|
||||||||
Opinion Polls Discussion Thread (Part 3) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1301 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,038
|
Quote:
and many of us would consider the last 5 years a disaster for the country, so it's rather how you read history.
Quote:
For example, I'm sure the "Bedroom Tax" had a 55% (or more support) just prior to it being implemented. It won't have that kind of support now will it? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1302 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,796
|
Quote:
Significantly, Sturgeon told Evan Davis tonight that she would back Labour Queen's Speech and seek to exert influence afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
#1303 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 30,976
|
Quote:
She might want that but Labour won't let her.
|
|
|
|
|
#1304 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,796
|
Quote:
She said that the SNP would have X number of seats and they would have their say in the House, not that she'd be twisting Ed's wrist.
|
|
|
|
|
#1305 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,494
|
Quote:
Those Tories on Political Betting, are insane though - the kind of people who really make you think about the Conservative Party. There's something not quite right about them - their tendency to overreact to polls is hilarious.
Nonetheless, I wonder if we'll start to see a trend across all pollsters towards the Tories now? I have a (bad) feeling that they'll be the largest party in a hung parliament - only really, the LD parliamentary party, and federal executive committee can stop a full blown Tory/LD coalition now, IMHO. Especially as Clegg doesn't appear to be drawing the EU ref as a red line - if he's prepared to accept it, then that's one huge milestone out the way. That of course depends on Clegg keeping his seat, which is still a knife edge situation right now. If he goes, along with Alexander that's a huge loss for the Tories in regard to coalition hopes. Even if the Tories form a minority government, I suspect without LD support at the least it wouldn't be able to pass a Queen's Speech (in fact, maybe even with LD support, with SNP + Lab combination, it could still lose). Oh well, we've still got a long way to go. But even I'm starting to have a feeling that the Tories, with the SNP tactic have edged away, although I think it's a small lead. If they do make managed to form a government, it'll be interesting to see how they make it out of a period that will include an EU ref (and how the Tories avoid tearing themselves a part over it), perhaps another Scottish ref (when Scots may well leave the union), and if they'll even meet their targets of cuts, given how they've not managed to do so in this term. Many Tory's and Lib Dem's don't want another coalition and neither do I. The best option is a Tory majority but as that seems impossible I now would prefer Labour to be the largest party. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1306 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,796
|
Having a look at Labour's target seats , Great Yarmouth is 74. Tories lead by 9.9 in the last election, Lord Ashcroft's latest poll says Tories lead by 2. If that proves accurate, that's swing of almost 8 to Labour
|
|
|
|
|
#1307 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: In the red mist
Posts: 19,787
|
Quote:
Don't we have to factor in Labours built in advantage within the voting system though? The Tory's have to be about six points ahead of Labour just to get the same number of seats or something like that.
Many Tory's and Lib Dem's don't want another coalition and neither do I. The best option is a Tory majority but as that seems impossible I now would prefer Labour to be the largest party. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1308 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 23,724
|
Quote:
She said that the SNP would have X number of seats and they would have their say in the House, not that she'd be twisting Ed's wrist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1309 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,106
|
Quote:
So to clarify:
Tory - 283 Labour - 270 SNP - 48 Lib Dem - 24 DUP - 8 Others - 16 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1310 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: The South, thankfully.
Posts: 2,089
|
Quote:
Nonetheless, from what I understood - even with an equal vote share to Labour, Labour would still have more seats than the Tories (due to Lab's electoral advantage). Which is why, I'm slightly confused by the projections from various sources, but particularly Newsnight showing the Tories leading by roughly 30 seats or so, on a equal vote share. I don't get how they get those projections.
I think the Labour electoral skew in their favour, where less votes equals more seats, requires that they aren't routed in Scotland. Labour being dead north of the border seems to result in a electoral balance. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1311 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 23,724
|
Quote:
Labour+SNP+PC+SDLP+Galloway+Lady Sylvia=326 and Miliband as PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1312 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,884
|
Quote:
Labour+SNP+PC+SDLP+Galloway+Lady Sylvia=326 and Miliband as PM.
![]() Unless the Tories can win some of the voters around or get the ones who haven't yet to a polling station
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1313 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,269
|
Quote:
Don't we have to factor in Labours built in advantage within the voting system though? The Tory's have to be about six points ahead of Labour just to get the same number of seats or something like that.
Many Tory's and Lib Dem's don't want another coalition and neither do I. The best option is a Tory majority but as that seems impossible I now would prefer Labour to be the largest party. Quote:
AFAIR, the Tories needed a 7-point lead to get a majority - they can get an equal/similar number of seats to Labour, or be the largest party in a hung parliament with a less % lead. Nonetheless, from what I understood - even with an equal vote share to Labour, Labour would still have more seats than the Tories (due to Lab's electoral advantage). Which is why, I'm slightly confused by the projections from various sources, but particularly Newsnight showing the Tories leading by roughly 30 seats or so, on a equal vote share. I don't get how they get those projections. Out of interest, why do you think a Labour majority is better than a Con-Lib coalition? At least you get some right-wing influence in that situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1314 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,138
|
Quote:
Precisely. Our political culture needs to understand the importance of the art of negotiation and compromise instead of these pantomime cartoon caricatures of arm twisting and people constantly being held to ransom. It's school kids talk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1315 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: North London, UK
Posts: 28,048
|
Quote:
Both the Tories and Labour have an inbuilt advantage. Is it fair that a party getting 15% of the vote may end up with 2seats instead of about 100?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1316 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,269
|
Quote:
Labour have the biggest advantage. Not that you'll admit it..
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1317 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,520
|
Quote:
Both the Tories and Labour have an inbuilt advantage. Is it fair that a party getting 15% of the vote may end up with 2seats instead of about 100?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1318 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort William
Posts: 22,269
|
Quote:
How about we focus on your neck of the woods where a party may get 18% of the vote and end up with 0 seats instead of about 8....
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1319 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1,973
|
Quote:
Don't forget the Greens!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1320 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,520
|
Quote:
No need to focus on anywhere, we need a more representational system so all political viewpoints which are voted for in numbers are properly represented.
As an example, under PR we might have a situation where UKIP have 78 seats,. Because of the weight of the Coalition against them, UKIP will almost certainly not get any of their front line policies accepted. So, I repeat - what is the point? (Apologies for derailing the Polls thread, don't know about anyone else but I'm finding the polls all over the place these days) |
|
|
|
|
|
#1321 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Los Angeles Underground
Posts: 100
|
A bad set of numbers for Ukip in the Ashcroft polls.
Castle Point still seems possible (Ukip and Conservatives were pretty much neck and neck in the unweighted numbers) but worrying for for them that all the effort invested there doesn't seem to have advanced their position. The Great Grimsby poll is a disaster for them. That's another consituency where they have invested huge effort but they've slipped right back. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1322 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3,125
|
Quote:
Having a look at Labour's target seats , Great Yarmouth is 74. Tories lead by 9.9 in the last election, Lord Ashcroft's latest poll says Tories lead by 2. If that proves accurate, that's swing of almost 8 to Labour
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1323 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3,125
|
Quote:
AFAIR, the Tories needed a 7-point lead to get a majority - they can get an equal/similar number of seats to Labour, or be the largest party in a hung parliament with a less % lead. Nonetheless, from what I understood - even with an equal vote share to Labour, Labour would still have more seats than the Tories (due to Lab's electoral advantage). Which is why, I'm slightly confused by the projections from various sources, but particularly Newsnight showing the Tories leading by roughly 30 seats or so, on a equal vote share. I don't get how they get those projections. Out of interest, why do you think a Labour majority is better than a Con-Lib coalition? At least you get some right-wing influence in that situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1324 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
|
Quote:
I'm on the fence - although leaning more and more towards PR. But playing Devil's advocate with you, unless that representation actually carries through to results - what is the point?
As an example, under PR we might have a situation where UKIP have 78 seats,. Because of the weight of the Coalition against them, UKIP will almost certainly not get any of their front line policies accepted. So, I repeat - what is the point? (Apologies for derailing the Polls thread, don't know about anyone else but I'm finding the polls all over the place these days) They are a minority party and will not hold the reigns of power while that is the case. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1325 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 53,387
|
Quote:
Nat Silver has just announced his predictions:
Given that UKIP will definitely win at least 2 it makes me worried about 'the worlds best pollster". Would have been much better to have had someone like Ashcroft do it. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:07.





