politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The YouGov poll at this point in the 2010 race got the CON-
Comments
-
It was all very close on the Ashcroft.Plato said:I''m expecting Berwickshire to go blue too.
HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Berwickshire-Roxburgh-Selkirk-April-2015-Full-tables.S3.pdf
If you add in named candidates the Lib Dems could well be ahead. The Ashcroft pre spiral of silence points to an SNP gain.
Personally I think the Conservatives are the least likely to take the seat.0 -
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.0 -
I've had a tickle on the DUP in Belfast North and South at 4-9 and 3-1 respectively !Neil said:
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.
0 -
I doubt that very much but UKIP vs LibDems Most Votes could be close and Ladbrokes' 5/2 on the Yellow Team could yet prove to be a value bet. I'm expecting them to be within 1% of UKIP, bearing in mind their better organisation and ability to get their vote out.Stickytroll said:UKIP on Thursday will be sub 10%. Who gets most seats will be determined by where those few % go - if anywhere.
0 -
The above quote from Lucy Powell on R5.BannedInParis said:More on the Policy Obelisk
“I don’t think anyone is suggesting that the fact that he’s carved them into stone means, you know, means that he will absolutely, you know, not going to break them or anything like that.”
What I really loved on that was the interjection of interviewer Peter Allen who said:
"Was it really a good idea to say that?"
Lucy Powell:
"Well Yes,....." and continued to prattle on wallowing in her Labour intellectual self confidence.
She was given a get out of jail card and declined!0 -
Lucy Powell has dropped another spectacular clanger. Asked on 5Live this morning whether having to carve their pledges into stone was a sign the public didn’t trust them, Labour’s election chief inexplicably replied:
“I don’t think anyone is suggesting that the fact that he’s carved them into stone means, you know, means that he will absolutely, you know, not going to break them or anything like that.”
Freudian slip?0 -
Especially since Con + LD + DUP + UKIP > 323. This is the crucial consideration for a Con/LD government.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
0 -
True except in conservative dreamlandPulpstar said:
It was all very close on the Ashcroft.Plato said:I''m expecting Berwickshire to go blue too.
HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Berwickshire-Roxburgh-Selkirk-April-2015-Full-tables.S3.pdf
If you add in named candidates the Lib Dems could well be ahead. The Ashcroft pre spiral of silence points to an SNP gain.
Personally I think the Conservatives are the least likely to take the seat.0 -
PFI was stupid I think the Tories still support it.watford30 said:
Hospitals crippled by the costs of Labour's PFI schemes.bigjohnowls said:
Every seat counts.Razedabode said:Just having a browse of the BBC Election feed, and it seems to be a never ending splurge of threats about the NHS from Labour. I know they're trusted on this issue, but to consistently push the "24 hours to save it" line smacks of utter desperation to me (alongside the 6000 nurse losses...)
I've noticed Labours panicky rhetoric more so in the last two days than at any other point in the campaign. Being that the polls are tied, is there any reason for them continue with this stance "if" they seem likely to become largest party?
The NHS is either the most important or 2nd most important issue in all the polls.
Over two thirds of hospitals have forecast deficits nearly all the clinical access standards are worse under the Tories.
It is valid for LAB to point this out.
Much mor significant to Hospitals Financial Crisis is the marginal tariff for Emergency Care and the BCF monies stolen and given to councils for pot holes.
Not to mention Lansleys Conflict of Interest reforms0 -
Fabulous. Made my day.Scott_P said:Oh FFS
@nickeardley: David Cameron is planning to "cling on" in Downing Street after the election, claims Gordon Brown
0 -
The PFI costs would be known.watford30 said:
Hospitals crippled by the costs of Labour's PFI schemes.bigjohnowls said:
Every seat counts.Razedabode said:Just having a browse of the BBC Election feed, and it seems to be a never ending splurge of threats about the NHS from Labour. I know they're trusted on this issue, but to consistently push the "24 hours to save it" line smacks of utter desperation to me (alongside the 6000 nurse losses...)
I've noticed Labours panicky rhetoric more so in the last two days than at any other point in the campaign. Being that the polls are tied, is there any reason for them continue with this stance "if" they seem likely to become largest party?
The NHS is either the most important or 2nd most important issue in all the polls.
Over two thirds of hospitals have forecast deficits nearly all the clinical access standards are worse under the Tories.
It is valid for LAB to point this out.
So this is the Tory government stuffing up the amount required to keep the service running.0 -
BenM said:
The PFI costs would be known.watford30 said:
Hospitals crippled by the costs of Labour's PFI schemes.bigjohnowls said:
Every seat counts.Razedabode said:Just having a browse of the BBC Election feed, and it seems to be a never ending splurge of threats about the NHS from Labour. I know they're trusted on this issue, but to consistently push the "24 hours to save it" line smacks of utter desperation to me (alongside the 6000 nurse losses...)
I've noticed Labours panicky rhetoric more so in the last two days than at any other point in the campaign. Being that the polls are tied, is there any reason for them continue with this stance "if" they seem likely to become largest party?
The NHS is either the most important or 2nd most important issue in all the polls.
Over two thirds of hospitals have forecast deficits nearly all the clinical access standards are worse under the Tories.
It is valid for LAB to point this out.
So this is the Tory government stuffing up the amount required to keep the service running.
No, its due to the hiring of additional nursing staff so that scandals like Mid-Staffs never occur again and patients are properly cared for.
0 -
No. Why?isam said:
Were you at the Matt Forde gig last week?Lennon said:
In terms of 2nd places - I reckon that you should have Bristol West, Norwich South (Assuming that you don't sneak a win in either of them). Then Sheffield Central (although a ridiculously long way behind). Other than that, there is an outside chance in Streatham in my view.Neil said:
That's a big hope. It would be a very distant second place if it came off but right now we have no second places to work on so we'll take what's going.Pulpstar said:
Greens to trounce the yellow peril in Sheffield Central I reckon.Neil said:
That would be a very pleasant surprise. I havent canvassed in Norwich in years so I had presumed from the outside it would be a very tough ask the way local results were going. I'd be more than happy with retaining Brighton Pavilion and getting one or two 2nd places. Anything more would be a bonus.dyedwoolie said:
Greens to come close in Norwich South (have given it them above)0 -
Dave is PM on 289 seats and Fisher's split.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
It's a very weak Gov't though.0 -
20 is the magic number IMO.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
If LAB is more than 20 behind EICIPM is no more IMO
0 -
Belfast North is 1/9 now - I wonder whether people are paying more attention to the opening of postal ballots than they should be...Pulpstar said:
I've had a tickle on the DUP in Belfast North and South at 4-9 and 3-1 respectively !Neil said:
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.
0 -
I think UKIP have a fair chance of coming second in Houghton & Sunderland South.Barnesian said:My prediction:
23:00 7th May
Houghton & Sunderland South
Richard Peter Elvin (UKIP) 5,150
Stewart Hay (Conservative) 8,277
Bridget Phillipson (Labour) 20,106
Others less than 1,000
Con-> Lab swing 2.3%
Caution - there is an MOE.0 -
Well there you go! Cheers, Neil.Neil said:
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.0 -
My prediction.
Con 300
Lab 254
Lib 18
SNP 53
UKIP 3
Plaid 3
Green 1
NI 180 -
Todays Populus EICIPM0
-
It was four years ago today that we voted to reject AV.
Given what we know, and the expected election result, would AV have passed now?
(I know, we don't discuss AV enough)0 -
I got my £25 to win £10 on when the pact was announced and prices hadn't been cut.Neil said:
Belfast North is 1/9 now - I wonder whether people are paying more attention to the opening of postal ballots than they should be...Pulpstar said:
I've had a tickle on the DUP in Belfast North and South at 4-9 and 3-1 respectively !Neil said:
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.
The fact its gone into 1-9 might be a bit of a pointer that McDonnell could be in trouble ?0 -
I don't think so. As a system it's a dog's dinner and confusing as buggery to the average voter. STV or full PR would probably pass though.TheScreamingEagles said:It was four years ago today that we voted to reject AV.
Given what we know, and the expected election result, would AV have passed now?
(I know, we don't discuss AV enough)0 -
He asked who was voting for who and one youngish guy at the front said he was voting for the Pirate partyLennon said:
No. Why?isam said:
Were you at the Matt Forde gig last week?Lennon said:
In terms of 2nd places - I reckon that you should have Bristol West, Norwich South (Assuming that you don't sneak a win in either of them). Then Sheffield Central (although a ridiculously long way behind). Other than that, there is an outside chance in Streatham in my view.Neil said:
That's a big hope. It would be a very distant second place if it came off but right now we have no second places to work on so we'll take what's going.Pulpstar said:
Greens to trounce the yellow peril in Sheffield Central I reckon.Neil said:
That would be a very pleasant surprise. I havent canvassed in Norwich in years so I had presumed from the outside it would be a very tough ask the way local results were going. I'd be more than happy with retaining Brighton Pavilion and getting one or two 2nd places. Anything more would be a bonus.dyedwoolie said:
Greens to come close in Norwich South (have given it them above)0 -
Totally different dynamics, I wouldnt read anything across to Belfast South. (Not that McDonnell doesnt have a battle on his hands .. the murder of a former IRA commander in the middle of his constituency last night will only serve to remind people what's at stake.)Pulpstar said:
I got my £25 to win £10 on when the pact was announced and prices hadn't been cut.Neil said:
Belfast North is 1/9 now - I wonder whether people are paying more attention to the opening of postal ballots than they should be...Pulpstar said:
I've had a tickle on the DUP in Belfast North and South at 4-9 and 3-1 respectively !Neil said:
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.
The fact its gone into 1-9 might be a bit of a pointer that McDonnell could be in trouble ?
0 -
@carrieapples: Responding to Lucy Powell's latest gaffe on #EdStone, Grant Shapps said: http://t.co/Qg2H9IYUjU
£30,000 !!!!!!!!!!0 -
And always remember Ashcroft weights by 2010 recall which suppresses the count of people who recall SNP as they are thinking about Holyrood 2011.Pulpstar said:
It was all very close on the Ashcroft.Plato said:I''m expecting Berwickshire to go blue too.
HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Berwickshire-Roxburgh-Selkirk-April-2015-Full-tables.S3.pdf
If you add in named candidates the Lib Dems could well be ahead. The Ashcroft pre spiral of silence points to an SNP gain.
Personally I think the Conservatives are the least likely to take the seat.0 -
Claim in the Mail today that Obama rejected the stone tablet idea as presumptuous...FrancisUrquhart said:
We he the man behind Ed Stone? As that is the sort of lack of self awareness required to come up with that statement and also the stone.Scott_P said:Oh FFS
@nickeardley: David Cameron is planning to "cling on" in Downing Street after the election, claims Gordon Brown
Perhaps a sign Labour under Axelrod's sway. Or that someone is trying to blame Axelrod for a daft idea...0 -
:-) That's awesome! Great that the party / name is getting out into the public consciousness in some ways. (Now just have to convert that to votes, members, finances, and more candidates next time!)isam said:
He asked who was voting for who and one youngish guy at the front said he was voting for the Pirate partyLennon said:
No. Why?isam said:
Were you at the Matt Forde gig last week?Lennon said:
In terms of 2nd places - I reckon that you should have Bristol West, Norwich South (Assuming that you don't sneak a win in either of them). Then Sheffield Central (although a ridiculously long way behind). Other than that, there is an outside chance in Streatham in my view.Neil said:
That's a big hope. It would be a very distant second place if it came off but right now we have no second places to work on so we'll take what's going.Pulpstar said:
Greens to trounce the yellow peril in Sheffield Central I reckon.Neil said:
That would be a very pleasant surprise. I havent canvassed in Norwich in years so I had presumed from the outside it would be a very tough ask the way local results were going. I'd be more than happy with retaining Brighton Pavilion and getting one or two 2nd places. Anything more would be a bonus.dyedwoolie said:
Greens to come close in Norwich South (have given it them above)0 -
Surprised Mr Green hasn't got a new get rich scheme going...sell giant slabs of stone to suckers at over inflated prices...so everybody can have their motivational pledge card set in stone in their back gardens.Scott_P said:@carrieapples: Responding to Lucy Powell's latest gaffe on #EdStone, Grant Shapps said: http://t.co/Qg2H9IYUjU
£30,000 !!!!!!!!!!0 -
Yes, I very much hope he fails on this. Depressing really how so-called progressive liberal parties are not at all progressive or liberal on the stuff that really matters e.g. free speech and our right to know what those in power are up to.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Urquhart, unsurprising but still displeasing. Let us hope Miliband fails.
Or how they don't seem to care about rulers being subject to the rule of law e.g. Labour's paymaster supporting a man who has been found by a court to have committed multiple and serious breaches of electoral law and the total silence from EdM and others in the Labour hierarchy on such matters.
Is the rule of law optional in such matters when the person in breach is from some favoured minority?
Perhaps one of our Labour supporting posters might care to venture a view.
0 -
AV is confusing but STV would pass?Anorak said:
I don't think so. As a system it's a dog's dinner and confusing as buggery to the average voter. STV or full PR would probably pass though.TheScreamingEagles said:It was four years ago today that we voted to reject AV.
Given what we know, and the expected election result, would AV have passed now?
(I know, we don't discuss AV enough)0 -
It could also be sheer desperation, a clueless campaign strategy - or both?taffys said:Cameron in Twickenham.
Would he be there if he didn;t think it was close?
I'd say both on the evidence thusfar.
It's from UKIP. A bunch of nutters and fruitcakes who will achieve only one thing - a Labour-led Government which, backed by hard Left MPs from elsewhere, will over the next 5 years implement policies which are the complete antithesis of everything UKIP stands for.logical_song said:
Who produced this - it looks like a joke.Pulpstar said:
Rofl Ipswich !Plato said:Errr.... Witney?
https://twitter.com/johnmknox/status/595349493492666370
Eastleigh and Portsmouth South - "Tories can't win here .... let Labour in"????
LibDems or Tories will win or come second. Labour will be nowhere, but probably ahead of UKIP.
So this joke effort with target constituencies is pretty tame in comparison to that...0 -
I'm on the DUP at 5/2 in Belfast South. This could be another heroic loser, but I have heard fro more than once source now that this contest is very close.Neil said:
Totally different dynamics, I wouldnt read anything across to Belfast South. (Not that McDonnell doesnt have a battle on his hands .. the murder of a former IRA commander in the middle of his constituency last night will only serve to remind people what's at stake.)Pulpstar said:
I got my £25 to win £10 on when the pact was announced and prices hadn't been cut.Neil said:
Belfast North is 1/9 now - I wonder whether people are paying more attention to the opening of postal ballots than they should be...Pulpstar said:
I've had a tickle on the DUP in Belfast North and South at 4-9 and 3-1 respectively !Neil said:
There are quite a few competitive seats in Northern Ireland.Anorak said:
I think it's because most people (including me) only have a vague understanding of NI politics. That may be unkind to fellow posters, but that's my perception.Philip_Thompson said:Curious about the practice of writing NI 18 in seat projections. In a Parliament as close as is being forecast the breakdown of that 18 could be critical. Alliance for instance would probably go with Labour but if the Unionists recover that seat then it'd probably be more palatable for Tory and LD than Labour and SNP.
Furthermore, my impression is that sectarian gerrymandering has rendered most seats 'safe' for one party or another
F&ST was the closest of all in 2010 and sees the DUP giving the UUP a clear run against SF. Sadly the UUP are totally crap at politics and the SF machine is legendary so that will probably be a SF hold.
Belfast East saw the leader of the DUP lose his seat in 2010. Nasty, ugly sectarian politics has reared its head since, the point that loyalists and others wanted to make back then has been made and the seat will probably go back to the DUP this time.
Belfast South is always a bit of a turkey shoot and with all parties contesting this time it would be a brave person to call it.
Belfast North is a sectarian headcount between the DUP and SF and is likely to be close.
SF would like to think they have a chance of finally winning Foyle (but tactical voting will hopefully see them off).
Potential shock of the night - Lady Hermon to lose!
That's not a bad proportion of seats that are competitive.
The fact its gone into 1-9 might be a bit of a pointer that McDonnell could be in trouble ?0 -
@SunNation: Just when you thought Labour's #Edstone shambles couldn't get any worse... http://t.co/DNECUslXV7 http://t.co/3rzxRwQYOv0
-
O/T are there any tickets for the all nighter in the pub near Earls Court still left?0
-
@schofieldkevin: Nicola Sturgeon tells @theJeremyVine that the SNP "didn't work with the Tories" at Holyrood between 2007 and 2011. Really?0
-
Genuine question: why do you say that, BJO? He could still get a majority in the Commons even if he were that far behind the Tories (I imagine). Or do you think the legitimacy issue kicks in, whatever the maths?bigjohnowls said:
20 is the magic number IMO.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
If LAB is more than 20 behind EICIPM is no more IMO
0 -
I wonder where the £30,000 came from?Scott_P said:@carrieapples: Responding to Lucy Powell's latest gaffe on #EdStone, Grant Shapps said: http://t.co/Qg2H9IYUjU
£30,000 !!!!!!!!!!
Of course, Labour, to use a phrase, are between a rock and a hard place - their defence might be 'It only cost £15,000'......which doesn't really sound much better, especially if your opponents have been characterising you as spendthrift....0 -
That audio...
https://audioboom.com/boos/3151117-lucy-powell-ed-miliband-might-break-edstone-promisesScott_P said:@SunNation: Just when you thought Labour's #Edstone shambles couldn't get any worse... http://t.co/DNECUslXV7 http://t.co/3rzxRwQYOv
0 -
Razedabode said:
Just having a browse of the BBC Election feed, and it seems to be a never ending splurge of threats about the NHS from Labour. I know they're trusted on this issue, but to consistently push the "24 hours to save it" line smacks of utter desperation to me (alongside the 6000 nurse losses...)
I've noticed Labours panicky rhetoric more so in the last two days than at any other point in the campaign. Being that the polls are tied, is there any reason for them continue with this stance "if" they seem likely to become largest party?
When Labour are really desperate they run home to the comfort blanket of the NHS.
last weekends Sunday Mirror surpassed itself as it had as a headline banner on the top of its front page
"200 hours to save the NHS"
I guess they have used every other figure/week/month combination and SURPRISE!!! the NHS is still here so it must be difficult to get a headline with traction or people are not going to laugh at. TBH that's really not bad hubris from a paper that supports the one party that has inflicted more damage on the NHS then anyone else but still. Also the one party that has the only Labour health minister that has ever privatised an NHS hospital.
Let's not talk about the PFI millstone levelled on the NHS during the Brown / Blair years the damage of which is Still yet to be fully realised.0 -
Well this should get a few more UKIP waverers back to the Tories in Pudsey.
(and what was it Dave said about UKIP?)
LEEDS, England—Parliamentary candidates selected to represent the U.K. Independence Party have told The Daily Beast that they believe 9/11 was a hoax, claimed the British government was to blame for the July 7 London bombings, which killed more than 50 people, and refused to condemn those traveling to live in the so-called Islamic State.
The extraordinary claims cast doubt on UKIP’s credentials as a mainstream political party ahead of the General Election on Thursday. The party, which campaigns for the introduction of tougher immigration controls and an exit from the EU, won the largest share of the vote in Britain’s European elections last year.
Despite UKIP’s anti-immigration stance and history of members being expelled for making Islamophobic or racist remarks, two Muslim immigrants have been selected as candidates in Northern England. During interviews in the Pudsey suburb of Leeds, one of them told The Daily Beast that Tony Blair and George W. Bush had “invented terrorism,” while the other suggested vulnerable animals should be granted the right to claim asylum in Britain like refugees.
http://thebea.st/1zw9yHN0 -
ICM?SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?0 -
People believing / hoping that what they want to be true will be true. Happens all the time, not just in politics.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
0 -
Labour most seats would probably win me a touch more money so there could be a touch of reverse psychology in my prediction.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?0 -
I doubt it's a clueless strategy. It probably reflects that the Tories have done all they can or think they need to do to defend the Lab/Con marginals and limit their potential losses to an acceptable level. Therefore there is more mileage in going after LibDem seats. This has been evident for a while as the Tories seem to have been bombarding the West Country.Bob__Sykes said:
It could also be sheer desperation, a clueless campaign strategy - or both?taffys said:Cameron in Twickenham.
Would he be there if he didn;t think it was close?
I'd say both on the evidence thusfar.
It's from UKIP. A bunch of nutters and fruitcakes who will achieve only one thing - a Labour-led Government which, backed by hard Left MPs from elsewhere, will over the next 5 years implement policies which are the complete antithesis of everything UKIP stands for.logical_song said:
Who produced this - it looks like a joke.Pulpstar said:
Rofl Ipswich !Plato said:Errr.... Witney?
https://twitter.com/johnmknox/status/595349493492666370
Eastleigh and Portsmouth South - "Tories can't win here .... let Labour in"????
LibDems or Tories will win or come second. Labour will be nowhere, but probably ahead of UKIP.
So this joke effort with target constituencies is pretty tame in comparison to that...
0 -
Kellner has as well, when his own polling suggests nothing of the sort. At one point, not in the too distant past he was predicting a easy win on the popular vote for the Tories.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
I haven't heard any explanation from him for his difference, it would be interesting to know.0 -
Mr. T, Labour will lose badly in Scotland. Conservatives will make gains at the expense of Lib Dems, and although the blues will lose some seats to the red in England, I think people remain unenthused by the prospect of 40 years in the wilderness to which Miliband will lead us.
There's also the mood music (Lib Dem desperation, Labour gloomy, Conservatives confident).0 -
I think for some it's poll cherry-picking based on post-hoc reasoning ("ICM is better", "phone polls are better") which may yet turn out to be correct. For others it's "feeling on the ground"/"the voters will suddenly realise they actually have exactly the same opinions as me when they're in the privacy of the polling booth"/"something something 1992 something", etc.Cyclefree said:
People believing / hoping that what they want to be true will be true. Happens all the time, not just in politics.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?0 -
I'm operating under the assumption that the UKIP vote is making the Con vote way, way more efficient - also Labour are going to be nibbled to death by Greens here and there.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
Even after that I only have the Cons ahead by 10, 269 to 279.0 -
My thoughts entirely. Everything points to Labour having most seats and has done consistently throughout the campaign. If the SNP don't indeed sweep away swathes of Labour MPs - and I don't think they will - then Ed won't be that far off a majority.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
It's got me foxed....
About 2 weeks ago I predicted something like 290 Lab, 270 Tory and that assumed big Labour losses in Scotland, and I see no reason to depart from something in that ballpark - I might even have been a bit too generous to the Tories who look set to lose 40-50 seats in E&W, which would mean making up to 15 gains from the LDs. I can't see them doing that.0 -
Zero Plaid seats?calum said:Having tried all possible angles Jim Murphy and David Clegg seem to be looking for the sympathy vote:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2015-jim-murphy-5637727
Anyway the Scottish Sun continues to push hard for the SNP, it will be interesting to see what impact, if any, their support will have when we see the last Scottish polls:
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/ge2015/6441099/Queen-Nic-First-Ministers-winning-formula.html
My overall prediction:
Cons 280
Labour 270
Lib Dems 20
SNP 55
Green 1
UKIP 3
Respect 1
The LibDems is the hardest one to call I think, they could get anything from 15 to 30 seats.0 -
Despite Scotland polling putting the SNP above 50% I am starting to get super nervous about my book.0
-
Quite a lot of the pollsters have the Cons ahead.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
ICM, Ipsos Mori, Opinium, Ashcroft, BMG.
Two of the most accurate pollsters at the last election have the Tories ahead.0 -
Pulpstar The Tory candidate John Lamont is already the MSP for Berwickshire and well known, as I said likely Tory gain0
-
And which party is actively going for the muslim vote?TheScreamingEagles said:Well this should get a few more UKIP waverers back to the Tories in Pudsey.
(and what was it Dave said about UKIP?)
LEEDS, England—Parliamentary candidates selected to represent the U.K. Independence Party have told The Daily Beast that they believe 9/11 was a hoax, claimed the British government was to blame for the July 7 London bombings, which killed more than 50 people, and refused to condemn those traveling to live in the so-called Islamic State.
The extraordinary claims cast doubt on UKIP’s credentials as a mainstream political party ahead of the General Election on Thursday. The party, which campaigns for the introduction of tougher immigration controls and an exit from the EU, won the largest share of the vote in Britain’s European elections last year.
Despite UKIP’s anti-immigration stance and history of members being expelled for making Islamophobic or racist remarks, two Muslim immigrants have been selected as candidates in Northern England. During interviews in the Pudsey suburb of Leeds, one of them told The Daily Beast that Tony Blair and George W. Bush had “invented terrorism,” while the other suggested vulnerable animals should be granted the right to claim asylum in Britain like refugees.
http://thebea.st/1zw9yHN
Oh - the SNP were saying on radio 5-live that they were prepared to work democratically in the next parliament.
Does that square with "Any party as long as it is Labour"?0 -
The only hope for Tories is if the phone polls are right and the online polls are wrongSeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?0 -
I've seen the Voter Intentions for the blues and been reading Labour's view on their stats. The reds are very good at crunching numbers and if you read Labour List they will tell you they are in trouble. The blues stats are good for Con to be largest party. Only outlying opinion polls agree but I don't know what to think of that. Jack W at 304 is plausible according to the data I've seen.FrancisUrquhart said:
Kellner has as well, when his own polling suggests nothing of the sort. At one point, not in the too distant past he was predicting a easy win on the popular vote for the Tories.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
I haven't heard any explanation from him for his difference, it would be interesting to know.
0 -
On the legitimacy of minority government point: I agree with the view that beyond a certain level, Ed could be constitutionally able to form a government, but politically incapable of so doing. The delegitimisation manoeuvres in the Tory-friendly press are only going to intensify if it's a live issue and there's little chance of a collective vow to give a fair representation of the constitution to the public.
What I'm not sure about is what his opponents expect him to do. Assuming that Cameron can't command the confidence of the house, is the idea that Labour should respect the "winners" (as newly defined) and abstain on the Queen's Speech? How far does this go? To abstaining on every Tory bill? Or refraining for voting no confidence but blocking all legislation? Is it an outrage if Labour introduce their own legislation through the various channels open to the opposition, and a majority of MPs (potentially including SNP) vote to enact it? This seems a route that gets absurd pretty quickly.
Or is the correct approach that Labour act in line with the likely wishes of their voters and oppose a Tory QS, leading to Ed being asked to form a government, but then decline to govern due to perceived illegitimacy and trigger a second GE?
0 -
I expect the ICM numbers to be broadly correct.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?0 -
That's my read of the situation to. Either a marginal has long gone or there is nothing more to do and it is safe. Certainly they are focussing on LD seats now.PeterC said:
I doubt it's a clueless strategy. It probably reflects that the Tories have done all they can or think they need to do to defend the Lab/Con marginals and limit their potential losses to an acceptable level. Therefore there is more mileage in going after LibDem seats. This has been evident for a while as the Tories seem to have been bombarding the West Country.Bob__Sykes said:
It could also be sheer desperation, a clueless campaign strategy - or both?taffys said:Cameron in Twickenham.
Would he be there if he didn;t think it was close?
I'd say both on the evidence thusfar.
It's from UKIP. A bunch of nutters and fruitcakes who will achieve only one thing - a Labour-led Government which, backed by hard Left MPs from elsewhere, will over the next 5 years implement policies which are the complete antithesis of everything UKIP stands for.logical_song said:
Who produced this - it looks like a joke.Pulpstar said:
Rofl Ipswich !Plato said:Errr.... Witney?
https://twitter.com/johnmknox/status/595349493492666370
Eastleigh and Portsmouth South - "Tories can't win here .... let Labour in"????
LibDems or Tories will win or come second. Labour will be nowhere, but probably ahead of UKIP.
So this joke effort with target constituencies is pretty tame in comparison to that...
0 -
There must be a Journo somewhere who will ask EdM why Lucy Powell thinks it is ok to smash his stone pledge..0
-
Interesting thoughts by David Goodhart on this point and what it might mean for Labour in future here - http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/05/three-reasons-why-labour-might-not-actually-want-to-govern/. Worth reading the underlying article and not just Ed West's take on it.weejonnie said:
And which party is actively going for the muslim vote?TheScreamingEagles said:Well this should get a few more UKIP waverers back to the Tories in Pudsey.
(and what was it Dave said about UKIP?)
LEEDS, England—Parliamentary candidates selected to represent the U.K. Independence Party have told The Daily Beast that they believe 9/11 was a hoax, claimed the British government was to blame for the July 7 London bombings, which killed more than 50 people, and refused to condemn those traveling to live in the so-called Islamic State.
The extraordinary claims cast doubt on UKIP’s credentials as a mainstream political party ahead of the General Election on Thursday. The party, which campaigns for the introduction of tougher immigration controls and an exit from the EU, won the largest share of the vote in Britain’s European elections last year.
Despite UKIP’s anti-immigration stance and history of members being expelled for making Islamophobic or racist remarks, two Muslim immigrants have been selected as candidates in Northern England. During interviews in the Pudsey suburb of Leeds, one of them told The Daily Beast that Tony Blair and George W. Bush had “invented terrorism,” while the other suggested vulnerable animals should be granted the right to claim asylum in Britain like refugees.
http://thebea.st/1zw9yHN
0 -
Ed's stones was the moment I knew he'd never be PM.0
-
I think MPs like John Mann, Simon Danczuk, Frank Field would Scupper EICIPM if the seat margin is over 20Cyclefree said:
Genuine question: why do you say that, BJO? He could still get a majority in the Commons even if he were that far behind the Tories (I imagine). Or do you think the legitimacy issue kicks in, whatever the maths?bigjohnowls said:
20 is the magic number IMO.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
If LAB is more than 20 behind EICIPM is no more IMO0 -
Going after the west country does nothing to reduce Labour seats though.PeterC said:
I doubt it's a clueless strategy. It probably reflects that the Tories have done all they can or think they need to do to defend the Lab/Con marginals and limit their potential losses to an acceptable level. Therefore there is more mileage in going after LibDem seats. This has been evident for a while as the Tories seem to have been bombarding the West Country.Bob__Sykes said:
It could also be sheer desperation, a clueless campaign strategy - or both?taffys said:Cameron in Twickenham.
Would he be there if he didn;t think it was close?
I'd say both on the evidence thusfar.
It's from UKIP. A bunch of nutters and fruitcakes who will achieve only one thing - a Labour-led Government which, backed by hard Left MPs from elsewhere, will over the next 5 years implement policies which are the complete antithesis of everything UKIP stands for.logical_song said:
Who produced this - it looks like a joke.Pulpstar said:
Rofl Ipswich !Plato said:Errr.... Witney?
https://twitter.com/johnmknox/status/595349493492666370
Eastleigh and Portsmouth South - "Tories can't win here .... let Labour in"????
LibDems or Tories will win or come second. Labour will be nowhere, but probably ahead of UKIP.
So this joke effort with target constituencies is pretty tame in comparison to that...
It's a great strategy to make an Ed Miliband Gov't look illegitimate.
CON Gain Yeovil could be a monster scalp... for Ed !0 -
Moses_ said:Razedabode said:
Just having a browse of the BBC Election feed, and it seems to be a never ending splurge of threats about the NHS from Labour. I know they're trusted on this issue, but to consistently push the "24 hours to save it" line smacks of utter desperation to me (alongside the 6000 nurse losses...)
I've noticed Labours panicky rhetoric more so in the last two days than at any other point in the campaign. Being that the polls are tied, is there any reason for them continue with this stance "if" they seem likely to become largest party?
When Labour are really desperate they run home to the comfort blanket of the NHS.
last weekends Sunday Mirror surpassed itself as it had as a headline banner on the top of its front page
"200 hours to save the NHS"
I guess they have used every other figure/week/month combination and SURPRISE!!! the NHS is still here so it must be difficult to get a headline with traction or people are not going to laugh at. TBH that's really not bad hubris from a paper that supports the one party that has inflicted more damage on the NHS then anyone else but still. Also the one party that has the only Labour health minister that has ever privatised an NHS hospital.
Let's not talk about the PFI millstone levelled on the NHS during the Brown / Blair years the damage of which is Still yet to be fully realised.
According to Labour leaflets, every single hospital will be closed for good if the Tories win! Effing liars.
0 -
SeanT The key is UKIP are on 12/13%+, if Cameron squeezes that vote down to 10% or so he would be on 36%+ and have done a Netanyahu and lead the largest party, even if he wins over not one further Labour or LD voter by polling day0
-
National swing being overweighted by large movement in already-red areas like London?SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
Both of my election game entries have Labour with (a few) more seats than the Tories, but I'm now in the too-close-to-call camp, mostly cos I underestimated the SNP surge (or at least thought it would tail off a bit as we got closer).
0 -
Hmmh. "Pear of Anguish".SeanT said:Are we allowed to have a last minute not-quite-as-official prediction, then?
Here's mine
Tories: 272
Lab: 279
LDs: 25
UKIP: 2
Greens: 1
SNP: 49
Basically what I predicted before, a very narrow Ed Plurality, but with extra lashings of lovable Nats.
And a very hung and messy parliament, with a likely 2nd election after a year of Sturgeon putting Miliband in Skeffington's Gyves
http://www.occasionalhell.com/infdevice/detail.php?recordID=Skeffington's Gyves
Edit: Or maybe the Pear of Anguish
http://www.occasionalhell.com/infdevice/detail.php?recordID=Pear of Anguish
You can just imagine the Monty Python skit where they decide what their new instrument of torture should be called...
"Well itl looks like a Pear"
"Yes, but, that doesn't sound very painful does it..."
Etc, etc
0 -
It's a "Thick of It" moment which resonates with folk like us, but passes by most people - like The Thick of It did itself.AndyJS said:Ed's stones was the moment I knew he'd never be PM.
I remember that fantastic afternoon on here when Brown had his Gillian Duffy "disaster", the highlight of GE2010 for many of us, yet it resonated nothing with voters. Indeed, it may have caused Brown to get a sympathy uplift.
0 -
On the Vote-2012 website Robert Waller has given more details on the Cheltenham constituency polling he did for Harris back in 1987 .
Without candidates names the Lib Dems were in the lead by 5% . Polling with candidates names had the Conservatives 7% in the lead . The final margin was in fact 7.8% .0 -
IMHO, an outcome similar to the last ICM poll would lead to a Conservative plurality.SeanT said:
But most of them, IIRC, are showing swings to Labour, in E&W, sufficient to give Miliband a narrow edge.TheScreamingEagles said:
Quite a lot of the pollsters have the Cons ahead.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
ICM, Ipsos Mori, Opinium, Ashcroft, BMG.
Two of the most accurate pollsters at the last election have the Tories ahead.
The one hope for Tories is that the electoral bias to Labour has almost vanished, thanks to Scotland, the rise of UKIP, LDs going Blue, changing demogs, etc.
If I were a Tory I'd cling to that.
Anyway now I gotta work to pay the vicious extra taxes the Sturgeon-Miliband government will be imposing on me, early Friday morning.
Later.0 -
1. Discard the online polls ENTIRELY. A pbtory would say that, wouldn't he, but their model is much more flawed than the standard flawed Literary Digest model which gets rubbished as an example of how not to do it in chapter 1 of any statistics textbook.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
2. The Sheffield effect, the point of which has always been that it doesn't show up in the polls, only at the moment of truth in the polling booth. The hope was always that people will face up to the fact that ed is crap, which they've secretly known since 2010, at the last minute. The Edstone is an unexpected bonus, genuinely worth - I think - 0.5% off the Lab national vote share.
Realistically though both points should be filed under "hope" rather than "expectation".0 -
Thank you BJO.bigjohnowls said:
I think MPs like John Mann, Simon Danczuk, Frank Field would Scupper EICIPM if the seat margin is over 20Cyclefree said:
Genuine question: why do you say that, BJO? He could still get a majority in the Commons even if he were that far behind the Tories (I imagine). Or do you think the legitimacy issue kicks in, whatever the maths?bigjohnowls said:
20 is the magic number IMO.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
If LAB is more than 20 behind EICIPM is no more IMO
0 -
It is easy to be blindsided by "the Polls" as if they are some homogenous whole. There have been a great number of internet polls, only a few phone polls. This represents an excess of quantity over quality IMO. But we shall see ...Sean_F said:
I expect the ICM numbers to be broadly correct.SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
0 -
I suspect the LDs will end up holding Berwickshire thanks to misplaced Conservative tactical votes. And I suspect the Conservatives will benefit similarly in Dumfrieshire.HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
0 -
One day we're going to find out Lucy Powell is a Tory plant0
-
How closely does the Ashcroft constituency polling methodology resemble the Ashcroft national methodology?
i.e. When deciding whether a party is over or under-performing in the marginals, does it make more sense to compare Ashcroft constituency polls with Ashcroft national, or with poll-of-polls?0 -
Never mind the specific MPs, isn't it blindingly obvious that the Labour Party would be better served by a short spell in opposition, a new leader, and then trying to force a new GE, rather than installing Ed in those circumstances (and having a short spell in government)? I'm curious as to Labour posters' views on this.Cyclefree said:
Thank you BJO.bigjohnowls said:
I think MPs like John Mann, Simon Danczuk, Frank Field would Scupper EICIPM if the seat margin is over 20Cyclefree said:
Genuine question: why do you say that, BJO? He could still get a majority in the Commons even if he were that far behind the Tories (I imagine). Or do you think the legitimacy issue kicks in, whatever the maths?bigjohnowls said:
20 is the magic number IMO.GIN1138 said:
Even if mathematically possible I can't see Ed becoming PM with 257 seats and more than 30 seats behind Con...Pulpstar said:
More the fact that his central projection of Con 289, Lab 257 gives a 50-50 probability of PM Ed. It gives a good indication of why Ed should still be favourite for PM.GIN1138 said:
If LAB is more than 20 behind EICIPM is no more IMO0 -
Re Berwickshire Ashcroft April 2015
But there is somewhat unexpected comfort for the Tories in Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk, where I found them a single point ahead in a three-party scrap (Conservative 30%, SNP 29%, Lib Dems 28%). Clearly this seat could go any one of three ways, and all three parties will try to tell potential tactical voters that they are the only way to stop the other two. Labour voters here say they are more likely to rule out the Tories than the Lib Dems, but how much further can the party’s 9% share be squeezed?
0 -
The methodologies are the same, when it comes to DKs.Stereotomy said:How closely does the Ashcroft constituency polling methodology resemble the Ashcroft national methodology?
i.e. When deciding whether a party is over or under-performing in the marginals, does it make more sense to compare Ashcroft constituency polls with Ashcroft national, or with poll-of-polls?
I looked at this a while back, his national poll is more consistent with his constituency Q1 findings than his Q2 findings.0 -
UK Elect predict
Labour 272
Con 271
SNP 55
LD 27
DUP 9,
SF 5,
PC 3
SDLP 3
UKIP 2
Green 1
Others 2.
LAB most seats 5.5 CON most seats 1.21 Betfair0 -
I'm willing to bet the tactical vote in Dumfriesshire is piling in behind the SNP even as we speak.rcs1000 said:
I suspect the LDs will end up holding Berwickshire thanks to misplaced Conservative tactical votes. And I suspect the Conservatives will benefit similarly in Dumfrieshire.HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
Oh look, I have indeed bet that!
0 -
Any overwhelming desire for change is confined to Scotland. Pithy enough?SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
0 -
There is no "Sheffield effect" for Labour evident in the ICM poll.Ishmael_X said:
2. The Sheffield effect, the point of which has always been that it doesn't show up in the polls, only at the moment of truth in the polling booth.
Labour on THIRTY SEVEN % in Hallam is a very strong indicator that they're doing quite well tbh.
Hallam is simply not the sort of place Labour should be picking up 37%.0 -
I got on Con Dumfrieshire at 7/1 a while back as a long shot. I still think it's a long shot.rcs1000 said:
I suspect the LDs will end up holding Berwickshire thanks to misplaced Conservative tactical votes. And I suspect the Conservatives will benefit similarly in Dumfrieshire.HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
0 -
You are thinking Dumfries & GallowayGhedebrav said:
I got on Con Dumfrieshire at 7/1 a while back as a long shot. I still think it's a long shot.rcs1000 said:
I suspect the LDs will end up holding Berwickshire thanks to misplaced Conservative tactical votes. And I suspect the Conservatives will benefit similarly in Dumfrieshire.HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
Dumfriesshire is where they are incumbent with Mundell.0 -
But how does that square with the polls?botanically_speaking said:
Any overwhelming desire for change is confined to Scotland. Pithy enough?SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?0 -
SPIN gap down one to 24.0
-
An effect which is by definition invisible in polls, is invisible in a poll? Golly.Pulpstar said:
There is no "Sheffield effect" for Labour evident in the ICM poll.Ishmael_X said:
2. The Sheffield effect, the point of which has always been that it doesn't show up in the polls, only at the moment of truth in the polling booth.
Labour on THIRTY SEVEN % in Hallam is a very strong indicator that they're doing quite well tbh.
Hallam is simply not the sort of place Labour should be picking up 37%.
0 -
I think he misunderstood what you meant by "Sheffield effect"Ishmael_X said:
An effect which is by definition invisible in polls, is invisible in a poll? Golly.Pulpstar said:
There is no "Sheffield effect" for Labour evident in the ICM poll.Ishmael_X said:
2. The Sheffield effect, the point of which has always been that it doesn't show up in the polls, only at the moment of truth in the polling booth.
Labour on THIRTY SEVEN % in Hallam is a very strong indicator that they're doing quite well tbh.
Hallam is simply not the sort of place Labour should be picking up 37%.0 -
polls schmolls.Stereotomy said:
But how does that square with the polls?botanically_speaking said:
Any overwhelming desire for change is confined to Scotland. Pithy enough?SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
:-)
0 -
By the way, when's Ashcroft out? 4?0
-
My reasons are:SeanT said:Can someone explain to me in short, pithy sentences, why so many esteemed pb-ers are predicting a Tory plurality when the majority of the polls indicate a Labour plurality, even and despite Scotland?
What are they pinning their hopes/fears on? Tory incumbency? Canvass returns? The betting markets? Tory out-performance in the marginals? Superiority of phone polls? A good hard stare into the scrying glass?
Que?
1. Superiority of phone polls.
2. Not a "change" election - eg more people still blame Labour for cuts, favour Tories on economic management, etc.
3. More Lib Dem seats are vulnerable to Tory challengers than Labour.
4. Scotland wipeout and differential Lib Dem gains imply a target of 50 Labour gains from Tories to reach parity, which is not supported by Ashcroft marginal polling.
5. Some plausible UKIP gains - eg Thurrock, Thanet South - are in Conservative seats that would have been likely Labour gains in UKIPs absence, so are in some sense Labour losses when you look at their target list.
6. History of Labour losing vote share in election after being ejected from government - see 1955, 1974 (Feb) and 1983.0 -
Oh yes, of course. Should know better seeing as my auntie lives there (D&G).Alistair said:
You are thinking Dumfries & GallowayGhedebrav said:
I got on Con Dumfrieshire at 7/1 a while back as a long shot. I still think it's a long shot.rcs1000 said:
I suspect the LDs will end up holding Berwickshire thanks to misplaced Conservative tactical votes. And I suspect the Conservatives will benefit similarly in Dumfrieshire.HYUFD said:AndyJS looks probable though the LDs will likely lose Berwickshire to the Tories while the SNP gain Dumfrieshire
Dumfriesshire is where they are incumbent with Mundell.
0 -
Clegg's circumstances are a bit unique. If you want to read across to other candidates, only Jim Murphy is perhaps in a similiar situation.0
