politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This afternoon’s batch of Ashcroft marginals polling has th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This afternoon’s batch of Ashcroft marginals polling has the battle for most seats on knife edge
@LordAshcroft Blackpool N CON hold pic.twitter.com/gkSBnMPxZr
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Nicky Morgan looks safe.
Good.
Still more than 10% in some of these seats, enough to change the vote significantly.
going to be a long night
Kippers must be spitting bricks being shown to be part of the LibLabConKip.
Overall, the UKIP vote share is up 7.6% on average, in these seats, compared to 2010, equivalent to a national equivalent vote share of 10.7%, if it were repeated across the board.
I hope and think that the public aren't as thick or ignorant as you make out.
FPT: Mr. Bets, cheers for that entertaining reply.
However, just because Ammianus Marcellinus wrote of events from some time ago does not mean his perspective on price fixing of commodities was wrong. That's as silly as saying surrounding the enemy is bad because Hannibal did it at Cannae.
Alas, I do not punt, nor do I have an affinity for lacrosse.
As for fantasy, I do rather like it, from videogames to books and films/TV series.
I also write it, and can heartily recommend these books, written by me, which are both modestly priced and rather well-rated: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thaddeus-White/e/B008C6RU98/
If, as you seem to be, you're on the left, and actively seeking to increase the pay of the self-employed or those on modest incomes, it's your moral duty to buy them. [And you might even like them].
However, I'm not sure this is correct. The reason being that Ashcroft has specifically chosen, on average, seats which he has previously polled with a lower swing for this batch of polls. There is always going to variance in the swing in the Lab - Con battleground, with it being higher than average in some and lower than average in the others. By picking a batch which he has previously identified as having a lower swing, it makes extrapolating the swing to the wider battleground much more difficult.
To show this point if we compare these polls to the last ones done by Ashcroft there has been an average movement of just 0.4% towards the conservatives (or a swing of 0.2%).
Con 207, Lab 190
Harrow East
Con 190 Lab 180
The risk for Labour is that they've picked up the can't-be-arsed vote.
30% Green, 30% Labour, 35% LD; 70% Con and 100% UKIP
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/537044601065197569
I like the Green PPBs though. This one, and the one from last year's EU Parliament campaign.
Could be
LDs 10%, 35 seats
SNP 5% 45 seats
Kipper 10% 3 seats.
Stockton South a slight fly in the ointment.
The interesting point in Loughborough is that the Tory lead has jumped from 3% to 9% without the UKIP vote dropping at all.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.hu/2014/04/and-where-might-ukips-support-go-to.html
This holds up better than some of my older posts.
Or the haven't even registered to vote vote.
That's 42 LAB gains from the Tories in the constituency polls so far.
twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/585405560914366464
My brother is a Labour Party member and only scored 60% in the Labour quiz
Mass immigration
Pro EU
Carbon subsidies
Big welfare state
Soft on crime
At least they stuck to their credentials and recycled a Horrible Histories sketch rather than making something new I guess
I think that's because in marginals people have now been really bombarded with leaflets and direct mails (an average of 8 per voter in my patch, by my estimate) so when they're asked how they'll vote, they immediately think of the local position anyway. We've probably seen most of the squeezing that we're going to see now.
Worth noting that the tip from someone the other day to bet on Tories in Hove looks wrong (in my opinion he was also wrong with his other two, Lincoln and especially Amber Valley). DYOR, though.
One other point of interest of course in all these marginals is the catastrophic collapse in the Lib Dem vote.
Politics is very difficult, I think. Objectivity is hard for both the test creator and the person doing it. For parties, policies change over time and whole political perspectives can shift.
Being a bit rubbish at updating my blog often enough lately [got a small queue of articles waiting], but if I remember I might dig out my old psych textbooks and have a look at the personality tests.
Thomas was often used as a very cheap and nasty one for sales orgs. I liked OPQ - you really needed to understand the methodology to game ti much.
It is a fascinating seat, but I think Andrew will hold on.
I like betting on winners though and since Winner won't allow withdrawals below £20 I've stuck the remainder on Kingswood @ 1.72.
Given that these are seats in which the Lib Dems are not remotely in contention, they would prefer to be losing more votes here in order to reconcile their national vote share with holding onto more votes where it could save MPs.
Their average share in these marginals is 5.2% (-12.1)
Hmm. Can't find references to the Big Five or Myers-Briggs/Keirsey. I knew they were few and far between in my textbooks. Bah. Still, got the actual Keirsey book, which is interesting.
OPQ is very occupational rather than team building orientated. Thomas is just about finding sales killers or "Doers" in their language.
Although my vote is, with no Green, totally up for grabs I've certainly seen enough leaflets and letters to last me a lifetime. I think I'm up to 6 Labour, 5 Conservative and 1 LibDem now.
Before these polls May 2015 had the Conservatives ahead in 9 of the 10 seats polled, they are now ahead in 5.
I play being ENTP nowadays when it suits me, otherwise it's all INTJ. The former is much more socially acceptable
I might even peruse your link
Your creative genius deserves success
I am sympathetic to a lot of green mindset; I worry about the environment, I rarely eat meat, I don't drive when I could get the train etc, but how would I know what they thought from their PEB?
All I get from it is they think if you share skin colour and gender you are categorised as "all the same"
Reality check
It's like getting a council newspaper on Country Life paper stock and full colour. It doesn't feel right with the brand.
It's not very likely to happen but it's probably better than a 2.5% chance. SNP meltdown? I've backed worse 40/1 shots.
I am a novice at this political betting lark, but if I moved my bets after every poll like some do I would have driven myself crazy by now.
No-one needs advice from me on how to bet on politics, but I formed my own opinion some time ago and have stuck to it, my competition entry was Con 302 Lab 270 and I still don't think I will be too far out.
My bets include Con minority at 9/2, which I am happy with, and UKIP 5 seats or more at evens which I am much less happy with.
I do think there are plenty of shy Kippers though and am hopeful of a few surprise wins whilst a couple of the big names don't get in.
5:02PM
My goodness me Scot P. Laura Kinnesburg of the BBC after a whole entire full day in nothern parts comes to a conclusion of sorts. Well with info such as this we must disregard the fact that the SNP is 1-10 on in Dundee West and 1-100 on in Dundee East, that Salmond has a meeting in the city last week packed to the gunnells with two overflows, 20 years of the SNP establishing dominance in the City. Well it is so obvious the great Laura has tweeted.
Scot P get a grip.
Spock was an INTJ, I think.
Mr. Bets, cheers.
Thus whilst the first round of polling showed Con was doing better than average in these seats they may not really have been doing better than average - because of the above two factors.
Plus you have to add that they are 10 different seats (ie big sample) with a good geographical spread - so hard to see why taken together they should behave significantly different from average.
So another new batch of polls in these 10 seats showing just a 2% swing is, in my view, very encouraging for Con.
So we have 10 seats which were previously showing a below-average swing to Labour in aggregate, still showing a below-average swing to Labour. It seems unlikely to me that this has much to do with sample variation.
The last set of Ashcroft polls had a 5% swing and that was just a few weeks ago. It seems unlikely that there has been a dramatic change in the last few weeks given other polling.
What is much more likely, in my view, is that there is something systemic about these seats which is resulting in a below average swing. You say its hard to see why they would behave differently but there are lots of reasons other than geography which alters the level of swing between seats - demographic change, incumbent popularity and campaign activity to name just a few.
Think we will see a substantial improvement in Con vote efficiency.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32216710