Does it need an 8.5 pc swing to oust Byrne or a 12.6 one?
December 5th, 2009
Which 2005 “notional” result do we believe?
A couple of weeks ago it was noted here that there was a big difference in the two most used projections for what the 2005 result in Ed Balls’s new seat at Morley and Outwood would have been on the new boundaries.
This afternoon, while researching for piece on Ladbrokes new market on how many cabinet members could lose their seats I’ve found an even more glaring disparity between the UKPollingReport projection and that from Professors Thrasher and Rallings for the Press Association.
The former puts the swing required in Birmingham Hodge Hill at 12.6% while the latter is at 8.5%. So if you were looking at the Anthony Wells numbers you would assume that Byrne was pretty safe - with Thrasher and Rallings it looks a lot tighter.
These numbers could have a big political impact because the view of the party machines over whether the seats are marginal or not and the level of resource allocated could change depending on which notionals you look at.
Among the other cabinet members who might be at risk I’ve noticed that Ben Bradshaw’s Exeter seat is more marginal with Thrasher and Rallings than with Anthony Wells. Jack Straw’s Blackburn, however, is a little bit safer.
A broader issue is that I believe the Anthony’s “notionals” are what are used as the basis for his excellent swing calculator. Would his projections look different, I wonder, with the Thrasher and Rallings figures?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
1st!
FPT,
Maybe the TimBot instant dismissal of these doctors claims would hold more weight if he told us his own academic qualifications.
I am not a medical doctor so have no idea if,
“in a 13-page dossier prepared as the basis for the legal action, the doctors argue that the bleeding from Dr Kelly’s ulnar artery in his left wrist is “highly unlikely” to have caused his death. They say a number of studies have shown that it is unusual for a patient to die from a single deep cut to the wrist.”
is complete cods wallop or not, and thus unable to dismiss their claims.
UKPolling report says average lead of two polls to-morrow is 12%.
On Topic, no idea.
Off Topic, enjoy your “social event” this evening Mike.
My post number will be higher than West Ham’s finishing position!
From a post Chris Whiteside made a while back, Copeland is another seat where there is a big discrepancy.
Sorry to go off topic so quickly - FPT
Get your popcorn boys and girls……
http://www.labour-watch.com/sleaze.htm
Some amusing comments before we start to wade through the links
“The public turfed out the last Tory government because of sleaziness; the “Cash for Questions” row and the failure of some back-bench Tory MPs to declare minor gifts or sources of income was too much for the public to stomach and they opted for a Labour government, ignoring Labour’s track record of sleaze in local government.
Eight years on, the Tories’ brand of sleaze looks pretty weedy compared to the wholesale corruption practised by the likes of Mandelson, Robinson, Irvine, Vaz, Byers, Jo Moore, Milburn, Hughes, Paul Corrigan, and Blair himself!
That’s the big difference - whereas under the Tories there were undeniably some individual back-bench MPs with dodgy agendas of their own, the Labour government is rotten to the core - the cabinet itself; the Prime Minister himself. Tony Blair was caught red-handed lying to the House of Commons about the £1m contribution Labour accepted from the motor racing industry. It was a defining moment and would easily have been the end of a less slimy politician’s career.”
Oh and this
“In the old days sleaze was about politicians succumbing to the material temptations placed before them, such as expense accounts and foreign travel, or it involved the personal sexual morality or marital fidelity of politicians. There was little or no direct impact on the general public, but the press and opposition politicians worked themselves into a frenzy about it.
New Labour’s New Sleaze works the other way round. It is all about the perversion of democratic government; matters of great importance to the public being cooked up behind closed doors, justified by massaged figures, semi-leaked documents and news management.”
And the line that tells the tale
“This page was getting far too big as we were all drowning in sleaze - so we have now moved all the IraqGate stories onto a separate page. Please have a look and spare a thought for the late Dr Kelly, whose usefulness as a scapegoat outlived him.”
Waiting for VIPA to tell us what the answer is!
The government acted in good faith over the naming of Kelly. That’s what the evidence supports and that is Hutton’s conclusion.
Perhaps some of the critics would like to put forward an alternative strategy.
A civil servant comes forward claiming that he may be the source of a story, damaging to the government. He doesn’t want his name to be released to the press. There are currently 2 parliamentary enquiries into matters related to the damaging story.
Do you name him against his will? Do you hide the fact that he exists from the public? And, from the official opposition? And, from the parliamentary enquiries?
What would you have done?
On the anticipated polls in the Sunday’s. Mike regular has to correct us when we compare polling figures from different pollsters. But maybe these polls due out tomorrow might show a slightly different picture from some of the others because they are polling at a different time in the week? Its Christmas time, could we see a disparity emerging between weekend and weekday polling?
“…Do you name him against his will? Do you hide the fact that he exists from the public? And, from the official opposition? And, from the parliamentary enquiries?…..”
I can neither confirm nor deny. It’s not difficult even someone with your incredibly low standards should be able to work that out.
ON TOPIC - Mike, can you check with the authors/analysts to flesh out specific differences between the two projection methods/results
OFF TOPIC re thred from not-too-distant-past:
Have just read Times (is this the Brit eqivalent of People Magazine these days?) story re: the revelations of Sally Bercow.
Surely the most interesting and amazing bit was the final paragraphs:
‘Nadine Dorries, a Tory MP who opposed Mr Bercow’s selection as Speaker, said: “We desperately need to restore authority and respect to Parliament. What this interview has done is remove any painstaking progress Parliament has made and reduced the Speaker and his office to that of a laughing stock.’
‘“How can we ask the people to trust us, when the man who holds us to account has such poor judgment that he allowed his wife to give such an appalling, self-obsessed interview?”’
Excuse me but:
1. Who is NDMP to critize ANYONE on grounds of “authority”, “respect” or “laughing stock”?
2. What is this shyte about how John Bercow “allowed his wife”? Say what? You mean NDPM obtains persmission before saying/doing/makkng an exhibition of herself? Then he’s an even bigger jackasssss than anybody knew!
7 Floater. Six academic doctors are confident Dr.Kelly was murdered and demanding the enquiry be reopened. Plenty of mileage in the poor man still.
7 Floater. Six academic doctors are confident Dr.Kelly was murdered and demanding the enquiry be reopened. Plenty of mileage in the poor man still.
3 If Labour are still sub 30, and the tories on 40, it will be smiles all around con hq.
9 - especially for you gabbs and tim.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2792303/Where-did-it-all-go-wrong-When-Labour-started-telling-lies.html
“Goebbels’ comment on the efficacy of propaganda will be familiar to many: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” What is less well known is his qualifying observation: “The lie can be maintained only for such time as the state can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.”
Labour’s big lies on budgetary prudence, educational standards, support for the Armed Forces, the economic benefits of immigration, a referendum on the European constitution (alias the Lisbon treaty), figures on violent crime, weapons of mass destruction, the abolition of quangos, British jobs for British workers and tackling welfare abuse have been exposed for what they were: cynical manipulation of credulous voters.
The problem for Brown and his troupe of political pygmies is that they have exhausted the supply of veils behind which they once danced. They now stand stark naked before the electorate and it’s not a pretty sight.
The lies can no longer be maintained. There is no way of shielding people from their loss of democracy, rising costs, falling incomes and the betrayal of those who are paying in blood for Mr Blair’s fiction.
The lies go on, naturally, but they have lost traction. Pledges that were once delivered with conviction now seem little more than an insult to the intelligence of decent folk whose patience has been exhausted by mendacity.
Mr Brown’s pursuit of prudence is a fantasy. In his Mansion House speech two years ago, he promised, “stability through a stable and competitive tax regime, and stability through a light-touch regulatory environment”.
Since then, we’ve had a tax cut that turned out to be an increase, followed by a humiliating climbdown when it became apparent the Government was punishing the working poor. A one-legged stilts walker would seem more stable.”
Lying isn’t working, but old habits die hard
d(too)
So, you would suppress the fact that this critic of the government had come forward and you would not allow him to testify to the enquiries?
You don’t think that would lead to allegations of a cover-up?
9.”What would you have done?”
I would have allowed a coroners report calling the relevant experts and witnesses under oath first, regardless of any other inquiry that followed on from it, and for whatever reasons.
gabble, you will get an answer from me when I get an answer from you re Brown being humiliated by the troops. So don’t hold your breath.
We can neither confirm or deny the identity of the man who will give evidence in camera to the committee.
Or
We will throw to the wolves anyone in order to further the New Labour project.
Hmm, I can see why it’s a tough call……
17 - Your straw man arguement is a little thin, Gabble.
“An aide-memoire by John Scarlett, chairman of the joint intelligence committee (JIC), shows that the prime minister chaired five meetings on July 7 and 8 at which the strategy of leaking Dr Kelly’s name to the media was agreed”
http://www.multiline.com.au/~johnm/key.htm
The discrepancy in notionals is bizarre. Surely wards are wards?
9 Gabble. You raise valid points, but overlook others. The government and the MoD also regularly encouraged David Kelly and other UNSCOM inspectors to give background briefings to the press. The infamous briefing Kelly gave which led to the story was also meant to be background. Kelly probably knew he had gone too far in his briefing, but sh*t, when you do so many briefings as he had, you’re going to f*ck up every now and then. The problem was by that stage Labour’s Iraq policy was no longer popular and Labour was turning on anyone and everyone that highlighted their problems, regardless of the fact that it was Blair and his coterie who f*cked up in the first place by sexing up the JIC report. However much David Kelly may have overstepped the mark in his background briefing, he was treated extraordinarily shabbily once he came forward.
21 It’s quite amusing how he is trying to portray leaking a name to clear upfront informing.
Macory said they ‘averaged’ a 12 point lead. That could mean one is bad - and that will no doubt be the one the media concentrate on.
20. David
You would be accused of a cover-up, not least by the official opposition.
Rallings & Thrasher’s figures should be regarded as the official statistics, no offence to the Wells calculations.
I think I pointed out the disparity involving Hodge Hill a few weeks ago on UKPR.
18, Christina D - hear, hear!
25 A 12% lead implies a 7.5% UNS from 2005-surely enough for an overall majority for Cameron,before one allows for possible over-performance in Lab-Con and southern Lib Dem-Con marginals
22:
No-one knows how a vote really voted in a general election - all the votes from all wards are mixed together before being counted. So they have to be estimated using local election results as a guide. That’s why different people can come up with different notional results.
Actually I think Hodge Hill is probably the most marginal Labour seat (on the R+T figures) which Labour is certain to hold. The reason I say that is that a lot of the LD support in the seat is a result of the 2004 by-election and will probably fade away next time to a certain extent.
26 Oh well, screw doing the right thing then. Typical Labour.
30: Meant to say “ward” not “vote”
22. Wards are wards, however on a General Election votes are not counted on a ward by ward basis. When a local government election is held on the same day this can be useful, but by no means are the figures always the same.
The problem is even worse if no local government election on the same day as General. It requires an estimate based on local government elections held in previous years, which can result in massively different results.
I have seen council elections which result in landslides for the labour candidate when held on GE day, often winning by over a thousand move votes then the nearest rival (in a seat with 4,000 electors), but then labour loosing that seat the following local election, because the turnout has dropped from 68% to 30%.
Its and art, not a science.
25 Quite right Sally. The media stil, are going on about the Mori poll of a 6% lead which even when it came out was a week out of date let alone how old it is now! Still not to worry - it was ever thus. Cheers. Peter
23. TimT: “However much David Kelly may have overstepped the mark in his background briefing, he was treated extraordinarily shabbily once he came forward.”
Yes but not by the government.
It was Gilligan who briefed the FASC that Kelly was the source for the Susan Watts’ story. This shook Kelly to the core when he was confronted with it and he was less than fully honest in his response - he must have thought that Watts had sold him out.
The leaking of Kelly’s name, the whole way his death was handled and the subsequent Hutton inquiry were set against a very torrid period for Blair’s government in the media and with the public. What ever happened to that man, it was all about handling one of the worst moments in that governments period of office politically in the media. And so much of what happened then goes back to that key point.
I can well understand why Dr Kelly’s family are totally loathe to see that most tragic and painful period in their lives being raked up and gone over again in the public domain again. The naming of Kelly at the height of this media frenzy is what set off this terrible chain of events in the first place.
But I find it equally abhorrent to then see anyone from this government trying to hide behind that after it was so politically expedient for them to set the Kelly name into that very public domain back then.
Who murdered Kelly ? Any theories, gang ?
“Yes but not by the government”
I don’t know what would be worse - that you truly believe that, or that you are simply trying to spin.
34. I think Mr Brown has been given an early Christmas present by a bored media and an extreme poll.
But in the long run, a bit of a scare might not do the Tories any harm, focusing the minds of some of the more flirtatious voters.
Can this site go 1 day without tory bomb throwing? Are you just a bunch of partisan crackheads would vote tory even if the candidate raped your child? Seriously some of you need a life.
Any PBers care to comment on the scandal currently engulfing Chinese professional cricket fighting?
An unreliable source intimates (but doesn’t say) that the source of SeanT’s fortune is NOT his writings (which by a contratural oversignt are payable in used dental floss) but instead his sizeable interest in a stable of Yunannese “super-crickets”.
It is unlikely that anybody murdered Kelly. But it would be nice to see his case in front of a coroner in the same way virtually every other suspicions death in Britain is and have the facts exposed.
39 - And of course the Tory vote dropping below 40% in the majority of recent polls.
Thats where the real interest has come from.
29.
Of course it’s enough. 8-10 percent is enough for a majority!
And as we all well know most of the polling companies historically overstate Labour anyway!
40 Utterly disgraceful comment which shows you for what you are and will no doubt show all the lurkers the mindset of the party who once promised to be whiter than white.
You are NuLabour.
If the Lib Dems did manage to oust Byrne in Birmingham Hodge Hill, and held Yardley and/or won Hall Green, it would be the first time since 1885 that the party or its predecessor had held more than one seat in the city.
How is the Lib-Con administration in the city council faring on the ground? Is it likely to help or hinder the parties involved in Birmingham at the GE?
In terms of overall projections the Wells and R&T notionals are near-identical, but there may be significant differences at the constituency level.
The differences are due to the way the two sets of calculations map the 2005 election onto the new boundaries, using the local election results as a transitional matrix.
In particular the treatment of multi-member council seats and uncontested council seats is different between the two estimates.
Multi-member: Wells takes the highest vote, R&T the average
Uncontested: Wells takes the average vote elsewhere, R&T the highest/lowest vote elsewhere.
There is no right or wrong answer, but I lean towards the R&T analysis…
FPT: the disturbance in Nottingham was (and maybe still is) in the city centre, a good way from my suburban patch. Early detials were here
http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/homenews/Police-told-respect-rights-protestors/article-1578512-detail/article.html
The police had a difficult job today as there was (a) a welcome-home military parade (not controversial but needed a lot of traffic re-routing) (b) an EDL anti-Muslim demo (c) a UAF counter-demo and (d) a major football match. There appears to be an overlap between EDL and football trouble-makers, and the UAF aren’t shy of trouble either. In the circs, the reported scuffles sound pretty minor, so far.
40 - some of us may be in need of a life. However, you are clearly in need of some help.
12 - I’d imagine that being attacked by Nadine Dorries is a 100% positive for the target of the attack.
What would be the downside?
37 URW All if us at UNSCOM received threats at some stage from the Iraqis - it was a badge of honour. I was myself excoriating in the Baghdad newspapers as a mass-murder, genocidal killer of babies. But David’s death had none of the Iraqi hallmarks. I still refuse to believe that any part of a British government, however much I hate Labour, would partake in a political killing of one of its citizens.
40. I’m not sure about rape but maybe a bit of a fondle.
“Are you just a bunch of partisan crackheads would vote tory even if the candidate raped your child? ”
That’s quite ironic given you’ve got a couple of Labour voters defending the driving of a man to death.
I am waiting for the Labour party supporters to say something re susanna’s comment at 40.
Is it normal for you?
Diane’s comment would suggest it is.
I suppose they know Mike isn’t around.
40.susanna, it didn’t take long, the mask totally slipped with that disgusting post.
susanna Hahahahahaha, excellent. you have just exposed yourself as exactly the sort of individual that lefties love to go on about, in the “look you have exposed the real face of the blah blah party” stylee. Be honest, have you had a drink tonight?
I’m guessing 41 27 21 in the ICM poll.
If the other (poss YouGov) 40 29 21
40: hmmm nice..comparing torys to child rapists…
Was there a purality of notionals calculations across the 1992/1997 reapportionment or (the 2001/2005 reapportionment for Scotland 2005)? If so, was there a winning calculation for accuracy and were the most apparently anomalous actual/notional results (e.g. Forest of Dean, Swindon North, …) good tie-breakers?
Mike’s post about why he left the Labour Party should be posted at the top of the thread.
susanna = tory troll
40 – susanna, well that didn’t take long did it, what an utterly vile human being you are.
I thought this was a site for political discussion rather than endless, and increasingly hysterical and nasty, Tory propaganda?
It’s interesting that our new friend susanna claims to be an independent who has never voted Labour but starts every comment by hurling abuse at Conservatives.
54 O.K,I fess up,when (I emphasise ‘when’) the Tories still held office in the mid 1990s,I said far,far worse about the then incumbent Tory govt
44 - where did hysterical Wayne go?
64. But you were probably pissed, no?
The thing that amazes me most about posters such as ‘diane’ and ’susanna’, is not their obvious vileness which they seem to think is normal but their utter stupidity is exposing their vileness so openly.
No Gabble - she isn’t. She is a regular. There’s a pattern and she’s all yours. But I suppose it saves you having to denouce her and make good on all your past assurances.
60 - Is there a link between “susanna” and the Labour Party, other than in your head?
67. * denounce
66 Nope,when as sober as a judge-its a long,long time ago and I’d older,fatter,more level-heade in my analysis nowadays
63.A couple of clues, she appeared less than a week after it was highlighted that despite there being less females on this site, there were no Labour ones at all. Read her initial posts, the clues were all there, she ticked every box in the Labour attack strategy being deployed in this GE.
65.
Stop it, your getting hysterical !
68. The similarity is striking; practically twins.
Rule 1 in the Draperbot manual is to declare yourself an independent.
58 - the toffs thing didnt work, then they tried the jumper, now we have this
61 - oh dear Gabbs, she is one of yours, be proud
tim, she has as tenuous a link to labour as much of your crap on here has to the tories so suck it up.
Take care Mike, I don’t believe either forecaster has made any adjustment for the recent expenses issues.
Whilst Jack “Accountancy isn’t my strong suit” Straw appears to have been forgiven by his own party for overclaiming Council Tax for several years in succession, I wouldn’t be surprised were his constituents to adopt a somewhat tougher attitude and I believe he is at some risk of losing his seat as a result. This is as yet totally unchartered territory and I suspect the impact come the GE will be far greater than is generally anticipated.
That’s also incidentally one of the reasons, apart from boundary changes, why I am going so strong on Simon Reevell winning Dewsbury for the Tories.
67. susanna = tory troll
I recognise the style.
There’s any number of tory trolls on this site who have said similar or worse.
37 - Norman Bakers “theory”, is that a group of Iraqi exiles who he could not name paid two other people that he could not name to inject Kelly in his buttocks with a fatal drug that he could not name.
The similarities between Baker and Tam Dalyell over the Hida Murrell case are striking.
WHP
I had £2 on your boys to draw today and another £2 on them to win.
Oh dear.
67 Some people do pathologically hate a politcal party ,or a football club or a place,city;its part of human nature,I guess.
)
(I can talk about politics to Tories,but talking footie to Spurs fans is a definite no-no -I can’t stand the bratty,spiteful,mutated little b*stards!
78. So when the moment came - a grisly one at that - to live up to your own billing, you bottle it. Total fail.
TimT: you might have mentioned it before but I hadn’t noticed you were with UNSCOM - that’s really interesting. I recently finished the book by Charles Duelfer, former deputy chair of UNSCOM - did you know him? What was your view of him? See
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65039/charles-duelfer/hide-and-seek-the-search-for-truth-in-iraq
Duelfer’s view doesn’t fit neatly with any of the current strains of thought: he thinks that the invasion was justified as sanctions weren’t working but Saddam would eventually have gone back to WMD, but he thinks the post-invasion de-Baathification was a hideous error - while it might have been democratic it swept away the military and administrative classes and opened a vacuum for chaos. He doesn’t really address the question of whether it would have been OK to maintain the Sunni minority in power to avoid the chaos, but it’s an interesting, thoughtful and sometimes witty book. (He describes a Blair-Bush meeting as having a difficult starting point - “Blair is a sophisticated European liberal. Bush is, well, not.”)
susanna - I’m not sure if you’re genuine or not, but the outbursts of rage aren’t helping persuade anyone! More arguments, less abuse, please.
I don’t know susanna, she just made me laugh with her post because it was so over the top. I mean, child rape? What is she going to move on to next? Tripping grandmothers? Strangling puppies and kittens? The H010c4ust?
Poor lady, I think she’s shot her bolt (or at least her screen name). You just can’t troll anymore after pulling something like that.
82. Oh. To be clear, I think that post is as abhorrent as many others posted by tory trolls.
57 Wayne - I think you’re too high on the total for the 3 major parties, allocating them a combined 89%-90%. I doubt this will exceed 85%-86%, with “other” parties picking up the balance.
80 Sorry,Richard!
Its fortunate that Wolves beat Bolton 2-1,thus keeoing the Hammers out of the bottom 3.
Away to Brum and Bolton,then home to Chelsea and Pompey on Boxing Day-a good guiding point is Boxing day,as to how the season is going (I firmly predict West Ham will NOT be in the bottom 3)
83. You could always threaten to stop her wages, Nick.
Well said Mr Palmer. And City are winning
78 - including Roger and coldstone I suppose?
When tim got himself yellow carded was he a tory troll too?
83 - I notice Hans Blix today accused Blair of conducting a witch hunt against Saddam Hussein.
Do you think he should ask for his witch hunts against Milosevic and the amputators in Sierra Leone to be taken into account as well.
If so, where do I sign up for the next witch hunt?
85. Well off for the night.
Apparently Gabble can sink lower. I had a small amount of respect left.
Now gone.
I remember all his all his proud assurances when a tory voter said he though Sarah was a bit dim.
Never trust Labour. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
82 Come on Sally that is the whole point of the Labour party, they removed clause 4 and replaced it with the “blame everything in perpetuity on the tories clause” So although any reasonable analysis of the past 13 years of disaster may point the finger at Labour. Labour know in their own minds it is all the Tories fault.
83. Tony Blair a “liberal”: Ha.
ID cards, children’s database, extension of CCTV, restrictions on protest, ASBOs, hearsay evidence in court, detention without charge.
You can make a case for Blair being a social democrat, an internationalist, an environmentalist even. But “liberal” - not even close.
47, Rod Crosby - thanks very much for your take on the difference between two methods cited by OGH of extrapolating past results onto new boundaries.
For what it’s worth, note that in US equivalent task during & after reapportionment & redistricting is eased by fact that we have results for individual voting districts, aka precincts.
UK parties and candidates can partially compensate for lack of detailed parliamentary election results reporting, via unofficial tallies & the like (RC, John Looney and small number of other PBers have personal expertise, which I’d love to hear more of) of vote counts from specific ballot boxes.
BUT reckon that this kind of data is only rarely available to the intrepid numbercruchers who analyze UK seat changes and their electoral implications. Again, this is topic upon which more direct knowlege would be of interest to many pbers, and of direct profit to a select few . . . who will no doubt help supply the Holiday Cheer at the upcoming PB HooHaw and BrainFry!
40 - Utterly disgusting comment.
96 - Yes it was.
How did the house move go?
Any hot tub cheshire wife swapping action yet?
91. As far as I’m aware, New Labour spin doctors weren’t writing intelligence reports to justify war in Sierra Leone and Yugoslavia.
ICM Con 40 Lab 29 Lib 19
92. Hmm. Difference is, I condemned the post whereas you found any number of reasons to avoid condemning the unfair attack on Sarah Brown.
87. WHP
The odds were generous on Betfair and I always think of West Ham as a good home team.
Things were looking promising for 40+ minutes!
97 - Move went well. Got the most important things set up.
Sky and Broadband.
The missus wont be joining me until next weekend, whilst i get the place sorted.
And I wouldn’t swap her for anyone.
ICM Changes:
CON -2
LAB nc
LIB nc
So, the other poll must be a 13 point lead.
When searchnig for something else I found this on Labour and its donations
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ1_K7ns1v8
Which suggests the other poll (YouGov?) has a 13% Conservative lead, probably 40-27 or 41-28.
Either way Con at 40 and Labour below 30 will give the Conservative leadership a boost after a pretty dismal period.
re 50. So Tim are you projecting that the swing in Nadine’s seat will be smaller than the regional average for seats currently held by the Tories. One would assume that by your postings.
This is the neighbouring constituency to mine and I know it well. Nad’s seat borders John Bercow’s.
I’d be very happy to agree a wager with you.
UK Polling gives 20 seat CON Majority - down from 62 on the previous ICM.
Does suggest Labour still not making any recovery and the Conservatives still not ’sealing the deal’.
103 - So Gabble what you are saying is after Gordo recent “brilliant” performances as PM, his new found PR savvy etc, errhhh, there is no increase in the number of people wanting to vote Labour.
106 - Yep - fine by me as a Tory. been through a bit of turbulence but where for goodness sake is there the slightest sign of a Brown bounce.
re 99. Do you have a source for ICM Peter?
Labourhome take on the Iraq inquiry.
http://www.labourhome.org/?p=8798
Make sure to read the comments. madasafish of this parish is one of them.
106.Be very interesting to see when the fieldwork for these polls was carried out. Are the Tories doing better when you poll on a weekday rather than at the weekend during this period? IIRC, both Mori and ComRes polled over the weekend.
112 Con Home Mike
Excellent poll for the Tories! I felt certain ICM would show them under 40% this month!
109 - I think it’s clear Gordon Brown has sealed the deal with the electorate.
It’s just a matter of which Anyone But Brown/Labour candidate they vote for.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2009/12/icm-confirms-trimming-of-tory-lead.html
This is YOUGOV for the Sunday Times
YouGov Con40 Lab 27 Lib 18
Increase in Tory lead from last time
13% YouGov lead for the Tories.
YouGov
Tory +1
Labour -2
Lib Dem -1
So Gabble how does that play with your Gordo doing well theory?
83. It may have been justified on some fronts but the reasons used and most of all the woeful post war response (strategy and resources) that nearly lost the peace. On this front the Britrish stank just as much and by the end of their term more than anyone.
For the big picture the US has blame but they are not the sevants of the people here. The UK government is and its failure to get its case right, some patent bull on things like 45 minutes (which anyone with an elementary understanding of the technology possessed by the Iraqis knew was bull) was poor. Worst of all its total failure to prepare for the post conflict situation in its own zone never mind persuade the Yanks is unforgiveable.
And thats from someone who supported the war on the basic principle that if it got rid of that freak in power and protected our oil supply then good enough. I have no problem with realpolitik but this was patent lying, patent incompetence and patent neglect.
99 On this basis, Ladbrokes’ handicapped share of the vote market works out as:
Lab…..44%
LibDem..41%
Tory….40%
Hmm. Wonder how the Christmas polls will shift. Recent years have seen a narrowing of the lead. If it ‘narrows’ to 10-14 points, then that’ll do.
59. In 1997 418 seats had more than a 5% change in their boundaries; the equivalent figure for 1983 was 541. The figure for the current reorganisation is 352. I don’t have the Scottish 2005 number, but they were substantial.
In 2005 only Scotland can be analysed for anomolous notional calculations. Perhaps the most obvious was where the lone Scottish Tory MP chose to stand for the wrong seat, and lost…
ConHome:
YouGov
Con 40 +1
Lab 27 -2
LD 18 -1
107 - I doubt that very much given the state of the Conservative party in Bedford constituency.
Now what was tim saying about 40% earlier in the thread?
Labour = tired, lost, liars
Not 5 more years but 6 more months (max!!)
117 - Sounds about right to me. If the Tories want a sizable majority they have still to convince some, but then that is no bad thing. I still want to hear more about what the Tory plan to do, before I decide my vote.
Mike, whilst you’re about, any chance of moderating post 40.
Changes from the YouGov/Sunday Times poll in December 2008 are
Con -1 Lab -8 Lib-Dem +3
I think we can say its been a bad 12 months for Labour!
ConHome Poll of Polls:
Hung parliament - CON short by 2.
133, forget the Golden Rule, Gabble? The worst poll for Labour is the most accurate.
144. Not for much longer Gabs. With each poll that silly MORI poll from November will lose its lnfluence.
131 Er,what about ‘freedom of speech’,please?
125.Morris, I thought that the polls in the lead up to Christmas have tended to be all over the place, and dotted with ones like we saw from ComRes and Mori. I do wonder if the timing of the polling is a factor. IIRC, they were both done over the weekend, be interesting to see if ICM and YouGov this Sunday carried out their fieldwork on weekdays.
What method are ConHome using, because UK Polling before these two new polls have Tory Majority of 28 in their poll of polls.
So is it appropriate now to call the Mori poll a roguer poll
These two polls are very much in line with expectations - confirmation of the small drop in the Tory lead since a few weeks ago, but nothing to suggest that this is part of a bigger trend. This is hardly surprising, since there have been no substantive political developments recently which could cause such a trend to develop.
The key to what will happen next is the PBR, and how it is reported. Osborne got his nasty news out of the way in October; Labour haven’t begun on theirs yet.
Changes on Sunday Telegraph’s last ICM:
CON: -2
LAB: +4
LIB: -2
CON Majority reduced by 86 seats!!
Not sure how the ST will spin that - but they will.
139.TSE, I don’t think you can to be honest.
Both polls in the same general range, both would give a working Tory majority.
It will be interesting to see the first polls in January when the full impact of the PBR has worked through!
136. It is part of Mike’s freedom of speech to decide what sort of views he wishes to provide a platform for on his blog.
40 susanna
I can vouch for this poster’s provenance. She is the wife of a prominent member of the Shadow Cabinet.
Regrettably, she spoke without first seeking the permission of her husband.
I have been asked by said husband to pass on her apologies.
120,124 - The outcome of Ladbrokes’ handicap at post 124 was based on ICM’s poll. On YouGov’s poll the outcome is:
Lab……42%
Tory…..40%
LibDem…40%
Close, but Labour has a clear edge, based on both the latest polls.
“ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1001 adults aged 18+ by telephone on 2nd-3rd December 2009. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/6737808/ICM-poll-puts-Conservatives-back-on-course-for-general-election-majority.html
I await with baited breath BBC coverage that new polls suggest we are moving out of hung parliament territory.
140, unconfirmed rumours reach me that Labour will introduce a top rate of income tax of 105%, as well as establishment of a new criminal offence: voting with the intention of returning a Conservative Government.
145 Susanna had informed us she is a parent seperated from her partner after he assaulted her
123, Yokel yes, yes and helll yes
new thread
If they hadn’t interviewed RodCrosby the Con lead might have been 41%.
147.So fieldwork carried out mid week, and it would have taken in PMQ’s and Eton too.
149 No chance of Spurs fans being sectioned en masse?
136 - I know, it’s a first for me, asking for a comment to be moderated. It’s just the subject matter at hand, is something that I’ve seen ruin a persons life, and to see it used to make partisan political points, in my opinion is quite off putting and disgraceful.
As someone who saw Martin Day’s posts *that* night, I have to say the comment at 40, made me feel more ill than Martin’s posts did.
Equivalent 2008 polls:
ICM
Con 38
Lab 33
LD 19
YouGov
Con 41
Lab 35
LD 15
Equivalent 2007 polls
ICM
Con 39
Lab 34
LD 18
YouGov
Con 43
Lab 31
LD 16
Conservatives about the same but it seems that Labour has suffered a permanent loss of support.
146 PfP - And IMO Labour is still good value in that market, even after the small adjustment to the odds today. The +15 handicap for Labour is very generous; the chances of the Conservatives being ahead by more than 15 points must be quite low, and whilst the LibDems (+22 handicap) might get within seven points of Labour, it looks more likely that they will be squeezed in national vote terms, even if they do better in their main targets.
On the polls, nothing startling but I’d be more keen to see what happens after the PBR.
This could represent another hiding to nothing moment for Labour but also can give us a gauge of how people now feel about the economy and Labour’s handling of it.
158. I cant see the Tories more than 12 points ahead on polling day.
Its all down now to how the Tories as a Party behave themselves from now on in.NuLab were immensely impressive up to 97 as a disciplined Party serious and not self indulgent, behaving responsibly.The County trusted them to run our affairs. Cameron is fine as far as the electorate are concerned - its the rumblings from the Party which still alarms some of the swing voters.Its not Lisbon or climate change but simply a query about the Party itself.
Responses to post 40. You have to hand it to posters on PB.Com. No other site does righteous indignation like it!
(I think she might have been using hyperbole)