When it's not weighted for 2010 vote it goes to 32% Labour and 26% Lib Dem.

 

DON'T PLAY WITH THAT LEVER BAD THINGS HAPPEN

 

DON'T PLAY WITH THAT LEVER BAD THINGS HAPPEN

WHAT DID I DO

Game On? They were only double the monster raving loony last week, more like Game Over and shouldn't Labour be more concerned with the UKIP defectors who could still desert in droves on the day....

Ashcroft poll of (mainly) Lib Dem seats puts them on 31% in Sheffield Hallam over Labour's 28%. When it's not weighted for 2010 vote (and to be honest why would you when it shows Labour taking nearly as many 2010 Lib Dem votes as the Lib Dems) it goes to 32% Labour and 26% Lib Dem.

 

Game on.

 

As much as one would like to see him kicked out, one thinks that Nick will cling on to the seat by the skin of his teeth. Which is a pity, because I'd rather he wasn't the deputy PM for another five years*.

 

*Prediction time - Lib Dems will lose half of their seats, yet will still be able to play a role in forming the next government.

My guess at the moment is that there will be another hung parliament after the next election but not another coalition. If Labour "win" then I think they will rely on the SNP and the remaining Lib Dem MPs either supporting them or abstaining on a lot of issues. If the Tories are the largest party Cameron has promised the MPs a vote on whether there should be another coalition. If he keeps his promise (a very big if given his track record) they may well vote against. Even if they don't it would have to be endorsed by Lib Dem MPs, the Lib Dem Federal Executive and a specially convened party conference. After the last five years there is likely to be strong opposition.

 

Of course that scenario is one reason why people in Lib Dem / Tory marginals should think carefully about how they vote. If there is a minority Labour government it is in their best interests to keep the number of Tory MPs on the opposition benches as low as possible. The Tories will oppose Labour on almost everything (even if they actually agree with the policy) while the Lib Dems are likely to be less tribal.

Game On? They were only double the monster raving loony last week, more like Game Over and shouldn't Labour be more concerned with the UKIP defectors who could still desert in droves on the day....

In Sheffield Hallam. That's literally all I was referring to.

 

The Lib Dems could have a massive problem after May if, as looks likely, they hold off the Tories in individual seats far more effectively than they hold off Labour. It will mean that their remaining MPs will be even further to the right of the membership than is currently the case, making any coalition very difficult.

 

The Tories simply have the problem that the only two parties they could realistically go into coalition with - the Lib Dems and UKIP - would never go in with each other, so they're squeezed in terms of numbers. If they're the biggest party I think they'll go it alone.

WHAT DID I DO

Taking off weightings is ALWAYS dangerous - particularly as even if 2010 Lib Dems are trending a certain way now, it doesn't necessarily mean they won't still go back for whatever reason in greater numbers than is currently the case. Also, you need to weight by 2010 vote otherwise you risk possibly getting in too many Labour/Lib Dem/Tory voters than you would otherwise - regardless of which way 2010 Lib Dems are trending, if you take off the weightings and have too many 2010 Labour voters as a result, you're going to get a skewed result.

 

Not that it's not game on in Hallam (have fun trying to argue Head Office around to that though :basil:), but yes, NEVER TOUCH WEIGHTINGS (unless you're accredited on stats and know exactly what you're doing and the consequences)

My guess at the moment is that there will be another hung parliament after the next election but not another coalition. If Labour "win" then I think they will rely on the SNP and the remaining Lib Dem MPs either supporting them or abstaining on a lot of issues. If the Tories are the largest party Cameron has promised the MPs a vote on whether there should be another coalition. If he keeps his promise (a very big if given his track record) they may well vote against. Even if they don't it would have to be endorsed by Lib Dem MPs, the Lib Dem Federal Executive and a specially convened party conference. After the last five years there is likely to be strong opposition.

 

Of course that scenario is one reason why people in Lib Dem / Tory marginals should think carefully about how they vote. If there is a minority Labour government it is in their best interests to keep the number of Tory MPs on the opposition benches as low as possible. The Tories will oppose Labour on almost everything (even if they actually agree with the policy) while the Lib Dems are likely to be less tribal.

People are starting to speculate on an SNP coalition, but don't they have a formal principle of not voting on English and Welsh issues? They'd be basically irrelevant to any coalition maths so long as that stays the case.

People are starting to speculate on an SNP coalition, but don't they have a formal principle of not voting on English and Welsh issues? They'd be basically irrelevant to any coalition maths so long as that stays the case.

Yes, I'm pretty sure the SNP do abstain on purely English and Welsh issues. If the Smith commission recommendations are implemented I don't know whether they will extend that to abstaining on some Budget measures.

The SNP have also ruled out a coalition at the moment. It's likely that they would be more inclined to prop up a Labour Minority government on an issue by issue basis than go into a coalition based on their history of abstention on rUK matters.

The Ashcroft polls do contain the odd glitch :lol:

 

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2014/12/ed-mi...tion/#more-6687

It did strike me as strange given that party leaders almost invariably get a bounce.

 

It'll be interesting to see if UKIP continue to flog that dead horse rather than giving more attention to the two or three Labour seats they actually have a chance in.

One basic rule of statistics - if you get a totally unexpected result, check your working. Then check it again. Then get somebody else to check it. Even if you like the original result, if it defies all logic it is probably wrong.

Ashcroft poll of (mainly) Lib Dem seats puts them on 31% in Sheffield Hallam over Labour's 28%. When it's not weighted for 2010 vote (and to be honest why would you when it shows Labour taking nearly as many 2010 Lib Dem votes as the Lib Dems) it goes to 32% Labour and 26% Lib Dem.

 

Game on.

 

It's interesting that the only two Sheffield Hallam polls have been taken at times when Labour nationally wasn't doing so well (now and in late 2010), yet they STILL showed Labour neck-and-neck. Presumably any Hallam polls in 2012 or 2013 would've shown a Labour lead.

 

**

 

Meanwhile, Tyron, are the whispers about Jim Murphy possibly losing the Scottish Labour contest true?!

Meanwhile, Tyron, are the whispers about Jim Murphy possibly losing the Scottish Labour contest true?!

I have no idea - where's it coming from? It's always been possible, but it needs Findlay to absolutely slam dunk the affiliates section of the electoral college, because he's miles behind amongst MPs/MSPs, and Jim's getting a lot of constituency party endorsements so I think he'll still be ahead on the members vote.

 

But then, all that happened for David Miliband as well. The difference is that Jim probably isn't too sniffy to actually secure the votes of MPs and MSPs rather than assuming they should be voting for him, as David did with a few. Also, Jim's getting a lot of backing from people who don't even really like him but want to win - people who would vote for a left-wing candidate if they were at all half-competent and electable. And if Neil Findlay's the best the left can do...

 

I still think Jim'll win, but the unions are throwing the whole kitchen at Neil's campaign, so if he does win it'll be because of that.

Jim Murphy is a vile creature so I'm keeping my fingers crossed it's not him. I'd rather have Farage. At least his delusions are occasionally amusing.

Jim Murphy is a vile creature so I'm keeping my fingers crossed it's not him. I'd rather have Farage. At least his delusions are occasionally amusing.

 

Is that Neil Findlay guy known at all in Scotland?

I've never heard of him. Although that's not much of an indication of his popularity given my lack of knowledge of Labour's ever declining number of MSPs.

growing as of dunfermline 2013 *.*

We'll see about that when we increase our majority in 2016.