What’s a good outcome for the Lib Dems on Thursday?
May 1st, 2007
Will Ming’s party consolidate its second place position?
With the big battle going on in Scotland and the attention on the Labour leadership the Lib Dems have been struggling, even more than usual, to get the attention of the media in the run-up to Thursday.
That’s nothing new and is not necessarily a problem because local elections, where you can put a huge amount of resource in to key ward contests, suit their style of campaigning. Unlike Labour, which is very much affected by the national headlines, Ming’s party is fairly immune as we saw with the Dunfermline by election last year. It’s what’s being pushed through letter boxes and said on the doorstep that matters and the party can be a powerful force.
At some stage, though, the credibility of the Lib Dems’ “It’s Neck and Neck” eve of poll leaflets are going to be undermined. Don’t voters remember that this was said to them the year before and before and before…?
Sean Fear in his predictions on the site ten days ago suggested that the Lib Dems would come out with about the same number of councillors that they have at the moment. That would be on a par with their performance last year and my guess is that that would be a disappointment.
Last week the Lib Dems had a great boost in the polls when all three firms that reported showed increases in their national share.
A second measure, as well as seat losses and gains, will be the extrapolations of the national vote share. A solid second place would position the party well for the future. Last year they got 27% in the BBC estimate which was one point ahead of Labour.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
“At some stage, though, the credibility of the Lib Dems’ “It’s Neck and Neck” eve of poll leaflets are going to be undermined. Don’t voters remember that this was said to them the year before and before and before…?”
For evidence of the folly of the grossly dishonest pre-election tactics of the Liberal Democrats, look no further than Moray. Their mind-bogglingly disgraceful behaviour at last year’s by-election is going to get its comeuppance at the Polling Stations in two days time. Moray is going to be one of the very first results called (about 2am?), so if the Lib Dems are in for a bad night that will be one of the first signs.
Here is what opinion poll guru - and well-known Liberal Democrat sympathiser - Professor John Curtice has to say about Nicol Stephen, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, in today’s Scotsman:
“He has run a poor campaign. The trouble with Nicol Stephen is that, you ask him for his vision and he tells you he wants an hour of PE for every kid every day (and even that is not strictly true, it includes playtime and other things). He cannot think in generalities.
His inability to set out what liberal democracy is all about, or to define his party in terms of issues, has been astounding.”
Who needs enemies when you have friends like that?
For the Record, here is how the strongly pro-Union Scotsman’s “panel of experts” rated the performances of the 4 party leaders at the final BBC Leaders Debate last night, at the University of Aberdeen:
1. Alex Salmond:
-debate performance: 7/10
-body language: 6/10
-overall campaign performance: 9/10
2. Annabel Goldie:
-debate performance: 8/10
-body language: 6/10
-overall campaign performance: 6/10
3. Jack McConnell:
-debate performance: 6/10
-body language: 4/10
-overall campaign performance: 6/10
4. Nicol Stephen:
-debate performance: 5/10
-body language: 4/10
-overall campaign performance: 5/10
The Lib Dems are in big trouble if their leader trails in behind the bunny-caught-in-headlights performance of the outgoing First Minister.
ni
Er… whoops, my finger slipped
I notice that the scrolling box on the top right of the screen says that Alex Salmond is 2/9 favourite (i.e. a “probability” of 81%) to be first minister of Scotland. How can this be so, when he is not likely even to be an MSP?
3. JohnLooney
Crikey, not this nonsense again! John, we have been through this tall tale several times before here at pb.com, but you seem to have missed it.
Firstly, we simply do not know how the constituency result is going to go in Gordon, but from all the information available, Salmond is very definitely “in the running” to gain it from the Lib Dems. However, that choice is up to the electorate in Aberdeenshire, and we await their final decision with interest!
Secondly, if Mr Salmond is unsuccessful in the Gordon constituency, he is the first person on the North East regional list. Now, even if the Scottish National Party gain both Aberdeen Central and Dundee West (as seems increasingly likely) - taking them to 6 seats in the region - the SNP still have a very good chance of winning the 6th, 7th or 8th spot on the regional list (ask ChrisA if he pops in today - he did a bunch of spreadsheet work on this question a few weeks ago).
Of course, it all depends on the SNP doing well in the 2nd list vote too, but they only need quite a modest swing to get a list MSP in the region, from the very low base of their poor 2003 performance. Given all the opinion poll evidence, the necessary swing on the North East regional vote looks eminently acheivable.
Can we stop the “Salmond won’t be an MSP” nonsense now? Because it just does not bear up to scrutiny.
4. Oh pardon me for asking. I do not regard “Salmond won’t be an MSP” as being “nonsense”, but as a realistic possibility. If the SNP does very well in the constituencies, it will not qualify for additional seats.
And if this is combined by unionist tactical voting in Gordon (i.e. the Lib Dem candidate getting lots of swing from labour and Conservative), then Salmond may well fail in both sections.
My point was (and is) that a probability of 81% seems to be very high for him to be an MSP, let alone First Minister; I would have guessed 50% or 60%.
And, if this subject has already been discussed at length on this website before, I have indeed “missed it”. Why? Because I don’t particularly like the layout of this website; it frequently frustrates me, it puts me off, and it makes it difficult to find things. Why do we have to have a system whereby there are hundreds of messages in each thread? It would be much better if it was a proper thread like on Digital Spy or Yahoo groups, where it is much easier to quote the relevant bits to which one is referring, and it is much easier to follow the flow of a conversation.
O/T France Update of the Ipsos daily poll
Sarkozy 53 (+0,5)
Royal 47 (-0,5)
as i thought, sarkozy goes up again thanks to a positive week-end.
i’m not sure if there will be an update tomorrow as today is a bank holiday in France
How can you not like this web site? It works.
Mikes leader sets a direction but doesn’t stop discussion.
I like it
6- Poll of polls update
average 52,5/47,5
(CSA, LH2 and TNS Sofres give 52, Ipsos, IFOP and BVA give 53)
5. JohnLooney - “If the SNP does very well in the constituencies, it will not qualify for additional seats.”
Nope John. That statement is quite simply untrue. Even if the SNP gain both Dundee West (pretty certain) and Aberdeen Central (quite likely), they only need about 34% (from memory, what was the exact %age ChrisA?) on the North East regional vote (the so-called “2nd” vote) to qualify for one additional list Member.
In 2003 - which was a very poor result for the SNP - they got 27.3% of that 2nd vote in the North East electoral region:
1 May 2003, North East regional list result:
1. SNP 27.3%
2. Lab 20.2%
3. LD 18.8%
4. Con 17.4%
5. Grn 5.2%
6. SSP 4.2%
7. Pensioners’s Party 2.3%
8. Fishing Party 2.3%
9. Socialist Labour Party 1.0%
10. UKIP 0.8%
11. Peoples Alliance 0.4%
12. Ind 0.4%
Now, given that the SNP only got 20.9% of the national share of the 2nd (list) vote in 2003; and they are currently scoring 31%-36% nationally in the list vote in recent British Polling Council pollsters surveys; it does not take an arithmetical genius to see that it is perfectly feasible, indeed highly likely, that the SNP can rise from 2003’s 27% to reach the necessary 34%. It is only a swing of 3.5%.
If you want to give Blair a kicking and you’re unenthused by Cameron-which seems to be the plat du jour -there really isn’t anywhere else to go! One of the stories of the night I suspect-Ming on the March! Libs to get between 28-30%
7. I have already explained why I don’t like (or, at least, I get frustrated with) this website. But since you have not bothered to read what I wrote, I will repeat myself:
On each thread, there are hundreds of messages.
Within each thread, there is not a user-friendly method of quoting a previous message and responding to it directly; therefore we have to refer to numbers, and we have to scroll up and down all the time to see what people are referring to.
Every day or so, a new thread appears. This means that all the flow of conversation suddenly gets cut off and people start chatting in the next thread instead.
This means that a conversation on one thread can be left unresolved, and people miss it because they have moved on to the next thread. I have found, on several occasions, that I make a comment on the end of one thread which never receives a reply.
The solution would be to have a continuous thread, with a proper replying mechanism, so that people can (a) see clearly what people are responding to; (b) not get cut off abruptly whenever a new thread appears.
9. And what if the SNP wins Aberdeen South? and/or AW&K?
4. and 9. Oh, and there is no e in Loony
I agree with Icarus. The layout’s really good. If you don’t like what’s on the thread you can meander as you want. And what can be simpler than following one thread a day?
13. There’s no capital ‘L’ in loony either
We regulars like the site as is thanks
5. JohnLooney - “unionist tactical voting in Gordon”
I hate to point this out John, but that old chestnut has also been trotted out with regularity here at pb.com over the past few weeks!!
The plain fact is that anti-Lib-Lab Executive tactical voting by the significant chunk of Tory voters (and disillusioned Labour and LD voters) is likely to more than cancel out any Lab and Con Unionist tactical voting to prop up the flailing Nora Radcliffe. Those who live outwith Scotland should not underestimate the profound level of dismay at the last 8 years of Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition government failure.
The Tory and Labour vote is undoubtedly going to get very badly squeezed indeed in Gordon, but who will benefit most from that - Salmond or Radcliffe - will only become evident in the wee small hours of Friday morning:
Gordon is estimated to be declaring about 5am:
http://www.election.press.net/ScotWalesDecs.html
15. Oh yes there bl–dy well is a capital L in “Loony”, and woebetide anybody who dares to suggest otherwise.
I would strongly advise you not to continue insulting me by such ludicrous and offensive comments in future, unless you want me to track you down ruthlessly and squirt custard into your ears.
14. What could be simpler would be to have one continuous thread. It would still be possible to have the daily articles, but without cutting off the thread abruptly each time. And what could be simpler would be to have a method of enabling us to quote each others’ messages. And what would be simpler would be not having to scroll up and down the screen half the time, trying to find the messages to which people have responded. And what could be simpler would be people reading what I wrote in the first place so that I don’t have to keep repeating what I wrote a few minutes earlier.
16. “We”? You mean “I”. Speak for yourself, but don’t presume to speak for all the others. I was speaking for myself and I didn’t assume that anybody else would automatically agree with me.
12. JohnLoony - ““And what if the SNP wins Aberdeen South? and/or AW&K”
That is an easy one John: if the Scottish National Party starts winning seats like Aberdeen South (Nº53 on their target list) and Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine (Nº54 on their target list) then Scotland will be taking her rightful seat in the United Nations before Christmas
… and residents of the Plymouth area will be getting used to the unfamiliar concept of living in the middle of a vast nuclear weapons silo:
“Revealed: the MOD plan to move Trident”
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=577262007
Surely if the SNP won (largely on the back of Salmond) and he didn’t get elected then the SNP would call an immediate by-election to get him in?
and residents of the Plymouth area will be getting used to the unfamiliar concept of living in the middle of a vast nuclear weapons silo:
Doubt it would bother them that much. It’s not quite the same as having a nuclear power station on your doorstep.
20. At this rate, the SNP might be winning Plymouth Devonport as well by 2009…
23.
… or western Devon may be applying to become part of a Free Greater Cornwall by voting Mebyon Kernow
Stuart, I notice you are even more upbeat than usual about the SNP’s chances this morning.
“the SNP can rise from 2003’s 27% to reach the necessary 34%. It is only a swing of 3.5%” - funny, I make it a 7% swing.
19 If I meant I, I’d have said so. WE. There is large agreement about satisfaction with PB as it is and your peevish ill-mannered demand for change to suit you was very jarring. In months of reading I’ve seen no posts from others asking for format change, single thread is simple and lucid.
25. SBS
“Swing” is probably the wrong concept on the regional list vote.
Whether “swing” is the right word or not, it’s still 7%
25 - of course, in a region where there is a four way split, it is difficult to talk about “swing” from one party to another. (Except for the SSP.)
It would indeed be a 3.5% swing if the other parties’ shares remained static, and the SNP went up by 7%. But that’s funny maths.
It may be that the strongest rise in SNP support will be where they are working from a lowish base. ie. not in NE Scotland. So that 10 - 15% rise in the polls (which may well be less come Thursday) could be only 6% in NE Scotland.
It’s not possible for other parties’ shares to stay static though, so it’s more than funny maths.
There was a suggestion in the Times yesterday that Labour may do better than expected because hundreds of thousands of Scots think the “regional vote” is used to express their second preference. Any comments?
Btw I predict vote share of 27% for the LDs and 80-100 losses, a very poor result for them.
Based on nothing more than my gut!
In the New Year competition I said the Lib Dems would lose heavily and I stick with that.
It would in my opinion be a miracle if they just stood still. They may vote well, mid twenties etc, but they are defending 2003 seats and I suspect will probable lose maybe even heavily to the Cons in the South and even maybe to Labour in places.
If I am right they will have a major problem at the weekend with the media. Notice that already BBC report “Senior Lib Dem figures are talking of major losses to the Conservatives”.
I am not a Conservative so I am not talking from a biased position.
The concentration on Scottish reports is hiding what may be happening in England. All the talk of the Cons not being in the North is more nonsense. Take Warrington Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield and Newcastle out of the picture and they stand up quite w ell. Fpor example Manchester Council is only one small part of the Greater Manchester conurbation and elsewhere in the huge area they have reasonable representation and indeed power in places.
There is an awful lot of conning and spinning going on. Cons have plenty of seats in Leeds for instance.
I am of the view Friday will be good for the Cons, reasonable for Labour.
29. SBS
Quite right! That very thought had occurred to me, and is very plausible, because there seems to be a lot of evidence now that the SNP are going to do really well in the (vital) Central Belt, but that inevitably means that they will get relatively modest swings in the north and south where they have done well over a long period.
But if you asked any SNP activist, they would much prefer a 15 point rise in the vast Greater Glasgow conurbation and only a 5 point rise in Aberdeen, rather than vice-versa, because there are absolutely tons of Labour seats to hoover up in west central Scotland, but only 2 in Aberdeen.
I am by no means saying that if Alex Salmond does not gain Gordon that he is somehow guaranteed a list place. But what I am definitely contending is that him winning a list place is not out-of-the-question, which is effectively what JohnLoony was saying.
30. alex
Well, yes it is, at least theoretically, cos lots of small parties could gather useless %ages of votes but leave Labour, Tories and LDs stranded on the same figures. But this is just getting a tad too theoretical…
30. It’s not possible for all the other parties’ shares to remain static if the SNP gain votes, but not all parties get seats anyway. It’s only the shares of the parties who are in contention for list seats that need concern us.
JohnL raises a good point and no matter how much Stuart (named after the House that brought us the Union, I notice), might try to disagree, he underlines John’s points in his own posts: we are talking probabilities.
“anti-Lib-Lab Executive tactical voting by the significant chunk of Tory voters (and disillusioned Labour and LD voters) is likely to more than cancel out any Lab and Con Unionist tactical voting”
“it is perfectly feasible, indeed highly likely, that the SNP can rise from 2003’s 27% to reach the necessary 34%”
This is a political betting site. The whole point about betting is that it is about assessing the likely outcomes to uncertain events. As you yourself say, there is no certainty in the events necessary for Salmond to be elected, never mind become First Minister. John’s original post was that the odds on Salmond look poor value. I agree.
If I felt the SNP were certain to be the largest party, but were doing less well in the NE, even I might be tempted to vote Salmond / SNP in Gordon / NE Scotland.
The idea of Nicola Sturgeon as First Minister is quite scary. I would have to back Salmond…
Predict:
Cons 41-42%, 600 + gains = first class result Cameron on way to no. 10, party performance hailed across the thinking media as breakthrough
LD 26-27%, 80-100 losses = very poor performance, “disappointing” used a lot, Rennard seen out of date, leadership mumblings start
Labour… 24-25%, loses to SNP in Scotland, holds up better than expected in Wales, disaster in England, 600 + losses, key councils fall to the Tories, activist base wiped out, demoralisation, determination to unite behind Gordon & hope for the best
38 - I predict Tories 41% - 650 gains. Good result, but as always, one or two very surprising reverses. (All parties have a few crap councils that deserve to get booted out whatever the national mood.) Media say “Cameron should be doing better…” but we knew they would.
LDs 27% - 100 gains - better in north than south. Patchy in the west. Media say “Very disappointing” But they would, wouldn’t they?
Labour 24% - 850 losses - dreadful night, tempered by better than expected results in Scotland and Wales.
SNP - 83% in Scotland. Immediate independence. Scotland to hold EU presidency within 1 year. Permanent seat on UN Security Council within 5 years. OPEC membership within 10. World domination will commence with invasion of Faeroe Islands in 2020.
I would happily exchange some LibDem gains for further Labour losses!
However, as a LD wouldn’t you say that gains in North and losses in West is a poor exchange considering your GE hopes?
26. My comments were not “peevish”; they were not “ill-mannered”, and they were not a “demand”. I expressed my opinion (an opinion which I have always held abouyt this site, by the way) and I did notin any way “demand” any “changes”.
34 I did not say that Salmond winning an additional seat was “out of the question”; I said that it was not certain. The point which I started with was that Salmond’s betting odds/probability are given as 2/9 i.e. 81% that he will become First Minister. My point was that if there is a less-than-81% probability of him being and MSP, then there must be a less-than-81% probability of him being First Minister.
It is possible that the news on Friday morning will be SNP do well, Tories sidelined. When the full results do come out they may make little impact as it is a holiday weekend - even PBers will be helping in the garden/watching cricket etc.
41 - I didn’t say losses in the west. I said patchy.
Although the media will talk of nothing but gains and losses (and hopefully more gains) I think that it’s more important for the LDs to be seen to have some momentum this week. The recent polls suggesting that LD figures are on the up has been a big boost - and may cover any local difficulties this week. As I’ve said before, I’d expect an anti-incumbency factor, so more gains where the LDs are in opposition, more losses where we have control.
I’ve done much less canvassing this year, but the only time that Ming has come up was very positive, a feeling that he was more sincere and less Punch and Judy than Blair and Cameron. I’ll tentatively predict 30 or so gains, but will depend on seats like the one I’m canvassing in; 2 vote majority over the Tories. Can we hold them off?
As the majority of seats being fought are in the Shires, and the Conservatives are standing more candidates than anyone else, you would expect them to do well. Factor in that the last time many seats were fought (in 2003) the Lib Dems were benefiting from an Iraq bounce and the Tories were led by IDS, and they should be doign very well. Factor in their poll improvement and our decrease and they should be making major gains.
The converse is that we will be doing well if we hold level given the prevailing conditions.
SBS has it about right. However gains are always easier to spin than losses!
46- on a related note, do we know how many TOry gains there are already through unopposed returns and multimember wards without enough opposition? That gains them two seats in my Borough before a shot is fired, for example.
Would be interesting to compare their opposed performance vs their unopposed performance.
26. You meant “I”, not “we”. You do not have the right to presume to speak on behalf of everybody else (or anybody else apart from yourself) until and unless we have a vote on the question.
Why did I make the criticisms about the design of this website in messages 5, 11 and 18? Because that is my honest opinion. Guess what? We have freedom of speech in this country, and I am entitled to my opinion. And guess what else? I was speaking for myself. I did not ever at any time say or suggest or presume that I was speaking on behalf of anybody else; I did not expect that many other people would agree with me, and I certainly did not make any “demand” about the website being changed.
47 - probably not many gains. It is unlikely that the Tories are the sole candidate in wards won by somebody else last time.
Anyway, must go to my (NHS) dentist. Thank you Mr Blair for giving us all NHS dentists. Vote Labour - or in Leeds get somebody else to do it for you…
Radio 4 ‘Today’ reporting Tony Blair has said he will make his position clear ‘next week.’
47 according to Mark Senior any losses will mean you have had a bad campaign. I’m not sure if he thinks having 2 gains will be a good campaign, though that’s the way he saw it last year.
Test said “We regulars like the site as is thanks”
Some of us were ‘regulars’ long before you turned up, and then stopped being regulars as the site changed its character (i.e. less fun, dominated by Tory drones). In the real ‘good old days’ there were characters on all sides, and we all took the mick in a gentle kind of way, and Rik would get over excited and blow his top. Oh well. Things change. Why would that be such a bad thing to happen. I am sure Rik is happy to ’see’ me less often than he used to - good for his blood pressure - and I am sure the site would miss you like a hole in the head.
If the Lib Dems end up evens that will be an improvement on last year because the mix of seatrs is harder for them this year. With many more rural districts up this year the same overall result as they got last year would result in net losses this year.
I expect that we will see a continuation of last year’s trend - gains in the north and midlands offset by some losses in the south. The Lib Dems may well, once again, end up representing more people than ever but still see a net loss of seats overall.
Vote wise the Lib Dems need to maintain the levels they have won in recent years. Any significant drop from that position, particularly if the Tories go up a few points, is bad news.
But what the Lib Dem number crunchers will really be looking at is how the result go in individual key constituencies. Will they do well within the various constituencies in places like Newcastle and Liverpool where they are targeting seats for the next general election, and how does their vote hold up in constituencies they will be defending against the Tories.
That is far more important to their result at the next general than overall vote share or overall number of seats.
I suspect the net seats for the Liberal Democrats will be sent downwards by bad results in a few all-up districts where we rely on old-fashioned and ineffective campaigning ideas. I’m increasingly optimistic about the overall result - it’s very clear Labour are really struggling on every front.
A good result for the LDs would be if they added a reasonable % of seats. If they added more than 5% on the circa 2,500 they are defending that would mean a gain of 125+.
Less than that and they are just treading water.
Any overall net loss at a time of a major slump in the Labour vote would equate to a serious decline in the party.
BBC Report on Blair departure announcement:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6610623.stm
53.”Will they do well within the various constituencies in places like Newcastle and Liverpool where they are targeting seats for the next general election”
I think gains are expected in Newcastle, whilst Labour seem confident of gaining seats from LD in Liverpool
Meanwhile in Scotland, Harry Potter’s Agrid has endorsed Labour and also the Michelle Mone of Ultimo Bra. Muriel Gray has also endorsed Labour because she fears some SNPs backers like Brian Souter (he spent lots of money in the anti Section 28 repeal campaign) and she is afraid they want Scotland to become a more conservative country
The Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party leader (they stand just on regional lists) has urged to vote Labour in the constituency vote.
And I see the election fever has hit Stuart Dickson!
51 My own judgement as to how well we have done is to do better than last year . As I have previously posted an equivalent performance to last year would be 30 gains . I expect us to do better than this .
The exchange of seats last year was not all one way between the Conservatives and LibDems . The Conservatives gained roughly 6% of seats that LibDems were defending but LibDems gained roughly 2.5% of seats that Conservatives were defending . Given the Conservatives are defending rather more seats than LibDems , it will take only a small improvement in LibDem performance to make net gains from Conservatives . I agree with tpfkar that in some councils there will be an anti-incumbency vote against whoever is running the council .
52 Aye, Paul (or as you were not then :), those were the days. You know, in a very real way, pbc should get back to basics…with warm beer, and oil maids posting before cycling through the spring mists to Evensong.
Anti SNP, Anti Labour vote
My street campaigning last night suggests there is a large base of people who hate Jack McConnell and dont trust Salmond. This base is growing every day. The question is do these people vote, stay at home and if they vote do they vote tactically. This is a major unknown especially as voting tactically is complicated.
The Aberdeen meeting confirms that the Tories have run a decent campaign given where they started and the number of active members. Cameron has been up in Scotland helping getting the Tories into the media and Goldie performs well too. Cameron is even on TalkSport this morning. I predict / hope that the Tories do not lose votes and seats.
re lib Dem result.
Likely share 26% but good news is 2nd place in share.
Seats becase so amy councils are all up in south net los of 150+
of seats to Lib Dems
But key fact is that main message on Friday/saturday will be huge success of Tories and SNP in Scotland.
Council seats ne tlosse sin spit eot the odd high profile gain nlike Hull.
Overall Lib dems going backwards in locals fro first time in many years.
Roger H
n
61 Roger H , Apart from typing problems you seem to have a problem with facts too . It is not many years since LibDems were going backwards in locals , the no of LibDem councillors peaked in 1996 and fell each year after that until it started to rise again in 2003.
60.JonL. where are campaigning?
On the Salmond seat there is active campaigning by the Lid Dems to get the Tories and Labour to give their constituency vote to them to stop Salmond. This they might do as they have no chance of winning the seat.
Amusing to see several Lib Dems spinning that zero gains or even losses will be a ’success’ this week.
Whatever happened to the ‘real opposition’ that was going to ‘replace the Conservatives’?
64.I think that there is something similar being attempted in Fergus Ewings constituency, StephenB might be able to confirm this. Although from what I am hearing from SNP activists in that area it appears that Labour voters are switching straight to them.
50. On the 8th/9th or 10th probably….when he has achieved ‘peace in our time’ in NI..for about the 4th time.
Glasgow. Home of the Conservative party.
68.
Loony, I meant WE, you continue peevish and are a troll to be ignored.
65 too right. Credit to Mike S for some admission that static is not good enough when Labour are collapsing.
It gets wearing with desperate prediction spin of static being great news and Tory benchmark is 2000 gains. Yawn.
Tell you what let’s all step outside the bubble and watch how the media report the result.
Chrisd, may I ask you which Scottish are you’re coming from?
70 when the seats are mostly rural and Conservative poll numbers up with Lib Dem poll numbers down, the default is to expect Conservative gains. There are not many Labour-held seats for the Lib Dems to offset predicted losses to the Tories.
In the years immediately preceding GE gains (1977-8, 1995-6), the eventual winning party held around 48% of council seats. Currently the Tories hold 38%. TO get to 48% requires them to make 2000 gains.
52 Paul, ah the good old days of yore when Gladstone was a young man, the only Tory troll was Sarah J, and Rik was predicting massive gains on the basis of exceptional canvass results ….
On reflection, some things don’t change
Re 72, so if Tories pick up 700 they lower that “metric” to 1,300.
54. Readingliberal makes a good point there. There is potential for some chunky seat losses for the Lib Dems in places like Bournemouth, Uttlesford, S Norfolk, E Yorks, Bath & NE Somerset and Waverley where they did very well in 2003. This could dominate the picture in terms of overall gains/losses.
John Loony
Would you like the site more if I pointed out that you can back the SNP at 4/7 with William Hill and Labour at 3/1 with Ladbrokes? That’s an effective book of 89%.
Free money doesn’t come a lot freer.
1.Message for Rik W, SBS and ReadingLiberal from last night’s string - It has been confirmed to me that Tory led Wokingham Borough have objected to Reading FC’s planning application to the Madjeski Stadium. I still have to find out which actual councillors made this decision and if they are standing for re-election though.
2.Lets hope tomorrow Sego performs well in the debate with Sarko tomorrow to spice up the French presidential election - I am sure she can still do it.
72 - Although prior to the 1974 election Labour had only 40% of council seats.
I think it’s fairly daft to set an target of 48% based on only two examples. Had Labour achieved less than that in 1995-1996 does anyone seriously think they wouldn’t have won the 1997 election.
74 my maths makes it that too!
74 This year is almost certainly the peak of the electoral cycle for Conservatives and standing still or even losses can be expected over the next 4 year cycle . It will be interesting next year how the Conservatives will spin expectations of losses , pretty much I suspect as some LibDems are doing this year .
Re 75: Yes I agree - I am expecting very mixed results for the Lib Dems and ending up about even overall.
71.Andrea, it is West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine.
Huge LibDem signs this year in Guildford….
By that I do not mean that they will take the council rather they have 10 foot yellow diamond “squarial” things.
I was passing and the the sheer size of the thing swung my vote. Good effort.
80. Sorry I’m unclear - are you are saying that in the 2009 election the Cons will do worse than 2005 ?
I think that we may see some surprising LD gains in the south simply because the Labour vote is vanishing. These won’t be gains from Labour but gains from the Tories, in 3 way marginals. Tories on more than 50% of the vote last time will probably be safe and we will see Tory gains when they are a closes second to Labour.
There will be LD losses where the Tories are a close second and only a small labour vote last time, but where that Labour vote was above 15% I think LDs should hold seats, especially in those that Labour are not contesting this year.
It will be a mixed bag of gains and losses for Lib Dems but overall a small increase in councillors and vote share. It won’t be the headline of the day either way so Ming will be safe.
What we will see in the South is that Labour have many losses that they will not recover from for many years. This has got to be good news for the Lib Dems as it puts them in a good position for the next locals and GE.
76. Ptp - SNP are 1.33 on Will Hill at mom
80 No I am saying that in 2008 local elections you will do worse than in the 2004 local elections . 2009 is more complex as the 2005 locals were fought on the same day as the GE and that may not be so in 2009 .
82. Thanks Chris
Btw, an amusing thought, if you go back to search Scot newspapers archives of 2005 pieces, I think you can find many of them about SNP being dead and similar things (I recall a couple of them)…they couldn’t have been more wrong!
87. So this year is only the top of the electoral cycle on a bar chart then ?
Wow it has been busy here this morning. We are expecting a few Lib Dem losses here this Thursday!
Hello all.
I actually saw 2 Tory garden banners yesterday. Very small text though - and I thought green and blue were an unlucky combo.
Drove through the quite posh area of Derwen Fawr in Swansea West. Saw the first evidence of Tories (as per above) and some more lab and LD - but no Plaid at all.
72: Is this true? sounds v. unlikley
I read somewhere that the tories hold ~4000+ of the 10,500 odd seats up for grabs. If they gain 2000, that will be 6000+ out of 10,500, which is way more than 48%, close to 60% in fact. I don’t think your facts can possibly be right. More like 800 gains??
Someone will post the true facts in a minute (I predict Andrea…)
83 Agreed that you can’t miss the LD presence (which is the purpose) but the orange diamond & bird are looking very dated and a touch cheap. Could still be a good brand image in terms of conveying third party eagerness and localism, not flash but trustworthy (Ming’s values?) but personally think the next election will be about change (whether Tory or Labour) and the LDs need to consider a rebrand.
89 As I said Jamie , let us see next year how you try to spin the likelihood of the Conservatives making a net loss of seats in the seats last fought in 2004 .
93 Fair comment but the new Conservative fuzzy oak logo has the novelty of being new but still look cheap .
93. Well we’ve had the ‘non-socialist alternative to the Tories’ (1980s) and ‘the real opposition to Labour’ (2000s)…who is left for the Lib Dems to redefine themselves against, one wonders? The Scottish Nationalists, perhaps?
Re95: I wonder what Maggie T thinks of it?
94. Are this weeks elections not a tad more important than next years ? Anything could have happened by next May..
92 Conservatives have roughly 8,500 out of a total of nearly 22,000 see the link a put on last night’s thread .
86 Yes, Ramper, they finally seem to have noticed how far out of line they were. Never mind. I filled my boots this morning. Hope you did too.
94. Mark Senior you really are getting pretty desperate talking about potential Tory losses NEXT year. Obviously you are non too confident about this week’s outcome.
101 I have made my forecast for this year quite clear , have you actually made any forecast or even any positive comment about anything on here EVER .
99: Thanks. But to gain 2000 all in 1 year seems a big ask, surely the %age of available seats on Thursday is the relevant stat? This 2000 figure is absurd.
Re 97 Tory Logo:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5348630.stm
103 I agree talking about 2,000 is absurd just as those Conservatives saying 300 to 400 gains this year as being a good result are being absurd .
Re 85, sounds plausible except that last year the LDs lost to Tories in the South.
I’d like to back John Loony’s comments about the navigation on this site - some form of threading (or reply with quote) would help and make it easier to ignore the vast amount of ‘noise’ that has developed on the site since the General Election.
I think those posters expecting the Lib Dems to standstill or make a small number of gains are deluding themselves.
These seats were last fought when IDS was Tory leader and their national vote share in these contests was just 36%. Bearing in mind that the elections included every single rural all up district in the South it was hardly surprising that the first calls for IDS’s head came at 10pm that evening.
The Lib Dems are defending 2,000 seats - the vast majority in the rural ‘all up’ areas. Assuming the Conservatives poll 5-6% above the 36% they got four years ago (to reflect their increase in the opinion polls) and the Lib Dems 1-2 points down, you’re looking at a 3-4% swing from Lib Dem to Con. This will result in hundreds of losses in the shire districts.
Yes the Lib Dems will make compensatory gains off Labour in the cities and the north, but here only a third of the seats are up, so the potential for gains is limited. Given also that electorates in the Mets are often 10,000+ comapred with 2,000 in the rural areas, winning one met ward is the equivalent of losing five rural wards.
If the Lib Dems can keep the losses below 300 they will be doing very well indeed.
Given the combined seat total for Labour and Conservative is less than in 1978, I don’t think the Conservatives need to be on 48% of seats to be confident of victory. IMHO, something like 43% is the benchmark. Labour were on 48% in 1997, and that pointed to a landslide - but it’s quite possible to have a working majority without a landslide.
Nor can I see any reason why Conservative results should be worse in 2008 than 2004. The Conservatives led Labour by 12% in 2004, and (at this stage) I’d expect that lead to be a little bit bigger in 2008. It was 13% last year, and will probably be c.16% this year. Labour may also suffer from anti-Labour tactical voting, which could magnify seat losses.
My prediction on this thread is Lib Dem 26-27.99%, and 0-149 gains.
Well Didsbury has become a sea of red….well perhaps a splatter but certainly no blue. I’ve just been out to Prestbury-a particularly posh part of Georges kingdom-and the Conservative trees on the trees are a wonder to behold! I saw ten in a row with the Tory logo on each one. All belonged to one house but that’s the nature of Prestbury. Fortunately Wayne Rooney’s mansion is posterless. Obviously prefers the cold shoulder of of his neighbours to the hairdryer from his manager!
107. Fair point - again highlights the fact that there isn’t a market on gains losses on betfair - what a pity !
What with the Lab leader & Blair switch markets likely to wrap up in the next couple of months (and the French Pres) - is there much to look forward to betting wise ??
107 - I made much the same point, though yours was better illustrated, last night Dan.
107 Sorry Dan , I do not agree with your analysis see my post at 58 for my take on the situation .
OT (France) - have put together spreadsheets for the detailed 1st round results by departement etc - if anyone wants a copy please email me at electiongame@yahoo.co.uk .
“If the Lib Dems can keep the losses below 300 they will be doing very well indeed”
When I predicted 100 LD losses I was accused of wild exaggeration and Tory spin!
But Sean Fear, others have analysis, I don’t pretend anything other than pure gut feeling. We are all probably led astray by canvass returns in our own patches
Betsan Powys on her BBC blog for the WA elections reports that the Inependent think that Blaenau Gwent is vulnerable for Labour from Trish Law. Er, excuse me Mr London Centric Journo - BG was TL’s last year when she won it in a Bye!
I’d love Labour to win it back off her.
Labour are going to get a drubbing in the South of England, but all I really care about is the WA election!
94 Agree it will be harder for Conservatives in locals from now on - holding the 2004 gains and making more headway difficult but not impossible if they are heading for an absolute majority in seats in 2009 GE. Depends if the next step change post Brown bounce is back to upper 30’s or into lower 40’s.
107 - The 2003 call for IDS’s head post locals looked silly: it was predicated on losses not gains so wrong-footed IDSs opponents who had been preparing the coup for months before. Did though give Howard time to prepare properly for a coronation.
115 If I were you I’d be watching English marginal areas, not the south east fair enough but the East Midlands, Yorks, that sort of area
Ted, Brown bounce. I confidently expect one like most Tories, it almost doesn’t matter how high it is. But what matters is how long it lasts. If it lasts until next year that would be worrying for sure, but I don’t see it.
100. Anyone who missed the 4/7 on the SNP with Hills, they’ve (accidentally?) left the price up at this level for Alex Salmond as First Minister. It may be harder to lay off by now though.
115. RedFlump, still confident for Swansea West?
119 - isn’t there enough of a chance that SNP could get the most seats but the unionist parties combine to keep them out of government to justify a slightly higher price on Salmond as First Minister?
110. Irish General Election? And hopefully the US primaries are heating up now. I think the Republican candicates have a debate later this week.
119 Thanks Caveman. Note however there is a possibility, albeit slim, that he might not become First Minister even if the SNP became largest Party.
You seem to have become our Valuespotter-in-chief! Well done.
Andrea - I have seen no Plaid “surge” here at all. There seems to be a lot of Lib Dem activity, mainly focusses around studenty areas - although I don’t know how motivated these people are to actually vote. Not much Tory activity at all.
I am still confident that Andrew Davies will hold the seat for Labour - and reasonably comfortably.
122 Irish General Election indeed! And I hereby nominate Yokel and Neil to be our guides to humungous profits.
:-)
The length and height of the Brown Bounce will depend on the Tories reaction.
Brown will come out with some exciting new policies: Leave Iraq, Privatise (sorry move into a Quango) the NHS, whatever. The Tories will respond: “We are unable to make meaningful comments on Mr Browns new policies at the moment we are waiting until our policy review is completed”
I think it wont be so much as Brown Bounce but a Cameron Sink!
Wow! Look at the BBC “Have Your Say” thread on Blair’s legacy
Bear in mind the BBC does its best to “balance” comments ie promote pro Labour ones
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=1&threadID=6234&start=45&tstart=0&edition=1&ttl=20070501111002&#paginator
125 - You’ll have to ask the bookies not to offer such mean prices on the constituency bets first - PP have 6 candidates at odds-on to win a seat in one 4 seater constituency! How is one meant to make a decent profit?
127 - they do not! Have Your Say on the BBC is an excuse for right-wing nut jobs to vent. The whole thing is so one sided its unbelieveable!
123. Jack McConnell still 3/1 with Paddy Power if you want to lay off.
128 Open accounts with Eastwoods? Or Sean Graham?
125. What would I know about down there for goodness sake?
Actually its beginning to look very interesting. I’m smelling really big issues for the governing coalition though the opposition has a fairly big mountain to climb I’m beginning to think the amiable Bertie is on his way out though Neil may disagree.
Neil’s first suggested bet yesterday on one of the Greens looks interesting indeed at the odds with Paddy Power. I’m sure he can let you know what it is. Reading the rumour mill its got a decent chance of coming off.
130 Caveman - Don’t laugh, but isn’t it possible for the dibbuk in charge of the Scottish Libdems to become First Minister?
131. Barnabas the bookie doesn’t have a market up yet and may not at all.
Can’t knock PP’s, holding 6/4 on no restoration of the NI Assembly on due target date whilst everyone else offering odds was cutting and cutting. Bless them, the optimists….
Ladbrokes are offering party seat odds but looks like PP’s are the only ones for constituency odds at the moment.
133 “dibbuk” ??
133 - I struggle to see how, as for that to happen you would need the Lib Dems to come at least second in seats overall, and thus be the major partner in a coalition.
132 - I would love Bertie to lose (both politically as I think FF have to go and I cant stand the PDs and because all my money is on Enda Kenny - admittedly at 2/1 so I’ll probably lay off soon) but I still think he’s justifiably favourite at this stage. The next poll will be very interesting though.
The airwaves are full of eulogies to the ‘Glorious ten years’. Even Portillo and Ashdown have been fulsome. In fact Ashdown spoke so well of most of his foreign policy achievements that I ended up wondering whether too many of us had misjudged him. Anyway this is just a taster for the full canonization next week.
PtP. I guess you take out insurance at 25/1. I think the value is still there even so. More likely may be the SNP get most seats without Alex Salmond winning, in which case you have to cover yourself with the 8/1 on Nicola Sturgeon which eats into most of the value, but I remember an earlier thread where someone claimed it was virtually impossible for him not to make it on somehow. I’m maxed out on the most seats, so I won’t be trying this one.
138. May be good for Blair but is that sort of talk good for Brown - the last thing he wants is Milibands prediction of “the good old days of Blair” to ring true.
Thursday is difficult for Brown to lose - do well and he can take credit, do poorly and he can blame Blair..
138. An illegal war with 600,000 dead and 3,000,000 refugees - quite a legacy
139 Pretty much the way I feel, Caveman. With WH handing out free dosh, who needs these complicated hedges?
140. Thats maybe not what the media response will be though. Its very possible the ‘this was Gordon’s campaign’ line will start pouring forth in the event of trouble.
For what its worth, if the SNP get more seats than Labour in Scotland and appear to be in pole position for some kind of coalition the media will lead with that. This of course is Gordon’s territory.
It seems plenty in the media are out for Brown and I dont expect them to change view overnight. Only a useful result for Labour will see them unable to to go down that path to any effect.
Has any one ruled out (really, really, really ruled out) a SNP/Labour or a Labour/SNP coalition?
138. Roger. I caught the tail end of the Today programme this morning and heard Michael Portillo eulogising about Blair. I thought he had already gone the way he was going on! Made me realise how big an event it will actually be when it happens.
142. O/T, PtP just wanted to check that you got the email I sent you last week with my address. Have had a few emails go missing recently.
144. Yes, Gordon Brown did yesterday.
146 Yes thanks, Ian. At home today. Will post cheque later.
Atb and congrats.
Like the sketch (Not the nine o’clock News, I think) about the two politicians slagging each other off in the studio - One drops dead and the other switches into what a wonderful fellow he was mode.
135 Jamie - Dibbuk/Dybbuk
Jewish folklore - translates roughly as lost soul searching for body to occupy to fulfil missed purpose in life.
147 - But so did Scroeder and Merkel in Germany. Given that it was Brown that said it, it would be easy to see Labour say “Well obviously Gordon wouldn’t have chosen to do so, but it is up to the Labour party in Scotland and McConnell - that’s how devolution works”
Peter the Punter (148) - is that you being a gentleman? - No sign of Prince Monolulu I suppose!!!
149. Icarus, judging by the noises coming from the SNP and Libdems this week I would predict the Libdems will see normal service return for them if the SNP are the largest party on Friday.
I also think it works for Alex Salmond, if they hold out on a independence referendum it means that he can shove that hot issue into the long grass for a while.
Very wishful thinking but I have picked the LD’s to get over 30% vote share, and to gain 150+. I don’t think I would put money on it though. As long as the Tories do not venture too much into the 40’s I will be happy, ecstically if the Tories poll below 40%, and mildy curious to see Alex Salmond as the first minister of Scotland.
150. PtP. Sounds like quite a good description of many of us PB anoraks!
Re 1