politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ex-ICM boss & political polling pioneer, Nick Sparrow, on t

FPTP is so brutal, Conservatives add 600,000 votes to their 2010 total and win 25 more seats. Labour add 700,000 votes and lose 26.

I can actually see Cons securing 20% in Scotland next time, and 5+ seats

kle4 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kle4 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

EPG said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Keep banging on about voting reform loonies. Nobody cares.

It is fundamentally fair that those with the most votes wins the constituency. As the referendum showed by an overwhelming majority in a referendum only four years ago. Those in the echo chamber of banging on about this were sure AV would be accepted as a stepchange to PR but it was rejected overwhelmingly. No lessons are ever learnt it seems.

SDLP (Irish nationalist) 24%
Democratic Unionist 22%
Alliance (pro-union) 17%
Ulster Unionist 9%
Ukip (unionist) 5%
Conservative (unionist) 2%

Winner: SDLP

Erm...

What's the problem, SDLP had most votes.

We could have a system whereby the unionist losers are eliminated step-by-step and their votes reassigned to another candidate until someone gets 50%+1, As losing people would be changing their vote, we could call it Alternative Vote. Perhaps we should have a referendum?

Oh wait, we did. 67.9% said no. It's over.

I don't see why the public would be convinced of the benefits of moving to another system given the result of that referendum, particularly as FPTP has not delivered a chaotic result as predicted, but as has been pointed out a million times but which never stops being true, a vote on AV would not preclude someone suggesting a different system that people might like better than FPTP. I don't think they would, but people were asked to back the status quo or one particular alternative, that doesn't mean it no-one can propose another alternative.

The arguments for and against PR were used in the referendum. It's a bit rich to say a stepping stone being overwhelmingly rejected in favour of the status quo means a more extreme change was wanted.

That's like saying a Tory win over Labour means that the public really wanted Communism.

No it isn't. PR was not one of the options in the referendum - I agree with you that people would probably not go for it if asked, but the arguments would be much more focused on whatever alternative was put up, rather than people alsomaking those points during a referendum on a different system altogether.

We weren't asked about or to decide upon PR, even though discussion of it also cropped up. Someone could therefore ask us about it if they wanted. That seems perfectly reasonable, if a probable waste of time and money.

It'd be reasonable if there was any evidence of a groundswell of support to show it was wanted and more popular than AV. Where is that evidence?

The party whose number one policy was voting reform has gone down to eight seats. Maybe we shouldn't be looking at their priority as what the public wants.

Speedy said:

Mortimer said:

Paddy Ashdown is really unhappy! Doing himself no credit.

Why should we listen to the tirades of a deranged old man who ruined everything because of his thirst for power and now blames others.
It was he the one who installed Clegg, it was he the one who pushed for a coalition with the Tories, it was he the man who protected Clegg and the coalition from the LD party members.

Paddy Ashdown shares the blame equally with Clegg for destroying the Liberals for ever.

And I guess he knows it, hence the bitterness and deflection. He's angry with himself

Heads need to roll for this polling disaster,Peter Kelner for starters.

Philip_Thompson said:

kle4 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kle4 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

EPG said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Keep banging on about voting reform loonies. Nobody cares.

It is fundamentally fair that those with the most votes wins the constituency. As the referendum showed by an overwhelming majority in a referendum only four years ago. Those in the echo chamber of banging on about this were sure AV would be accepted as a stepchange to PR but it was rejected overwhelmingly. No lessons are ever learnt it seems.

SDLP (Irish nationalist) 24%
Democratic Unionist 22%
Alliance (pro-union) 17%
Ulster Unionist 9%
Ukip (unionist) 5%
Conservative (unionist) 2%

Winner: SDLP

Erm...

What's the problem, SDLP had most votes.

We could have a system whereby the unionist losers are eliminated step-by-step and their votes reassigned to another candidate until someone gets 50%+1, As losing people would be changing their vote, we could call it Alternative Vote. Perhaps we should have a referendum?

Oh wait, we did. 67.9% said no. It's over.

I don't see why the public would be convinced of the benefits of moving to another system given the result of that referendum, particularly as FPTP has not delivered a chaotic result as predicted, but as has been pointed out a million times but which never stops being true, a vote on AV would not preclude someone suggesting a different system that people might like better than FPTP. I don't think they would, but people were asked to back the status quo or one particular alternative, that doesn't mean it no-one can propose another alternative.

The argumed.

That's like saying a Tory win over Labour means that the public really wanted Communism.

No it isn't. PR money.

It'd be reasonable if there was any evidence of a groundswell of support to show it was wanted and more popular than AV. Where is that evidence?

The party whose number one policy was voting reform has gone down to eight seats. Maybe we shouldn't be looking at their priority as what the public wants.

I meant it would be reasonable to put any proposition before us, as we haven't had that proposition before - certainly if there if no party who won was advocating it, it would be peculiar to do so. The distinction I'd make is it is not unreasonable in principle to ask us even though we had the AV referendum, because if it is a different option then one cannot argue we have already made up our minds on the new question, but you are right if there is no mandate to make a change, it might not be reasonable to ask us in the first place.

Purseybear said:

BBC News really bringing it home. Cameron has culled 3 party leaders.

Amazing.

That's just over the past 24 hrs - lets not forget Gordon Brown and Alex Salmond.

medwayandproud said:

I can actually see Cons securing 20% in Scotland next time, and 5+ seats

Well they are in second in a few, and SLAB and SLD are in disarray. Their vote seems stubbornly stuck at where it is, more or less, but there's potential there at least, even if there is no guarantee - hell, they could get 20% and secure 0 seats if they are unlucky.

Floater said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Along with Paddy eating his hat and Bad Al eating his kilt, I also believe at midnight last night Lord A also said the exit poll was dead wrong....

Also seen Montie and Nelson amongst others out pontificating on what Cammo should do now - no doubt Portillo will too on TW (will Ed B or NP be the new lab voice on the sofa?) having been so wrong in the run up, why should he listen to such sage advice?

get hodges in! Even the much insulted Matt Parris did a lot better.

For me the WTF moment was Labour trying to argue that because the coalition would lose seats despite Labour having less seats they should get the opportunity to form a government.

Maybe they're Borgen fans? IIRC correctly that was the reasoning in the first episode as to why the Moderate leader was asked to try to form a government even though they weren't the largest party.

Mark Hopkins - LOL. Whether or not Obama wanted him back, since WW2 there hasn't been a more irrelevant British PM on the world stage. As a senior civil servant put it, Dave thinks the rest of the world is somewhere to go on holiday.

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

medwayandproud said:

I can actually see Cons securing 20% in Scotland next time, and 5+ seats

Jeez the first call for a Scottish Tory surge. At least wait until the Scottish elections are out the way.

If Cameron gives them FFA and they accept it in a referendum, followed by the SNP having to make massive cuts then lots of the vote could amass around the Tories. Or more likely, not.

Alistair said:

FPTP is so brutal, Conservatives add 600,000 votes to their 2010 total and win 25 more seats. Labour add 700,000 votes and lose 26.

Like a reverse 2005.

I note Stephen Timms added decently to his majority....

Have I heard correctly on the BBC News, has Jim Murphy not resigned as SLAB leader?

Ishmael_X said:

volcanopete said:

Heads need to roll for this polling disaster,Peter Kelner for starters.

I feel your pain; his organisation lost this for Labour pretty much single-handedly.

I don't think he meant to, if that helps.

How did he lose it for Labour? Complacency? I thought it was because EIC?

Pulpstar said:

Alistair said:

FPTP is so brutal, Conservatives add 600,000 votes to their 2010 total and win 25 more seats. Labour add 700,000 votes and lose 26.

Like a reverse 2005.

I note Stephen Timms added decently to his majority....

I wonder if there's scope for him to do so again next time? Eventually even East Ham's love for Labour has to reach a limit, surely?

Speedy said:

Have I heard correctly on the BBC News, has Jim Murphy not resigned as SLAB leader?

Of course. What possible reason would he need to resign for? *innocent face*

kle4 said:

Pulpstar said:

Alistair said:

FPTP is so brutal, Conservatives add 600,000 votes to their 2010 total and win 25 more seats. Labour add 700,000 votes and lose 26.

Like a reverse 2005.

I note Stephen Timms added decently to his majority....

I wonder if there's scope for him to do so again next time? Eventually even East Ham's love for Labour has to reach a limit, surely?

Speedy said:

Have I heard correctly on the BBC News, has Jim Murphy not resigned as SLAB leader?

Of course. What possible reason would he need to resign for? *innocent face*

Well it took two huge defeats to get Harman to step down as Deputy Leader...

The Southwork Cllr (aka the new MP for Dulwich) set a small business which then merged with a big firm of architects.

The Copeland Cllr now MP for Workington lists in her register of interests "Consultancy work" whatever it is.

The Birmingham Cllr (now MP for Yardley) works for Women's Aid and in Dromey's office.

Ron Davies' former wife also studied law but I think she works as a squash coach.

Pennycook (Greenwich) used to work in the voluntary sector.

Imran Hussain (Bradford East) is also a solicitor.

The Wakefield Cllr, now MP for Dewsbury, is another working for NHS

TCPoliticalBetting said:

AndreaParma, thanks. So just one worked in business as well as two solicitors. The rest either public sector, unions, councillors or MPs workers. No wonder Labour have a problem understanding business.

MP_SE said:

Wow. UKIP have three core areas to start working on for 2020:

https://twitter.com/CaitlinMilazzo/status/596780575941402624

Well usual areas, Linconshire, Thames Estuary, Kent coast.
But also South Yorkshire and the occasional inner city seat outside of London.

8 seats above 30%, with the proper candidate and smoothing the rough edges to reduce the anti-UKIP tactical vote and they might gain those in the future.

Just watching QT on iplayer... How bitter are Ali and Paddy?

@NickPalmer

What happened?

You've been telling us for at least two years it was a formality Red Liberals, every one had made up their minds,you never seemed to meet a Tory voter & Soubry was useless etc etc.

Or was it all going well until Roger & Tysos turned up to canvas for you this week ?

Chameleon said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

medwayandproud said:

I can actually see Cons securing 20% in Scotland next time, and 5+ seats

Jeez the first call for a Scottish Tory surge. At least wait until the Scottish elections are out the way.

If Cameron gives them FFA and they accept it in a referendum, followed by the SNP having to make massive cuts then lots of the vote could amass around the Tories. Or more likely, not.

Sturgeon would be wise to ensure that FFA required a uk wide referendum.

Newsnight jumping the shark...playing Eminem as opening to programme. I remember when it used to be serious show.

You don't want the polls to always right.
From a betting point of view its a disaster if they are.

Due respect to Nick Palmer. Last night the guy gave us in one post the most honest and straightforward warning of exactly what was going to happen, without any filtered bull. For me it pretty much convinced me that the exit poll had veracity.

I managed to trade my way past some bad previous bets based on that one posted anecdote, which is exactly what someones presence on this site can do for people like me who are less interested the anorak minutiae of politics and more interested in the betting.

JosiasJessop said:

NickPalmer said:

Ishmael_X said:

pollbludger said:

It seems to me that the difference is compulsory voting. At least three-quarters of the adult population casts a valid vote in Australia, and the other quarter are presumably among the non-respondents. So there's nothing in questionnaires about likelihood of voting, and no need to second guess the accuracy of their responses. And because there has never been a past disaster like 1992, pollsters have pretty much just stuck to demographic weighting, without ever having to devise ad hoc solutions like weighting by past vote as problems have emerged.

Thanks: that is a riveting point about compulsory voting (and a subsidiary argument for having it here, that it would improve the polling).

To be provocative, you can make an argument that the polls were correctly representing the public and the actual election was in error, because of failures to register and vote. But the polls of non-voters that I've seen don't show them as hugely different to voters.

Perhaps we should pay more attention to the polling question "Will you definitely vote for that party or might you still change your mind?" If we accept that there was a last-day shift to a perceived "safety first", then that possibility would show up in the question. The snag is that the figures for that question didn't look very different for Labour or Tories.

To be fair, we should acknowledge that the polls weren't ridiculously wrong - we're talking about a last-minute swing of around 3%. It doesn't make the earlier polls invalid and it won't always happen, but we need to keep the possibility in mind when we move towards the next election.

What makes you think it was a last-minute swing? It's just as likely that the pollsters have massive problems detecting the real picture.

After your comments on the ground game, it seems you do too.

Have Nick Palmer and Marcus Wood ever been seen together in the same room?

Alistair said:

Chameleon said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

medwayandproud said:

I can actually see Cons securing 20% in Scotland next time, and 5+ seats

Jeez the first call for a Scottish Tory surge. At least wait until the Scottish elections are out the way.

If Cameron gives them FFA and they accept it in a referendum, followed by the SNP having to make massive cuts then lots of the vote could amass around the Tories. Or more likely, not.

Sturgeon would be wise to ensure that FFA required a uk wide referendum.

With a view to stopping it?

Speedy said:

Have I heard correctly on the BBC News, has Jim Murphy not resigned as SLAB

Yes it is difficult to understand is it not?. However it is not tenable and the dirks are already out to put a stop to such noinsense.

Have I missed tonights YouGov...innocent face...

Ah, I didn't know. They failed to explicitly mention it in her bio. Or at least I didn't read it.

notme said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

She moved there because of Evil Cameron?

"After nearly a decade in the Police Service, Paula joined the NHS, working in a front line role in Community Healthcare provision. In 2013, the service Paula works within was transferred to the private healthcare sector and her employment was consequently transferred, so she’s seen first-hand the effects of David Cameron’s top down NHS reorganisation."

notme said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

The Southwork Cllr (aka the new MP for Dulwich) set a small business which then merged with a big firm of architects.

The Copeland Cllr now MP for Workington lists in her register of interests "Consultancy work" whatever it is.

The Birmingham Cllr (now MP for Yardley) works for Women's Aid and in Dromey's office.

Ron Davies' former wife also studied law but I think she works as a squash coach.

Pennycook (Greenwich) used to work in the voluntary sector.

Imran Hussain (Bradford East) is also a solicitor.

The Wakefield Cllr, now MP for Dewsbury, is another working for NHS

TCPoliticalBetting said:

AndreaParma, thanks. So just one worked in business as well as two solicitors. The rest either public sector, unions, councillors or MPs workers. No wonder Labour have a problem understanding business.

Actually the dewsbury one doesnt work for the NHS, she works for Virgin Care.

She's a pilgrim, i doubt she got much involved in patient care.

I disagree that the result being different from the polls was down to a late swing. There is a fundamental flaw in polling methodology which the British Polling Council must addressed. In my involvement in the campaign I found steady Conservative support reaching the levels of 2010 in contradiction of the polls. Conservatives were mush more determined to vote than other parties so differential turnout played its part. This is not a revival of the "shy Tories" as they never went away. Many Conservative supporters, in my experience, are reticent about openly displaying their party allegiance but they does not mean that such allegiance is less than firm.

Guardian have dug up a youtube video of Lynton Crosby giving his words of wisdom how to sock it to the other lot.

But either way, while many of the Conservatives’ opponents and many journalists and voters were assuming that the Tory campaign was drifting or stalling, Crosby’s well-funded infantry were quietly, busily seizing the marginals. Another of his favourite electioneering phrases is “below the radar”.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/08/lynton-crosby-wedge-politics-general-election-tories

FrancisUrquhart said:

Guardian have dug up a youtube video of Lynton Crosby giving his words of wisdom how to sock it to the other lot.

But either way, while many of the Conservatives’ opponents and many journalists and voters were assuming that the Tory campaign was drifting or stalling, Crosby’s well-funded infantry were quietly, busily seizing the marginals. Another of his favourite electioneering phrases is “below the radar”.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/08/lynton-crosby-wedge-politics-general-election-tories

“Ignore most of the opinion polls that you see in the newspapers, because they are so simplistic.”

Wise words.

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Guardian have dug up a youtube video of Lynton Crosby giving his words of wisdom how to sock it to the other lot.

But either way, while many of the Conservatives’ opponents and many journalists and voters were assuming that the Tory campaign was drifting or stalling, Crosby’s well-funded infantry were quietly, busily seizing the marginals. Another of his favourite electioneering phrases is “below the radar”.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/08/lynton-crosby-wedge-politics-general-election-tories

“Ignore most of the opinion polls that you see in the newspapers, because they are so simplistic.”

Wise words.

I am watching the video and it is really quite interesting...Also, I can see why Tories hired him AND Messina...it seems like for a lot of Crosbys ideas to work, he needs Messina analysis.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

Unpunted bet #181821 of the GE:

... 5-7 on the "300 ups"...

Yes, me too. In fact it was lower still at one point yesterday. I seriously thought of taking it, but didn't.

Still, can't complain! I'm still counting the dosh.. 66/1 on Berwickshire etc was the highlight.

Well done on the 66/1.

My best bets of the election (outside of scotland) were on the 2nd place Spread markets. In amongst the dozens of great value losers were a couple of very big winners.

19/1 on labour coming 2nd in wyre forest was the highlight. Not sure if I tipped that on here or not.

Its becoming clear what the Tories were up with all the Facebook months ago now. Crosby basically says that evidence shows you can't just convince somebody in a campaign. No matter how much better Ed might be doing to exception during the debates, unless you have already built some sort of rapport well in advance, you are asking too much.

If you like the Tories, hate the Tories, not to fussed either way, I highly recommend watching this Crosby video it is incredibly revealing about what is going on and also an insight into what we should and shouldn't (in his opinion) care about in the polls...The polling stuff is particularly interesting and a lot of it seems to ring true with this GE.

FB The only poll taken of leadership candidates showed to a focus group had Umunna taking Labour up to 37%, higher than Burnham, Cooper or Miliband and level with Alan Johnson
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2826937/Ed-shadow-minister-plunges-dagger-Tristram-Hunt-joins-Labour-revolt-poll-says-Miliband-liability.html

In any case Labour do not need small towns to win, they become largest party if they win the inner cities and add the suburbs

RodCrosby said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Been catching up as have been moving today. One of the things that really strikes me is not just about the result today but how much harder the job has become for Lab in 2020.

If you have a super marginal seat like Bedford and stand still then at least you are well placed to try again in 2020. The problem for Lab is that many of the marginals have becomes less marginal. Super marginals like Broxtowe, N Warks and Amber Valley have now become semi-marginal. Middling targets like Kingswood, Gloucester and Stafford now look safeish. While at the bottom of the list seats like Leicester NW, Tamworth and S Derbyshire now look safe.

And of course the final phase of individual registration and the boundary review are likely to set the bar higher.

The electoral system is probably slightly biased to the Tories now - or soon will be!

You mean post the implementation of the Boundary Commission proposals, said to be worth circa 8 seats to the Tories?

HYUFD said:

FB The only poll taken of leadership candidates showed to a focus group had Umunna taking Labour up to 37%, higher than Burnham, Cooper or Miliband and level with Alan Johnson
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2826937/Ed-shadow-minister-plunges-dagger-Tristram-Hunt-joins-Labour-revolt-poll-says-Miliband-liability.html

In any case Labour do not need small towns to win, they become largest party if they win the inner cities and add the suburbs

Labour need Worcester, Gloucester, Nuneaton, Redditch etc etc....Umannua will have zero resonance there.Nil. Jarvis maybe. Others perhaps. A slick London metro lawyer, no chance.My view.

FB Indeed, and Worcester and Gloucester are cities and Redditch a suburb, only Nuneaton could be considered a small town. All 4 voted for a slick London lawyer named Anthony Lynton Blair, educated at Fettes and Oxford on 3 occasions, and Worcester and Redditch are relatively prosperous and want moderate, reasonable leaders, not UKIP style populism, I know Worcester reasonably well

Evening all.

I see the public wake for the left continues on the BBC 24 hours on...

@iainmartin1: Some Lib Dems very dignified in defeat. Others being extremely sanctimonious and unwilling to accept blame. I'm thinking Paddy Ashdown.

Interesting panel discussion on how did Labour lose, part 27 Newsnight that reiterated the theory that Ed was crap, was always crap, would always lose and based on economic competence and leadership the polls were 6 points out...

Also, the demise of DUEMA

as late as last night, at one minute to ten, just before the exit poll came out showing Miliband had been trounced, disappointed Conservative friends were telling me that DUEMA had been right all along and that Ed Miliband had fought a much better campaign than David Cameron. Now the results are in, and the Tories have a majority, one hears less of this view.

http://www.capx.co/duema-closing-statement/

On the betting front, it has been a pleasant day retrieving cash from various bookies. SPIN were particularly generous this time round. Thanks also to all those who tipped what seemed like long shot winners, and of course Jack W and RodCrosby (SWIIINNNGGGGBBAAAACCCCKKKKKK)

In Scotland

@elliotttimes: Cameron's message to the SNP tonight appears to be 'sweet FFA'.

@iainmartin1: Get ready for the highly amusing spectacle of the SNP turning down fiscal autonomy. Bloody Tories, offering Holyrood too much power...

Popcorn on standby

And finally, a quick note to my fans, although they seem thin on the ground right now

@hopisen: When I'm wrong, @SophieRanald sings the 'I was right' song. It goes "I was right and you were wrong, so I can sing the "I was right" song"..

Can you hear it?