politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB close the gap with Ipsos and get within 1% with Ashcrof

Oliver_PB said:

Daniel said:

I wonder if the attempted character assassination of Ed Miliband has backfired; generated sympathy with the public and, some ways, might have benefited Labour.

I do wonder whether the Tories and the press ended up setting such low expectations for Ed Miliband that a large proportion of the electorate ended up being pleasantly surprised simply because he managed to come across as a functioning human being.

maybe it was newzoids that did it?

Stereotomy said:

SeanT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

In homage to Avery, here's a yellow box with the latest forecasts from various academics/pundits, and a slection of PB regulars. Apologies for any mistakes (in a couple of cases I've had to guess the PC/Respect figures):

Con Lab LD UKIP SNP PC Resp Grn ======================================= rcs100 311 248 18 2 47 3 1 1 JackW 302 251 28 3 42 3 1 1 Richard Nabavi 295 258 22 3 48 3 1 1 Jonathan 295 270 20 2 40 4? 0 0 Rod Crosby 294 247 34 2 49 3 1 1 Southam Observer 290 251 27 3 55 3 1 1 Peter the Punter 284 264 25 3 50 1? 0? 2 Nick Palmer 271 280 24 2 50 3 0 1 antifrank 266 280 21 4 54 4 1 1 Stephen Fisher 285 262 25 3 53 3 1 1 Peter Kellner 283 261 32 2 50 3 0 1 Election Forecast 281 266 27 1 51 4 1 1 UKelect 274 275 26 2 50 3 0 1 May2015 273 268 28 2 56 3 1 1 Poll Observatory 271 273 24 2 55 3 0 1

For the record, here is my latest prediction, made two days ago (my Official Prediction was very similar):

Tories: 272
Lab: 279
LDs: 25
UKIP: 2
Greens: 1
SNP: 49


Just me, antifrank, and NPXMP on our own predicting a Labour plurality.

rcs100's prediction of CON 311, Lab 248 is especially piquant.

I'm predicting a Lab plurality too, though I haven't had the guts to tie myself to particular numbers, so maybe that doesn't count.

I did on both of the prediction games (under my real name). Also here a couple of days ago went for a dead heat 276-276 (I think), but with one seat having to go back to the polls because of some sort of foul-up.

I'm sure partisans will see it as rationalising (and people were saying this in 2010 as well), but this is surely an election to lose.

Given the ludicrous over-promising by all parties, squaring the circle in the light of the true state of the economy is going to be incredibly difficult.

Even more money stacking up to back the tories at 1.26??

macisback said:

The Conservatives are going to be about as happy as a penguin in a microwave looking at the latest polls, either the polls or the betting markets are wrong, we will see later.

Labour judging by here in Amber Valley yesterday put a huge effort in, where they found all the numbers on a working day I can only guess. Looking at the polls it may have paid off, in the end Cameron and co have hugely brassed off Public Sector workers, capitalised on fully by the Unions. That is where it may end up won and lost. Public Sector workers are motivated en masse to go out and vote Labour.

Not sure most will gain as much as they think they will the nation still spends far too much.

I can't see why the tories ground game has been so poor, tbh. Noone but themselves to blame if they've been this complacent.

John_M said:

I'm sure partisans will see it as rationalising (and people were saying this in 2010 as well), but this is surely an election to lose.

Given the ludicrous over-promising by all parties, squaring the circle in the light of the true state of the economy is going to be incredibly difficult.

There are better elections to win, but never a good one to lose.

TGOHF said:

Martin Boon ‏@martinboon 2m2 minutes ago
Turnout does look like it might return to 1990's levels. Upping my prediction to 72-74%. @ElectoralCommUK 10/10 in @guardian_clark poll 74%

Good - people might finally stop talking about the inevitable decline of our turnout, even though it went up the last 2 times (even if it was still too low and from the lowest point)

The Google election forecast is in the Mail. Very funny. But interesting for perspective

Polruan said:

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

What i don't understand is how a consistent and clear trend to the Tories in the phone polls since Jan/Feb would level out and all return to Labour in the last 36 hours.

Makes no sense to me at all.

Nothing has changed in the last 36 hours or even two four weeks.

The only small difference that has been was recorded in the beginning of the campaign when the Great British public found out that Ed Miliband did not eat babies after all. There was a one-off jump and it has remained like that.

Arguably the key failing in the Blue campaign was the inability to decide whether the line was "Ed eats babies" or "Ed is too incompetent to eat babies and looks stupid when he tries".

Exactly. And when Ed did better than expected or not as bad as expected people stopped listening to the rest of the Tory message. All the stuff about high employment, low inflation, what this means for you and why this is good was missing. Plus the Tories have - assuming for the moment that they win - made life impossible for themselves with all these promises of no tax increases etc.

They should have - right from the moment they were elected - been explaining day in day out how badly Labour left the economy, not just in terms of deficit which is too abstract but in terms of every day stuff e.g. this PFI contract means that his hospital has to pay £859 to change a lightbulb for the next thousand years or whatever. They needed to do this so that they could explain and get people to understand why savings needed to be made, where and why Labour could not be trusted and they could. But they didn't do that and have rather lazily assumed that the relative good economic news spoke for itself. Whereas - either people don't notice - or, if they do, they think that it's safe to vote Labour again.

And - their biggest failing to my mind - too many of them have not thought of their policies in terms of how they affect ordinary people. It's fine to worry about business and rich people like, say, Dyson creating jobs etc but they needed to be much more focused on, say, the 6-man business struggling to survive (there was a lovely quote by a stonemason in EdM's Doncaster constituency in the Evening Standard last night saying that they were nearly bankrupt at the end of the last Labour government) and the ordinary family. Funnily enough I think Osborne probably gets this more than Cameron but they don't have enough people in their party who have lived ordinary lives and experienced what it is like to be unemployed, made redundant, worry about redundancy, worry about savings and pensions and where to live etc. I don't think Labour have such people either. None of them do, really.

Which is why we have a choice between the Crap, the Credulous and the Complacent.

John_M said:

I'm sure partisans will see it as rationalising (and people were saying this in 2010 as well), but this is surely an election to lose.

Yup. Not much of a choice on offer. But paves the way for a new Blair/Thatcher in 2020 or sooner. Who, though?

(Clue - it won't be Michael Gove)

JackW said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Cyclefree said:

SeanT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

In homage to Avery, here's a yellow box with the latest forecasts from various academics/pundits, and a slection of PB regulars. Apologies for any mistakes (in a couple of cases I've had to guess the PC/Respect figures):

Con Lab LD UKIP SNP PC Resp Grn ======================================= rcs100 311 248 18 2 47 3 1 1 JackW 302 251 28 3 42 3 1 1 Richard Nabavi 295 258 22 3 48 3 1 1 Jonathan 295 270 20 2 40 4? 0 0 Rod Crosby 294 247 34 2 49 3 1 1 Southam Observer 290 251 27 3 55 3 1 1 Peter the Punter 284 264 25 3 50 1? 0? 2 Nick Palmer 271 280 24 2 50 3 0 1 antifrank 266 280 21 4 54 4 1 1 Stephen Fisher 285 262 25 3 53 3 1 1 Peter Kellner 283 261 32 2 50 3 0 1 Election Forecast 281 266 27 1 51 4 1 1 UKelect 274 275 26 2 50 3 0 1 May2015 273 268 28 2 56 3 1 1 Poll Observatory 271 273 24 2 55 3 0 1

For the record, here is my latest prediction, made two days ago (my Official Prediction was very similar):

Tories: 272
Lab: 279
LDs: 25
UKIP: 2
Greens: 1
SNP: 49


Just me, antifrank, and NPXMP on our own predicting a Labour plurality.

rcs100's prediction of CON 311, Lab 248 is especially piquant.

Er, I predicted 300 seats for Labour this morning.

On the pb contest I was Con 288 Lab 270. I would reverse those now.

Adherents of my ARSE need to hold it and their nerve tight.

No gibbering or lip wobbling will be allowed.

has the last batch of polls forced you to rethink your ARSE or are you still holding it tight?

Would higher turnout benefit Labour?

Well, just voted - Labour in the GE, LD in the local.

I don't know about anyone else, but I always get a bit emotional when I go and cast my ballot. It's all held together by good people from all parties doing their bit and we all take it so much for granted. It's what you do. But when you think about how many can't vote around the world and how people in this country struggled to get the vote and then fought to preserve the right to vote and so on, it's actually a huge thing that we do and that we are able to do. And it's all so understated and polite in there, and quiet; and yet we are making a massive choice that will shape lives and markets and history. What a truly wonderful country we live in that we are able to do it.

Blimey - and I have not had a drink since Sunday :-)

Daniel said:

Would higher turnout benefit Labour?

Theoretically yes, but in this crazy election, who knows?

Richard_Tyndall said:

Just noticed this paragraph from an article in the Telegraph.

Referring to Nick Clegg

"Labour strategists now accept that Mr Clegg’s political career looks likely to be saved from a combination of an estimated £200,000 spent on campaigning in the seat in recent weeks, and Tory supporters voting tactically to help Mr Clegg."

How does that comment about £200,000 spent in the seat tally with the supposed limits on how much can be spent by an individual candidate?

Ways and means to spend money. Nothing to stop "private individuals" spending what they like, nudge-nudge, wink-wink.

If the turnout is up that is probably extremely good news for UKIP and pretty good news for Labour.

I'm getting the feeling that the neck and neck polling may not be right and that one party may actually do much much better than the other. I just can't tell which! Blimey.

calum said:

With 54% of Scots feeling the UK MSM and UK Politicians have become more hostile, the bizarre thing is that they may well have just killed off the Union. The constant demonising of the SNP by the Tories and the MSM has effectively done the SNPs work for them. History may yet judge David Cameron as the man who first saved and then destroyed the UK by putting party before country.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/uktone.jpg

I think irrespective of todays results in Scotland, the SNP surge is about to get super charged. Holyrood 2016 is likely to result in the 3 "mainstream parties" being squeezed in a pincer movement by the SNP, Greens and rather bizarrely UKIP.

I'd be surprised if a poll of the English showed different results to that picture.

I also think Labour will stage a resurgence in Scotland over the next 9 months to draw neck-and-neck with the Nats by early next year.

Cyclefree said:

Polruan said:

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

What i don't understand is how a consistent and clear trend to the Tories in the phone polls since Jan/Feb would level out and all return to Labour in the last 36 hours.

Makes no sense to me at all.

Nothing has changed in the last 36 hours or even two four weeks.

The only small difference that has been was.

Arguably the key failing in the Blue campaign was the inability to decide whether the line was "Ed eats babies" or "Ed is too incompetent to eat babies and looks stupid when he tries".

Exactly. And when Ed did better than expected or not as bad as expected people stopped listening to the rest of the Tory message. All the stuff about high employment, low inflation, what this means for you and why this is good was missing. Plus the Tories have - assuming for the moment that they win - made life impossible for themselves with all these promises of no tax increases etc.

They should have - right from the moment they were elected - been explaining day in day out how badly Labour left the economy, not just in terms of deficit which is too abstract but in terms of every day stuff e.g. this PFI contract means that his hospital has to pay £859 to change a lightbulb for the next thousand years or whatever. They needed to do this so that they could explain and get people to understand why savings needed to be made, where and why Labour could not be trusted and they could. But they didn't do that and have rather lazily assumed that the relative good economic news spoke for itself. Whereas - either people don't notice - or, if they do, they think that it's safe to vote Labour again.

And - their biggest failing to my mind - too many of them have not thought of their policies in terms of how they affect ordinary people. It's fine to worry about business and rich people like, say, Dyson creating jobs etc but they needed to be much more focused on, say, the 6-man business struggling to survive (there was a lovely quote by a stonemason in EdM's Doncaster constituency in the Evening Standard last night saying that they were nearly bankrupt at the end of the last Labour government) and the ordinary family. Funnily enough I think Osborne probably gets this more than Cameron but they don't have enough people in their party who have lived ordinary lives and experienced what it is like to be unemployed, made redundant, worry about redundancy, worry about savings and pensions and where to live etc. I don't think Labour have such people either. None of them do, really.

Which is why we have a choice between the Crap, the Credulous and the Complacent.

Spot on, Cyclefree. Can you please consider running for the leadership of that bunch of muppets in the Tory party?

I'd vote for you.

What polls are we yet to await?

I've got mega-YG, Ipsos MORI, Ashcroft

Did ICM update their fieldwork?

paulyork64 said:

betfred also 6/5 Ed to be PM. not on that one for now.

Will we get adverts through the night with Ray Winstone asking who will win the next seat or bet on the final Scottish position?

SandraM said:

As PB's self-appointed fashion correspondent, here are my views on the outfits of the wives and female party leaders at the ballot station.
SamCam - a bit nursey in that outfit but some men are turned on by that. Approve.
Justine Miliband - Hmm. I feel she should have made more of an effort and it's not really co-ordinated.
Miriam Clegg - stylish as always.
Natalie Bennett. WTF? I thought the Greens believed in global warming so why is she wearing boots as if it's the middle of winter. Thumbs down.
Leanne Wood - stylish but her hair would look better in a bob.
Nicola Sturgeon. Very stylish. Perhaps a bit cocktail party-ish. She's probably got the champagne on ice for later

BTW when I voted this morning, on the ballot paper the Conservative candidate didn't give his address but just said "in the constituency". Is that usual?

There's a box to tick if you don't want your address made public. For security I suppose, or to stop constituents bothering you at home.

AndyJS said:

Some advice: if you live in a densely-populated area or in an area with a lot of students, don't wait until the final hour to go to vote. We all know what happened in Clegg's constituency last time. They couldn't cope with the last minute rush. The same thing happened in parts of central London and Birmingham. And in Liverpool Wavertree they ran out of ballot papers, despite the turnout being just 61%.

So long as you're in the queue at 10 you get to vote this time round.

TGOHF said:

chestnut said:

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/GE2015_final_poll_tables.pdf

Con 12 ahead with private sector workers, 11 ahead with homeowners.

How do you lose on those numbers?

s

a client state.

Labour ahead with people with worse record of turning up to vote

SandraM said:

BTW when I voted this morning, on the ballot paper the Conservative candidate didn't give his address but just said "in the constituency". Is that usual?

We had one like that here. I thought it might be a privacy/security thing if, e.g. threats (of any sort) had been made.

Cyclefree

The crap the credulous and the complacent

I like it!

I was going to be away for this election because I felt like that but ultimately was persuaded by Dave's campaign to vote. His policy on housing and Scotland turned me back into a raging lefty leaving my bloated bourgeoise side behind

Cyclefree said:

Funnily enough I think Osborne probably gets this more than Cameron

He definitely does, and I think for all of his prancing public-schoolboy image he genuinely wants to make the country's economy better for everyone, not just his rich mates. Witness his northern powerhouse stuff, which should've really given Labour a wobble up here, if only the focus hadn't been on porcine mastication.

I also think he'd be a formidable party leader and PM - much more so than BoJo - but I wonder about skeletons in the closet.

(N.B. I'm not a Tory).

Ghedebrav said:

John_M said:

I'm sure partisans will see it as rationalising (and people were saying this in 2010 as well), but this is surely an election to lose.

Yup. Not much of a choice on offer. But paves the way for a new Blair/Thatcher in 2020 or sooner. Who, though?

(Clue - it won't be Michael Gove)

While such a scenario good happen, I don't think it is assured. That would be holding on to too much comfort for the blues, as it could lead to them not changing in the way they ned to on the assumption that 5 years of Ed ina dificult situation would have to lead to them winning next time. By tomorrow Ed will have proven a lot of people wrong - I have my doubts he will be up to the challenges he faces, or if anyone is, but he could surprise people again.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

What polls are we yet to await?

I've got mega-YG, Ipsos MORI, Ashcroft

Did ICM update their fieldwork?

Sunil (and anyone) is there a correlation between proximity of polls to election day and accuracy/GE results?

Just bumped into one of my neighbours at the local Morrisons on Sheppey. Matt is an elderly Labour activist. He told me he'd been telling at one of the local polling stations.

I enquired as to activity and he said voting had been brisk (I was told the same at the station I voted in). I enquired as to how it was going for his bloke and he just shrugged and said "ok". He then added they thought they may trail in 3rd behind the Tories and UKIP. Must admit I was surprised to hear that.

As an aside I told him I dreaded the thought of a Miliband led government. His response; "he's just an ordinary, comprehensive schooled bloke, just like us". I clearly looked shocked, as he asked why I'd pulled the face. I explained I didn't think living in a £2M house was particularly ordinary. His respone; "you're talking rubbish, son".

They clearly don't like facts in the Labour party....

If the final polls are right it may be that the election campaign ended a week too late for the Tories. While the Ed Stone may have been amusing it took the attention away from the Lab in the SNP's pocket message which seemed to be gaining some traction.

Casino_Royale said:

Cyclefree said:

Polruan said:

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

two four weeks.

.

Arguably the key failing in the Blue campaign was the inability to decide whether the line was "Ed eats babies" or "Ed is too incompetent to eat babies and looks stupid when he tries".

Exactly. And when Ed did better than expected or not as bad as expected people stopped listening to the rest of the Tory message. All the stuff about high employment, low inflation, what this means for you and why this is good was missing. Plus the Tories have - assuming for the moment that they win - made life impossible for themselves with all these promises of no tax increases etc.

They should have - right from the moment they were elected - been explaining day in day out how badly Labour left the economy, not just in terms of deficit which is too abstract but in terms of every day stuff e.g. this PFI contract means that his hospital has to pay £859 to change a lightbulb for the next thousand years or whatever. They needed to do this so that they could explain and get people to understand why savings needed to be made, where and why Labour could not be trusted and they could. But they didn't do that and have rather lazily assumed that the relative good economic news spoke for itself. Whereas - either people don't notice - or, if they do, they think that it's safe to vote Labour again.

And - their biggest failing to my mind - too many of them have not thought of their policies in terms of how they affect ordinary people. It's fine to worry about business and rich people like, say, Dyson creating jobs etc but they needed to be much more focused on, say, the 6-man business struggling to survive (there was a lovely quote by a stonemason in EdM's Doncaster constituency in the Evening Standard last night saying that they were nearly bankrupt at the end of the last Labour government) and the ordinary family. Funnily enough I think Osborne probably gets this more than Cameron but they don't have enough people in their party who have lived ordinary lives and experienced what it is like to be unemployed, made redundant, worry about redundancy, worry about savings and pensions and where to live etc. I don't think Labour have such people either. None of them do, really.

Which is why we have a choice between the Crap, the Credulous and the Complacent.

Spot on, Cyclefree. Can you please consider running for the leadership of that bunch of muppets in the Tory party?

I'd vote for you.

Thank you.

Do you think Britain is ready for another bossy, opinionated, middle-aged woman to run it??!!

SouthamObserver said:

If the turnout is up that is probably extremely good news for UKIP and pretty good news for Labour.

In every election since 1979 Labour + LibDems have gained a steady 15.5m votes +/- a very small number. The split of those votes has varied. Likewise Tory + Did Not Vote added up to a static total. High turnouts have historically indicated a Tory win.

This time round will be fascinating to analyse. I suspect the Lab + LD thing may remain (with Labour hoovering up a big chunk of 2010 LDs). I suspect the Tory/turnout link may not - as UKIP eat into the DNV vote with newly energised voters.

Anorak said:

Ghedebrav said:

John_M said:

I'm sure partisans will see it as rationalising (and people were saying this in 2010 as well), but this is surely an election to lose.

Yup. Not much of a choice on offer. But paves the way for a new Blair/Thatcher in 2020 or sooner. Who, though?

(Clue - it won't be Michael Gove)

Pickles for PM. Boris as Chancellor. Dream ticket.

Ha! Shades of the Nicola Murray - Ben Swain combo (only sweatier).

SeanT said:

Cyclefree said:

SeanT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

In homage to Avery, here's a yellow box with the latest forecasts from various academics/pundits, and a slection of PB regulars. Apologies for any mistakes (in a couple of cases I've had to guess the PC/Respect figures):

Con Lab LD UKIP SNP PC Resp Grn ======================================= rcs100 311 248 18 2 47 3 1 1 JackW 302 251 28 3 42 3 1 1 Richard Nabavi 295 258 22 3 48 3 1 1 Jonathan 295 270 20 2 40 4? 0 0 Rod Crosby 294 247 34 2 49 3 1 1 Southam Observer 290 251 27 3 55 3 1 1 Peter the Punter 284 264 25 3 50 1? 0? 2 Nick Palmer 271 280 24 2 50 3 0 1 antifrank 266 280 21 4 54 4 1 1 Stephen Fisher 285 262 25 3 53 3 1 1 Peter Kellner 283 261 32 2 50 3 0 1 Election Forecast 281 266 27 1 51 4 1 1 UKelect 274 275 26 2 50 3 0 1 May2015 273 268 28 2 56 3 1 1 Poll Observatory 271 273 24 2 55 3 0 1

For the record, here is my latest prediction, made two days ago (my Official Prediction was very similar):

Tories: 272
Lab: 279
LDs: 25
UKIP: 2
Greens: 1
SNP: 49


Just me, antifrank, and NPXMP on our own predicting a Labour plurality.

rcs100's prediction of CON 311, Lab 248 is especially piquant.

Er, I predicted 300 seats for Labour this morning.

And what did you forecast in the Official PB Prediction, a couple of weeks ago?

I was unable to do it, as I was flying back from Oz, but as soon as I landed I made my own Official Prediction, so I could be laughed at or lauded, as and when.

It was this:

Tories: 278
Labour: 282
LDs: 26
UKIP: 2
Green: 1
SNP: 39

So I was still forecasting a Miliband plurality, back then.

Like many others I am now utterly mystified by the betting markets.

I didn't. I did one a few weeks back when we were first asked and I remember putting Lab at 300 then.

Anorak said:

calum said:

With 54% of Scots feeling the UK MSM and UK Politicians have become more hostile, the bizarre thing is that they may well have just killed off the Union. The constant demonising of the SNP by the Tories and the MSM has effectively done the SNPs work for them. History may yet judge David Cameron as the man who first saved and then destroyed the UK by putting party before country.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/uktone.jpg

I think irrespective of todays results in Scotland, the SNP surge is about to get super charged. Holyrood 2016 is likely to result in the 3 "mainstream parties" being squeezed in a pincer movement by the SNP, Greens and rather bizarrely UKIP.

I'd be surprised if a poll of the English showed different results to that picture.

I also think Labour will stage a resurgence in Scotland over the next 9 months to draw neck-and-neck with the Nats by early next year.

I think it will take SLAB years to recover from this, I'm sure the Scottish Tories kept expecting to stage a recovery back to the old normal - 20 years on they are still waiting. If anything SLAB and SLID are about to become a zombie party like SCUP with support levels below what is needed to succeed in a FPTP system.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Tough election work in Buckingham.

3 names on the list - Bercow, kipper, green.

JB could easily poll >50% I'd suggest.

Draw a cock and balls next to his name.

Patrick said:

SouthamObserver said:

If the turnout is up that is probably extremely good news for UKIP and pretty good news for Labour.

In every election since 1979 Labour + LibDems have gained a steady 15.5m votes +/- a very small number. The split of those votes has varied. Likewise Tory + Did Not Vote added up to a static total. High turnouts have historically indicated a Tory win.

This time round will be fascinating to analyse. I suspect the Lab + LD thing may remain (with Labour hoovering up a big chunk of 2010 LDs). I suspect the Tory/turnout link may not - as UKIP eat into the DNV vote with newly energised voters.

That is the kind of interesting fact that you learn every day on pb

Bond_James_Bond said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Two Bank of England members have said today that tax rises will not close the deficit. A labour government will be overwhelmed by the markets and will be forced as per Greece to cut spending and by that time some banks and non doms will have left and created big funding gaps for NHS and Education spending.

Labour will probably just do some sort of raid on private pensions.

Aggregate private pension wealth was about £3.6 trillion in 2010-2012 (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/was/wealth-in-great-britain-wave-3/2010-2012/report--chapter-6--private-pension-wealth.html).

An annual theft of say 2.5% of the current value of all private pensions would raise £90 billion, which would close the deficit - and wholly at the expense of private sector scum. It is also quite hard for the money to escape, so they could eventually just take it all.

Oliver_PB said:

Daniel said:

I wonder if the attempted character assassination of Ed Miliband has backfired; generated sympathy with the public and, some ways, might have benefited Labour.

I do wonder whether the Tories and the press ended up setting such low expectations for Ed Miliband that a large proportion of the electorate ended up being pleasantly surprised when he managed to come across as a functioning human being.

When did he manage that?

Every time he appeared.

One thing's for sure, I'm feeling like my wallet will be better off in the immediate aftermath. Lab most seats, Tories below 300, UKIP 5 or lower. Only Tories most votes/Lab most seats that looks in potential doubt.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

should be fun on here...

Owen Jones‏@OwenJones84·4 mins4 minutes ago
The finally polls show a shift to Labour. They may be wrong. But imagine the scenes of panic in Tory HQ right now. And savour it.

If there's one thing that might cause be leave my desk right now and help GOTV, it's little prats like Owen Jones gloating.

SandraM said:

As PB's self-appointed fashion correspondent, here are my views on the outfits of the wives and female party leaders at the ballot station.
SamCam - a bit nursey in that outfit but some men are turned on by that. Approve.
Justine Miliband - Hmm. I feel she should have made more of an effort and it's not really co-ordinated.
Miriam Clegg - stylish as always.
Natalie Bennett. WTF? I thought the Greens believed in global warming so why is she wearing boots as if it's the middle of winter. Thumbs down.
Leanne Wood - stylish but her hair would look better in a bob.
Nicola Sturgeon. Very stylish. Perhaps a bit cocktail party-ish. She's probably got the champagne on ice for later

BTW when I voted this morning, on the ballot paper the Conservative candidate didn't give his address but just said "in the constituency". Is that usual?

Myriam's the stylish one. SamCam can look gorgeous but is sometimes a bit bland and I don't like the belts she has. Her outfit today was dull.

Whatever other qualities Justine M has, a sense of fashion and elegance is not one of them. Her outfit (if one can call it that) today looks like something chosen out of Oxfam - in 5 minutes - in the dark.

Hard at this moment to think of any very elegant well-dressed public figures, certainly in public life. Theresa May, maybe.

Helen Mirren knows how to do it.

I'm still with the betting fraternity but painfully aware that OGH warned a few days ago that the punters (not pollsters), while united in their opinion (IYKWIM), can be very VERY wrong. He also pointed out that pollsters have a far better record overall, however difficult one (I mean I) might find that to believe this morning.

And yet, and yet... An Ed win on VI seems so counterintuitive given the huge weight of contrary (anti-Ed) opinion on the very important qualitative questions **in the same polls**. Surely voters do not, en masse, vote against their own known/express preferences? Do they? Are we all mad, my masters?

Well, I dunno. To coin a phrase, all bets are off.

(Um, can one be excommunicated for saying such a thing on here?)

GarethoftheVale2 said:

If the final polls are right it may be that the election campaign ended a week too late for the Tories. While the Ed Stone may have been amusing it took the attention away from the Lab in the SNP's pocket message which seemed to be gaining some traction.

Not sure - I think Dave in shirtsleeves doing passion was quite effective. Another week of that would have been better.

chestnut said:

surbiton said:

Nothing has changed in the last 36 hours or even two four weeks.

The only small difference that has been was recorded in the beginning of the campaign when the Great British public found out that Ed Miliband did not eat babies after all. There was a one-off jump and it has remained like that.

I think you may be misreading this.

I think people that were flirting with the Greens and such like have suddenly realised that the Tories were winning and are swinging behind Ed and trying to shore up Labour.

What you are both misreading is labour's 'Tories eat babies' campaign as per their last PPB with Coogan.
In contrast the tories have not said that of Miliband or Labour. The papers may have derided Miliband and pointed out that Labour are happy with segregated audiences. The reality is the Tories have done nothing in office to justify these Labour attacks; but if the electorate chose to believe Labour then thats the boat we are stuck in.
As for the Green vote - looking at the breakdowns earlier in Ashcrofts poll - then for England and Wales the Labour vote was mostly dire and the Greens remarkably good. Didn't ICM do Ashctofts polls?

Thank you for the comments about no address for the Conservative candidate. I suspected it might be for security reasons. There has been a bit of controversy about the local Havant Conservative candidate Alan Mak, who has taken over from David Willetts. Mak is the son of Chinese immigrants who grew up in Yorkshire. There have been complaints that he is not local; not on ethnic ground but the fact he's from Yorkshire.

@LadPolitics: Just taken the biggest bet yet on Labour most seats. £50,000 at 4/1, odds now 7/2.