The Sunday Poll Rush
April 30th, 2005
First up tonight is Communicate Research in the Indpendent on Sunday which has LAB 39 (-1): CON 31 (-4): LD 23 (+5).
Next Thursday will be the first time CR has been tested against real results. It remains to be seen whether it can perform better than the pollster the Indy on Sunday used four years ago, Rasmussen, which with its automated phone methodology was the only firm to get the Tories right and got the Labour margin within 2%. All the others underestimated William Hague’s party. CR do not weight by past vote recall and until they introduced party prompts three weeks ago reported the lowest LD shares.
Second up is YouGov with LAB 36 (nc) : CON 33 (+1): LD 23 (-1) . So the only change since Friday has been a slight shift from the LDs to the Tories.
Although the embryonic YouGov did carry out polls for the 2001 General Election this will be the first major UK test for the internet-based firm which is so often criticised by other pollsters. Until now, however, whenever it has been tested in UK elections it has come out pretty well. This is not its final polls and perhaps two more surveys are expected before polling day.
Third up is ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph which has LAB 39 (-1): CON 31 (-2): LD 22 (+2) so unlike YouGov a move from the Tories to the Lib Dems.
ICM’s final poll in 2001 had an 11% Labour lead compared with the 9.3% that actually happened. Another ICM poll started at the same time with a larger sample had a 17% Labour lead. The pollster has not carried out any surveys since 2001 when it could be compared with real results. Further ICM polls are expected before polling day.
My big bet - several hundred a percentage point on a spread selling Labour at the equivalent of 38.6% - looks pretty good. Two polls showing Labour down a notch to 39% and the third showing no change.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Lib Dem vote share has just gone up 0.25% to 22.5% on IG.
Here at last comes the Lib Dem surge. my experience on the doorstep would suggest much more is to come!
Bravo Charlie K, he played his hand well this week.
The tories on the basis of this poll should be worried.
Perhaps MH gaffe on QT about the war has done more damage than we think, on swallow does not make a summer however and one poll does not make a ……? any suggestions?
2. I wouldn’t get too confident until we have seen the other polls. Is there any chance that CR could have fiddled with their formula to save their professional reputation?
Woof - that’s one hell of a shift. I’ll post more fully on my experiences today, but nice to see. Let’s hope its reflected in the others.
Actually this poll is in line with all others and not really that much of a shock.
One poll does not make a Big Tent?
Unless of course there is a confirmed rush from tory to libdem. Anyway off to the rear of the sofa - the Daleks are back!
4 - I can’t be from QT, note that the fieldwork was conducted between last Saturday and Thursday, making this poll a little old.
Has CR changed their methodology as Chrisco less diplomatically put it? If not, this is really quite a huge swing. Of course CR’s poll may be very poor, making the fact that it shows a swing less interesting.
7 - yes, but CR were out of line with everyone else. You have to look at the pollsters trend, and a 5% rise, if that represents a trend, is significant.
I mean “It can’t be from QT”, of course.
Bumped into the independent candiate in Rhykl today….guy has run avery good campaign….he had a run in with the Tories and the Tories are clearly panicing…..not gonna win vale of Clwyd….meanwhile we are still picking up support from unlikely places and getting a smattering of new members etc….all positive with a few days to go….
A very reliable source in cambridge tells me Lib dems will now in….although my source voted Labour by post he now regrets it and says he wishes he had backed the “winners”….
Re 14. My info is similar - Cambridge looks very good for the LDs even though Labour have a 20% majority.
I saw the rally in Cambridge - the number of people was unbelievable. Not all Lib Dem supporters, but Lib Dems surely had a massive boost from the rally.
The fieldwork dates for the CR polls are:
Last week’s IOS: 19th-22nd
This week’s IOS: 23rd-28th
So any movement reported tomorrow could in fact be a week old. Yesterday’s Yougov poll in the telegraph is actually more recent, since the fieldwork was conducted between 26th-28th.
The movement may be real, but we do need to be careful how we date it if we want to know what caused it.
I guess the only comment I’d make re post 17 is that things have hardly got worse for the LD’s since the CR fieldwork concluded?
ok here are the you gov and icm results:
YouGov put Labour on 36%, with the Tories on 33% and the Lib Dems on 23%.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4502089.stm
An ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph puts Labour on 39%, the Conservatives on 31%, and the Lib Dems on 22%.
Yougov showing the gap narrowing by one point. 36, 33 etc
Going back to the tactical voting, I’ve been playing with Baxter and assuming that the LD’s dump labor and tactically vote with the conservatives. I’ve plugged in the admittedly big tactical vote of 20% C-LD -20% LD – L (since LD –con isn’t and option). The results are staggering:-
On IoS poll result is
C 31 186
L 39 326
LD 23 105
Lab majority is 5 so Just a couple of defections and Chat show Charlie’s controls the government.
Suppose hat the poll understates C and overstate L. then we get
C 34 237
L 36 272
LD 23 107
Lad minority of 50 - i.e. Charlie is the king maker – labor have to have him to form government.
Reduce tactical voting to +10% C-LD -10 LD-C on both sides and the result is:-
C 34 276
Lab 36 272
LD 23 68
i.e. conservatives are the largest party (even with less of the vote than Labour) but Charlie ahs enough votes to king make either – good negotiating positions methinks (if he hadn’t been dumb enough to explicitly rule out conservatives before hand).
Reduce tactical to 5% level and we get
C 34 246
L 36 304
LD 23 66
I.e. labor short of a majority by 20 so may be able to tie up with the independents as opposed to LD but obviously LD’s still in the strongest position.
So if people take the Indies advice and stop tactically voting for L and others take Peter Riddell advice instigate LD-C tactical voting against Blair the results are staggering.
Bets on Conservatives largest party open up, LD’s with more than 100 seats become plausible and sub 300 seats labor spreads look well priced.
Be interesting to see if IOS analysis is repeated.
The CR numbers in H&K give lab 125 maj. Why the lib dem excitement?
phil 20% is a stupidly high figure. There is no way that would ever happen.
21. Mental masturbation, methinks!
My nerve has run out and I’m going to get rid of one of my bets on Tories to get over 206 seats. All the momentum seems to be going the other way ans someone predicted authoritatively that the turn out was going to be significantly up. This seems likely. The campaign is less bland. Last time everyone knew the result and were OK with it. This time people are not so content so are likely to want to make a statement one way or the other.
Phil@21::You missed an option.What if nobody votes Labour???Dream on
22. Funny, I adjusted them appropriately and H&K gave Labour a majority of 134.
I still think that LDs will gain mainly from Labour and pick off some very long shots. I’m now short Labour seats…
Post at http://ukdebate.conforums3.com while vote-2005 is down.
Although I think this is the fairest interpretation of the Lib Dem vote that I have seen, I think it underestimated the tories and flatters Labour by about 2.5%.
Post at http://ukdebate.conforums3.com while vote-2005 is down.
I also am very doubtful about turnout. This campaign has been very dirty. It must be higher than last time but not much.
127. even funnier, I just got 140 with 39 31 23 and balancing on others.
Sky showing
ICM
Lab 39
Con 31
LD 22
YouGov
Lab 36
Con 33
LD 23
Very little movement
can we now get weather forcasts for thursday, surly this will effect the result. Can anyone find a good report
33.
Thursday
Scattered Clouds. High: 13° C Wind WNW 10 km/h
33-34. A good turnout needs bad or good weather?
Yes re. weather. There will be a cool north-westerly flow with showers. Temps not very high - struggling in the north.
I do know about weather and have been studying the model runs. I’ll update this as we go.
It will be first cool spring election since May 03rd 1979 …
34. 20% chance of rain.
http://www.wunderground.com/global/stations/03772.html
I’m not sure weather makes as much difference as it used to. I think it originated when Labour were working class and had to use the bus and Tories were middle class and had cars. So if it rained Labour supporters were unwilling to get soaked at the bus stop. But this was long ago!
re 38 - now Labour supporters drive while Tories and LDs go on their bikes
Any more polls due tomorrow Mike?
If they’re not on their allotments picking their organic cabbages
Re. 39, the Tories and LDs are obviously following Lord Tebbit’s advice..
Re 40 - The BPIX survey in the Mail on Sunday should be out and there might be a Mori poll in the Observer. In recent weeks the full BPIX figures have not been available online overnight and I’ve had to go and buy the bl**dy paper - which makes me feel a bit sore.
MORI
Lab 36
Con 33
LD 22
Observer/Sunday Mirror tomorrow
http://www.mori.com/election2005/index.shtml
44 certain to vote figures
For info (subject to all the usual caveats about uniform swings, tactical voting, differential turnout etc) putting an average of the three polls (38%; 31.6%; 22.6%) into the Hill & Knowlton election predictor, then I get the following:
Labour majority: 130
Labour 338 seats (-15) (losing 6 to LDs, 7 to Con, 2 to SNP)
Conservative 159 (-6) (losing 13 to LDs; gaining 6 from Lab
Lib Dem 70 (+19)
We had all these polls and we now know less than before. :/)
Some polls with Lab lead increased (CR and ICM), some with Lab lead reduced (yougov) and MORI with Lab lead up in the certain to vote and down between all respondents.
21 & 25.You are not going to get anywhere near this level of tactical voting. The Conservative likely outcomes lies in a range of 190-250 seats. The raw polling data is pretty close BUT the inbuilt advantage that Labour retains & the bleed of Lab to Lib Dem support will hurt the Tories in Lib/Con marginals.The Party will do best in straight Lab/Con fights. Regardless of what the polls say there is a perceptible swing across the country to the Conservatives & the Lib Dems. There is a lack of passion among Labour voters which is spooking Labour HQ - hence the scare campaign re voting Lib Dem. The gap between Lab & Con voters in terms of determination to vote remains pretty much the same as it did at the outset of the campaign.After a further day of canvassing & chatting to people across the country on the phone I retain the view that the likely Tory outturn is 220-230 seats.Labour returned with an overall majority of around 40.What is spooking Labour High Command is not the prospect of losing BUT of losing their large majority including a lot of Blairites.
well i think what we know now is that MH’s gamble did not pay off…at all.
Are you thinking what I am thinking: It is fun watching the responses to the polls, supporters of all 3 parties interpret them in their own sweet way. All we can gather is most probably that Labour will win on May 5th if the polls are right.
32. The more I see of youGov, the more I know about the voting intentions of their 40,000 pool of e-volunteers. How representative of the voting population the pool is, is anyone’s guess. Copmparing to the other polls, it seems to be biased 3% from lab to con. One would imagine there must be some bias due to the pool qualification. And fiddling with the pool, of course, defeats the object. Must be pure fluke they get it right.
49. I am not sure that the gamble had any impact at all either way. The only thing I would observe is that last weekend there was a perceptible firming in Labour support that has not advanced this weekend. This weekend there has been a noticeable firming of Tory support on the ground. The negative fireworks for both main parties of the last week seems to have been neutral/mildly negative for Labour, firmed up the Tory leaning vote BUT may have pushed some undecideds into the hands of the Lib Dem camp.
51. John - How representative are the phone pollsters? They need to make maybe six call for each interview and the majority of people they get through to refuse to take part. When you vote you do it in secret - unlike a phone survey where interviewees might wish to say what they think will please the interviewer.
The result is a generation of Labour over-statement.
That’s why I’m betting big on at this election against what the phone pollsters are reporting.
50. I am inclined to agree with you.
The average of the final Sunday’s 3 polls in 2001 was:
Lab 47.7%
Con 30.3%
LD 16%
This compares to the average of tomorrow’s 4 polls which is:
Lab 37.5% (-10.2%)
Con 32% (+1.7%)
LD 22.5% (+6.5%)
Sky reporting a leak to the Sunday Times of a document showing that Blair was pushing for regime change well before he says - mid 2002 I think.
Anyone got the details?
53, Mike - re the phone poll bias. It appears to some that the Tory campaign has been disproportionately focused on the C1 C2 voters rather than the B’s.Assuming this bias has been successful is it likely to be picked up & correctly interpreted by a phone poll?
Aside from Betfair’s embryonic market, does anyone know any odds on Cambridge? Id fancy a small bet on the lib dems - they must be failry long surely?
53. Mike - all I am saying is that YouGov are stuck with the pool, for better or worse. At least the other polsters can, at least in princple, talk to anybody, including the YouGov pool! To try and determine the parameters of the voting population you must sample from that population, there is no way round it. Look at it this way -if you decided to make your sample size 40,000, to take any sample that consisted entirely of internet users, let alone voluteers, would be, statistically, a crazy thing to do.
What was the average error of the polls last time?
No doorstep views today as we had a six-hour tour with an open-top bus - a traditional Broxtowe Labour thing that I introduced in 1997. Halt at shopping centres, disgorge clouds of leafleters, go round the block, pick up leafleters, drive on to the next centre, loudhailing as we go. Generally friendly/neutral reception - well, nobody mooned us as happened in 2001!
If we compare the current polls with each other instead of their previous polls, the pattern does seem very consistent:
“Certain to vote phone poll” or “internet poll”: Labour lead 3%.
“Phone poll weighted by voting likelihood”: Labour lead 6-8%.
Note that Mori and YouGov are I think both from Thursday/Friday.
In both cases, LibDems around 22-23%. Note that this pattern differs from the past, when the thing about YouGov compared with “certain to vote phone polls” was that it put LibDems higher and Labour lower. It now shows Con higher and Labour lower. But the difference is a lot smaller than it was.
I’ll venture a delphic prediction. I think that Labour’s lead in seats where the campaign has been lively enough to suggest marginality will be consistent with a 6-8% overall lead, i.e. an average 2-3% swing to Tories. I think the Labour lead will be a bit lower in other seats, but that this won’t make much if any difference in seat terms. I won’t guess about the LibDems - suspect the pattern will vary a great deal, but the prediction by Neil L at 46 looks plausible.
Report from a contact in Eastbourne: the streets are “completely awash” with Tory and LibDem posters!
60. Here’s all 2001 polls:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/english/opinion_polls/newsid_1218000/1218579.stm
59 John. I have stated many times my reservations about the panel aspect of YouGov and the massive weighting - 56% of all those in their surveys - that they give to those who voted Labour in 2001. But until now they have performed much better than the interview-based pollsters. Let’s see what happens on Thursday.
John is right. BUT the problem is that each technique has its failings - and its impossible to get a properly representative sample. There will always be an error. The thing which is odd is that this error rather than being random always seem to overestimate Labour!
Re. 43, Mike, if you lived in Leek, I’d swap you my Mail on Sunday for whatever paper you take. Now that would be Lib-Lab co-operation! (just like my branch having its Christmas Pub Quiz in the old Liberal Club).
Ref 53.Mike believes that the phone pollsters have got it wrong.Is this the same Mike Smithson that admitted to cheating the YouGov poll by telling them that his past vote was Labour and that he read the Sun and not the Independant.
I think that on this basis we should discount the Internet polls.
61. “I think that Labour’s lead in seats where the campaign has been lively enough to suggest marginality will be consistent with a 6-8% overall lead, i.e. an average 2-3% swing to Tories.”
In 2001 the polls were given something like a 14% lead, then the real results was a 9% lead. The theory is that lab voters in safe seats stayed at home, while they voted in marginals. So the lead in marginals was consistent with the 14% overall lead. if now the lead in marginals is consistent with a 7-8% lead, the swing to the toris is bigger than 2-3%
It has been very quiet here on the Fylde coast, more posters up in the Blackpool North seat than South, the Fylde seat (Michel Jacks) is very safe Tory, but I thought it was fairly marginal here, but obviously not, I say that as up to 97 the whole coast was Tory and safe with it
66. Ray, people could lie to phone pollsters too: nobody stops people to tell them they voted Labour,while in reality they voted Libdems.
Ref69 Of course they can lie to all pollsters,but I think that the Internet model gives people a better chance to think about their strategy,rather than reponding on the spur of the moment which happens when you are called on the telephone.
Edinburgh South was increadibly busy today. Tories had three street stalls two in safely Tory areas (Fairmilehead & South Morningside) and one in a Lib Dem area (North Morningside), Labour had a stall as well, but no sign of the LD’s. Hundreds of posters as well.
Ray 66 - all polls are imperfect. For all the defects - and what I did with YouGov was publicised on the site and by Nick Cohen in the Observer - the internet pollster’s record is way ahead of the phone firms on UK elections since 2001.
Last June the only phone pollsters doing the Euro election did not even get any of the first four parties in the right order.
Maybe they will make amends on May 5 - I’m betting big money that they won’t.
Is there any info from 97 and 92 on the polls?
63, 64. sorry, but you must sample with some finite probability that you could include any member of the population that you wish parameterise. There are many millions of people of all shapes and sizes, on the end of a telephone. There are a specific 40000 in the pool (from what you said, they do fiddle further with this, and make it even more specific). If they get it right I will remain unimpressed.
73. Look at the links on this site.
RE 71: Selby seemed to be full of tories today too, i saw about three cars driving around with tory posters plastered over the windows (not sure how safe that is!) and lots of teams of young people canvassing.When i came out of Somerfield there were a couple of tories posting stacks and stacks of mail into the letterbox opposite Kwik Save. I am guessing they are probably from the university. When i came out of Somerfield there were a couple of tories posting stacks and stacks of mail into the letterbox opposite Kwik Save. I am guessing they are probably from the university. I also followed one of the same cars heading out towards the york villages (around Church Fenton) with 5 people in, before i turned off. Interestingly the song blasting out at high volume from the car was “You Won’t Forget About Me” by Danni Minogue. Interesting choice!!! Also saw one car with an upside down labour poster in the back window.
It’s worth mentioning that if MORI is a phone poll it is showing quite a move away from Labour from their last phone poll. Agaist this though is the fact that it was taken on Thursday Friday in the middle of Labours crisis so is probably a little overstated. If Nick and Nick are right about 130 Labour victory though I’ll be pleased I’ll also be poor! Why can’t our Tory canvassers give us some readings on the ground before it’s too late?
53. I have done a lot of canvasing over the years both on the doorstep and by phone and I believe that phone is more accurate. The phone is much more annonymous and also less intrusive. I believe that people are less likely to say what you want to hear when it is not face to face. I am dubious about YouGov, as many of us know here it is easy to sign up and give answers we think they want to hear to the demographic questions . Perhaps a few political anoraks dont make much odds but 100s of students signing up to get a £1 a time answering questions can certainly skew the results.
But 74 - how many of these millions have phone numbers which fit with the pollsters automated random dial machines?
How many always have the answerphone on?
How many use call-screening and do not accept unidentified phone calls?
Are those at home and available to answer representative of the population as a whole?
How do we know that the 50+% who refuse to take part have the same political views as those who do?
72::Mike I agree that it cannot be an exact science,I think that the Euro election turnout may have caused the problem.
I just have to believe that these are serious Companies.Therefore they must be working continuously to improve their technique.
The answer to that Mike is that in the US election most of the polls were within 2% either way
63, 64. sorry, but you must sample with some finite probability that you could include any member of the population that you wish parameterise. There are many millions of people of all shapes and sizes, on the end of a telephone. There are a specific 40000 in the pool (from what you said, they do fiddle further with this, and make it even more specific). If they get it right I will remain unimpressed.
79. Mike intresting enough I find it is unusual for people to refuse to answer questions on the phone. I always say who I am calling on behalf of and ask them if they mind answering a few questions. Maybe people have a higher opinion of political parties than pollsters ( I doubt it some how)
79 I cannot see how any poll of 2000 people out of an electorate of 40,000,000, ie 1 in 20,000 voters (ie about 2 people per constituency of those who actually vote) can hope to get it right
Here’s my view from inside the tent. I think the Tories will win a reasonable number of white working class votes on the back of their nudge nudge wink wink immigration campaign and that is about it as far as switchers go. there is no mood in the country for howard to become PM…quite the opposite. his private polling figs on whether he’d make the best PM are terrible - less than 1 in 4 voters. i think the lib vote is unpredictable, but i think it will tail off the closer we get to polling day - still enough for them to win seats off the tories - and maybe two or three from labour. i think the tories will pick up a few seats, because their vote is more solid, but they are miles away from winning 40 per cent of the vote in my view. overall, i’d stick with what i said four weeks ago - labour majority between 60 and 80, assuming a turnout of around 60 per cent. i think the country would like to see labour returned with a reduced majority and the country generally gets what it wants.
Re 76 - Sarah their was a Scottish Tory euro-election candidate who got in a bit of trouble for putting Tory stickers on his cars. His car was white and the stickers were blue and yellow. The police flagged him down on the suspision that he was trying to impersonate a police car!
83, Well that’s meant to be the science, they did not do too bad and what would we do with out them?
RE 85: Thats v amusing. They also had helium balloons on string coming out of one of the back windows which promptly snapped and floated away when they turned a corner!
79. It may be small, but there is a finite probability that any member of the voting population is at the end of any telephone when it rings. There is zero probability that 20,000,000-40000 are in the pool.
Re 84 - I agree about 100% with that. I’ve said before that we are performing better in places like West Yorkshire than in other parts of the country. In these areas the crime and immigration policies play well. Unfortunately none of the pollsters have carried out a ‘mega-poll’ which might have shown an accurate regional break-down. For instance, if the Lib Dems are well up in the urban North of England they could substantially increase their vote without reaping the benefit in terms of seats.
I know Brigg and Goole isnt a big seat, but there a pretty tough battle on at the minute. Been swamped with Tory letters. Will be close, hopeful of a tory gain here.
Re: 55, If you do the same adjustments on those averages, as you would have had to, to get the correct reult you get L 30, C 34, LD 25 approx, which according to one seat calculator gives a hung parliament with Labour on most seats.
As said in 50 and 54, you can take what you like from these polls, it all depends on if they are right. If in attempting to correct for understatement of Tories and over of Labour some are suddenly deciding Labour are shyer than Tories, they could be further out. We can only wait and see.
Re: 56, feign surprise. I should have stuck my neck out and predicted that it would have been either in the Indy or Times. Todays Indie has labour high command blaming the Conservatives for the leak.
As for phone polsters, you have the problem of not only making the polster happy, but whoever else is in the same room as you. They are all prone to error, one way or another. You would normally expect that to be random (which is fine) but in voting polls it is all one way.
Benedict - people mind their minds up about the war ages ago - and trust too. nothing, short of a memo showing tony blair was shagging george bush will move public opinion. most people are not THAT interested in politics or the war. Most people are actually sick of hearing about it.
Jaz - in what way does swamping anywhere with letters make a penny’s worth of difference in any election?
This time in 97 we had some v.interesting marginal polls, indeed one of which lead to Michael Portillo’s defeat in Enfield Southgate. Will any of the papers (and usually only the sunday’s are interested in this) have commissioned any polls on marginal seats. Would be v.interesting to know what the position is in the LD decapitation targets, Sedgefield and Bethnal Green and Bow.
Not that it’ll make in difference but did the Sunday Times back the Tories last time and did the IoS back the Liberals, or have they changed allegiance this time round?
Jaz - Think Brigg and Goole would need too big a swing. But Shipley, Calder Valley and Elmet look good. Really have to start winning back some of these sub-urban seats.
95 - Andrew the only one’s so far are by NOP in welsh constituencies. Showed Plaid ahead in Ynys Mon and Labour ahead (with a decent swing to the Tories) in Cardiff North.
93. I reckon most people made their minds up about the war, before the war.
Re: 93, Most have yes, but I see it adding a bit more to the Lab to LD swing, and the protest vote. This is a game where one thing might shift a few voters, and something else will shift a few others etc. I did say when I said the next big leak would be this that it would have limited effect, but it will have some.
RE: 96, that is No 68 on the Conservative hut list according to the BBC, they may not get it, but it will be closer than it was last time.
99, What leak is this?
91. I was in Brigg and Goole last Saturday. Hope Bean wins even though I did not get the chance to meet him. Seems to be a good org of letters and leaflets based in the Goole Con Club.
Had another good week in Lincoln too.
Today we hired a bus to tour and deliver the city by covering deliveries to Bracebridge Ward from 10.00am to 11.30am, Moorland from 11.30am to 1.00pm and after a superb lunch at the home of Chris Heaton Harris and our regular Saturday stroll through the High Street we went off to deliver in Hartsholme from 2.30pm to 4.00pm and Birchwood from 4.30pm to 6.00pm.
Friday was a long, long day though!
Meeting the Labour candidate over breakfast is not the ideal start to the day, however in front of an audience of 70 plus business men and women of Lincoln Karl McCartney gave a pretty good account of how the Conservative party has always been the party of business, and anyone’s own personal experiences of trying to run a successful small business, whilst suffering from the over-regulation and lack of understanding that this Labour government have given us for the last 8 years.
The audience warmed to the Conservative policies on crime prevention and the removal of political correctness – getting people to warm to political commentary and even receive a round of applause for a political statement at such an early hour was an achievement in itself. It soon became obvious that Lincoln’s Labour candidate, like so many of her party and the government’s cabinet, have little or no experience or understanding of running a small business. Gillian Merron’s claim to be a supporter of businesses in Lincoln city has been shown to be a fallacy when one considers that all her election literature has been printed in both Croydon, south of London, and Leicester.
The day continued with a big team out in Bracebridge Heath canvassing. This team included the two MEP’s Chris Heaton-Harris and Roger Helmer plus a few of their helpers. We also visited the Air Ambulance, which was both interesting and informative for myself and the two MEPs. Following some more canvassing in the afternoon in Bracebridge Heath, with some very good results, the team was split in two with one team going back on the ‘outs’ in Bracebridge Heath and the other hitting our best bits in Glebe Park.
This evening saw the second debate of the day at the Duke William with the NUT. Although approached with trepidation, KM once again answered all questions succinctly and at times with humour to ensure our supporters present were enthused and those not of the Conservative persuasion had food for thought. Once again the Labour candidate waffled inanely in many of her answers and was ably assisted by the Lib Dem candidate who seems to be showing her true colours as the campaign wears on.
Re 97/95 - NOP showed a swing of 4% to the Conservatives. If that was national would lead to Tory gains in Monmouth, Clwyd West and nearly in Preseli.
Can someone explain why Oliver Letwin is never to be seen? I know his seat is in danger but surely he’ll be seen by more of his voters on a national stage than by knocking on doors?
For those interested in newspaper endorsements last time look at this:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election2001/story/0,9029,502869,00.html
What is shocking is that the Tories had no clear endorsements. The Telegraph one was vote Tory if you are a Tory, the Mail no labour landslide. The Sunday Times backed labour.
So in newspaper terms, the Tories have made big gains since 4 years ago (clear endorsements from Daily Mail, Telegraph, Express and Speccie of course), though compared to 97 are still behind (no Times or Economist endorsement). Only interesting one is the Sunday Times which has been v.critical of new labour and is more right wing than the daily.
RE 100, the one I said was likely, see 56, I have no way of confirming this myself though. Looks like tony first got advice after the ranch visit in 2002, according to UNCONFIRMED reports. We will see.
103 Letwin is a good constituency MP is probably the reason why. He is a thoroughly decent man, and I sincerely hope he keeps that ghastly liberal at bay.
105. More warballs.
107 He has been at it all day ramping this or that he never gives up, like he has all inside info
The endorment from the Sunday Times does seem like a bit of a sop from Rupert Murdoch. Easily the least influential of the News International papers.
I assume Letwin isn’t on TV much because his constituency is marginal and he’s (allthough very nice and very clever) a very weak shadow chancellor. In the two years that MH stays on for its (shadow Chancellor) going to be a very important role to fill.
106. He was on tv yesterday, submerged under dorset blue rinses. Though I have as little time for him as any of the tories, I hope he beats that particular lib dem.
107 If true, it proves incontrovertibly that Blair misled parliament, the ‘l’ word cannot fail to stick.
108 - I quoted Sky News re: the Sunday Times.
Actually the Sunday Times is a very significant endorsement as it is the only broadsheet to get over 2 million readers. All the Dailies even the Telegraph get less than a million. However the daily Times endorsement gets much more news coverage.
111. More Howard says “liar” the more the lab vote converges firmly on 40% and the tory vote on 30%. If the lib dems wish to go backwards, they can start using the word.
Do you have a link to the endorsement?
Mori Observer/Sun Mirror.
Lab 36; Cons 33; Lib Dem 22; others 9.
Cf last one 10 April Labour down 4; Cons unchanged; Lib Dems up 3.
Never realised it had such a big readership. Supose thats pretty good then. Just a shame they employ Portillo!
111.Give up.The public have already factored in that TB engineered the situation.Everyone has decided their position on TB,nothing more will change.BTW I posted this view on Wednesday evening when the news broke.Marcus Wood called me an idiot.I rest my case
116 You are about 2 hours behind. I thought you were usually ahead of the game.
Roger - Don’t think their is a link yet. It was reported on the BBC website. Apart from Sunday Times and IoS there weren’t any surprises.
re 119. Sorry missed the above. Bit late logging on tonight.
See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4502089.stm
For news on polls and the Sunday endorsements.
114 & 118 - Howard and Kennedy won’t need to run with it, the further drip drip of the story unravelling will send labour voters to the lib dems or keep them in their armchairs.
The Observer story will also do Blair no favours.
BTW Sunday Times official circulation only 1.4 million but over 2 million will read it (significant number of couples). For those interested in the potential significance of endorsements as regards the levels of readership see this:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,1782,00.html
123. I took my position on the war, before the war! So did you. Why do you imagine anyone else is different?
125 - Not that people’s positions have changed, just that they had persuaded themselves not to care. When people are reminded of their previous position they may revert. Not saying that war supporters will switch but those who may have drifted back to labour are more likely to drift away again.
126, and your evidence is?
After the way Blair looked on QT I wonder if he had to take today off campaigning because of his recurring heart trouble …
126. Too subtle for me, mate.
127 - as with evryone it’s awaiting us on Thursday 5th May.
Regarding people persuading themselves not to care, you must have also read the many posts (here and elsewhere) from people saying as such.
If voters have not shifted over the last 3 days over the Iraq issue they are not going to shift as result of this S Times story. The reality is most people do not actually care.
Max at 71 - the Lib Dems were where they usually are - meeting voters on their doorsteps.
Only Lab and Cons do streetstalls/bustrips etc - I’ve never worked out why - you hav eno guarantee that the people you are talking to are votiers in the division you’re concerned with and it takes a lot of people to make an impact - what with the regular loonies most shopping centres have - like the trots, animal barmies or moonies.
On the current polls the Tories have no chance in Edinburgh South or D,C,T or Angus.
Maybe you’re recent activity on here is a bit like John Robertson who said today ‘there’s everything to play for’ despite being 10 points behind Hibs (who have the UEFA cup spot) with three games to play.
Bravado doesn’t win elections (or indeed football trophies).
Enjoy your time at Seaton Sands while the Hibs are going to Europe!
According to Sky the Observer was supporting the Lib Dems and as a result have a lead story from a General calling Tony Blair a war criminal. This was apparently intended to boost Lib Dem chances.
46 The average I get of the four latest polls is
L 37.5 C 32 LD 22.5
For this HK gives L382 C 163 LD 71
On Baxter L385 C173 LD 58
The last three (MORI, ICM YouGov) average is L 37 C 32.3 LD 22.3
This gives on HK L 375 C173 LD68
On Baxter L 378 C181 LD 57
Re: 108, I am not trying to ramp anything. I stick by my vague prediction that this election will result in anything from a labour majority of 60 to a Conservative one of less than 25. (That is about as broad as you can get.)
Obviosly I would put far better odds on a Labour overall majority, but a hung parliament is a real prospect, a conservative majority an outside bet.
All the information I have is in the public domain, but I did predict that the info about when the decision to go to war would come out on Sunday, and regret not picking the newspaper publicly (because I had it down to two, and it was my favorite of the two).
I agree that it won’t help the Conservatives much on its own, but it will help the Lib Dems. What it will do however is put the Labour election machine on the back foot, obscure their agenda, and leave both Lib Dems and Conservatives, who have moved on on this issue to persue their own agenda’s. So all the punters are going toe hear about labour is broadly negative, if they have any brains at all, the other parties will move on, and leave them to present their own policies to an own goal. There is of course the possibilty that some stratigist at either the Conservatives or Lib Dems feel they need to keep it going, which will then also obscure their own message.
Broadly speaking, it is all about who is controling the agenda. The conservatives did well early, then lagged. Iraq, regardless of how much traction it actually gets in the booths (And the more it is mentioned the better it will do) does server to obscure the labour message.
I will post here a less wide prediction before 6 PM on May the 5th, but I do warn anyone who is reading my ramblings, that these are my own divinings, and do not place your own money on them.
(So for the pundits, thats an overall change from May the 6th to after the polls close, to as close to 6PM as I can make it, but it doesnt matter anyway, as my views come with a health warning)
124. I found it particularly interesting that the Observer decided to swing behind Labour in the end after potentially flirting with the LDs. Does this mean that the Guardian will also go for the Toynbee “nose pegs on and vote Blair” approach? If so, how significant is this endorsement in preventing Lab to LD swings?
RE: 133, i am pleased to see journalist everywhere are living down to my expectations. The AG’s originals advice is clear, whilst there are arguments on both sides, he plumped for it being legal, and no one has the balls to sue, (unless the next Government is Lib Dem) but this will as I have said only get limited traction, drawing mostly Labour to Lib Dem. (Though I will clarify that point before 6pm on May 6th). I can be happy he is called a liar, but war criminal? silly.
Re: 134, you are assuming the polls are accurate, when as far as I can tell they are several points out from looking at historical evidence. The hope is they have corrected, I personally have no confidence in there methods to correct which have been mentioned here.
60 Roger The polls published by all companies and listed by MORI archive (on their site http://www.mori.com/polls/trends/voting-allpub-trends.shtml ) in the last five days of the campaigns over estimated (+) or underestimated (-)
LibDems thus:
1992 +1.01 1997 -1.31 2001 -1.94
Conservatives thus:
1992 -5.26 1997 -1.51 2001 -2.31
Labour thus:
1992 +4.22 1997 +3.71 2001 +4.57
The MORI site is by far the easiest reference for all company’s polls 1992 to 2005.
Re: 138, from my point of view it makes the election less fluid and less interesting. I am not sure how much effect it will end up having though.
136. The Guardian backing Labour is a bit of a ‘dog bites man’ story. Effect: zero.
And surely at odds with a majority of their readership?
Re: 137 - I disagree.
He plumped for it being legal if and only if there was clear objective evidence of non-compliance. Anything less, and the determination of non-compliance was for the Security Council to make. Even given clear objective evidence, he said he could not be sure that if prosecutions were brought the courts would agree with him. He also said that war for the purpose of regime change was illegal under any circumstances.
Between the 7th and 17th, Blair gave him confirmation that in his view there was objective evidence of non-compliance, hence the firmer view that was set before Parliament.
That’s in contradiction to what we now know about the evidence, thus in my view Blair misled the AG, either deliberately or through self-deception. It is absolutely clear on the face of it that given the hedges and uncertainties in the JIC reports, it was not clear and objective, and thus the determination of non-compliance was for the Security Council to make.
Blair then misled Parliament the same way, producing a dossier based on unashamed advocacy rather than accurate reportage. He further failed to make it clear to Parliament that war for the sake of regime change was always illegal - this was possibly not actively misleading, but less than was his duty to Parliament and the country.
Given that Blix was in on the ground and reporting increasing compliance, there were no grounds for war other than regime change, thus the war was illegal.
I don’t expect this to make any difference: people have already made their minds up. However, the basic outline is that Blair only saw what he wanted to see in the intelligence, and reported only what he saw to the AG and Parliament, thus misleading both through omission. Whether this was knowing or not is irrelevant - all that changes is whether he’s a liar or an incompetent, and in either case he’s not fit to govern.
Dan - you clearly don’t have a clue about DC&T. Still standing by your prediction tht the Tories could finish third in this constituency?
136: I don’t think anyone should be surprised that the Observer has swung in behind Lab. It was supportive of the war and the columnists on the whole are very pro New Labour, especially Rawnsley and Aaronovitch. The Guardian took a more progressive stance than the Observer over the last parliament.
I wonder whether more Iraq news will have any negative effect on Lib Dem votes? They have taken the moral highground for about as long as it’s possible. And one thing voters get bored with quickly is politicians being too sanctimonious. And no one does sanctimony like a Lib Dem.
145 - I don’t think so. Charlie K played a blinder on this this week (one of the few he has played). By raising the issue then letting MH and TB beat each other over the head with it, he’s come out of it very well in my view.
RE: 142, you make a good symantic argument against mine, and we will have to agree to differ, in any case we agree on the fundamentals, TB is not fit to govern. the press look more like they are playing it you way than mine. Ultimatley on the war it moves Lab to Lib Dem, on the question of trust it moves bit Lab to Con and Lib Dem.
It is my view that trust has bigger traction than Iraq, hence overall benefitting the Conservatives.
I see so many issues having differing and sometimes contradictory traction that I would not wish to stake a reputation on it. That said I will eneter the competition.
definiteness ribbons ignition safeguarded!scorns blues woody
cheap hotels…
glazer zest colleague exhibitors assemblage embassy suites http://embassy-suites.orringtonhotel.com/ …
Life Insurence…
Dubhe tailoring asylum tester,Online Life Insurance [url=http://www.ononlinelifeinsurance.com/#]Online Life Insurance[/url] http://www.ononlinelifeinsurance.com/# …
m791z…
lo421l…