politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » GE 2015 – the view of the spread betting trader
Comments
-
Just voted.
Got recognised by a candidate (shan't say whom) which rather surprised me.0 -
My 6th in 6:GarethoftheVale2 said:Morning all. Today will be my 5th GE in 5 different seats in 5 different counties. Can anyone beat that?
1997 - Northavon
2001 - Exeter
2005 - Surrey SW
2010 - Reading East
2015 - Wantage
And I'm moving to Maidenhead tomorrow (although no guarantee will be living there in 2020)
1992: Colchester
1997: Banff & Buchen
2001: Hampshire NE (I think)
2005: Maidenhead
2010: Uxbridge
2015: Wantage
0 -
The False Flag Guide to Foreign AffairsFalseFlag said:
People realised you opposed the Iraq war for cynical electioneering reasons when you subsequently supported Libya and Syria. Getting what you deserve today.MarkSenior said:
We Lib Dems put country before party in 2010 . If as is likely we lose a number of seats because of it , then we will put party before country post today and there will be no Lib Dem coalition with either Labour or ConservativesPeterC said:
David Steel is no doubt influenced by his own experience following the 1976/78 Lib-Lab pact which led to a poor Liberal performance in the 1979 election. I feel he has become rather bitter and negative - a coalition would be better for the country than minority government, I thinkdavid_herdson said:
For many members or supporters of the Lib Dems (or former ones), that was precisely the purpose of that party: to be a 'nice' opposition and provide an alternative to the nasty and/or incompetent parties of government. Clearly the flaw in that purpose was that were it electorally successful it would inevitably undermine first the conditions necessary to bring it about (being in opposition) and then the rationale itself. But as long as the self-destruct button could be avoided, they ran with it and left the long term to take care of itself.TOPPING said:
Yes because the whole point of a political party is to be out of power.TheScreamingEagles said:Go back to your constituencies and prepare for opposition ?
@patrickwintour: Former LD leader Lord Steel in any Libdem vote after election will oppose any further coalition - party should recharge batteries & values.
What the purpose of the Lib Dems is now, goodness only knows.
Russian intervention in another country's affairs = good
Western intervention in another country's affairs = bad
0 -
Sunderland result supported the 2010 exit poll.Dadge said:Just getting my head round the swings required. I think 2% would deprive the Tories of the possibility of a workable coalition, 3% would make Labour the largest party and able to form a govt with SNP support and 4% would be enough for a Lab-LD arrangement. Is that about right?
Fine margins anyway and it might not be able to jump to any conclusions from the Sunderland results...0 -
LA 3k
33 33 10 LD 11 Kip 6 Grn0 -
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Final Ashcroft National Poll, 3k sample, 5-6 May: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.0 -
Interesting that everyone's been talking about the polls in terms of convergence. Surely if you believe in this "phone polls are the ones that matter" thing, what we're seeing is actually late momentum?0
-
"It's also discounting the possibility the polls are wrong, but wrong in labours favour.
Not likely (and rather unintuitive) - but it's probably only a little less likely than the reverse."
Looking at the final GE 2010 polls, if anything I feel you could make a case they very slightly over-estimated the Tory lead. What is the assumption of the underestimation of the Tory lead systematically by the polls and in the academic forecasts based on? Incumbency?0 -
I understand it happens a lot to famous authors.Morris_Dancer said:Just voted.
Got recognised by a candidate (shan't say whom) which rather surprised me.0 -
You can get 5/1 on labour most seats on betfair... very very good value i would have thought.0
-
It makes @Casino_Royale's worry that he voted previously for his Kipper PPC pale in comparison - he only threatened to shoot another candidate.MarqueeMark said:
But let's face it - that hat? She had it coming.....Plato said:Shows how little activity down here is local election related - I didn't know there were any in Eastbourne today. I just looked them up and was Really??!
When I lived in Wealden - it was wall to wall placards in Polegate for the local candidates - that one tried to murder another is of course more gaiety for the nation.
sussexexpress.co.uk/news/county-news/breaking-news-former-polegate-councillor-sentenced-to-20-years-in-prison-for-attempted-murder-of-his-wife-1-6702521Beverley_C said:
No. JCB (big yellow diggers) are in Uttoxter, not far from my sister-in-law's place.Plato said:Is that a CJD jokette? I know it was popular at the time to call CJD JCB in France when they were pretending they didn't have it too!
Well, my democratic duty is done and my votes are cast. I have plenty of time to make popcorn for later...
0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3071622/Fears-voting-Scotland-disrupted-intimidating-SNP-supporters-plan-arrive-late-follow-counting-staff-police-issue-warnings-polling-stations.htmlSandpit said:It seems some of our more excitable Scottish friends are going to be out to make a nuisance of themselves again.
Scottish police have issued nationwide warnings amid fears of 'threatening behaviour' from firebrand SNP supporters.
According to the Guardian police and election officials have still sent out warnings to all of Scotland's 32 councils urging them to be aware to problems during voting and when the papers are transported.
Nationalists who believe that last year's referendum was rigged in favour of the 'No' campaign have urged people to photograph their votes.
The campaign, called Operation Scallop, has been widely shared across Facebook and Twitter because some SNP members fear their votes will be torn up, changed or not counted.
Organisers also say that supporters should vote in the last hour - between 9pm and 10pm - and then 'hang about outside' and 'take photos of anything suspicious' as the papers are loaded into vans.
They should then use their own transport to trail ballot boxes when they leave polling stations and follow them to the count and watch them being unloaded, it says.
And the cybernats becmoe the cybernuts...0 -
Don't forget the Cannabis Party.Razedabode said:
I've got the wonderful choice of Jonathan Lord, who I don't like, or the lib dem who doesn't even seem to live in Woking. Aren't we lucky?tlg86 said:My voting history:
Woking
Woking
Woking0 -
Final Ashcroft National Poll: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.0
-
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 3 mins3 minutes ago
Final Ashcroft National Poll, 3k sample, 5-6 May: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.
47 retweets 8 favorites
0 -
I believe I can claim an interesting nugget in my electoral history.
In 2002, I lived in OXWAB and voted in the Jericho & Osney ward in the Oxford City Council local elections.
At that time, I voted Liberal Democrat. I was one of 219 voters who voted for ...
Well, you can find the name of the candidate I voted for by scrolling down this wikipedia page to Jericho & Osney:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_City_Council_election,_20020 -
An interestingly close correlation between JackW's and RodCrosby's respective final GE forecasts:
Party .................. JackW .............. RodCrosby
Con .................... 302 .................... 294
Lab ..................... 251 .................... 247
LibDem ................ 28 ...................... 34
SNP ...................... 42 ...................... 49
N.I. ...................... 18 ....................... 18
Plaid C ................... 3 ........................ 3
UKIP ...................... 3 ......................... 2
Others ................... 2 ......................... 2
Speaker ................. 1 ......................... 1
Total ................. 650 ..................... 6500 -
Filling up on a few insurance votes. That is one.Slackbladder said:You can get 5/1 on labour most seats on betfair... very very good value i would have thought.
Lab 275-300 @ 3/1 interesting.0 -
Well, that was worth the wait...Tissue_Price said:Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Final Ashcroft National Poll, 3k sample, 5-6 May: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.0 -
It's cuts all the way (as expected in the next government, regardless of who wins).madasafish said:Well if we have a Labour Government, the outlook for the increased revenues they need is not great according to this...
"Raising taxes to plug Britain’s deficit will not work, two founder members of the Bank of England’s panel that sets interest rates have warned."
http://tinyurl.com/knhnrn90 -
Excited ... and nervousJosiasJessop said:Good morning everybody!
Are we all excited? ;-)0 -
History.bazzer said:"It's also discounting the possibility the polls are wrong, but wrong in labours favour.
Not likely (and rather unintuitive) - but it's probably only a little less likely than the reverse."
Looking at the final GE 2010 polls, if anything I feel you could make a case they very slightly over-estimated the Tory lead. What is the assumption of the underestimation of the Tory lead systematically by the polls and in the academic forecasts based on? Incumbency?0 -
It seems there is a late rally by the voters to Labour, not the Conservatives.
We will get the government we deserve.0 -
Another load of bollocks.Slackbladder said:Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 3 mins3 minutes ago
Final Ashcroft National Poll, 3k sample, 5-6 May: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.
47 retweets 8 favorites
0 -
You forgot:rcs1000 said:
The False Flag Guide to Foreign AffairsFalseFlag said:
People realised you opposed the Iraq war for cynical electioneering reasons when you subsequently supported Libya and Syria. Getting what you deserve today.MarkSenior said:
We Lib Dems put country before party in 2010 . If as is likely we lose a number of seats because of it , then we will put party before country post today and there will be no Lib Dem coalition with either Labour or ConservativesPeterC said:
David Steel is no doubt influenced by his own experience following the 1976/78 Lib-Lab pact which led to a poor Liberal performance in the 1979 election. I feel he has become rather bitter and negative - a coalition would be better for the country than minority government, I thinkdavid_herdson said:
For many members or supporters of the Lib Dems (or former ones), that was precisely the purpose of that party: to be a 'nice' opposition and provide an alternative to the nasty and/or incompetent parties of government. Clearly the flaw in that purpose was that were it electorally successful it would inevitably undermine first the conditions necessary to bring it about (being in opposition) and then the rationale itself. But as long as the self-destruct button could be avoided, they ran with it and left the long term to take care of itself.TOPPING said:
Yes because the whole point of a political party is to be out of power.TheScreamingEagles said:Go back to your constituencies and prepare for opposition ?
@patrickwintour: Former LD leader Lord Steel in any Libdem vote after election will oppose any further coalition - party should recharge batteries & values.
What the purpose of the Lib Dems is now, goodness only knows.
Russian intervention in another country's affairs = good
Western intervention in another country's affairs = bad
Anything bad that ever happened = probably the Jews
0 -
Why not? This is an exciting late movement in Ashcroft!Scott_P said:
Well, that was worth the wait...Tissue_Price said:Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Final Ashcroft National Poll, 3k sample, 5-6 May: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, UKIP 11%, GRN 6%.
Or are polls only worth the wait when they show a CON lead?0 -
So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.0
-
Lolz from Lord Oakeshott
@oakeshottm: I've just voted in Vauxhall,only in local by-election. Lords, lunatics and prisoners-lots of overlap there!)can't vote in General Elections.0 -
I think my telling fever has started early - I just quizzed my Tesco delivery chap about where he voted...
*another 12hrs of this to go*0 -
Voted in six constituencies too:
1979 - Durham
1983 - Edgbaston
1987 - Yardley
1992/1997 - Reading West
2001/2010 - Wantage
2015 - Totnes
Just missed out on voting in Dulwich in 1992....0 -
Yeah, I noticed that.edmundintokyo said:So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
Pretty weird result. Do most people even know who the DUP are?0 -
Well, I've voted. Conservative at the GE (I wasn't going to vote for a Lib Dem who could not even ensure his leaflets had correct spelling), and Labour for the local election.
The latter is the first time as far as I can recall)I've voted Labour. There were three candidates; the Green was a bit loony, and the Conservative is a man who had previously stood as an independent against a housing development in the area. I've had a run-in with him in the past, and he's utterly a one-issue idiot. It's sad the Conservatives chose him to stand, and even sadder that he'll be elected.
So really there was no choice in it: the Labour candidate was the best of a bad lot.
On other notes: the polling station was busier than I've seen here before (though I've only lived here four years), and a lady said they were much busier than usual.
There was a light plane flying overhead pulling a 'Better Conservative' banner. I'm not quite sure that that sort of trick is the best use of money ...0 -
1997 - Sheffield Hallam
2001 - Kensington and Chelsea
2005 - K&C
2010 - Tatton
2012 - Manchester Central
2015 - Sheffield Hallam0 -
Any room in there?MarqueeMark said:
Jack's ARSE has given refuge to many.....Scrapheap_as_was said:
I am clinging to it ....JackW said:
Absolutely not.MarqueeMark said:
Any ominous rumblings to cause concern that your ARSE may be in trouble, JackW?JackW said:Good morning ARSE lovers worldwide ....
My ARSE is looking especially resplendent this fine morning but also looking forward to a well earned sabbatical in warmer climes where the following phrase need not require any internal rationalization :
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister
Which reminds me... http://funnyasduck.net/post/122330 -
Hmm, so prisoners can vote in locals? And Lords? How peculiar. I assumed Don't Have The Vote to apply to all elected offices. Can they do Euro ones too?TheScreamingEagles said:
Lolz from Lord Oakeshott
@oakeshottm: I've just voted in Vauxhall,only in local by-election. Lords, lunatics and prisoners-lots of overlap there!)can't vote in General Elections.0 -
"Final" UK-Elect prediction was/is May 6 UK-Elect Prediction
I was hoping to update it with the last polls this morning (actually expecting a slight move back to the Conservatives). Where are they?0 -
Polls looking poor for the Tories!0
-
Jim Wells saying that children were more likely to be abused by same-sex parents and getting into an argument with a couple of lesbians was probably a timely reminder of the wonderful values DUP MPs bring to Westminster (not that huge numbers will have noticed).edmundintokyo said:So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
0 -
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
0 -
Hmm
George Eaton@georgeeaton·54 secs55 seconds ago
Final YouGov, ICM and Ashcroft polls all have Labour and the Tories tied - not looking good for Cameron if correct.0 -
Voted in Brentford and Isleworth; queued for 15 mins. I expect the Labour candidate to win, which is a shame as she's the sort of tedious socialist who "fought Fatcher" as a student radical.
Took the kids (6&8) who - I think - found it interesting. After explaining the counting processs my 8 year old asked why you could vote on a computer so it could add it all up instantly. That's my boy
Five candidates only (3 + UKIP + Green) which surprised me, usually there's a couple of nutters on there, too.0 -
Well, there's always a surprise somewhere ..... I certainly never had you down as a Labour voter.JosiasJessop said:Well, I've voted. Conservative at the GE (I wasn't going to vote for a Lib Dem who could not even ensure his leaflets had correct spelling), and Labour for the local election.
The latter is the first time as far as I can recall)I've voted Labour. There were three candidates; the Green was a bit loony, and the Conservative is a man who had previously stood as an independent against a housing development in the area. I've had a run-in with him in the past, and he's utterly a one-issue idiot. It's sad the Conservatives chose him to stand, and even sadder that he'll be elected.
So really there was no choice in it: the Labour candidate was the best of a bad lot.
On other notes: the polling station was busier than I've seen here before (though I've only lived here four years), and a lady said they were much busier than usual.
There was a light plane flying overhead pulling a 'Better Conservative' banner. I'm not quite sure that that sort of trick is the best use of money ...0 -
I am concerned about my own country's affairs not others.rcs1000 said:
The False Flag Guide to Foreign AffairsFalseFlag said:
People realised you opposed the Iraq war for cynical electioneering reasons when you subsequently supported Libya and Syria. Getting what you deserve today.MarkSenior said:
We Lib Dems put country before party in 2010 . If as is likely we lose a number of seats because of it , then we will put party before country post today and there will be no Lib Dem coalition with either Labour or ConservativesPeterC said:
David Steel is no doubt influenced by his own experience following the 1976/78 Lib-Lab pact which led to a poor Liberal performance in the 1979 election. I feel he has become rather bitter and negative - a coalition would be better for the country than minority government, I thinkdavid_herdson said:
For many members or supporters of the Lib Dems (or former ones), that was precisely the purpose of that party: to be a 'nice' opposition and provide an alternative to the nasty and/or incompetent parties of government. Clearly the flaw in that purpose was that were it electorally successful it would inevitably undermine first the conditions necessary to bring it about (being in opposition) and then the rationale itself. But as long as the self-destruct button could be avoided, they ran with it and left the long term to take care of itself.TOPPING said:
Yes because the whole point of a political party is to be out of power.TheScreamingEagles said:Go back to your constituencies and prepare for opposition ?
@patrickwintour: Former LD leader Lord Steel in any Libdem vote after election will oppose any further coalition - party should recharge batteries & values.
What the purpose of the Lib Dems is now, goodness only knows.
Russian intervention in another country's affairs = good
Western intervention in another country's affairs = bad
Your obsession with me is beginning to concern me, long given up on facts and debate, more adolescent name calling. Your twice my age too.0 -
1992: whichever constituency South Woodford is inMarqueeMark said:Voted in six constituencies too:
1979 - Durham
1983 - Edgbaston
1987 - Yardley
1992/1997 - Reading West
2001/2010 - Wantage
2015 - Totnes
Just missed out on voting in Dulwich in 1992....
1997: South Derbyshire.
2002: South East Cambridgeshire
2005: Missed due to being out walking, but would have been South Cambridgeshire
2010: Romsey and Southampton North
2015: South Cambridgeshire
So 5 different constituencies in six general elections.0 -
Teh pollsters seem to think there is safety in numbers..0
-
I dont think thats what he said, just that they can't vote in generalsPlato said:Hmm, so prisoners can vote in locals? And Lords? How peculiar. I assumed Don't Have The Vote to apply to all elected offices. Can they do Euro ones too?
TheScreamingEagles said:Lolz from Lord Oakeshott
@oakeshottm: I've just voted in Vauxhall,only in local by-election. Lords, lunatics and prisoners-lots of overlap there!)can't vote in General Elections.0 -
Maybe the online polls were right all along...Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
0 -
Well that should keep you off the blacklist here.YBarddCwsc said:
In 2002, I lived in OXWAB and voted in the Jericho & Osney ward in the Oxford City Council local elections.
At that time, I voted Liberal Democrat. I was one of 219 voters who voted for ...
Well, you can find the name of the candidate I voted for by scrolling down this wikipedia page to Jericho & Osney:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_City_Council_election,_2002
0 -
Feb 74 Twickenham
Oct 74 Twickenham
1979 Oxford
1983 Oxford West
1987 Oxford West
1992 Chertsey and Walton
1997 Chertsey and Walton
2001 Chertsey and Walton
2005 Chertsey and Walton
2010 Esher and Walton
2015 Esher and Walton0 -
Neither did Labour's canvass returns!peter_from_putney said:
Well, there's always a surprise somewhere ..... I certainly never had you down as a Labour voter.JosiasJessop said:Well, I've voted. Conservative at the GE (I wasn't going to vote for a Lib Dem who could not even ensure his leaflets had correct spelling), and Labour for the local election.
The latter is the first time as far as I can recall)I've voted Labour. There were three candidates; the Green was a bit loony, and the Conservative is a man who had previously stood as an independent against a housing development in the area. I've had a run-in with him in the past, and he's utterly a one-issue idiot. It's sad the Conservatives chose him to stand, and even sadder that he'll be elected.
So really there was no choice in it: the Labour candidate was the best of a bad lot.
On other notes: the polling station was busier than I've seen here before (though I've only lived here four years), and a lady said they were much busier than usual.
There was a light plane flying overhead pulling a 'Better Conservative' banner. I'm not quite sure that that sort of trick is the best use of money ...0 -
I guess this way they'll all have egg on their faces tomorrow if the result isn't a tie.Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
Safety in numbers for pollsters?0 -
And I know the difference between "your" and "you're"FalseFlag said:
I am concerned about my own country's affairs not others.rcs1000 said:
The False Flag Guide to Foreign AffairsFalseFlag said:
People realised you opposed the Iraq war for cynical electioneering reasons when you subsequently supported Libya and Syria. Getting what you deserve today.MarkSenior said:
We Lib Dems put country before party in 2010 . If as is likely we lose a number of seats because of it , then we will put party before country post today and there will be no Lib Dem coalition with either Labour or ConservativesPeterC said:
David Steel is no doubt influenced by his own experience following the 1976/78 Lib-Lab pact which led to a poor Liberal performance in the 1979 election. I feel he has become rather bitter and negative - a coalition would be better for the country than minority government, I thinkdavid_herdson said:
For many members or supporters of the Lib Dems (or former ones), that was precisely the purpose of that party: to be a 'nice' opposition and provide an alternative to the nasty and/or incompetent parties of government. Clearly the flaw in that purpose was that were it electorally successful it would inevitably undermine first the conditions necessary to bring it about (being in opposition) and then the rationale itself. But as long as the self-destruct button could be avoided, they ran with it and left the long term to take care of itself.TOPPING said:
Yes because the whole point of a political party is to be out of power.TheScreamingEagles said:Go back to your constituencies and prepare for opposition ?
@patrickwintour: Former LD leader Lord Steel in any Libdem vote after election will oppose any further coalition - party should recharge batteries & values.
What the purpose of the Lib Dems is now, goodness only knows.
Russian intervention in another country's affairs = good
Western intervention in another country's affairs = bad
Your obsession with me is beginning to concern me, long given up on facts and debate, more adolescent name calling. Your twice my age too.0 -
Any opinion polls out today?
I'm so obsessed with opinion polls that I've forgotten to vote...
Still time though!0 -
Peers are disqualified from the parliamentary franchise on the ground that they have separate parliamentary representation from commoners, viz. the House of Lords. So if you are a peer in receipt of a writ of summons, you cannot vote in a parliamentary election. You can however vote in local government elections and referenda.Plato said:Hmm, so prisoners can vote in locals? And Lords? How peculiar. I assumed Don't Have The Vote to apply to all elected offices. Can they do Euro ones too?
Prisoners detained under sentence or unlawfully at large cannot vote in either parliamentary or local government elections (see section 3(1) of the 1983 Act), and, as the franchise for referenda is usually based on the latter, cannot vote in referenda either. Prisoners have no right to vote in European elections either (R (Chester) v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] AC 271 (SC)).0 -
This 'herding' actually concerns me. safety in numbers, not being the one company to, well, call it wrong.Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
If you're two out from +1 to -1, that looks far worse than from 0 to either +/- 2.0 -
-
It does seem extraordinary to me that the variation that was previously present has suddenly disappeared. It could be just chance, but I wonder if anyone has any theory as to why this might have happened?Slackbladder said:Teh pollsters seem to think there is safety in numbers..
0 -
I've always said I vote for a candidate. So far in my relatively short electoral career I've voted Conservative, Lib Dem, Indy, Green, and now Labour. And probably in that order of frequency.peter_from_putney said:
Well, there's always a surprise somewhere ..... I certainly never had you down as a Labour voter.JosiasJessop said:Well, I've voted. Conservative at the GE (I wasn't going to vote for a Lib Dem who could not even ensure his leaflets had correct spelling), and Labour for the local election.
The latter is the first time as far as I can recall)I've voted Labour. There were three candidates; the Green was a bit loony, and the Conservative is a man who had previously stood as an independent against a housing development in the area. I've had a run-in with him in the past, and he's utterly a one-issue idiot. It's sad the Conservatives chose him to stand, and even sadder that he'll be elected.
So really there was no choice in it: the Labour candidate was the best of a bad lot.
On other notes: the polling station was busier than I've seen here before (though I've only lived here four years), and a lady said they were much busier than usual.
There was a light plane flying overhead pulling a 'Better Conservative' banner. I'm not quite sure that that sort of trick is the best use of money ...
It was pretty much Hobson's Choice in the locals for me. I put my cross in the box of the best candidate.0 -
Historically, do pollsters tend to converge on the eve of an election? It doesn't seem too fantastical to me- by this point, almost everyone will either not be voting or be certain who they'll vote for, so the issue of reallocating undecideds becomes much less important.
Though it'd be interesting to see if the numbers back up that theory.0 -
Price on the Conservatives winning most seats looks even more poor. I've had to back Labour at just shy of 5/1. Desperately hope that is a losing bet, but it's definitely the value given the polls, weather and expectations of higher than average turnout.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
0 -
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/569181/sex-abuse-claims-Leo-McKinstryNeil said:
Jim Wells saying that children were more likely to be abused by same-sex parents and getting into an argument with a couple of lesbians was probably a timely reminder of the wonderful values DUP MPs bring to Westminster (not that huge numbers will have noticed).edmundintokyo said:So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
0 -
Arse covering methinks.glw said:
It does seem extraordinary to me that the variation that was previously present has suddenly disappeared. It could be just chance, but I wonder if anyone has any theory as to why this might have happened?Slackbladder said:Teh pollsters seem to think there is safety in numbers..
0 -
I'm sure there will be many theories, just not sure it is wise to announce them on PBglw said:
It does seem extraordinary to me that the variation that was previously present has suddenly disappeared. It could be just chance, but I wonder if anyone has any theory as to why this might have happened?Slackbladder said:Teh pollsters seem to think there is safety in numbers..
0 -
Saw another Scottish Labour poster today, swingback.
I have to say after the explosion of Flags and signs that met me when I stepped out to vote in the Indyref today has been incredibly low key. I will, however, never get tired of voting.0 -
Have the Lib Dems complained yet?Plato said:0 -
Keep digging.rcs1000 said:
And I know the difference between "your" and "you're"FalseFlag said:
I am concerned about my own country's affairs not others.rcs1000 said:
The False Flag Guide to Foreign AffairsFalseFlag said:
People realised you opposed the Iraq war for cynical electioneering reasons when you subsequently supported Libya and Syria. Getting what you deserve today.MarkSenior said:
We Lib Dems put country before party in 2010 . If as is likely we lose a number of seats because of it , then we will put party before country post today and there will be no Lib Dem coalition with either Labour or ConservativesPeterC said:
David Steel is no doubt influenced by his own experience following the 1976/78 Lib-Lab pact which led to a poor Liberal performance in the 1979 election. I feel he has become rather bitter and negative - a coalition would be better for the country than minority government, I thinkdavid_herdson said:
For many members or supporters of the Lib Dems (or former ones), that was precisely the purpose of that party: to be a 'nice' opposition and provide an alternative to the nasty and/or incompetent parties of government. Clearly the flaw in that purpose was that were it electorally successful it would inevitably undermine first the conditions necessary to bring it about (being in opposition) and then the rationale itself. But as long as the self-destruct button could be avoided, they ran with it and left the long term to take care of itself.TOPPING said:
Yes because the whole point of a political party is to be out of power.TheScreamingEagles said:Go back to your constituencies and prepare for opposition ?
@patrickwintour: Former LD leader Lord Steel in any Libdem vote after election will oppose any further coalition - party should recharge batteries & values.
What the purpose of the Lib Dems is now, goodness only knows.
Russian intervention in another country's affairs = good
Western intervention in another country's affairs = bad
Your obsession with me is beginning to concern me, long given up on facts and debate, more adolescent name calling. Your twice my age too.0 -
Well, phone pollsters appear to be picking up a trend of increased Labour certainty (their vote is not going up at the expense of the Tories who are also up) - if this is the case it should mean the late ICM data puts Lab a point ahead or so and MORI see a sharp swing back of the large lead. If those two things happen, I think we can start to Hoover up on the spreads and betting!0
-
"Election Day" - Arcadia (1985), ie. Duran Duran side-project
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mBVY_QoLTc0 -
The general weight of the Green vote tells you a lot about Oxford.YBarddCwsc said:I believe I can claim an interesting nugget in my electoral history.
In 2002, I lived in OXWAB and voted in the Jericho & Osney ward in the Oxford City Council local elections.
At that time, I voted Liberal Democrat. I was one of 219 voters who voted for ...
Well, you can find the name of the candidate I voted for by scrolling down this wikipedia page to Jericho & Osney:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_City_Council_election,_20020 -
https://twitter.com/kevcecil/status/596064478090960896Stereotomy said:
Have the Lib Dems complained yet?Plato said://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/596239737305829377
0 -
I searched and searched for the reference to the Jews being to blame for it all but I couldnt find it. *confused*FalseFlag said:
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/569181/sex-abuse-claims-Leo-McKinstryNeil said:
Jim Wells saying that children were more likely to be abused by same-sex parents and getting into an argument with a couple of lesbians was probably a timely reminder of the wonderful values DUP MPs bring to Westminster (not that huge numbers will have noticed).edmundintokyo said:So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
0 -
Either the pollsters have all got their Al Gore Rhythms sorting the polling down to four decimal places.BannedInParis said:
This 'herding' actually concerns me. safety in numbers, not being the one company to, well, call it wrong.Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
If you're two out from +1 to -1, that looks far worse than from 0 to either +/- 2.
Or they haven't got a Scooby how to model 7 party politics, and are huddling together in the darkness.
12 hours until the exit poll sheds some light....0 -
All these tied polls and the drifting price is making me ponder a late punt on Lab most seats even though I am a believer in the Jockalypse.0
-
Split my vote - 2 votes for the Baby Eaters, 1 for the eco-loons 0
-
Ahem. That should be 2001, not 2002 ...JosiasJessop said:
1992: whichever constituency South Woodford is inMarqueeMark said:Voted in six constituencies too:
1979 - Durham
1983 - Edgbaston
1987 - Yardley
1992/1997 - Reading West
2001/2010 - Wantage
2015 - Totnes
Just missed out on voting in Dulwich in 1992....
1997: South Derbyshire.
2002: South East Cambridgeshire
2005: Missed due to being out walking, but would have been South Cambridgeshire
2010: Romsey and Southampton North
2015: South Cambridgeshire
So 5 different constituencies in six general elections.0 -
Conflating criticism of Zionism with something else, dangerous and stupid.Neil said:
I searched and searched for the reference to the Jews being to blame for it all but I couldnt find it. *confused*FalseFlag said:
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/569181/sex-abuse-claims-Leo-McKinstryNeil said:
Jim Wells saying that children were more likely to be abused by same-sex parents and getting into an argument with a couple of lesbians was probably a timely reminder of the wonderful values DUP MPs bring to Westminster (not that huge numbers will have noticed).edmundintokyo said:So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
0 -
Interesting that half of Ashcroft's final poll was conducted by mobile phones. ICM normally only allocate 15% of their sample to mobiles.0
-
One of the mysteries of this campaign is the Tories re-running the "Are you thinking what we're thinking" campaign albeit from a slightly different angle. "If you dislike the Nats as much as we do don't vote Labour"
It remains to be seen whether it'll work this time but it was certainly an odd decision.0 -
It seems that it's now all coming down to the presence or otherwise of Shy Tories.Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
0 -
Once again I enjoyed the experience of voting at a polling place that is outside my constituency.0
-
Labour most seats moving in quite quickly, now 5.5, looks like a small resistance level at 5.3 where there is 500 quid0
-
For balance -FalseFlag said:
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/569181/sex-abuse-claims-Leo-McKinstryNeil said:
Jim Wells saying that children were more likely to be abused by same-sex parents and getting into an argument with a couple of lesbians was probably a timely reminder of the wonderful values DUP MPs bring to Westminster (not that huge numbers will have noticed).edmundintokyo said:So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/child-abuse-in-russia-is-routine/473633.html0 -
What will be fascinating if the result is tight will be what happens to UNS - logic says the rise of UKIP and the decline of the Lib Dems should increase the efficiency of Tory voting and decrease the Labour efficiency, but will that play out?
One thing looks clear ATM - by Monday EICIPM0 -
Stereotomy said:
Historically, do pollsters tend to converge on the eve of an election? It doesn't seem too fantastical to me- by this point, almost everyone will either not be voting or be certain who they'll vote for, so the issue of reallocating undecideds becomes much less important.
Though it'd be interesting to see if the numbers back up that theory.
It's seems natural to me for the numbers to converge on the eve of polling as more and more people make up their minds. Of course the only glimmer of light for the Tories is that even today there are hundreds of thousands of people who still don't know who to vote forBannedInParis said:
This 'herding' actually concerns me. safety in numbers, not being the one company to, well, call it wrong.Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
If you're two out from +1 to -1, that looks far worse than from 0 to either +/- 2.0 -
My first General Election today. Heading down in an hour. That list in full:
2015: Leyton and Wansted
Until today, I'd voted in a national referendum, all sorts of local elections, and European elections.0 -
And the cybernats becmoe the cybernuts...MattW said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3071622/Fears-voting-Scotland-disrupted-intimidating-SNP-supporters-plan-arrive-late-follow-counting-staff-police-issue-warnings-polling-stations.htmlSandpit said:It seems some of our more excitable Scottish friends are going to be out to make a nuisance of themselves again.
Scottish police have issued nationwide warnings amid fears of 'threatening behaviour' from firebrand SNP supporters.
According to the Guardian police and election officials have still sent out warnings to all of Scotland's 32 councils urging them to be aware to problems during voting and when the papers are transported.
Nationalists who believe that last year's referendum was rigged in favour of the 'No' campaign have urged people to photograph their votes.
The campaign, called Operation Scallop, has been widely shared across Facebook and Twitter because some SNP members fear their votes will be torn up, changed or not counted.
Organisers also say that supporters should vote in the last hour - between 9pm and 10pm - and then 'hang about outside' and 'take photos of anything suspicious' as the papers are loaded into vans.
They should then use their own transport to trail ballot boxes when they leave polling stations and follow them to the count and watch them being unloaded, it says.
The BBC suggested that a fair proportion of Scottish police have been bearing firearms on traffic duties.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28656324
0 -
I wouldn't call this Government great, but it has been pretty good overall.JosiasJessop said:
There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.Roger said:Richard Nabavi
Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.
In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."
Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?
Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.
Clegg as well as Cameron deserve praise for that.0 -
Tories have been relying on outperforming the polls for the last two months, nothing's changed. Just a question of whether you think that's valid or not.Millsy said:Stereotomy said:Historically, do pollsters tend to converge on the eve of an election? It doesn't seem too fantastical to me- by this point, almost everyone will either not be voting or be certain who they'll vote for, so the issue of reallocating undecideds becomes much less important.
Though it'd be interesting to see if the numbers back up that theory.
It's seems natural to me for the numbers to converge on the eve of polling as more and more people make up their minds. Of course the only glimmer of light for the Tories is that even today there are hundreds of thousands of people who still don't know to vote forBannedInParis said:
This 'herding' actually concerns me. safety in numbers, not being the one company to, well, call it wrong.Casino_Royale said:
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.Millsy said:Polls looking poor for the Tories!
If you're two out from +1 to -1, that looks far worse than from 0 to either +/- 2.
0 -
In my calculations, now largely based on that article, I am counting SNP as equiv to LAB for stats/betting purposes, and re. likelihood of Dave or Ed being PM. That of course disregards minor parties (small beer, I think, on the cosmic scale) and leaves aside entirely the constitutional niceties post GE.david_herdson said:Interesting article here, though its analysis is still very much effectively through the UNS prism and doesn't in my opinion give sufficient weight to the changes since 2010 that the rise of UKIP and the SNP have brought. Still, food for thought.
http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2015/05/shy-tory-factor-2015.html/
Having said which, I favour a working CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY the more I think about it. Mock if you like.
A propos (as must be obvs) I have abandoned the polls, the final straw being that 34.1 tie (king ridiculous) and the clustering around it. Credibility zero from that point on.
I am also musing that post GE it may be that talk of a new multiparty landscape will evaporate like, erm, Scotch mist. Mass disengagement by a politically hoodwinked, ill-informed, Gramsci-ed electorate, however, will abide.
0 -
I'm flying to Germany in a couple of hours and will miss most of the excitementJohnO said:
Is VE day celebrated much there btw?
0 -
@TSEofPB: RT @JamieRoss7: Please, whatever you do today, if you spoil your ballot make it as funny as this. #GE2015 http://t.co/VnMtH7r4VS0
-
97 - Warwick & Leamington
01/05/10 - Burnley
15 - Bury South
Voted Tory every time but never backed a winner. That is highly unlikely to change today.
Cameron's last full day as PM then. I always felt he would stifle UKIP and be in with a chance of a majority. Even as someone who has bemoaned his idleness, he has failed to meet even the low expectations I had for him. I concur with every word of DavidL's excellent post earlier.
Good riddance to Dave. There will be open warfare in the Tory Party tonight from 10.01pm so there should be plenty to keep the pundits occupied until the results start coming in.
I am very depressed about how this has all ended.0 -
1997 - Did not vote as on year abroad. However there is the possibility that my vote was cast by my twin brother in Warrington North
2001 - Bradford West
2005 - Aldridge and Brownhills
2010 - Aldridge and Brownhills
2015 - Thornbury and Yate0 -
Hey, you are on my patch, Grandiose!Grandiose said:My first General Election today. Heading down in an hour. That list in full:
2015: Leyton and Wansted
Until today, I'd voted in a national referendum, all sorts of local elections, and European elections.
Greetings from wonderful Wanstead.0
