? You wouldnt want to get a reputation as a poster who makes very wrong calls very prematurely.

  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,792
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    What's more, Richard, none of them puts either Party within 19 seats of an overall majority (and rather perversely Labour come closest with 306).

    You can't often say that a 1/5 shot is value, but NOM at that price with Betfair is an exception.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Roger said:

    ARSE is so far out from all the other predictions do we put it down as another PB embarrassment like Angus Reid or merely an outlier?

    Or do we wait to see who is right first ?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    SNP seats - 55, 49, 49, 47, 40, 38 and er, 9..? – brave call by BGSS&W.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    Were you with the 2nd forecaster!!!!
    Well they have the Lib Dems on 48
    Old joke from when David Pleat managed the Owls

    How do you know if a girl in Sheffield is a Prosser

    They have a Pleat in their Skirt

    Should now read they are forecasting EICIPM
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited March 2015
    Roger said:

    FPT.TGOHF

    "Rupert Murdoch ✔ @rupertmurdoch
    Thanks for 2 mentions, Ed Miliband. Only met once for all of 2 minutes when you embarrassed me with over the top flattery."

    Extraordinary. Who but a fetid vulgarian would send a tweet like that?

    Woger - I once had red wine with fish or even may even have worn tweed outside shooting season but I would never stoop to post a tweet by the dirty Digger after his Braveheart conversion during Sindy ref.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    Consider the alternative, of course.
    Quite possibly.

    After all, the saying that "An economist is an expert who will be able to tell you tomorrow why what he forecast yesterday didn't happen today" applies to psephologists as well.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    If SNP 9 comes to pass then A I will be poorer and B those guys are geniuses.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    SimonStClare said:

    SNP seats - 55, 49, 49, 47, 40, 38 and er, 9..? – brave call by BGSS&W.

    If Burnap is right, Christmas, Easter and about 5 birthdays are cancelled at Chez Pulpstar.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    Roger said:

    ARSE is so far out from all the other predictions do we put it down as another PB embarrassment like Angus Reid or merely an outlier?

    BJESUS sits mid range
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,179
    edited March 2015
    Don't know about psephologists, aren't some of the above law firms? :-)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    Consider the alternative, of course.
    Labour would need about a hundred gains from the Conservatives to win a majority at the same time as losing Scotland to the SNP, so the only realistic alternative is a Conservative majority - I think Pulpstar and others already came to the conclusion this morning...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    On 12th Feb, at the London polling event I went to, Lebo forecast Con - 322 and Lab - 254.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,741
    How come a lot of the predictions have stuck LDs and SNP or both in with "others"?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,325
    http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-03-27/first-reporter-convicted-in-elveden-trial-has-conviction-quashed/
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Can only assume the SNP "9" prediction hasn't been updated since last summer ?

    Suggest both Rod and Jack are outside the range of these "academics" ?
  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,179
    I've regularly introduced the word "wankfest" onto PB, but I don't think I'm responsible for this one.

    Anyway, apart from some outlandish predictions, it is all pretty consistent with what looks ever increasingly likely - Ed Miliband is about to become Prime Minister.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    dr_spyn said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-03-27/first-reporter-convicted-in-elveden-trial-has-conviction-quashed/

    Another CPS victory....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Casino_Royale said:

    On 12th Feb, at the London polling event I went to, Lebo forecast Con - 322 and Lab - 254.

    Have Dave's ratings tanked that much since then ?!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    S&W model forecasts the best part of 85 Labour gains from the Tories in E&W.

    I'd like to have some of what they're smoking.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    edited March 2015
    6 have Lab most seats 6 Tories most seats (LAB in to 3.05 on Betfair)
    11 have EICIPM against 1 that has EWNBPM (EICIPM 2.42 Betfair)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    Pulpstar said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    On 12th Feb, at the London polling event I went to, Lebo forecast Con - 322 and Lab - 254.

    Have Dave's ratings tanked that much since then ?!
    No. I have my doubts about these numbers. Lebo explained his model and it's been consistent for months.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    No Kellner, no ARSE...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    Peter_the_Punter said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    What's more, Richard, none of them puts either Party within 19 seats of an overall majority (and rather perversely Labour come closest with 306).

    You can't often say that a 1/5 shot is value, but NOM at that price with Betfair is an exception.
    NOM is basically buying free money now.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I think these predictions need a "date made" beside them.
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    FPT

    Nick Palmer: "What is this 2% lead of which you speak? I'm aware of two polls in the last couple of days that weren't a tie - one had Con+2, the other Lab +2. Everything else has been +1 to -1.TFPT"

    Nick .... as I stated in my post the 2% Tory lead (i.e. 34% vs 32%) is as applied by Stephen Fisher - check this out on his website as necessary. Exactly how he arrived at these figures I know not, but doutless it's all set out in his small print.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,767
    Candidates are all getting floods of NGO material. A small prize for drama goes to this one:
    -----
    UK's FUTURE ON THE LINE

    With a controversial referendum in Scotland behind us – for the time being - a General Election and a new Government just around the corner, increasing devolution of power around the country, and the longer-term prospect of a referendum and further renegotiation of the UK’s relationship with Europe, this is a critical time for the UK.

    Prospective parliamentary candidates will be honing their messages to voters, and, if past turn-out is an indicator of future engagement in General Elections, those carefully-thought-out words will fall on largely deaf ears – so it’s time to talk about some of the issues that affect real people every day…
    -----
    So what is it about? Er, it's a proposal to paint road markings more often, from the Road Safety markings Association.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,942
    Neil

    "How about you wait and see how the election goes before calling a particular forecast an embarrassment? You wouldnt want to get a reputation as a poster who makes very wrong calls very prematurely."

    Apart from the 'very prematurely' I think your warning's too late
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    OblitusSumMe said:

    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    Consider the alternative, of course.
    Labour would need about a hundred gains from the Conservatives to win a majority at the same time as losing Scotland to the SNP, so the only realistic alternative is a Conservative majority - I think Pulpstar and others already came to the conclusion this morning...
    Yes, I've backed Con majority for £40 at 7.8 and now it's drifted to 8.2/8.6 !
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    How come a lot of the predictions have stuck LDs and SNP or both in with "others"?

    Two-body problems are much simpler than six-body problems. So you produce a much simpler model if you assume it's just a two-party contest between Labour and Conservative, and then tack on some others afterwards.

    I guess we'll see how valid that approximation is on May 8th.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Pulpstar said:

    SimonStClare said:

    SNP seats - 55, 49, 49, 47, 40, 38 and er, 9..? – brave call by BGSS&W.

    If Burnap is right, Christmas, Easter and about 5 birthdays are cancelled at Chez Pulpstar.
    Having studded the above table in detail, my prediction is most experts are winging it.


    I think you're safe - after May, there will still be food on the table at Chez Pulpstar :)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 64,186
    Pulpstar said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    Consider the alternative, of course.
    Labour would need about a hundred gains from the Conservatives to win a majority at the same time as losing Scotland to the SNP, so the only realistic alternative is a Conservative majority - I think Pulpstar and others already came to the conclusion this morning...
    Yes, I've backed Con majority for £40 at 7.8 and now it's drifted to 8.2/8.6 !
    It might come in on the night if the Tories do better than expected.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    One of the things that we are seeing in this table is the problem of seeing everyone's best guess. This means that the results cluster much more closely than they should. Is it unthinkable that Labour will get fewer than 260 seats or more than 315? Of course it isn't - that's quite a narrow band. Similarly, is it unthinkable that UKIP will get more than five seats? No, of course not.

    I expect most of these forecasters would readily acknowledge the possibility of other results.

    Probability distributions would be more helpful.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited March 2015
    Overhearing a sadly superficial discussion between 2 ladies, they were not impressed by politicians (although as I say their reasoning was not deep) and were totally undecided. I put them down as Green. One thought Caroline Lucas MP deserved to be re-elected because she was an 'outsider' to the system, nothing to do with policy - and of course she was charming sweetness and light.
    Yesterdays interviews/debates did not budge them either way.
    On that basis I think there is all to play for and every chance of one or other party with a majority.

    On the subject of Lucas I see she wants an alliance with the SNP, no surprise as Greens are essentially far left if policy is to be examined and are happy to break the system as a precursor to getting their way.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,237
    As the advocate said to the judge you may not be any wiser but you are hopefully better informed!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    Casino_Royale said:

    S&W model forecasts the best part of 85 Labour gains from the Tories in E&W.

    I'd like to have some of what they're smoking.

    The Conservatives would have to be losing seats like Basildon South and East Thurrock, Burton, Reading West, Rugby, Battersea. For that to happen, they'd have to be 2-3% behind in England and Wales. Not completely beyond the bounds of possibility, if it's a really bad night, but significantly worse than current polling.
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    hast gora list o yon academics 2010 predictions youth?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    The 33 different possible coalitions and power sharing deals...

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11497669/Every-single-possible-coalition-and-post-election-power-sharing-deal-in-one-chart.html
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,848
    FPT
    TheWatcher said:

    » show previous quotes
    Wee Jimmy Krankie's more your thing.

    You stick to your dogging and stop trying to guess human beings tastes
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Sean_F said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    S&W model forecasts the best part of 85 Labour gains from the Tories in E&W.

    I'd like to have some of what they're smoking.

    The Conservatives would have to be losing seats like Basildon South and East Thurrock, Burton, Reading West, Rugby, Battersea. For that to happen, they'd have to be 2-3% behind in England and Wales. Not completely beyond the bounds of possibility, if it's a really bad night, but significantly worse than current polling.
    I've got Reading West down as an outside shot for Labour :)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    edited March 2015
    Hmmmm....

    BBC bosses insist it is due to "heightened sensitivities" and to avoid accusations of a conflict of interest, and the father-of-four will be back after May.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11498823/BBC-Radio-DJ-vents-anger-after-being-ousted-for-getting-engaged-to-Tory-MP.html

    Will Peston, Ben Wright, etc be bumped to the graveyard shifts during the GE's due to being relations of Labourites? What about Craig Oliver's wife who is a newsreader?

    I think if the BBC took this policy across the board and clear out all those who are connected to politicians and political families, not sure they could keep the lights on.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Good afternoon all and what struck me was the substantial change in Stephen Fisher's team prediction from last week. Have read their reasoning beyond the methodology which whether correct or not, is easy to follow.

    This brings me back to my recurring comment, what chance Labour end up with fewer seats on 8th May than in 2010?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Easterross said:

    Good afternoon all and what struck me was the substantial change in Stephen Fisher's team prediction from last week. Have read their reasoning beyond the methodology which whether correct or not, is easy to follow.

    This brings me back to my recurring comment, what chance Labour end up with fewer seats on 8th May than in 2010?

    Zero
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    surbiton said:

    Easterross said:

    Good afternoon all and what struck me was the substantial change in Stephen Fisher's team prediction from last week. Have read their reasoning beyond the methodology which whether correct or not, is easy to follow.

    This brings me back to my recurring comment, what chance Labour end up with fewer seats on 8th May than in 2010?

    Zero
    That's absurd.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    It was a significant moment, because it was the Syria vote that Miliband himself selected as the best example of his suitability to be Prime Minister of this country.

    And it was a lie. A total, and utter misrepresentation of what Ed Miliband did, and did not do, over the Syria vote. He knows it’s a lie, the shadow cabinet know it’s a lie, Labour MPs know it’s a lie.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11499438/Ed-Miliband-is-peddling-a-lie-about-his-volte-face-on-Syria.html
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    surbiton said:

    Easterross said:

    Good afternoon all and what struck me was the substantial change in Stephen Fisher's team prediction from last week. Have read their reasoning beyond the methodology which whether correct or not, is easy to follow.

    This brings me back to my recurring comment, what chance Labour end up with fewer seats on 8th May than in 2010?

    Zero
    Certainly not zero, if say, 35 seats go in Scotland.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited March 2015
    antifrank said:

    One of the things that we are seeing in this table is the problem of seeing everyone's best guess. This means that the results cluster much more closely than they should. Is it unthinkable that Labour will get fewer than 260 seats or more than 315? Of course it isn't - that's quite a narrow band. Similarly, is it unthinkable that UKIP will get more than five seats? No, of course not.

    I expect most of these forecasters would readily acknowledge the possibility of other results.

    Probability distributions would be more helpful.

    Fisher of course does provide error bars, currently for example he has:

    Con: 296 (251– 343 at 95% confidence limits)

    So, yes, in general commentators and punters under-estimate the probability of reasonably large shifts from the current position. Of course as the election gets closer polls start to become more and more reliable as predictors. We're pretty close now, so I wouldn't expect big shifts from current polling - however a shift of a few points makes quite a big difference in seats, so the full outcome is quite uncertain.

    Overall, it looks like a hung parliament, Con most seats slightly more likely than Lab, Lab Maj out of reach, Con Maj still in reach but unlikely, SNP surge nailed on, LibDems floundering, UKIP around 3.

    Basically everyone loses apart from the SNP.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,115
    NickPalmer said:

    Candidates are all getting floods of NGO material. A small prize for drama goes to this one:
    -----
    UK's FUTURE ON THE LINE

    With a controversial referendum in Scotland behind us – for the time being - a General Election and a new Government just around the corner, increasing devolution of power around the country, and the longer-term prospect of a referendum and further renegotiation of the UK’s relationship with Europe, this is a critical time for the UK.

    Prospective parliamentary candidates will be honing their messages to voters, and, if past turn-out is an indicator of future engagement in General Elections, those carefully-thought-out words will fall on largely deaf ears – so it’s time to talk about some of the issues that affect real people every day…
    -----
    So what is it about? Er, it's a proposal to paint road markings more often, from the Road Safety markings Association.

    Actually more relevant than you possibly think. Road signage is one of the very few additional powers for Scotland that survived the Vow and the Smith Commission - and even then it's being watered down.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    but you were thinking it :-)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    antifrank said:

    One of the things that we are seeing in this table is the problem of seeing everyone's best guess. This means that the results cluster much more closely than they should. Is it unthinkable that Labour will get fewer than 260 seats or more than 315? Of course it isn't - that's quite a narrow band. Similarly, is it unthinkable that UKIP will get more than five seats? No, of course not.

    I expect most of these forecasters would readily acknowledge the possibility of other results.

    Probability distributions would be more helpful.

    Fisher of course does provide error bars, currently for example he has:

    Con: 296 (251– 343 at 95% confidence limits)

    So, yes, in general commentators and punters under-estimate the probability of reasonably large shifts from the current position. Of course as the election gets closer polls start to become more and more reliable as predictors. We're pretty close now, so I wouldn't expect big shifts from current polling - however a shift of a few points makes quite a big difference in seats, so the full outcome is quite uncertain.

    Overall, it looks like a hung parliament, Con most seats slightly more likely than Lab, Lab Maj out of reach, Con Maj still in reach but unlikely, SNP surge nailed on, LibDems floundering, UKIP around 3.

    Basically everyone loses apart from the SNP.
    I would add in the wildcard that isam keeps noting, which is that polling this time round is not necessarily as reliable as in previous cycles because the pollsters don't know what to make of the kippers (and to a lesser extent the SNP). So while opinion may be slowly setting, we can't be too confident that the pollsters are accurately picking up how it is setting.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited March 2015
    Scott_P said:

    It was a significant moment, because it was the Syria vote that Miliband himself selected as the best example of his suitability to be Prime Minister of this country.

    And it was a lie. A total, and utter misrepresentation of what Ed Miliband did, and did not do, over the Syria vote. He knows it’s a lie, the shadow cabinet know it’s a lie, Labour MPs know it’s a lie.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11499438/Ed-Miliband-is-peddling-a-lie-about-his-volte-face-on-Syria.html

    Yep, Dan H is spot-on on that. Labour's attempt to rewrite history is breath-takingly cynical.

    It was Ed's weakness in allowing himself to be pushed into breaking his word, on a matter of international importance, which pushed me from the 'Ed's useless but relatively harmless" camp into the realisation that he will be an unmitigated disaster.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    edited March 2015
    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    antifrank said:

    One of the things that we are seeing in this table is the problem of seeing everyone's best guess. This means that the results cluster much more closely than they should. Is it unthinkable that Labour will get fewer than 260 seats or more than 315? Of course it isn't - that's quite a narrow band. Similarly, is it unthinkable that UKIP will get more than five seats? No, of course not.

    I expect most of these forecasters would readily acknowledge the possibility of other results.

    Probability distributions would be more helpful.

    Fisher of course does provide error bars, currently for example he has:

    Con: 296 (251– 343 at 95% confidence limits)

    So, yes, in general commentators and punters under-estimate the probability of reasonably large shifts from the current position. Of course as the election gets closer polls start to become more and more reliable as predictors. We're pretty close now, so I wouldn't expect big shifts from current polling - however a shift of a few points makes quite a big difference in seats, so the full outcome is quite uncertain.

    Overall, it looks like a hung parliament, Con most seats slightly more likely than Lab, Lab Maj out of reach, Con Maj still in reach but unlikely, SNP surge nailed on, LibDems floundering, UKIP around 3.

    Basically everyone loses apart from the SNP.
    I would add in the wildcard that isam keeps noting, which is that polling this time round is not necessarily as reliable as in previous cycles because the pollsters don't know what to make of the kippers (and to a lesser extent the SNP). So while opinion may be slowly setting, we can't be too confident that the pollsters are accurately picking up how it is setting.
    Thanks for the name check!

    What I find quite mystifying are the Ukip scores in the last three ICM polls

    One UK (or GB I don't know the difference!)
    One Scotland only
    One London only

    Ukip got 9%, 7% & 9%

    I can't make sense of that.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,205
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    So, when you get 12 groups of academics, every one of which is forecasting a hung parliament, what should you do?

    I'd check their forecasts from last time tbh
    Last time was of course particularly tricky because of the Cleggasm.
    We are still some distance from when the polls began to move apart in 2010, and still well short of when the Cleggasm occurred. Click to enlarge...

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Clear as mud. When were these predictions made? Is there a link to the predictions?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    I'd love to know where UKIP are getting 7% from in Scotland.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,451
    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    antifrank said:

    One of the things that we are seeing in this table is the problem of seeing everyone's best guess. This means that the results cluster much more closely than they should. Is it unthinkable that Labour will get fewer than 260 seats or more than 315? Of course it isn't - that's quite a narrow band. Similarly, is it unthinkable that UKIP will get more than five seats? No, of course not.

    I expect most of these forecasters would readily acknowledge the possibility of other results.

    Probability distributions would be more helpful.

    Fisher of course does provide error bars, currently for example he has:

    Con: 296 (251– 343 at 95% confidence limits)

    So, yes, in general commentators and punters under-estimate the probability of reasonably large shifts from the current position. Of course as the election gets closer polls start to become more and more reliable as predictors. We're pretty close now, so I wouldn't expect big shifts from current polling - however a shift of a few points makes quite a big difference in seats, so the full outcome is quite uncertain.

    Overall, it looks like a hung parliament, Con most seats slightly more likely than Lab, Lab Maj out of reach, Con Maj still in reach but unlikely, SNP surge nailed on, LibDems floundering, UKIP around 3.

    Basically everyone loses apart from the SNP.
    I would add in the wildcard that isam keeps noting, which is that polling this time round is not necessarily as reliable as in previous cycles because the pollsters don't know what to make of the kippers (and to a lesser extent the SNP). So while opinion may be slowly setting, we can't be too confident that the pollsters are accurately picking up how it is setting.
    Thanks for the name check!

    What I find quite mystifying are the Ukip scores in the last three ICM polls

    One UK (or GB I don't know the difference!)
    One Scotland only
    One London only

    Ukip got 9%, 7% & 9%

    I can't make sense of that.
    9% for London is about right, I think. 7% for Scotland is far too high (more like 2% IMHO). But neither is compatible with 9% nationwide.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Yep, Dan H is spot-on on that. Labour's attempt to rewrite history is breath-takingly cynical

    So the obvious questions are;

    1. Since everyone knows he was lying, will it come up in any of the other TV formats?

    2. If he really could stand up to "the Leader of the Free World" (sic), why can't he tell Eck where to shove his tartan trews?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Fun and games...

    @LabourList: Coventry North West: Might Geoffrey Robinson stay on as an MP after all? http://labli.st/1Eb9YVF
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Scott_P said:

    It was a significant moment, because it was the Syria vote that Miliband himself selected as the best example of his suitability to be Prime Minister of this country.

    And it was a lie. A total, and utter misrepresentation of what Ed Miliband did, and did not do, over the Syria vote. He knows it’s a lie, the shadow cabinet know it’s a lie, Labour MPs know it’s a lie.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11499438/Ed-Miliband-is-peddling-a-lie-about-his-volte-face-on-Syria.html
    Yep, Dan H is spot-on on that. Labour's attempt to rewrite history is breath-takingly cynical.

    It was Ed's weakness in allowing himself to be pushed into breaking his word, on a matter of international importance, which pushed me from the 'Ed's useless but relatively harmless" camp into the realisation that he will be an unmitigated disaster.

    Pushed you from the Tory voter camp to the Tory voter camp.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    bigjohnowls said:

    One forecaster thinks 9 SNP

    That seems low?
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    edited March 2015
    A measly old 14%

    May2015 (@May2015NS)
    27/03/2015 14:35
    After a few polls dragged them below 13%, Ukip are now back at 14% in the polls (via May2015.com). pic.twitter.com/KWAMupaNIy
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Scott_P said:

    It was a significant moment, because it was the Syria vote that Miliband himself selected as the best example of his suitability to be Prime Minister of this country.

    And it was a lie. A total, and utter misrepresentation of what Ed Miliband did, and did not do, over the Syria vote. He knows it’s a lie, the shadow cabinet know it’s a lie, Labour MPs know it’s a lie.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11499438/Ed-Miliband-is-peddling-a-lie-about-his-volte-face-on-Syria.html

    I'm still struggling to understand how anyone could actually be criticising Miliband for choosing NOT to side with ISIS.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    DH - My initial impression last night was that it was essentially a tie, but because of the lower expectations attached to Ed Miliband, the prevailing narrative would be that he edged it. And that remains my view this morning.

    But bad for Ed because DH knows why Ed saved us from being on the wrong side in Syria better than Ed does
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Dan's problem is that everyone takes his arguments about as seriously as a pork chop at a ba-mitvah.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,943
    What about Jack's ARSE!
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,767
    Had a look at Fisher's working paper to see where his 2-point Tory bonus comes from. As noted elsewhere, he's given up on swingback. However, he notes that in several recent elections the Tory-Lab difference was typically slightly greater than polls in the final week, especially in 1992 (Major/Kinnock). Caveats: the reverse was true in 2010, and in pre-2010 polling the pollsters used older methods which have been revised.

    There's also some evidence that what happened in earlier elections was that the party seen as leading by miles (not the case this time) lost ground towards the end (presumably because people were scared of giving them too much) - that happened in 1997-2005 and in 1983. It's all quite inconclusive - there might be something there, or not...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    Floater said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wankfest?

    Honest I didn't write that.

    but you were thinking it :-)
    Absolutely not.

    I admire these academics.

    It is economists I think are a great shower of shite, especially when in a group.

    Yes I'm thinking about the 364

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3623669/How-364-economists-got-it-totally-wrong.html
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited March 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    S&W model forecasts the best part of 85 Labour gains from the Tories in E&W.

    I'd like to have some of what they're smoking.

    The Conservatives would have to be losing seats like Basildon South and East Thurrock, Burton, Reading West, Rugby, Battersea. For that to happen, they'd have to be 2-3% behind in England and Wales. Not completely beyond the bounds of possibility, if it's a really bad night, but significantly worse than current polling.
    I've got Reading West down as an outside shot for Labour :)
    Yes, Reading for some reason has been giving Labour some of its more spectacular results in local elections. Probably a better bet than a good few of the seats on Labour's official target list.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,130
    Danny565 said:

    Scott_P said:

    It was a significant moment, because it was the Syria vote that Miliband himself selected as the best example of his suitability to be Prime Minister of this country.

    And it was a lie. A total, and utter misrepresentation of what Ed Miliband did, and did not do, over the Syria vote. He knows it’s a lie, the shadow cabinet know it’s a lie, Labour MPs know it’s a lie.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11499438/Ed-Miliband-is-peddling-a-lie-about-his-volte-face-on-Syria.html
    I'm still struggling to understand how anyone could actually be criticising Miliband for choosing NOT to side with ISIS.


    But no one has the guts to say that that's what was being proposed. And Ed certainly didn't oppose the action on the grounds that he thought the rebels were worse than Assad.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,205
    edited March 2015
    Miliband apparently also lied when he said that he had stood up to Rupert Murdoch, who subsequently tweeted...

    Rupert Murdoch (@rupertmurdoch) March 26, 2015
    Thanks for 2 mentions, Ed Miliband. Only met once for all of 2 minutes when you embarrassed me with over the top flattery.

    http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/rupert-murdoch-mocks-ed-miliband-s-tough-talk-1.856560
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    Oh dear
    Sun Politics ‏@SunPolitics 1m1 minute ago
    Lib Dem arrested over child sex allegation http://sunpl.us/6014N3a4
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Gadfly said:

    Miliband apparently also lied when he said that he had stood up to Rupert Murdoch, who subsequently tweeted...

    Rupert Murdoch (@rupertmurdoch) March 26, 2015
    Thanks for 2 mentions, Ed Miliband. Only met once for all of 2 minutes when you embarrassed me with over the top flattery.

    That would have been at the Freud party. I believe the other Ed was there too.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    tlg86 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Scott_P said:

    It was a significant moment, because it was the Syria vote that Miliband himself selected as the best example of his suitability to be Prime Minister of this country.

    And it was a lie. A total, and utter misrepresentation of what Ed Miliband did, and did not do, over the Syria vote. He knows it’s a lie, the shadow cabinet know it’s a lie, Labour MPs know it’s a lie.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11499438/Ed-Miliband-is-peddling-a-lie-about-his-volte-face-on-Syria.html
    I'm still struggling to understand how anyone could actually be criticising Miliband for choosing NOT to side with ISIS.
    But no one has the guts to say that that's what was being proposed. And Ed certainly didn't oppose the action on the grounds that he thought the rebels were worse than Assad.

    I can't really remember what arguments Ed made, but I remember reading online at the time reports about how sinister some of the rebels were, and how we'd better sticking with Assad as the devil we knew.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025