BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register | Help )

Latest Site News
64 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
> OPINION POLLS 2017, A whole new world
Track this topic - Email this topic - Print this topic - Download this topic - Subscribe to this forum
Silas
post May 11 2015, 04:45 PM
Post #41
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 74,015
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


QUOTE(Qassändra @ May 11 2015, 01:55 PM) *
There are only 7 seats the SNP gained from Labour that have majorities of less than 10,000.

So you think you'll be up to 8 MPs in 2020 then?

The more likely path I see right now, assuming FPTP remains, is that Scotland becomes a single party state in 2020 or a repeat of 2010 where no seats change hands.

My assumptions:
-Labour doesn't properly understand the reason for it's Scottish losses and moves right to placate England/Wales which then strengthens the SNP in Scotland.
-LibDems are done in Scotland forever for bringing in a Tory Government.
-That the 2016 victory and the next 5 years of power in Holyrood doesn't lead to any major f***-ups that causes an SNP downfall.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post May 11 2015, 06:11 PM
Post #42
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


I don't count on any Scottish seats returning for certain, but any future leader faces the choice of tackling 10k+ majorities for the SNP or aiming for mainly Tory seats with majorities of less than 10k. I presume it will be left to Scottish Labour to decide the best route towards winning back the former, so a national leader would likely focus on the latter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post May 11 2015, 07:31 PM
Post #43
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,579
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Qassändra @ May 11 2015, 02:03 PM) *
No, but I've done them off the back of calculation. This is all pre-boundary changes as well, I should add:

(Please can Buzzjack install some kind of tabulation function thanks)

# Constituency Result Majority Maj %
1 Derby North LAB->CON 41 0.1
2 Gower LAB->CON 27 0.1
3 Croydon Central CON HOLD 165 0.3
4 Vale of Clwyd LAB->CON 237 0.7
5 Bury North CON HOLD 378 0.8
6 Morley & Outwood LAB->CON 422 0.9
7 Plymouth Sutton & Devonport CON HOLD 523 1.1
8 Thurrock CON HOLD 536 1.1
9 Brighton Kemptown CON HOLD 690 1.5
10 Bolton West LAB->CON 801 1.6
11 Weaver Vale CON HOLD 806 1.7
12 Bedford CON HOLD 1097 2.4
13 Plymouth Moor View LAB->CON 1026 2.4
14 Lincoln CON HOLD 1443 3.1
15 Peterborough CON HOLD 1925 4.1
16 Sheffield Hallam LD HOLD 2353 4.2
17 Cardiff North CON HOLD 2137 4.2
18 Corby LAB->CON 2412 4.3
19 Warrington South CON HOLD 2750 4.6
20 Waveney CON HOLD 2408 4.6
21 Southampton Itchen LAB->CON 2316 5.2
22 Keighley CON HOLD 3053 6.2
23 Warwickshire North CON HOLD 2973 6.3
24 Carlisle CON HOLD 2774 6.5
25 Renfrewshire East LAB->SNP 3718 6.6
26 Leeds North West LD HOLD 2907 6.7
27 Halesowen & Rowley Regis CON HOLD 3082 7
28 Crewe & Nantwich CON HOLD 3620 7.3
29 Erewash CON HOLD 3584 7.4
30 Hendon CON HOLD 3724 7.5
31 Ipswich CON HOLD 3733 7.7
32 Broxtowe CON HOLD 4287 8
33 Stroud CON HOLD 4866 8
34 Northampton North CON HOLD 3245 8.2
35 Calder Valley CON HOLD 4427 8.3
36 Blackpool North & Cleveleys CON HOLD 3340 8.5
37 Pudsey CON HOLD 4501 8.8
38 Amber Valley CON HOLD 4205 9.2
39 Sherwood CON HOLD 4647 9.2
40 Hastings & Rye CON HOLD 4796 9.4
41 Bristol North West CON HOLD 4944 9.5
42 Colne Valley CON HOLD 5378 9.5
43 High Peak CON HOLD 4894 9.6
44 Edinburgh North & Leith LAB->SNP 5597 9.6
45 Harrow East CON HOLD 4757 9.7
46 Stockton South CON HOLD 5046 9.7
47 Northampton South CON HOLD 3793 9.8
48 Norwich North CON HOLD 4463 10.2
49 Enfield Southgate CON HOLD 4753 10.4
50 Stevenage CON HOLD 4955 10.4
51 Cannock Chase CON HOLD 4923 10.5
52 Morecambe & Lunesdale CON HOLD 4590 10.6
53 Nuneaton CON HOLD 4882 10.7
54 Dudley South CON HOLD 4270 11.2
55 Finchley & Golders Green CON HOLD 5662 11.2
56 South Ribble CON HOLD 5945 11.4
57 Worcester CON HOLD 5646 11.4
58 Rossendale & Darwen CON HOLD 5654 11.5
59 Dumfries & Galloway LAB->SNP 6514 11.5
60 East Lothian LAB->SNP 6803 11.5
61 Swindon South CON HOLD 5785 11.7
62 Pendle CON HOLD 5453 12.3
63 Paisley & Renfrewshire South LAB->SNP 5684 12.3
64 Preseli Pembrokeshire CON HOLD 4969 12.3
65 Dover CON HOLD 6294 12.5
66 Reading East CON HOLD 6520 12.9
67 Scarborough & Whitby CON HOLD 6200 13
68 Warwick & Leamington CON HOLD 6606 13.1
69 Aberconwy CON HOLD 3999 13.3
70 Crawley CON HOLD 6526 13.4
71 Vale of Glamorgan CON HOLD 6880 13.4
72 Reading West CON HOLD 6650 13.7
73 Arfon PC HOLD 3668 13.7
74 Gloucester CON HOLD 7241 13.8
75 Great Yarmouth CON HOLD 6154 13.8
76 Carmarthen East & Dinefwr PC HOLD 5599 14.2
77 Thanet South CON HOLD 7098 14.3
78 Chipping Barnet CON HOLD 7656 14.4
79 Stourbridge CON HOLD 6694 14.5
80 Brighton Pavilion GRN HOLD 7967 14.6
81 Elmet & Rothwell CON HOLD 8490 14.7
82 Milton Keynes South CON HOLD 8672 14.7
83 Aberdeen South LAB->SNP 7230 14.9
84 Carmarthen West & Pembrokeshire South CON HOLD 6054 15
85 Camborne & Redruth CON HOLD 7004 15.3
86 Battersea CON HOLD 7938 15.6
87 Edinburgh South West LAB->SNP 8135 15.8
88 Redditch CON HOLD 7054 16
89 Gravesham CON HOLD 8370 16.7
90 Milton Keynes North CON HOLD 9753 16.9
91 Basildon South & Thurrock East CON HOLD 7691 16.9
92 Rutherglen & Hamilton West LAB->SNP 9975 17.3
93 Watford CON HOLD 9794 17.4
94 Cleethorpes CON HOLD 7893 17.5
95 Ochil & South Perthshire LAB->SNP 10168 17.6
96 Loughborough CON HOLD 9183 17.7
97 Shrewsbury & Atcham CON HOLD 9565 17.7
98 Clwyd West CON HOLD 6730 17.7
99 Paisley & Renfrewshire North LAB->SNP 9076 18
100 Canterbury CON HOLD 9798 18.3


As in 1992, one of the depressing things about this list is just how few votes delivered a Tory majority. Assuming there are no ultra-marginal Con / Lib Dem seats (I don't think there are), the total majority in the six most marginal seats is just 1,270. In 1992, the 11 lowest majorities (giving them their Commons majority of 21) added up to a mere 2,478.

It is notable that most of the seats near the top of the list are ones which Labour have won at some stage (Sheffield Hallam is a notable exception). It is rather more alarming to see how far down the list some of the seats they won in 2005 have fallen. Crawley is one example, even though they did only win by 37 votes in that election.

You mention that Labour need to win Chingford & Wood Green to get a majority of ten. On the bright side, there couldn't be many better scalps than Iain Duncan Smith (unless he retires back to his coffin at the next election).

Both Labour and the Lib Dems need to see the reversal (at least in part) of the demonising of the SNP. I have been hearing from some Lib Dems that the Tories' scare stories struck a chord. I assume Labour found the same. Paddy Ashdown has suggested that, if the polls had been more accurate, fewer people would have fallen for it as a Labour-led government would have seemed less likely. Unfortunately, the London-based news media ignores Scotland most of the time, so information about what the SNP are actually doing is somewhat lacking south of the border. That is one reason why the Tory message was so effective.

Other seats will depend on whether the incumbent stands. I assume Caroline Lucas is now safe for as long as she wants the seat. When she steps down, Brighton Pavilion will be up for grabs again. Brighton & Hove is a bit of a world unto itself, so Labour would have a decent chance there.

Of course, the boundary changes complicate matters, particularly if the number of seats is reduced. Effectively, parties cannot do much about selecting candidates until the proposed boundaries are known. That means that the challenging candidates will have a lot less time to establish themselves.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post May 11 2015, 07:39 PM
Post #44
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


They've said they're scrapping the reduction of MPs to 600 - presumably they know that would stop some backbenchers voting for the reforms - so it's just changes to the boundaries but sticking to 650.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Danny
post May 11 2015, 08:06 PM
Post #45
BuzzJack Gold Member
*****
Group: Members
Posts: 4,259
Member No.: 457
Joined: 11-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


Tbh, I've changed my mind completely and think Labour and the Lib Dems should have a pact at the next election (much as many Labour members won't like that). Labour have to face facts that they're probably not going to win a majority on their own, so they need the LDs to knock out as many Tories as possible in seats which are no hopes for Labour (though the reverse might not work so well, I'm not sure if all remaining Lib Dem voters in a lot of Con-Lab marginals would necessarily go Labour).

Plus, it might help Labour neutralise the SNP line next time because they could say they'd go into coalition with the LDs instead.


This post has been edited by Danny: May 11 2015, 08:07 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post May 11 2015, 08:16 PM
Post #46
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,579
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Qassändra @ May 11 2015, 08:39 PM) *
They've said they're scrapping the reduction of MPs to 600 - presumably they know that would stop some backbenchers voting for the reforms - so it's just changes to the boundaries but sticking to 650.

Is that confirmed? I saw a suggestion that they would, but nothing definite.

The case for a reduction was always very weak. It was just a vote-winnng gimmick on Cameron's part. I know that the Lib Dems proposed an even bigger reduction, but that was part of a package that included an elected second chamber as well as other reforms.

We have had around 620 - 650 MPs for many decades. In that time, the population has increased substantially, so the average number of constituents has gone up. The days when an MP's annual visit to his constituency was a big event are, thankfully, long gone. The old Liberal Party played a big part in that change. The advent of e-mail means that an MP now receives far more correspondence than at any time in the past. Therefore, an MP's workload has increased massively. Reducing the number of MPs will just make things worse.

It is, of course, true that the House Of Commons is larger than the parliaments of similar-sized countries. However, those countries devolve a lot more power to local and regional authorities, so there is a good deal less for the parliament to do. If we had proper regional government, it would be possible to reduce the size of the House Of Commons.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post May 11 2015, 08:25 PM
Post #47
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,579
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Danny @ May 11 2015, 09:06 PM) *
Tbh, I've changed my mind completely and think Labour and the Lib Dems should have a pact at the next election (much as many Labour members won't like that). Labour have to face facts that they're probably not going to win a majority on their own, so they need the LDs to knock out as many Tories as possible in seats which are no hopes for Labour (though the reverse might not work so well, I'm not sure if all remaining Lib Dem voters in a lot of Con-Lab marginals would necessarily go Labour).

Plus, it might help Labour neutralise the SNP line next time because they could say they'd go into coalition with the LDs instead.

The big problem with that is that the Lib Dems are now in a very weak position. Lib Dem members would resist a deal that they thought exploited that weakness too much. Similarly, Labour members would resist a deal which they felt offered the Lib Dems too much.

I can only see there being any chance of it working if Labour bit the bullet and offered electoral reform. They could go into an election with that as a key part of their platform, and with the intention of calling an election after the reforms have been introduced and boundaries set. Assuming the Tories haven't cynically repealed the Fixed Term Parliament Act (in order to cut and run two some point), that might need some sort of manipulation, but it could be justified if it was part of their election programme.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post May 11 2015, 08:26 PM
Post #48
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


Oh CHRIST I'd forgotten they'd be able to scrap Fixed Term Parliaments on their own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post May 11 2015, 08:36 PM
Post #49
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,579
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Qassändra @ May 11 2015, 09:26 PM) *
Oh CHRIST I'd forgotten they'd be able to scrap Fixed Term Parliaments on their own.

I'm quite surprised not to have read any suggestion that they might do this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve201
post May 11 2015, 09:44 PM
Post #50
Shakin Stevens
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 45,994
Member No.: 5,138
Joined: 29-December 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Silas @ May 11 2015, 05:45 PM) *
So you think you'll be up to 8 MPs in 2020 then?

The more likely path I see right now, assuming FPTP remains, is that Scotland becomes a single party state in 2020 or a repeat of 2010 where no seats change hands.

My assumptions:
-Labour doesn't properly understand the reason for it's Scottish losses and moves right to placate England/Wales which then strengthens the SNP in Scotland.
-LibDems are done in Scotland forever for bringing in a Tory Government.
-That the 2016 victory and the next 5 years of power in Holyrood doesn't lead to any major f***-ups that causes an SNP downfall.


I also wouldn't be surprised if another choice was that things turn more into a NI situation where the Tories squeeze out the lib dems/labour completely and it becomes a unionist vs SNP issue although that would be probably unlikely given the Tories are hated up north.

I also think this division could see a realigning of politics in England where the Tories are like a liberal party, the success of UKIP (120 second places, 360 odd third places) means they are the right wing party winning votes from right and left and labour/lib dems become the centre left party with greens as the anti austerity left wingers?!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve201
post May 11 2015, 09:53 PM
Post #51
Shakin Stevens
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 45,994
Member No.: 5,138
Joined: 29-December 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


Are the Tories really going one nation with their cabinet appointments _


Amber Rudd - Energy - climate change believer
Grant Shapps gone
Rob Halthone - Deputy Chairman - a guy who's argued for a higher min wage and Tory trade unions

Vs balancing the right with

Iain Duncan Smith still at welfare
Michael Gove
Boris
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post May 11 2015, 10:08 PM
Post #52
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,579
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


Various environmental groups have reacted positively to Amber Rudd's appointment, so there could be some hope.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Brett-Butler
post May 14 2015, 05:35 PM
Post #53
Howdy, disco citizens
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 12,774
Member No.: 10,455
Joined: 16-January 10
   No Gallery Pics
 


A short but sweet satire of opinion polls, from the occasionally funny Newzoids -

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Silas
post May 16 2015, 09:21 PM
Post #54
Queen of Soon
********
Group: Moderator
Posts: 74,015
Member No.: 3,474
Joined: 24-May 07
 


Murphy gone. What a wonderful week and a half this has been
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve201
post May 16 2015, 10:12 PM
Post #55
Shakin Stevens
*******
Group: Members
Posts: 45,994
Member No.: 5,138
Joined: 29-December 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


Well that's good news lol
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Soy Adrián
post May 17 2015, 07:53 AM
Post #56
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
******
Group: Members
Posts: 12,908
Member No.: 10,596
Joined: 6-February 10
 


QUOTE(Silas @ May 16 2015, 10:21 PM) *
Murphy gone. What a wonderful week and a half this has been

The only good thing for anyone even pretending to be left-wing is the fact that Eric Pickles is no longer DCLG Secretary. Well, and Esther McVey.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Brett-Butler
post May 17 2015, 05:03 PM
Post #57
Howdy, disco citizens
******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 12,774
Member No.: 10,455
Joined: 16-January 10
   No Gallery Pics
 


Another possible, scientific, explaination as to why the Conservatives did so much better in the election than was predicted in opinion polls - according to a 2011 study by Cornell University, people are more likely to vote conservatively if they are given a reminder of physical cleaniness before they are about to vote (i.e seeing soap or hand sanitiser). I don't know what the rules are about allowing such products to be on display in voting halls, but if the study is correct, it could have been an unconscious factor in people's voting habits.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post May 17 2015, 08:10 PM
Post #58
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,695
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ May 17 2015, 08:53 AM) *
The only good thing for anyone even pretending to be left-wing is the fact that Eric Pickles is no longer DCLG Secretary. Well, and Esther McVey.


I concur. It's effing depressing from my point of view as a beleaguered council worker having to work from home to meet deadlines while caring for mum with rapidly advancing alzheimers, ailing dad following a big heart attack, multi-problems and more surgery, and personal depression and exhaustion. I get no actual practical help. I get lip service. The mythical marvellous NHS bullshit about support for carers, available local gov bureaucracy to cutback on spouted by all politicians is lies. They can all go proverbially do unto themselves as can anyone who remotely thinks the current political and financial situation is a good thing, from my point of view...

There is no laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Sep 22 2015, 10:15 PM
Post #59
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,579
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


Some interesting points from the last few days.

It has been claimed that seven Tory wins on 7 May can be attributed specifically to people switching from Lib Dem to Labour. That's just enough to account for their majority. Obviously, if they had fallen just sort of a majority, it is almost certain that they would have formed a minority government.

Second, I heard that large numbers of Labour members in Ed Balls' constituency spent a lot of the campaign in Sheffield Hallam. Therefore, their desperate (and unsuccessful) attempt to oust Nick Clegg may have cost them their Shadow Chancellor.

I also heard some interesting stories about the Lib Dem campaign. Some of the Scottish MPs found it a little embarrassing to have to change their main message to potential Tory voters from "Vote Lib Dem to stop Labour winning" to "Vote Lib Dem to stop the SNP winning" almost overnight after the referendum. Still in Scotland, apparently the Tories spent a lot of money in some Scottish Lib Dem seats where their own chances of winning were precisely zero. However, they may have been trying to persuade their supporters to stick with voting Tory rather than switching to the Lib Dems. In most seats, that won't have made a significant difference, but it might have saved one or two Lib Dems if the Tories had kept quiet.

The Lib Dems' private polling showed that the "incumbency effect" was almost non-existent. The defeats of popular, long-standing and hard-working MPs such as Charles Kennedy and Simon Hughes adds weight to that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Qassändra
post Sep 22 2015, 10:41 PM
Post #60
DROTTNING!
********
Group: Members
Posts: 63,953
Member No.: 480
Joined: 15-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Sep 22 2015, 11:15 PM) *
The Lib Dems' private polling showed that the "incumbency effect" was almost non-existent. The defeats of popular, long-standing and hard-working MPs such as Charles Kennedy and Simon Hughes adds weight to that.

Not quite. There was an incumbency effect - people recognised in private polling they had good local Lib Dem MPs who they'd be ordinarily favourable to voting for under ordinary circumstances. It just wasn't strong enough to stand up to the overriding 'vote Tory this time for stability' message. It's telling that the seats the Lib Dems lost where they generally stood up best were in Scotland.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post


64 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 12:49 PM