politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov London Mayoral poll has Sadiq with 7% lead

AndyJS said:

No EU polls for more than a week, and just 4 during March so far. What's going on?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum#2016

DavidL said:

Not sure I understand why, "this is reasonably good news for Zac" unless he really wants to remain a somewhat part time MP who can indulge various interests with less hassle.

TheScreamingEagles said:

If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor

DecrepitJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor

Zac's 33/1 supporters will rely on DKs, differential turnout, and Zac eventually saying something interesting that is not about airports.

DecrepitJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If those DKs break decisively for Goldsmith, he might have a chance, but I'm not expecting him to be Mayor

Zac's 33/1 supporters will rely on DKs, differential turnout, and Zac eventually saying something interesting that is not about airports.

FrancisUrquhart said:

I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

Plato_Says said:

The rubber marks are very clear, stupid producer decision - now disowned.

FrancisUrquhart said:

I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

watford30 said:

Plato_Says said:

The rubber marks are very clear, stupid producer decision - now disowned.

FrancisUrquhart said:

I am not sure Chris Evans claim of long lens gave a false impression of how close those doughnuts were to the Cenotaph is going to hold up....oh well plenty of free publicity for the new Top Gear.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3491341/Top-Gear-host-Chris-Evans-apologises-unreservedly-Matt-LeBlanc-s-disrespectful-wheelspins-Cenotaph-criticism-Army-veterans-says-him.html

As if. Nothing's happening on that show without Evans knowing about it.

AlastairMeeks said:

I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.

Please not the 23rd of June.

I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I take it that we don't yet know how second preferences would be distributed. But I would have thought that would stretch Sadiq Khan's lead further.

34/42 on the final ballot in favour of Khan in a forced question.

Repercentaged to remove DKs, it gives Khan a 10% lead. Khan 55% Zac 45%

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/em8yhyeskh/LondonMayoralResults_March16_W.pdf

The polls are looking remarkably consistent with each other on this.

This doesn't particularly surprise me. With neither candidate looking particularly memorable, the public are presumably largely defaulting to voting along normal party lines. Since London is trending towards Labour, that means that Labour should win without breaking sweat.

CarlottaVance said:

Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

It'll p*ss off the French:

http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

TheScreamingEagles said:

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well the Tooting by election should be fun, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

Tooting is running somewhat against London trend. The constituency has been Labour ever since first fought, in Feb 1974, but is now very marginal. The wrong Labour candidate would certainly put the seat at risk.

Presumably the by-election (there or in Richmond) would take place on the same day as the EURef, which might have an effect.

Please not the 23rd of June.

I just know my next stint as Guest Editor covers the EURef bar the last four days will be the least stressful stint ever.

CarlottaVance said:

Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

It'll p*ss off the French:

http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

Wanderer said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

CarlottaVance said:

Great reason for voting REMAIN.......

It'll p*ss off the French:

http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2016/03/12/une-majorite-de-francais-souhaite-un-referendum-sur-le-frexit-la-sortie-de-la-france-de-l-ue_4881768_3214.html

Never mind the politics, the word 'Le Frexit' must be causing apoplexies at L'Académie française.

"Brexit" is bad enough in English. Proposed new Leave conspiracy theory: the establishment (BBC?) are forcing this name on you to make it sound alien and offputting. What's wrong with Brindependence or Ukfreedom?

NorfolkTilIDie said:

I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

NickPalmer said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.

NickPalmer said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.

Innocent_Abroad said:

NickPalmer said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

I ain't been following closely, but hasn't it been groups Khan has supported and aides he has employed?? I think the Right over eggs this stuff, but the Left really needs to get a grip.

I agree about getting a grip. My recollection is that he had two aides (out of how many I don't know) who turned out to have expressed dodgy views, the former husband of his long-divorced sister had expressed extreme views in the 1990s, and he'd attended meetings where people with extreme views also attended. The first is a valid point and shows the need for better vetting (which also applies to new party members, though there's a limit to how far you can check everyone). The second seems tosh to me. The third is to my mind also tosh - default for politicians is to go to meetings where you're asked to speak (I'd cheerfully go to a UKIP meeting if they let me put my views), and it doesn't mean you agree with everyone else - but others disagree.

But they all fall down on the fact that he doesn't actually look or sound extreme, and isn't. These guilt by association things only really stick if people already suspect you of dodgy views yourself. Merely being a Muslim doesn't make most people think that, certainly not in London.

This is an example of how London (and some other large cities) are now very different from rural and suburban England. I doubt if any of those here insinuating that SK supports terrorism have votes in the Mayoral election.

Cyclefree said:

NickPalmer said:

The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

But it isn't. It shames your party.

chestnut said:

Yougov turnout 77%
London real turnout 2012 38%

40-59 age group - Goldsmith leads on certain to vote

RodCrosby said:

Trump had to divert to Charlotte, NC because of fog

AlastairMeeks said:

My referendum anecdotes (from a family wedding). No, I didn't bring the subject up.

My elder sister and brother-in-law (Daily Mail readers, not very interested in politics generally, both culturally very conservative) are both voting Remain. They've made their minds up very firmly and were very surprised that I was surprised. Their three children's choices are unknown to me.

My younger sister and brother-in-law, a teacher and IT professional, are both probably voting Leave, though may yet change their minds. My sister was also very surprised that I was surprised at this. They had obviously thought about this a lot and discussed it a lot with their children (both also of voting age and both it seems from what she was saying Remain voters). Her view was that it would take about 10 years to see returns from leaving and there would be some hard years ahead, but that at present they thought that it was on balance worth leaving.

My parents are keeping their cards very close to their chest. If I were guessing, I'd guess they're both going to vote Leave, though my mother in particular is a hard one to read on this.

My only conclusion is that people aren't necessarily going to vote along stereotypical lines in the referendum.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Cyclefree said:

NickPalmer said:

The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

But it isn't. It shames your party.

Save your breath. Corbyn is an ace guy in his book and he is terrorist sympathiser, unlike Khan, who just appears to have a blind spot to associating with people who are.

chestnut said:

Tories pushing up towards 30% among pensioners in Scotland, and have close to a quarter of the ABC1's.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/hsxl98o8mw/TimesResults_160310_ScotlandVI&Trackers.pdf

Cyclefree said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Cyclefree said:

NickPalmer said:

The detailed figures show the don't knows splitting 50-50 if they are given a forced choice, but I suspect that most simply won't vote. The second-ballot question has Khan 8 points ahead, making the poll closely matched to Opinium (which had 5/10), as the header notes.

IMO Khan seems the more serious candidate, and he brushes off the "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff with the right degree of aplomb. Goldsmith is against airports and Khan, but I don't know what he's for. I think he's wasting coverage by pushing the "extremist" line - the effect is minimal as people don't think Khan looks dangerous, and the Standard doesn't report much of whatever else Goldsmith might be saying.

Oh please Nick: don't take us for fools. It's more than "your second cousin once said something dreadful" stuff and you know it. It's him speaking with Cage at rallies. Cage are not the RSPCA. They are a dreadful organisation and for anyone claiming to be a serious politician to associate with it shows appalling judgment. I know that we have got used to lots of senior Labour people associating with terrorists and their friends in ways that would have been thought of as unimaginable and beyond the pale in the past, so much so that it almost seems banal.

But it isn't. It shames your party.

Save your breath. Corbyn is an ace guy in his book and he is terrorist sympathiser, unlike Khan, who just appears to have a blind spot to associating with people who are.

I'm not going to save my breath. I'm going to keep on calling people out on this because this is important.

There is not a vast difference between sympathising and turning a blind eye.

If you turn a blind eye to evil then you enable evil to triumph. Though Mr E Burke put it rather more eloquently than me.

The abandonment by the Left (or a significant part of it) of its moral compass in order to flirt with and embrace people and groups who, were they not a bit dark-skinned and/or claiming to be religious, would in other times be described by the Left as fascists is an utter disgrace. Without a moral compass Labour is nothing. Nothing worthwhile, IMO, anyway.

Scott_P said:

@MrHarryCole: Movement: Understand statement is coming re Vicki Kirby. Seems she was never formally booted out, just blocked from being candidate in 2014

@PolhomeEditor: BREAKING: Labour say they will only take action against Vicky Kirby "If new evidence comes to light".