politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Our GE15 prediction competition: results + chart showing CO
Comments
-
Sefton Central was amazing as well.RodCrosby said:Southport was an amazing result.
Both LibDems and Tories collapsed, but the LDs clung on with 31%. Can't actually see Labour ever winning this, but I could imagine UKIP.
Nuttall has probably got his eye on it for 2020.
Has the area changed much from 1992 ?
Swing wise it must rival the likes of Mitcham, Hayes and Edmonton.
But without the demographic change.
Are middle class Scousers proud or embarrassed to be so different to the rest of England and Wales politically ?
0 -
Yep, agreed.Slackbladder said:
Difficult to say, after all, we only get to actuallly test the poles once every 5 years (for a GE).The_Apocalypse said:
I agree with you on YouGov, I think we actually had way too many polls in this election. We don't need that many opinion polls. On the polls being mood music - tbh, even the opinion polls we got in the election weren't great mood music predictors. They implied it was fairly close - when it wasn't in the slightest!Slackbladder said:
Well some polls are better than no polls, and as i've said before, ok as mood music, not seat predictors directly.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't think we should have any polls in the next five years tbh. How can we believe them?Plato said:Many of us were hit over the head with so many polls that it was almost irresistable - how could they ALL be wrong?
As we've learnt subsequently - some were buried and then others fiddled their models to *fit in* so no one was exposed at the end.
Well - all that happened was Collective Guilt not Innocence.
It's certainly bruised my faith in all pollsters for a while.ukelect said:The reason that many seat predictors (including UK-Elect) failed so badly to predict the LibDem seat total was because they were fine-tuned by the Ashcroft constituency polls, which seemed to show that the LibDEm incumbency factor really existed. That made me extremely nervous at the time (I said so at the time) but trusted the data rather than my instincts. Damn.
Theres a not of helpful secondary information which is good
But I think that daily YouGov poll has been a huge mistake.
I think all the polling companies need to go away, have a long hard think, then come back and explain what happened and then present information in a new way with new ideas.
0 -
I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.0
-
While there is some merit in your argument, it also demonstrates both why the Scottish Independence movement is the correct course of action and how you fundamentally do not understand it.Luckyguy1983 said:
It's human nature. That doesn't change.EPG said:
I do think this time is different. It is now clear that the SNP will never be in the Westminster government, and that even supporting a Westminster government will be very difficult for them. And in the last forty-eight hours, it suddenly become conceivable to them that they could achieve their true goal within three years.
Independence is at its heart a deeply held inferiority complex. I mean that very specifically, NOT that Scottish people are inferior - they punch above their weight in almost every field of human endeavour, but that many FEEL so though they would never admit it. It's the upper class English and the London elite that make them feel that way. Take away the self loathing, and you take away the desire for independence.
Self-loathing indicates that it is an internal decision process.
But then you confirm that it is an external imposition - the hatred felt by an English Elite towards Scots.
Scotland has woken up. There is a very clear understanding of just how much the English Elite hates Scotland and the Scots. In those circumstances, the Union is dead, you cannot be linked (and numerically dominated) by another nation while the Elite of that nation despises you (and has the tacit supporter of their wider population in that hatred).0 -
As Deb Mattinson [Gordon's polling lady] said yesterday - to paraphrase Lord Ashcroft has a lot to be pissed off about.FrancisUrquhart said:
One question is...Ashcroft spent £5+ million on his polling, including the constituency based ones. I wonder how much the Tories via Crosby / Messina spent on their polling and what was the secret sauce that meant they were far more tuned in?
Remember Crosby told people a bit over 300 (306 I believe) was his prediction based upon their polling a couple of days before the GE. They apparently were confident of around this up until 2 weeks out, they had a wobble, they sent out "pumped up Dave", and then finalized on a bit over 300.0 -
Thanks for that. The actual results will need to be processed, analysed and put on the website. Then it will be time to (mostly) take a break for the summer - before preparations start for forecasting the 2016 Scottish Parliament and other elections! Hopefully the polling companies will have sorted themselves out by then - but it will take a long time for them (and, I fear, election forecasters) to regain people's trust! Quite rightly, I suppose.Plato said:I do hope you aren't hanging up your hat Mr Elect?
A great resource and some superb tweets.
Look forward to reading more of them, hopefully.ukelect said:I think the LibDems will be back - although it is a long, long, way back. There is no reason to loathe them any more - tuition fees and the coalition with the Conservatives will fade from memory. They still have some strength in some constituencies, and, during the years of Conservative majority rule, naturally liberal voters will come to look back more kindly on a time when what they will see as the Conservatives worst excesses were tempered somewhat.
0 -
Would anyone care to speculate on what Cameron is going to ask for in terms of a renegotiation with the EU.
There are an awful lot of unnamed EU bureaucrats being quoted saying that they intend to not offer anything worthwhile to DC and expect him to campaign for an IN vote regardless.0 -
My mistake - Gower and Vale of Clwyd. The third Conservative Welsh gain was Brecon from the LibDems.felix said:
I can only find 2 Con gains from Labour in Walesanother_richard said:
London was Labour's best region:EPG said:
But as discussed, they didn't do especially well in London. They only gained a handful of seats.AndyJS said:Hendon should have been one of the easiest Labour gains in the country, especially being in London. Instead the Tory majority went from 106 to 3,724.
EPG said:
Labour gained more votes than the Conservatives in Finchley and Golders Green. So this is normal variance.Sean_F said:
Look at the way the Conservative vote rose in the two most Jewish seats in the UK, Hendon and Finchley & Golders Green. Look at the way it rose in the two most Hindu seats in the UK, Harrow East and West. I think that the interview with Muslim News did Labour absolutely no favours at all with those communities.EPG said:
The proposal to introduce a crime of aggravated assault against Muslims just didn't get that much traction outside the usual anti-Islam circles, who don't vote Labour anyway.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
London +7
NW +4
East +2
NE +1
Yorkshire +1
West Midlands +1
SE --
SW --
East Midlands -1
Wales -2
Scotland -40
Against Conservatives:
London +4
NW +2
NE --
SE --
East --
Yorkshire --
West Midlands --
Scotland --
SW -1
East Midlands -1
Wales -3
Cardiff North almost feels like a Conservative gain with its majority being so small in 2010 and Labour winning the equivalent Assembly seat in 2011.
0 -
Betting post-the result being bloody obvious was even better advice. I was getting 1.6 on Tory Maj even as +19 was already on screen with 3 LD gains (and the heavily trailed Balls defeat) to come. Get your own spreadsheets, pay the PA for the feed, and you'll have a massive edge over punters going on what the BBC/Sky projection is showing. God only knows why they update it so slowly.Plato said:Well done, Sir.
Your advice to bet post-exit-poll seems like one followed by many on PB - I was too blotto/sunstroked by then to know if I was imaging it all so didn't.
BUGGER.0 -
Just seen a result I had to look twice at to make sure I wasn't seeing things: the LDs polling 6.3% in Surrey SW. A couple of elections ago they almost won the seat when Virginia Bottomley was the MP.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E140009530 -
No doubt when Emily stands next time for the third GE in a row and she is still only 30 (having first been selected as a PPC at age 17 in 2007), she can pen another piece about how she isn't a careerist politician picked for her family name (as failing to win, and thus having to get a job elsewhere, means you cannot be a professional politician).AndreaParma_82 said:yes but it was in Gainsborough. He polled 21.3%, 5.7% increased compared to 2010
Emily Benn polled 24.8% in Croydon South (+4.8%)
Con increased their vote share in both seats too.Flightpathl said:
Was Prescott junior standing anywhere?FrancisUrquhart said:
I see Kinnock's son got his seat....felix said:
Labourites love a dynasty!Slackbladder said:
Don't give them ideas....another_richard said:
In a year's time they'll be advocating Young Kinnock.nigel4england said:
I was talking with an ex-Labour MP this morning, we were talking about potential leaders. He doesn't like any at the top of the list, he wants David Miliband back.AndyJS said:One thing Labour might think about addressing is this sort of thing:
A newly-elected MP being booed by Labour activists a matter of seconds after having been declared the winner. Whatever you think of him, he'd just been endorsed by the voters. Maybe not the best attitude to take if you're in the business of winning elections:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgGoOOwXip00 -
You don't think after 10 years of Tory posho rule the public might be a bit sick of that?SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
0 -
The last thing the SNP want is FFA. Heavens above, the notion of having to tax their own people at the level needed to justify their policies would be a complete disaster. It would quickly turn into S(weet)FA. No FFA before another indyref. No exposure of the delusion.0
-
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
0 -
Seriously?SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
I'm loath to comment as a Tory partisan, but would Labour really pick an Old Etonian called Tristram? Cue the Pavlovian reaction of UKIP in all those second places to Labour.0 -
The voters do not back a majority Tory government. They are not to blame.kle4 said:This sort of thing actually makes me angry - http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/dont-give-angry-population-hard-govern-depressed-population-easy
Today, David Cameron does not just have the political will to slash welfare and widen the wealth gap: he has a mandate.
I have spent much of the past 48 hours lying in bed staring at the ceiling, reading despairing, four-letter posts on social media and trying to work out how on earth this happened, as if anyone with half a brain doesn't know. The political elites closed ranks and capitulated to a politics of fear, first in Scotland, and then across the nation.
How can you go from admitting Cameron got a mandate, much as you might hate that, to blaming it on the political elite (not least because Labour are the political elite too)? If he has a mandate, the people you need to blame are the voters (or possibly figure out how to win those voters back), blaming the elite is just an easy cop out, making it seem as though not convincing the voters was not a problem.
Cameron got less than 37% of the vote but got a majority government off the back of that. It's not a democratic outcome by any measure of the word. You can't blame voters for an outcome they never voted for.0 -
Do hypnosis and fear affect pollsters' methodology?MikeSmithvson said:
And it was the small and medium English towns where most of the marginals were.AndyJS said:The election was a victory for provincial England and Wales. They didn’t accept the metropolitan view of Ed Miliband. Labour’s vote went up in trendy areas like Hackney and Islington. They tanked in the small to medium sized towns of England and Wales.
I think that the YouGov daily poll has an almost hypnotic effect and pollsters are fearful or producing something that is much different.0 -
You would have thought that they would be sick after 5 years of posho rule,but clearly they weren`t.FrancisUrquhart said:
You don't think after 10 years of Tory posho rule the public might be a bit sick of that?SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
And whoever wins is going to have to grovel to Murdoch.0 -
I read somewhere that Tamworth was the constituency in the UK that had seen the biggest increase in employment during the coalition years.AndyJS said:I said the same thing myself a couple of weeks ago, and requested a thread on the subject like we had just before the 2010 election.
Plato said:IIRC we spent A LOT of time talking about English Market Towns pre-2010 and didn't do so much pre-2015.
Is that false recall from me?MikeSmithson said:
And it was the small and medium English towns where most of the marginals were.AndyJS said:The election was a victory for provincial England and Wales. They didn’t accept the metropolitan view of Ed Miliband. Labour’s vote went up in trendy areas like Hackney and Islington. They tanked in the small to medium sized towns of England and Wales.
I think that the YouGov daily poll has an almost hypnotic effect and pollsters are fearful or producing something that is much different.
I suggest this goes some way to explain the Tories' good results in the not-too-faraway North Warwickshire and Nuneaton.
0 -
I wish they would. Hunt has a vast capacity for issuing blatant lies from a physically twisted mouth. Perfect for Labour!!!!SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
0 -
Re. Labour in London. I don't think there is a metropolitan divide in opinions about Miliband. He actually underperformed quite badly here as well. I expected Ealing Central & Acton (my constituency) to go Labour with a 5,000+ majority. They won by 274 votes - similar story in neighbouring Brentford & Isleworth. In neither constituency can the result be explained by Jewish communities turning against Labour. Throughout the nation (with the possible exception of Merseyside) floating voters thought he just wasn't up to the job.0
-
Can you really see labour electing someone call Tristram to be leader??
'Cameron...you posho public school toff....'
'Hunt, you ....ummm errr...'0 -
It's a Kiss Of Death when the ENTIRE point of your business is to tell us the truth, no matter how unwelcome.
It's like a bent accountant.MarkHopkins said:What we are finding out about the pollsters shows how powerful peer pressure can be, even in a professional/scientific environment.
The problems with the "consensus" about AGW come to mind as well.
Not sure what the answers are though.0 -
Euroscepticism is at its heart a deeply held inferiority complex. I mean that very specifically, NOT that UKIP people are inferior - they punch above their weight in almost every field of human endeavour, but that many FEEL so though they would never admit it. It's the cosmopolitan Europeans and the Brussels elite that make them feel that way. Take away the self loathing, and you take away the desire for UK 'independence'.Luckyguy1983 said:
It's human nature. That doesn't change.EPG said:
I do think this time is different. It is now clear that the SNP will never be in the Westminster government, and that even supporting a Westminster government will be very difficult for them. And in the last forty-eight hours, it suddenly become conceivable to them that they could achieve their true goal within three years.
Independence is at its heart a deeply held inferiority complex. I mean that very specifically, NOT that Scottish people are inferior - they punch above their weight in almost every field of human endeavour, but that many FEEL so though they would never admit it. It's the upper class English and the London elite that make them feel that way. Take away the self loathing, and you take away the desire for independence.
0 -
They missed out with Alan Johnson.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
Even I like Alan Johnson0 -
Plus he is an idiot.Baskerville said:
Seriously?SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
I'm loath to comment as a Tory partisan, but would Labour really pick an Old Etonian called Tristram? Cue the Pavlovian reaction of UKIP in all those second places to Labour.
When Yvette is the likely choice you know Labour are in trouble.0 -
Has Murdoch commented at all on the result? He must have been worried for a bit.SMukesh said:
You would have thought that they would be sick after 5 years of posho rule,but clearly they weren`t.FrancisUrquhart said:
You don't think after 10 years of Tory posho rule the public might be a bit sick of that?SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
And whoever wins is going to have to grovel to Murdoch.
Now you're being absurd - I don't like FPTP but it is the system we have and we have accepted in the past governments with massive majorities on far less than 50% of the vote.Dair said:
The voters do not back a majority Tory government. They are not to blame.kle4 said:This sort of thing actually makes me angry - http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/dont-give-angry-population-hard-govern-depressed-population-easy
Today, David Cameron does not just have the political will to slash welfare and widen the wealth gap: he has a mandate.
I have spent much of the past 48 hours lying in bed staring at the ceiling, reading despairing, four-letter posts on social media and trying to work out how on earth this happened, as if anyone with half a brain doesn't know. The political elites closed ranks and capitulated to a politics of fear, first in Scotland, and then across the nation.
How can you go from admitting Cameron got a mandate, much as you might hate that, to blaming it on the political elite (not least because Labour are the political elite too)? If he has a mandate, the people you need to blame are the voters (or possibly figure out how to win those voters back), blaming the elite is just an easy cop out, making it seem as though not convincing the voters was not a problem.
Cameron got less than 37% of the vote but got a majority government off the back of that. It's not a democratic outcome by any measure of the word. You can't blame voters for an outcome they never voted for.
Penny is simultaneously saying Cameron got a mandate and that the nasty elites are to blame. It cannot be both; a mandate says he won the support of the people, so you cannot them act like elites stole the result from the people (which blaming them is doing).
And if we are to blame our voting system for Cameron being able to govern with a slim majority on 37% of the vote, that is still the voters' fault, as they rejected an alternative and didn't support any party that wants to change it. this time.
Either way, blaming the elites is ridiculous when the votes went Cameron's way.
0 -
I was under the impression that Milton Keynes was the biggest success story?No_Offence_Alan said:
I read somewhere that Tamworth was the constituency in the UK that had seen the biggest increase in employment during the coalition years.AndyJS said:I said the same thing myself a couple of weeks ago, and requested a thread on the subject like we had just before the 2010 election.
Plato said:IIRC we spent A LOT of time talking about English Market Towns pre-2010 and didn't do so much pre-2015.
Is that false recall from me?MikeSmithson said:
And it was the small and medium English towns where most of the marginals were.AndyJS said:The election was a victory for provincial England and Wales. They didn’t accept the metropolitan view of Ed Miliband. Labour’s vote went up in trendy areas like Hackney and Islington. They tanked in the small to medium sized towns of England and Wales.
I think that the YouGov daily poll has an almost hypnotic effect and pollsters are fearful or producing something that is much different.
I suggest this goes some way to explain the Tories' good results in the not-too-faraway North Warwickshire and Nuneaton.0 -
At the risk of being banned, I have to confess that after 2 days I am suffering withdrawal problems from having no articles on here on why the Conservatives will find it impossible/difficult to win a General Election. Are there any other members of the PB community suffering similar problems? Let us all be open and admit to our problem.0
-
I got a Team2015 email this morning from the Tories asking me to join if I wasn't already a member.ukelect said:
I wonder how many of those are actually returning members?No_Offence_Alan said:
I'm probably telling tales out of turn here, but the LDs have signed up 3,000 new members since Thursday night.Dair said:
I can't comment for others but on my part there is no shadenfreude. I quite like the ideas of the Liberal Party which have been fairly consistent in the Lib Dem proposal even if contaminated by the SDP socialist dogma. The liberal voices in the party eventually won out. I would have liked them to continue.EPG said:
But they knew that about Labour last time too. We should be careful about believing schadenfreude too much.Slackbladder said:
the lib dems don't have union sugar daddys
But there has to be some realism. When the Liberals were dead, in the 50s and 60s they still had that core support in the Highland and Islands of Scotland keeping them alive. That's gone now. They have no core anywhere, no money, no significant VI share.
Reality has to be recognised.0 -
UKIP vote was based on 2 things-Immigration and Europe(amongst themselves intertwined).Baskerville said:
Seriously?SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
I'm loath to comment as a Tory partisan, but would Labour really pick an Old Etonian called Tristram? Cue the Pavlovian reaction of UKIP in all those second places to Labour.
Labour unnecessarily alienated them by refusing to offer a vote on Europe and then making a big issue that they didn`t offer one...lol
And they didn`t make a big enough offer on Immigration.
Given that Miliband was courting the working class(he didn`t make any offer to the middle class) and these were the things they were concerned about,you don`t win their votes by focussing only on zero hours and bedroom tax.0 -
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.
0 -
0
-
If he'd ever shown any indication that he wanted the job, he'd have been a shoo-in.nigel4england said:
They missed out with Alan Johnson.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
Even I like Alan Johnson0 -
Him and Portillo on This Week are a great duo. That said, I'm not sure if Johnson would have been the man to win Labour the election.nigel4england said:
They missed out with Alan Johnson.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
Even I like Alan Johnson0 -
TBF Con+UKIP are nudging 50% between them. With a couple of minor exceptions where UKIP and Con disagree, Lab generally agree with Con, so there's almost nothing the Tories will do that wouldn't have had the support of 50% of MPs on a non-mental voting system.Dair said:
The voters do not back a majority Tory government. They are not to blame.kle4 said:This sort of thing actually makes me angry - http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/dont-give-angry-population-hard-govern-depressed-population-easy
Today, David Cameron does not just have the political will to slash welfare and widen the wealth gap: he has a mandate.
I have spent much of the past 48 hours lying in bed staring at the ceiling, reading despairing, four-letter posts on social media and trying to work out how on earth this happened, as if anyone with half a brain doesn't know. The political elites closed ranks and capitulated to a politics of fear, first in Scotland, and then across the nation.
How can you go from admitting Cameron got a mandate, much as you might hate that, to blaming it on the political elite (not least because Labour are the political elite too)? If he has a mandate, the people you need to blame are the voters (or possibly figure out how to win those voters back), blaming the elite is just an easy cop out, making it seem as though not convincing the voters was not a problem.
Cameron got less than 37% of the vote but got a majority government off the back of that. It's not a democratic outcome by any measure of the word. You can't blame voters for an outcome they never voted for.0 -
Unfortunately, I don't think he wants it, ever. The death curse was when he was made shadow chancellor, he just couldn't do the job. However, for leader you don't need to know you CDSs from your HFTs, you need to be able to lead, show direction etc e.g Reagan, was never going to win a noble prize.nigel4england said:
They missed out with Alan Johnson.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
Even I like Alan Johnson0 -
That strikes me as a bit peculiar and OTT. I'm guessing they were all running scared of 1992 Groundhog Day and just made it worse.
It's up the pollsters prof body - the BPC - to do a drains up and fix it.
The pollsters can carry on day to day business asking about everything non-political for their other clients.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't think we should have any polls in the next five years tbh. How can we believe them?Plato said:Many of us were hit over the head with so many polls that it was almost irresistable - how could they ALL be wrong?
As we've learnt subsequently - some were buried and then others fiddled their models to *fit in* so no one was exposed at the end.
Well - all that happened was Collective Guilt not Innocence.
It's certainly bruised my faith in all pollsters for a while.ukelect said:The reason that many seat predictors (including UK-Elect) failed so badly to predict the LibDem seat total was because they were fine-tuned by the Ashcroft constituency polls, which seemed to show that the LibDEm incumbency factor really existed. That made me extremely nervous at the time (I said so at the time) but trusted the data rather than my instincts. Damn.
0 -
I think he needs a name more risable than even Young Kinnock:nigel4england said:
I was thinking the same thing but didn't want to offend, I see him most Saturday's and don't want to fall out.another_richard said:
If this Miliband fails then try that Miliband.nigel4england said:
I was talking with an ex-Labour MP this morning, we were talking about potential leaders. He doesn't like any at the top of the list, he wants David Miliband back.AndyJS said:One thing Labour might think about addressing is this sort of thing:
A newly-elected MP being booed by Labour activists a matter of seconds after having been declared the winner. Whatever you think of him, he'd just been endorsed by the voters. Maybe not the best attitude to take if you're in the business of winning elections:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgGoOOwXip0
If the nerd fails then try the dweeb.
If the ruthless one fails try the gutless one.
If the metropolitan one fails then try the metropolitan one.
If the money grubber fails then try the money grubber.
If the disaster in government fails then try the disaster in government.
In a year's time they'll be advocating Young Kinnock.
Young Kinnock would be hilarious.
Boy Kinnock
Mater Kinnock
Little Lord Kinnock
0 -
Richard, You will enojoy this
Ben Bradshaw@BenPBradshaw
Next leader please come to Exeter & find out how former safe Tory city now a safe Labour one - sensible centre left approach & organisation.another_richard said:
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.0 -
I like Little Lord Kinnock :-)another_richard said:
I think he needs a name more risable than even Young Kinnock:nigel4england said:
I was thinking the same thing but didn't want to offend, I see him most Saturday's and don't want to fall out.another_richard said:
If this Miliband fails then try that Miliband.nigel4england said:
I was talking with an ex-Labour MP this morning, we were talking about potential leaders. He doesn't like any at the top of the list, he wants David Miliband back.AndyJS said:One thing Labour might think about addressing is this sort of thing:
A newly-elected MP being booed by Labour activists a matter of seconds after having been declared the winner. Whatever you think of him, he'd just been endorsed by the voters. Maybe not the best attitude to take if you're in the business of winning elections:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgGoOOwXip0
If the nerd fails then try the dweeb.
If the ruthless one fails try the gutless one.
If the metropolitan one fails then try the metropolitan one.
If the money grubber fails then try the money grubber.
If the disaster in government fails then try the disaster in government.
In a year's time they'll be advocating Young Kinnock.
Young Kinnock would be hilarious.
Boy Kinnock
Mater Kinnock
Little Lord Kinnock0 -
Actually, I think those defections, especially Reckless', hindered UKIPs advance rather than helped. After the Euphoria of those defections, UKIP percentages started to go down. This was not one of Nigel's better ideas.MarkHopkins said:Tissue_Price said:
However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.justin124 said:The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.
"Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."
I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.
0 -
Not being well-connected with the English elite (or any elite), I can't judge, but I seriously doubt what you're saying has any true basis. The old elite (aristocracy) simply associate with each other -the Duke of Devonshire would have far more in common with Lord Hopetoun than he would do with the a fellow English market trader or even a Doctor or Solicitor. As for the political or financial elite, I wouldn't be sure there either.Dair said:
While there is some merit in your argument, it also demonstrates both why the Scottish Independence movement is the correct course of action and how you fundamentally do not understand it.Luckyguy1983 said:
It's human nature. That doesn't change.EPG said:
I do think this time is different. It is now clear that the SNP will never be in the Westminster government, and that even supporting a Westminster government will be very difficult for them. And in the last forty-eight hours, it suddenly become conceivable to them that they could achieve their true goal within three years.
Independence is at its heart a deeply held inferiority complex. I mean that very specifically, NOT that Scottish people are inferior - they punch above their weight in almost every field of human endeavour, but that many FEEL so though they would never admit it. It's the upper class English and the London elite that make them feel that way. Take away the self loathing, and you take away the desire for independence.
Self-loathing indicates that it is an internal decision process.
But then you confirm that it is an external imposition - the hatred felt by an English Elite towards Scots.
Scotland has woken up. There is a very clear understanding of just how much the English Elite hates Scotland and the Scots. In those circumstances, the Union is dead, you cannot be linked (and numerically dominated) by another nation while the Elite of that nation despises you (and has the tacit supporter of their wider population in that hatred).
As for the rank and file, I would ask you to consider the cultural treatment of the English and Englishness by that same elite. Our culture has been a dirty word, and in many instances still is, for decades. We have seen devolution in the other constituent nations of the UK, and a democratic deficit for England. We have seen them supported in their proud expressions of nationhood, where similar expressions here have been the preserve of those who don't care if they're despised. Small wonder that the English feel betrayed when they see that they are so disliked North of the border.
0 -
Yes, I noticed that as well. It was obvious quite quickly that the swing was even greater than that implied by the exit polls, but the projection didn't change for ages after that.Tissue_Price said:
Betting post-the result being bloody obvious was even better advice. I was getting 1.6 on Tory Maj even as +19 was already on screen with 3 LD gains (and the heavily trailed Balls defeat) to come. Get your own spreadsheets, pay the PA for the feed, and you'll have a massive edge over punters going on what the BBC/Sky projection is showing. God only knows why they update it so slowly.Plato said:Well done, Sir.
Your advice to bet post-exit-poll seems like one followed by many on PB - I was too blotto/sunstroked by then to know if I was imaging it all so didn't.
BUGGER.0 -
I think you will find that those are UK rather than GB figures.felix said:
Roflmfao.Tissue_Price said:
Also, Justin, I trust you have noted that the 37-30 victory for the Tories is actually only 6.5% when you look at 1 decimal place (36.9-30.4). Could be important, that.justin124 said:The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.0 -
EPICFrancisUrquhart said:
Matt great as always...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CEish5nWMAAunk1.jpg0 -
Actually, Ben Bradshaw did really well in Exeter. I suspect there was a strong personal vote.another_richard said:
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.0 -
Quite agree on the AGW business. Making arguments about a scientific theory based on how many chaps believe it [many of whom have vested interests] and not on scientific reasoning persuades me only that scepticism, the starting point of science, is the right view of such things.
On Tristram Hunt: no. Not unless you want UKIP to take seats that Labour hold easily because there's an anti-Conservative vote that has made the reds complacent. He's an arrogant, inarticulate oaf.
I think Lammy would be better than the consensus here, but still not the best chap for the job. As I said before, I'd go for Cooper or Jarvis, probably (although Stella Creasy[sp] is worth some thought too).
Umunna would be the worst for Labour.0 -
Very true Plato. Some of these polling companies will have done massive damage to their businesses. All because they ignored a growing body of evidence that they almost always under estimate the Conservative vote. After I saw that numbercruncher website and the Labourlink postal voting piece I summoned the courage to put just £30 at 13/2 on a Con majority. My only bet in the GE. I did not trust my own judgement in case it was my heart ruling my head.Plato said:It's a Kiss Of Death when the ENTIRE point of your business is to tell us the truth, no matter how unwelcome.
It's like a bent accountant.MarkHopkins said:What we are finding out about the pollsters shows how powerful peer pressure can be, even in a professional/scientific environment.
The problems with the "consensus" about AGW come to mind as well.
Not sure what the answers are though.
0 -
The guy I was speaking with this morning was a junior minister in Johnson's office and he said pretty much the same thing, in addition he had a personal issue too.ThomasNashe said:
If he'd ever shown any indication that he wanted the job, he'd have been a shoo-in.nigel4england said:
They missed out with Alan Johnson.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
Even I like Alan Johnson
He would have been good for Labour though.
0 -
I guess I was thinking of more political, than non-political polling. I hope they fix the issue - it's just I can see myself having a high degree of scepticism about any political poll until 2020.Plato said:That strikes me as a bit peculiar and OTT. I'm guessing they were all running scared of 1992 Groundhog Day and just made it worse.
It's up the pollsters prof body - the BPC - to do a drains up and fix it.
The pollsters can carry on day to day business asking about everything non-political for their other clients.The_Apocalypse said:
I don't think we should have any polls in the next five years tbh. How can we believe them?Plato said:Many of us were hit over the head with so many polls that it was almost irresistable - how could they ALL be wrong?
As we've learnt subsequently - some were buried and then others fiddled their models to *fit in* so no one was exposed at the end.
Well - all that happened was Collective Guilt not Innocence.
It's certainly bruised my faith in all pollsters for a while.ukelect said:The reason that many seat predictors (including UK-Elect) failed so badly to predict the LibDem seat total was because they were fine-tuned by the Ashcroft constituency polls, which seemed to show that the LibDEm incumbency factor really existed. That made me extremely nervous at the time (I said so at the time) but trusted the data rather than my instincts. Damn.
0 -
I'm reasonably pleased with half of my prediction. I was 4 too high on the Conservatives and 4 too low on the Liberal Democrats. But then I ruined it by going 32 too high on Labour and 40 too low on the SNP! I think it's a combination of the fact that I know very little about Scotland and, also, my inability to relate to (or even comprehend) any kind of nationalism whatsoever that did for me there.0
-
If I had to pick a place not to open a business it'd be Liverpool.
It's like a throwback to the 80s and BBC's Bread. Funny how well the Rev from Bread did against Kippers.AndyJS said:I think a lot of people in Merseyside define themselves as not being Tories in a way that no-where else in England does, which explains why the Conservatives are continuing to do so badly. It's probably getting more pronounced as time goes on.
AndreaParma_82 said:Merseyside continue its love for Labour and in their middle class areas their journey towards them
Liverpool Walton 81.3% of the vote for Labour
Liverpool West Derby (Twigg) 75.2%
Liverpool Wavertree (Luciana Berger) 69.3 % (LDs 6%...in 2010 they hope to get it)
Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle) 69.1%
Liverpool Riverside 67.4%
Knowsley 78.1%
St Helens is less monolithical
St Helens South 59.8%
St Helens North 59%
Elsewhere
Bootle 74.5% (Paul Nuttal 10.9%)
Birkenhead (Frank Field) 67.7%
Wallasey (Angela Eagle) 60.4%
continuing their journeys towards Labour
Sefton Central 53.8% (and a 24.2% majority over Con now)
at a lesser extent
Wirral South 48.2% (now a 11% majority)
and Wirral West being one of the few Lab gains from Con of the GE0 -
Maybe we will see the pollsters preferring quality over quantity, with larger samples and multiple contact methods. The idea of a self-selecting internet-based sample is surely dead for serious political research.Plato said:Many of us were hit over the head with so many polls that it was almost irresistable - how could they ALL be wrong?
As we've learnt subsequently - some were buried and then others fiddled their models to *fit in* so no one was exposed at the end.
Well - all that happened was Collective Guilt not Innocence.
It's certainly bruised my faith in all pollsters for a while.ukelect said:The reason that many seat predictors (including UK-Elect) failed so badly to predict the LibDem seat total was because they were fine-tuned by the Ashcroft constituency polls, which seemed to show that the LibDEm incumbency factor really existed. That made me extremely nervous at the time (I said so at the time) but trusted the data rather than my instincts. Damn.
0 -
Jarvis has no track record as a politician. He was lucky to be selected in the by election and only came into parliament in 2011.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
He looks normal which would be a help.0 -
Hey! I wasn't that far out. I had them on 4 seats.Philip_Thompson said:What's remarkable is how nobody other than Stephen Parker was remotely close to the 8 seats the Lob Dems got. Despite 5 years of very low poll ratings the idea of Lib Dem seats being in single digits just wasn't taken seriously.
0 -
Helps all the well paid public sector workers in Exeter. Met Office, Uni, etc. There was the poll (I know, I know) showing that Lib Dem support had collapsed among uni academics, it was Labour, Labour, Labour.ThomasNashe said:
Actually, Ben Bradshaw did really well in Exeter. I suspect there was a strong personal vote.another_richard said:
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.0 -
Agreed. A younger version with his kind of back story and human touch would be ideal. But there isn't one.nigel4england said:
The guy I was speaking with this morning was a junior minister in Johnson's office and he said pretty much the same thing, in addition he had a personal issue too.ThomasNashe said:
If he'd ever shown any indication that he wanted the job, he'd have been a shoo-in.nigel4england said:
They missed out with Alan Johnson.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
Even I like Alan Johnson
He would have been good for Labour though.0 -
Well done to Lynton Crosby-the win was classic Lynton:
Pick a straw man(the SNP),scare-monger and drive up your turnout.(He did this before with the immigrant boat in Australia.)
This was doubly effective because the SNP picked up on it and blared their anti-austerity agenda from the rooftops.
Beautiful politicking ending with the Tories and SNP winning and Miliband looking like an idiot.
0 -
Kudos!Steven_Whaley said:
Hey! I wasn't that far out. I had them on 4 seats.Philip_Thompson said:What's remarkable is how nobody other than Stephen Parker was remotely close to the 8 seats the Lob Dems got. Despite 5 years of very low poll ratings the idea of Lib Dem seats being in single digits just wasn't taken seriously.
0 -
They don't ignore it - the raw data is usually more favourable to Labour than the published results. They just underestimate it when they do their final adjustments,e.g. the "manual" adjustments. (The bit where they correct the data to what they think it is.)TCPoliticalBetting said:
Very true Plato. Some of these polling companies will have done massive damage to their businesses. All because they ignored a growing body of evidence that they almost always under estimate the Conservative vote. After I saw that numbercruncher website and the Labourlink postal voting piece I summoned the courage to put just £30 at 13/2 on a Con majority. My only bet in the GE. I did not trust my own judgement in case it was my heart ruling my head.Plato said:It's a Kiss Of Death when the ENTIRE point of your business is to tell us the truth, no matter how unwelcome.
It's like a bent accountant.MarkHopkins said:What we are finding out about the pollsters shows how powerful peer pressure can be, even in a professional/scientific environment.
The problems with the "consensus" about AGW come to mind as well.
Not sure what the answers are though.0 -
Sir, out of simple curiousity - where are you based and how did you vote on Thursday?
I voted Tory in Eastbourne.EPG said:
The AGW consensus is among scientists who research it using everything from evidence to computer models, not people being polled.MarkHopkins said:
What we are finding out about the pollsters shows how powerful peer pressure can be, even in a supposedly professional/scientific environment.
The problems with the "consensus" about AGW come to mind as well.
Not sure what the answers are though.0 -
One day into the new parliament and already you are underestimating Cameron. You seem to have all the qualities as leader of the Labour Party!MP_SE said:Would anyone care to speculate on what Cameron is going to ask for in terms of a renegotiation with the EU.
There are an awful lot of unnamed EU bureaucrats being quoted saying that they intend to not offer anything worthwhile to DC and expect him to campaign for an IN vote regardless.0 -
Realistically UKIP were always going to get squeezed in a general election, short of Farage unleashing his version of Cleggasm in the debates.MikeK said:
Actually, I think those defections, especially Reckless', hindered UKIPs advance rather than helped. After the Euphoria of those defections, UKIP percentages started to go down. This was not one of Nigel's better ideas.MarkHopkins said:Tissue_Price said:
However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.justin124 said:The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.
"Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."
I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.
PS I do wonder if Carswell will re-rat, though. What if Cameron offers him recall powers with teeth, for example? He can afford to be generous to Carswell after squishing Reckless like a bug.0 -
Plus lots of students and public sector middle classes.AndreaParma_82 said:Richard, You will enojoy this
Ben Bradshaw@BenPBradshaw
Next leader please come to Exeter & find out how former safe Tory city now a safe Labour one - sensible centre left approach & organisation.another_richard said:
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.
Coming soon to a Nuneaton or Morley near you. Or perhaps not now that Labour aren't in government.
0 -
It's not absurd to think that Majority Government on 37% of the vote is a mandate for the manifesto of that party. It's a blatant example of an utterly broken voting system and only once before has a party won a majority with less than 40% of the vote - 2005 Blair and we all know how well that went.kle4 said:
Now you're being absurd - I don't like FPTP but it is the system we have and we have accepted in the past governments with massive majorities on far less than 50% of the vote.
Penny is simultaneously saying Cameron got a mandate and that the nasty elites are to blame. It cannot be both; a mandate says he won the support of the people, so you cannot them act like elites stole the result from the people (which blaming them is doing).
And if we are to blame our voting system for Cameron being able to govern with a slim majority on 37% of the vote, that is still the voters' fault, as they rejected an alternative and didn't support any party that wants to change it. this time.
Either way, blaming the elites is ridiculous when the votes went Cameron's way.
Legitimacy should be the focus of all media analysis of this debacle. It's not. And that's because the elite and the Tory Party (and to an extent senior Labour Party now it's been taken over by the Primrose HIll Set) are THE SAME ENTITY.
Of course I doubt that's what the New Statesman blogger meant. But to me it is a fundamental problem with where Britain is today.
We have an illigitimate government, with no mandate, not supported by the popular vote and about to impose policies on the a country which never voted for them.
That should be the front page of every newspaper, the lead story on every TV Station. That it is not is part of the problem.0 -
That list really sums up their dismal performance.
I'm still rubbing my eyes at Gower. Tories haven't had that since what? 1906?another_richard said:
London was Labour's best region:EPG said:
But as discussed, they didn't do especially well in London. They only gained a handful of seats.AndyJS said:Hendon should have been one of the easiest Labour gains in the country, especially being in London. Instead the Tory majority went from 106 to 3,724.
EPG said:
Labour gained more votes than the Conservatives in Finchley and Golders Green. So this is normal variance.Sean_F said:
Look at the way the Conservative vote rose in the two most Jewish seats in the UK, Hendon and Finchley & Golders Green. Look at the way it rose in the two most Hindu seats in the UK, Harrow East and West. I think that the interview with Muslim News did Labour absolutely no favours at all with those communities.EPG said:
The proposal to introduce a crime of aggravated assault against Muslims just didn't get that much traction outside the usual anti-Islam circles, who don't vote Labour anyway.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
London +7
NW +4
East +2
NE +1
Yorkshire +1
West Midlands +1
SE --
SW --
East Midlands -1
Wales -2
Scotland -40
Against Conservatives:
London +4
NW +2
NE --
SE --
East --
Yorkshire --
West Midlands --
Scotland --
SW -1
East Midlands -1
Wales -30 -
Bad luck - I hope the loss is bearable.isam said:
I laid out £4400 and lost £2682Pong said:I remember this competition. I sent my entry by post - have you still not received it Mike? It's probably stuck in the post office - it'll drop through your letterbox on monday morning, then you can update the figures with my entry at the top.
Anyway, I've just done all my GE2015 accounting.
I had a betting bank of just over £12k, with pretty much all of it invested by the exit poll.
Net profit = £5793.22
Longest odds winner; Conservatives winning margin of over 40 seats - BACK £0.07 @ 989/1 = +£67 (matched on Thursday AM, thanks to the betfair overround bot)
Shortest odds loser; No Overall Majority - BACK £1000 @ 1.12 (laid off later at higher odds)
Most amusing bet; Labour's pink bus to get a respray (£100 @ 10/1)
Worst value winner; Lib Dems to win Sheffield Hallam (£100 @ 1/4)
Best value loser; Con to gain Halifax £100 @ 9/2
Most unlikely winner; Conservative Majority (£40 @ 25/1)
The *why the hell did I place that bet?* bet; UKIP to win amber valley (£20 @ 20/1)
Cheekiest trade; Backing the SNP to win Glasgow SW @ evens minutes after the Ashcroft poll had a 21 point lead.
Most profitable single bet - Labour to come 2nd in Wyre forest (£200 per point @ 0.5, equiv 19/1) = +£1800
Largest single loss: over 2.5 UKIP seats @ 6/4 = -£500
Bookie of the election; (Joint winners) Coral & William Hill
Best Advice to myself (that I didn’t take); Between 10pm & midnight bet on the exit poll, ESPECIALLY if it doesn’t seem *right*
Best advice to myself (that I reluctantly took); Bet on Con Maj if the odds are high enough, however remote the possibility seems.
Advice for next time – Don’t underestimate the uncertainty. NOM should have never been anywhere near as low as it was (as short as 1.05, on thurs PM, I believe).
What was everyone else's P/L & best/worst election bets?
I think it's probably easier to win if you have accounts with all online bookies.. I have one
The premise for all of my bets was that ukip would easily get over 10%. I offered 4/6 under 10% on here two years ago when lads were 1/5 because I was bored on a Saturday night in...
I guess being proved right when being lairy was quite satisfying
No ones paid yet mind!
Unfortunately that premise led me to bet a lot of big price ukip constituencies on the thinking 2-3 would come in if I was right about the 11-14% vote share...and obviously none did!
The Farage -6.5 bets and ukip*4 to by lib dems were obv bad value when I made them but I was just bored really! And fancied a bet... Silly me!
In fairness, UKIP really were an unknown factor. I bought them on the spreads (@8.5, 6.5 & 5) - and even though I lost a fair chunk - the value was definitely there at the time.0 -
I think the left might have to reconsider Crosby a bit. I went and did a bit of digging like the Guardian and it seems that the thought that he is JUST a scare monger dates back to one election campaign in Australia over illegal immigrants. He then tried that approach with Howard in the UK and it didn't work.SMukesh said:Well done to Lynton Crosby-the win was classic Lynton:
Pick a straw man(the SNP),scare-monger and drive up your turnout.(He did this before with the immigrant boat in Australia.)
This was doubly effective because the SNP picked up on it and blared their anti-austerity agenda from the rooftops.
Beautiful politicking ending with the Tories and SNP winning and Miliband looking like an idiot.
However, since then he has run lots of campaigns including Boris and Tories this time. When you do a bit of reading / watching videos it is clear he is much sophisticated operator than is the characterized and his approach worked on a lot more than just the last minute SNP scare. The Tories with him and Messina have been working around the clock for over a year on lots of stuff below the water line.0 -
Jarvis is a complete unknown, which could be a disaster, or could be a revelation.Flightpathl said:
Jarvis has no track record as a politician. He was lucky to be selected in the by election and only came into parliament in 2011.The_Apocalypse said:
Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.SMukesh said:I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.
He looks normal which would be a help.
How much of a powerbase/network he has to win is another matter.
Who UNITE back is another, thats how Ed won, and the unions have even more of a stranglehold on the party now.0 -
Definitely Little Lord Kinnock.another_richard said:
I think he needs a name more risable than even Young Kinnock:
Boy Kinnock
Mater Kinnock
Little Lord Kinnock-1 -
Add in Norwich S - there's always one you miss first time.another_richard said:
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.
Lancaster and Chester have similarities but are not as noticeable cartographically.
0 -
We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.0
-
That was why I said you were being absurd, because that is what I was talking about - her hypocrisy at claiming there was a mandate and then suggesting it was irrelevant by moaning about elites, not an analysis of whether the electoral system is ok. Did you not see the bit where I explicitly stated I don't like FPTP either? I support reform to a more proportional voting system, but I don't see that being on the horizon now (and in fact on an entertainment basis have been robbed of the expected avalanche of Labour and Tory new converts in the face of an uncertain electoral result, and discussions about which system might be better)Dair said:
It's not absurd to think that Majority Government on 37% of the vote is a mandate for the manifesto of that party....Of course I doubt that's what the New Statesman blogger meant. .kle4 said:
Now you're being absurd - I don't like FPTP but it is the system we have and we have accepted in the past governments with massive majorities on far less than 50% of the vote.
Penny is simultaneously saying Cameron got a mandate and that the nasty elites are to blame. It cannot be both; a mandate says he won the support of the people, so you cannot them act like elites stole the result from the people (which blaming them is doing).
And if we are to blame our voting system for Cameron being able to govern with a slim majority on 37% of the vote, that is still the voters' fault, as they rejected an alternative and didn't support any party that wants to change it. this time.
Either way, blaming the elites is ridiculous when the votes went Cameron's way.0 -
A Farage-ism was never going to happen, he's one of the best known politicans out there. Clegg was new and shiney and the public hadn't really seen him before/edmundintokyo said:
Realistically UKIP were always going to get squeezed in a general election, short of Farage unleashing his version of Cleggasm in the debates.MikeK said:
Actually, I think those defections, especially Reckless', hindered UKIPs advance rather than helped. After the Euphoria of those defections, UKIP percentages started to go down. This was not one of Nigel's better ideas.MarkHopkins said:Tissue_Price said:
However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.justin124 said:The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.
"Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."
I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.
PS I do wonder if Carswell will re-rat, though. What if Cameron offers him recall powers with teeth, for example? He can afford to be generous to Carswell after squishing Reckless like a bug.0 -
In the 1981 census, Crosby (Sefton C) was categorized as one of a select band of just 28 seats – “Very High Status Areas”, along with Croydon South, Beaconsfield, Wokingham, Sevenoaks, Henley, Reigate, Mole Valley, etc, almost all in the South East… All were Tory held in 1983.another_richard said:
Sefton Central was amazing as well.RodCrosby said:Southport was an amazing result.
Both LibDems and Tories collapsed, but the LDs clung on with 31%. Can't actually see Labour ever winning this, but I could imagine UKIP.
Nuttall has probably got his eye on it for 2020.
Has the area changed much from 1992 ?
Swing wise it must rival the likes of Mitcham, Hayes and Edmonton.
But without the demographic change.
Are middle class Scousers proud or embarrassed to be so different to the rest of England and Wales politically ?
Along with Wirral West (regained yesterday) it's the only seat of that group to be held by Labour.
Nothing has changed dramatically in 30 years, except perhaps it has just got more “Scouse”, though even that is not terribly marked.
Demographically it's still 98% White, 80% Christian, highest owner-occupation in the country, many wealthy pensioners. A pleasant mix of beaches, villages, woodland and very leafy avenues in the three towns of Crosby, Formby and Maghull.
The others of the 28 Very High Status Areas (all Tory in 1983) which subsequently slipped from their grasp, although some were regained, were.
Cheadle (LD)
Wirral West (Lab)
Solihull (LD)
St Albans (Lab)
Stayed True Blue…
Croydon South
Altrincham & Sale
Sutton Coldfield
Woodspring
Windsor & Maidenhead
Wokingham
Beaconsfield
Chesham & Amersham
Brentwood & Ongar
Hertfordshire SW
Beverley
Sevenoaks
Rushcliffe
Henley
Chertsey & Walton
Surrey E
Esher
Mole Valley
Surrey NW
Reigate
Surrey SW
Woking
Sussex Mid0 -
Tory MPs don't tend to die as much as labour ones...justin124 said:We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.
0 -
I could feel Kippers being all over Stoke Safe this time - if they're still around in one form or another in 2020 and Tristram is still standing... who knows.AndreaParma_82 said:
In terms of Lab majorities over UKIP is Stoke Central the 4th lowest in the country?
Hartlepool 7.7%
Heywood/Middleton 10.9%
Rother Valley 15.5%
Stoke Central 16.7%
Other seats with under 20% majorities?AndyJS said:Labour majorities in the Stoke-on-Trent seats:
Central: 5,179 (previously 5,566)
North: 4,836 (8,235)
South: 2,539 (4,130)0 -
There are certainly some visceral and illogical aspects to Euroscepticism, which it has in common with Scottish independence, but it doesn't strike me that a feeling of inferiority is one of them (though in many cases perhaps we should feel that!). We have a feeling of tribal nationalism, a feeling of wanting to protect ones own territory and resources in common.Theuniondivvie said:
Euroscepticism is at its heart a deeply held inferiority complex. I mean that very specifically, NOT that UKIP people are inferior - they punch above their weight in almost every field of human endeavour, but that many FEEL so though they would never admit it. It's the cosmopolitan Europeans and the Brussels elite that make them feel that way. Take away the self loathing, and you take away the desire for UK 'independence'.Luckyguy1983 said:
It's human nature. That doesn't change.EPG said:
I do think this time is different. It is now clear that the SNP will never be in the Westminster government, and that even supporting a Westminster government will be very difficult for them. And in the last forty-eight hours, it suddenly become conceivable to them that they could achieve their true goal within three years.
Independence is at its heart a deeply held inferiority complex. I mean that very specifically, NOT that Scottish people are inferior - they punch above their weight in almost every field of human endeavour, but that many FEEL so though they would never admit it. It's the upper class English and the London elite that make them feel that way. Take away the self loathing, and you take away the desire for independence.
But I actually think the feeling of inferiority and self-loathing is more on the Eurofanatic side, but it expresses itself a different way. It expresses itself in people who hate their Britishness and want to do everything they can to recreate the UK as a birkenstock-wearing social democratic europaradise where we all travel on trams and speak esperanto. Which we can never be and which is a disaster for the country on multiple levels. Thankfully many such people are no longer MPs now.
0 -
Yawn. We have 650 seats. Its the job of every single candidate to win his/her seat. Elections are contests.Dair said:
It's not absurd to think that Majority Government on 37% of the vote is a mandate for the manifesto of that party. It's a blatant example of an utterly broken voting system and only once before has a party won a majority with less than 40% of the vote - 2005 Blair and we all know how well that went.kle4 said:
Now you're being absurd - I don't like FPTP but it is the system we have and we have accepted in the past governments with massive majorities on far less than 50% of the vote.
Penny is simultaneously saying Cameron got a mandate and that the nasty elites are to blame. It cannot be both; a mandate says he won the support of the people, so you cannot them act like elites stole the result from the people (which blaming them is doing).
And if we are to blame our voting system for Cameron being able to govern with a slim majority on 37% of the vote, that is still the voters' fault, as they rejected an alternative and didn't support any party that wants to change it. this time.
Either way, blaming the elites is ridiculous when the votes went Cameron's way.
Legitimacy should be the focus of all media analysis of this debacle. It's not. And that's because the elite and the Tory Party (and to an extent senior Labour Party now it's been taken over by the Primrose HIll Set) are THE SAME ENTITY.
Of course I doubt that's what the New Statesman blogger meant. But to me it is a fundamental problem with where Britain is today.
We have an illigitimate government, with no mandate, not supported by the popular vote and about to impose policies on the a country which never voted for them.
That should be the front page of every newspaper, the lead story on every TV Station. That it is not is part of the problem.
Contests.
Contests with winners and losers. Every other alternative to this is flawed to at least the same degree. Sometimes that results in 56 SNP seats in Scotland.0 -
The only by-election I am hoping for is one in Buckingham. NB resignation, not death, as you seem to be hoping for.justin124 said:We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.
0 -
Could you point out where in my post I underestimated Cameron? I believe I only mentioned EU beaurocrats being under the impression they can offer him nothing and expect him to campaign to stay in.Flightpathl said:
One day into the new parliament and already you are underestimating Cameron. You seem to have all the qualities as leader of the Labour Party!MP_SE said:Would anyone care to speculate on what Cameron is going to ask for in terms of a renegotiation with the EU.
There are an awful lot of unnamed EU bureaucrats being quoted saying that they intend to not offer anything worthwhile to DC and expect him to campaign for an IN vote regardless.
0 -
Carswell burnt his bridges too much I think. I like the man, he has interesting ideas, though I don't share all of his views on reform, but after his conversion the way he described Cameron and the Conservative party was so extremely bad it made him look a bit silly, because he made it sound as though they'd been obviously terrible for so long that it made his previous defences of it look like lies or an admission he was an idiot.edmundintokyo said:
Realistically UKIP were always going to get squeezed in a general election, short of Farage unleashing his version of Cleggasm in the debates.MikeK said:
Actually, I think those defections, especially Reckless', hindered UKIPs advance rather than helped. After the Euphoria of those defections, UKIP percentages started to go down. This was not one of Nigel's better ideas.MarkHopkins said:Tissue_Price said:
However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.justin124 said:The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.
"Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."
I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.
PS I do wonder if Carswell will re-rat, though. What if Cameron offers him recall powers with teeth, for example? He can afford to be generous to Carswell after squishing Reckless like a bug.
0 -
"We are a bit overdue"justin124 said:We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.
The parliament hasn't even started yet!
0 -
Make him Deputy Prime Minister, it would show the Eurosceptics he is serious about reform, but more to the point I have a fiver at 66/1!edmundintokyo said:
Realistically UKIP were always going to get squeezed in a general election, short of Farage unleashing his version of Cleggasm in the debates.MikeK said:
Actually, I think those defections, especially Reckless', hindered UKIPs advance rather than helped. After the Euphoria of those defections, UKIP percentages started to go down. This was not one of Nigel's better ideas.MarkHopkins said:Tissue_Price said:
However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.justin124 said:The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.
"Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."
I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.
PS I do wonder if Carswell will re-rat, though. What if Cameron offers him recall powers with teeth, for example? He can afford to be generous to Carswell after squishing Reckless like a bug.0 -
Check out the Local Elections - Tories UP TWENTY EIGHT councils and still more to declare.
bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/councilsSandpit said:
Someone pointed out on the last thread that the Tories only lost eight seats in total, astonishing.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.0 -
I know he's now on the outer rims of the Tory party, but with a lot more ministerial posts up for grabs, maybe Clarke could be put back in a minor ministry? He only needs a few more years to break the record for time as a minister.0
-
Currently watching some shows we'd recorded on Sky+ and Sky's "ballot band" advert they were regularly showing in ad breaks with the four party leaders edited to look like they were singing came on.
My wife just said how awkward it is now looking back that only Cameron is still there, the other three have all resigned. Makes the ad seem rather different now.0 -
They ignored the evidence that their adjustments were inadequate.ukelect said:
They don't ignore it - the raw data is usually more favourable to Labour than the published results. They just underestimate it when they do their final adjustments,e.g. the "manual" adjustments. (The bit where they correct the data to what they think it is.)TCPoliticalBetting said:
Very true Plato. Some of these polling companies will have done massive damage to their businesses. All because they ignored a growing body of evidence that they almost always under estimate the Conservative vote. After I saw that numbercruncher website and the Labourlink postal voting piece I summoned the courage to put just £30 at 13/2 on a Con majority. My only bet in the GE. I did not trust my own judgement in case it was my heart ruling my head.Plato said:It's a Kiss Of Death when the ENTIRE point of your business is to tell us the truth, no matter how unwelcome.
It's like a bent accountant.MarkHopkins said:What we are finding out about the pollsters shows how powerful peer pressure can be, even in a professional/scientific environment.
The problems with the "consensus" about AGW come to mind as well.
Not sure what the answers are though.
0 -
Nevermind those not registered, roughly 25% of those who are backed Cameron. 75% didn't. We've hear a lot about 'the 45%' in Scotland. We need to start hearing rather more about the 75% from Labour. Learn from Obama and try to create a new majority - and by that I don't mean 326 seats, I mean people. A party concerned with fairness, aspiration and not privileging one group over another. Blairites who want to target a handful of Tories in the marginals or those who think it's all about buttering up the unions or sections of the press or particular identities need to take a long walk off a short plank.0
-
The same thing happened in 1992, although the local elections were held a month after the general election in that case.Plato said:
Check out the Local Elections - Tories UP TWENTY EIGHT councils and still more to declare.
bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/councilsSandpit said:
Someone pointed out on the last thread that the Tories only lost eight seats in total, astonishing.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.0 -
I think the left might have to reconsider Cameron a bit too!FrancisUrquhart said:
I think the left might have to reconsider Crosby a bit. I went and did a bit of digging like the Guardian and it seems that the thought that he is JUST a scare monger dates back to one election campaign in Australia over illegal immigrants. He then tried that approach with Howard in the UK and it didn't work.SMukesh said:Well done to Lynton Crosby-the win was classic Lynton:
Pick a straw man(the SNP),scare-monger and drive up your turnout.(He did this before with the immigrant boat in Australia.)
This was doubly effective because the SNP picked up on it and blared their anti-austerity agenda from the rooftops.
Beautiful politicking ending with the Tories and SNP winning and Miliband looking like an idiot.
However, since then he has run lots of campaigns including Boris and Tories this time. When you do a bit of reading / watching videos it is clear he is much sophisticated operator than is the characterized and his approach worked on a lot more than just the last minute SNP scare. The Tories with him and Messina have been working around the clock for over a year on lots of stuff below the water line.
Paul Richards @Labourpaul · May 8
Cameron has won the first Conservative majority for 23 years and vanquished three party leaders. Should we take him seriously yet?0 -
But the whole of the SW Tories will be gunning for him next time!ThomasNashe said:
Actually, Ben Bradshaw did really well in Exeter. I suspect there was a strong personal vote.another_richard said:
Bristol is included in the SW as well, so a total of 4 Labour.Plato said:Everyone is going on about Scotland being a wipe out - but look at the SW.
2 seats aren't - the other 50 odd are Tory.felix said:
Given the hyperbole on here a week ago about Battersea being 'interesting' it can't help but make you laugh. That much acclaimed London dominated ground game couldn't even get it right in.. London.Plato said:Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?
Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.
Blimey.felix said:Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:
1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.
The 'posh Labour' specks really stand out on the map - Exeter, Southampton Test, Hove, Cambridge, Oxford E, York, Edinburgh S.0 -
Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?
I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.0 -
One more thought on the polling. So after the omnishambles budget, when the polls were showing us miles ahead, the true picture was probably neck and neck. That's the best we managed over 5 years.
So, do we expect a Tory lead in tonight's YouGov?0 -
I think you're spot on.felix said:Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.
They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?
If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.0 -
David Miliband to stand in Doncaster N? Would be beautiful.AndyJS said:Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?
I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.
David Miliband to lose in Doncaster N? I might combust.0 -
He vanquished 3 in one day. He's vanquished about 9 in total.Tissue_Price said:
I think the left might have to reconsider Cameron a bit too!FrancisUrquhart said:
I think the left might have to reconsider Crosby a bit. I went and did a bit of digging like the Guardian and it seems that the thought that he is JUST a scare monger dates back to one election campaign in Australia over illegal immigrants. He then tried that approach with Howard in the UK and it didn't work.SMukesh said:Well done to Lynton Crosby-the win was classic Lynton:
Pick a straw man(the SNP),scare-monger and drive up your turnout.(He did this before with the immigrant boat in Australia.)
This was doubly effective because the SNP picked up on it and blared their anti-austerity agenda from the rooftops.
Beautiful politicking ending with the Tories and SNP winning and Miliband looking like an idiot.
However, since then he has run lots of campaigns including Boris and Tories this time. When you do a bit of reading / watching videos it is clear he is much sophisticated operator than is the characterized and his approach worked on a lot more than just the last minute SNP scare. The Tories with him and Messina have been working around the clock for over a year on lots of stuff below the water line.
Paul Richards @Labourpaul · May 8
Cameron has won the first Conservative majority for 23 years and vanquished three party leaders. Should we take him seriously yet?0 -
With Mr Cooper as Labour candidate for Doncaster North.AndyJS said:Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?
I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.0
