PBC’s first 100,000 day
October 5th, 2007
Our site statistics have gone through the roof as speculation about a general election continues to mount. The above table shows the total number of page downloads and as can be seen yesterday we broke though the 100,000 mark for the first time ever.
The number of unique visitors is about fifth to a quarter of the page downloads.
Sky News tomorrow morning. The site will be featured on Sky New tomorrow from about 8.40am. They are sending a satellite truck to my house in Bedford so we can have a live discussion.
Thanks to everybody for their support and for continuing to keep our discussions civilised.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Thought that was a prediction of how long Labour would be in power LOL!!!
Well done everyone… whoppeee
congrats. this really is an excellent site.
Well done Mike.
Well done, Mike. You should be rewarded for your services to geeks. The ermine beckons…
I wonder if Brown is one of the 100,000
Need to emphasise this:
THE FAMOUS 4th POLL!!
WHEN IS THE COMMUNICATE RESEARCH (CR) POLL OUT?
Someone must know..
iraq stunt going down badly on any questions……very very poor reaction
Btw, I think value in the 2007 has now gone.
BUT, theremust be value in betting on GE in June-Dec 2008 - available to back at 21/1??
I’ll take it!
This was one of Channel Four News 2005 marginal seats polls. Tory gains from 2001 of 20-80 is the conclusion! In the event the Tories made just over 30 gains which was within their range. However, it’s not exactly a narrow enough range to stake your whole future on it.
http://www.channel4.com/news/microsites/E/election2005/swingseats.html
This is a really geeky question only those with websites will have any view on.
Mike and others - what time period do you use with your counter software to measure whether a visit is unique?
Some are saying Brogan sounds less certain. Not to me he doesn’t. Just stating the obvious he might be incorrect but is sticking to his guns. He also said this on the Tories, “Take account of the margins of error (up to 3.5 pts each way) and it is impossible to say with any certainty what will happen to Labour’s majority if Mr Brown goes now. I can report that Tory unease about an election has vanished this morning: they want one.” That to me is the most significant thing he says. Like a Rugby team facing the All Blacks most times for the last 3 times in a row the Tory team has been beaten mentally before they even take to the field. That is what makes this really different
Congrats Mike - though the National Archive guys must be regretting have to store the volume of posts!
I’m stll tipping an election before the end of the year.
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/category/british-politics/
11 Like a Rugby team facing the All Blacks most times for the last 3 times in a row the Tory team has been beaten mentally before they even take to the field. That is what makes this really different
If that was true, Labour would never have got in after 18 years of opposition.
…mainly because players change…or lose their edge…or become arrogant…
Wow - a satellite truck to your house, that is the big time.
Congratulations on your continued success, Mike.
Mike. Would you care to care to plug my ARSE in the morning ??
I am hearing that we are prepping for a Tues announcement & that the feeling is Brown is being successfully goaded into an earth-shattering mistake
17 - Politically I hope he;s goaded into it, on a personal level I’m too busy to follow an election!
The Tory mood has turned around completely, marginal ppcs eager for a fight
Punter.
Yesterday Brogan said bold as brass ‘the election’s off.’ Today he’s saying it depends on a new poll. He doesn’t know what will be in it any more than anyone else does. He still expects no GE but he’s less certain. I’d be gobsmacked if Andy Coulson wasn’t spinning furiously ‘bring it on’.
More marginal seat polling from 2005 GE. It showed the Labour vote in the two Party marginals falling slightly more than the Tory vote to the benefit of the LDs. Fairly accurate but the swing to the Tories varied greatly which was key last time and may be so this time. Without capturing the regional factor can one poll really be accurate enough to make a decision on a GE?
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/publications/plb/marginal-seat-picture.shtml
17-Tend to agree. For a long time I thought no way 2007 election but now not so sure. Stand to lose 1000 roubles if he goes this year, to a Scot!!!
But, as Test says, I think it’ll be a terrible terrible mistake by GB. It may be the happiest 1000rb loss ever!!
6. Can anyone answer this?
Well done Mike - What is the fee? - How much do you have to pay them!
14?! What are you trying to say the the Tory Party in 97 was in happy confident mood. That 99.9% of people had correctly no doubt as to the result. The Tories knew for their last 3 times they were going to be beaten and that sank into their attitude. Now they may incorrect, but they don’t believe that this time and will campaign accordingly for the first time since 1992
GORDON:
PRESSURE, PRESSURE, PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE
FEEL THE PRESSURE, PRESSURE, PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE
24 - As long as the leadership don’t go the complete other way and get over-confident.
20 I think you’re harsh on Brogan. He has not resiled from his opinion. He is simply stating the obvious. Yesterday this poll was not in commission. Now it is. Therefore if it is way away from what Brogan guesses of course it will change things. I am not therefore sure why you attack him.
Re Marginals. If it is the number mentioned. That should give you a reasonable regional guess
26 I doubt that the opinion Polls give them that luxury. It is not that they are convinced of inevitable victory but that they are no longer convinced they can inevitably be beaten or perhaps at least decisively beaten. That is is a big thing psychologically
Test.
I’m hearing the same. Labour preparations are proceeding apace including things like booking helicopter slots etc…. They could still abort, of course, but those who say ‘no way, inconceivable’ are flat out wrong.
No decision has been taken yet but I think GB wants to go psychologically because he doesn’t want to take the huge hit of being seen to bottle it.
Still my own view is odds against because I can’t see the polls moving in his favour short term with the Tory post Conference momentum. At the end of the day Brown won’t commit suicide.
David Herdson from the previous thread.
How can you say that presentational skills are Osborne’s weakness and then suggest he should be party chairman - where presentational skills are essential.
I think this criticism of Osborne is overdone, its a way for Labour to weaken the Tory team. Compare his performance at conference, on the news and on QT with recent past performances by Balls, Cooper, Smith, Harman, Hain, Kelly, Browne (the part timer), Blears, Hoon.
Lets forget, please, the Ainsworth fiasco on Newsnight.
Mike- I’ve never placed a bet in my life, but I’m a regular visitor and enjoy your thoughtful analysis. Keep up the excellent work
The wonderful late Baroness Nancy Seear on the Parliament Channel 87 election coverage.
They don’t make old gals like her anymore.
Punter. I’m not attacking him. Anyone who hasn’t changed their mind on this question from time to time is probably a stubborn fool. Nick Robinson admits he has on his blog. I don’t think Brogan has done a U turn but the tone is a liitle less definitive and rightly so IMHO.
30 - I agree Osborne criticism is overdone, I think what he does lack is the same personability that Cameron has. Probably why George didn’t go for the leadership in 2005. I think though he is clearly very tactically aware and you can see that in the way his IHT proposals have done Labour up like a kipper.
32 - I think this is the most politically extraordinary period I can remember for sheer edge of your seat kind of stuff when basically nothing is happening.
Ah, the new Labour poster ad first suggested on this site?
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/10/05/clucking_fist.jpg
Mike, Well done! I also hope the site is beginning to pay its way!
Also well done to your son Rob, and if you need and Linux advice you know where to get hold of me.
Don’t forget to mention my prediction of no Gordon challenger and no election this year
Re 8, Casino Royale. “BUT, theremust be value in betting on GE in June-Dec 2008 - available to back at 21/1??”
Only to make your book greener, I am confident there will not be an election then. (That said as part of a book balancing exercise you may gain a position which you can sell a bot of later if speculation builds)
one of the best sites on the web, keep it up
Just back from a phone canvass of a ward which we narrowly lost in May, so we have lots of fresh canvass data to compare to. On the basis of the 257 people we rang tonight, there has been a heavy swing to us since then, with LibDems in particular coming over.
Now obvious caveats apply - the May result was weak (it’s what made me say I thought I was then around 1500 votes behind). the sample’s not large, and so on. But comparing canvass data to canvass data normally works (if people fib, they fib the same way each time) and it reinforces the belief that we can increase our majority in Broxtowe. I can’t say if that’s a national pattern, but I’m still keen to go for it - and I’m the only regular poster here who admits to his job being on the line, so it’s not in my interest to spin.
I did get one chap who said he’d been a wavering Tory but the conference had cheered him up, and two people who really liked the IHT cut idea and will vote Tory in future local elections (uh, they’re Swedish).
Guido is saying tonight that the No2ID campaign are planning on launching a tactical voting campaign to target and defeat those MPs who have supported ID cards.
A couple of general questions off the back of this;
Is it the case that the peception is correct and tactical voting on a large party scale has had some success in the past, particularly in terms of anti-Tory voting?
And does the panel think (I love that line) that on single issue cases like the ID cards, tactical voting could really make much difference in an election?
32 Blue Moon. Of course he would. The commissioning of the Poll (do we know by whom) does that. It would be breathtaking clairvoyance on his part to simply dimiss it, when he cannot predict 100% what it will say. He is therefore as confident as this unknown Poll allows. That doesn’t necessarily make him right naturally
I don’t pretend to understand the whole betting/odds thing, but congrats on the success of the site.
IMHO Gordon will call it. The Conservatives are not 8-10% ahead (which they need for a majority) and Labour are solidly on 38/40% of the vote with at least another 5% out there (in the 7/8/9 range of certainty to vote). Where are the Tories going to get another 5-10% from? The most encouraging thing I have read today is the comment that IDS got a similar 3-5% bounce after his 2003 conference speech.
Yes, there will be all kinds of different things going on with tactical voting and Lib Dem votes being squeezed all kinds of different ways dependent on the type of marginal, but Labour is not going to lose on a 38-40% share.
34 - James Burdett, nice one.
Gordo can still back off, caveats apply, but whilst I wouldn’t tell any punter to back 07, I would tell them NOT to lay it, as it were.
38 - That is all well and good but how convinced are you that you can get a good enough pledge conversion rate?
Much of the bile directed at Osborne is a direct result of his mission being to rile Brown, at which he has been successful. The comments from sources close to Brown reported in newspapers recently (and by Ben Brogan in his latest post “I also wonder whether he might not wish to use an election to answer the charges about his character being peddled by the Tories”) show that he has been successful and might push Brown into making a decision based on personal animosity rather than “calm” deliberation.
Brown seems as thin skinned as Major regarding the media and prone to political vendettas. This unwillingness to give up hope of crushing the Tories in an early election until the last scintilla of hope that it is possible may reflect that.
Despite the risks, will Brown’s animosity, rather than confidence, push him into an election that could wreck his premiership?
29 - That’s what i decided from the betting market until the last couple of days little blip. The default position is to go for it, the decision has been taken in principle.
The decision now is not to go for it, but whether to call it off.
38 - Ummmm Nick P, those of us who work for MPs also have our jobs on the line!!!!
38 - how many people do you have to ring to get 257 responses?
44 - I think we need to think back only just over a year to that bizarre September when Gordon allowed a number of his fawning fans to jump off of a cliff for him only to leave them to splat at the bottom on their own. I do not rule out a similar scenario now, although the stakes are higher and the longer he leaves it the more backdraft he is likely to suffer.
47 - If my experience is anything to go by anything between 1000-1250. We usually get a 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 success rate on the phone and a 1 in 6 to 1 in 7 on the door depending on timing. By success I mean any response rather than the one we want.
I’m hearing from my close friend, mebyon kernow candidate 4 north cornwall, that the lib dems could be wiped out west of the Tamar. Partly cause of Europe.
Yes, Richard (39), definitely. It is an extremely important issue - for many, THE issue, as the invasion of Iraq was last time.
If it gets off the ground, it will favour the Lib Dems, of course, who have been consistently opposed to ID cards. It will help some Labour MPs, and harm others, since Labour is very much split on the issue. It will harm the Tories since they are sometimes in favour ID cards and sometimes against, so it is best to vote against them to be sure.
I hope it is a move that really gathers momentum. It is important for our fundamental freedoms.
24. I dont know what your point was.
My point is that a winning team doesnt win forever because it has won 3 or 4 in a row.
Winning teams lose for many reasons. Team members change…dont stay hungry…become complacent…become arrogant…
Labour is not complacent…
but Labour hunger has turned to greed and the team members have changed and they have definately become arrogant.
Very interesting comment tucked away tonight on the PM programme from the UKIP chairman.
Basically he agreed that they would be counter-productive to stand against Tory candidates in at least the 24 marginal seats deprived to the Conservatives by the UKIP vote last time; now that Conservatives have agreed to offer a referendum on the constitution - the only party to do so.
Now I know several UKIP activists locally who have been saying this to me for ages - but it’s the first sniff of anything like this occurring higher up the food chain.
Make no mistake, even the (admittedly) slight possibility of UKIP not opposing Tory candidates in marginals could make a massive difference to the result of Browns election calculations.
Another nail in the 2007 coffin or a red herring?
52 - Predicting 3 figure majorities seems pretty complacent to me.
46: Rik, join the Light side and come and work for me
49: About 60% are willing to respond to the current script, but that’s only people who answer - a third or so either have number unobtainable or are out.
Pledges->votes - yes indeed, who knows? But a pledge isd bettter than a ‘dunno mate’…
51 - How many Labour MPs voted against ID cards? The implication that somehow the Tories are a bigger risk on the issue than Labour is rather ludicrous.
re 39 Nick…impressive, as was Shepshed result. (An LD delivering on the ground there told me ‘Lab had no chance’…sadly I relayed that here). But I don’t think friends in Kent etc will be having such good tidings.
Rik W Hi - good to see you in Blackpool but pity we never managed a pint.
53: Marcus, I heard the UKIP interview too, and he didn’t seem to me to be saying that. He said something like, “Well, it might seem churlish to stand against the Tories if it would stop them getting inmto power and having a Treaty referendum, but that’s because we feel the Treaty is only the latest addition to all the unacceptable aspects of Europe, and we want a referendum on copming out.” I’m sure he didn’t say they wouldn’t stand in Tory marginals - though of course they might so decide in the future. If anything it should logically mean they won’t stand against LibDem MPs, as Ming’s promised the referendum they want!
52 My point is that losing teams will continue to be beaten if they believe each time they will. Only when that stops happening do they have a chance. That by itself is not enough viz 92 but is essential if there is to be any chance of a contest.
BTW Paul Linford is on form with possible Scenarios
30. The position of party chairman is what he/she and the leader want to make of it. Osbourne has been criticised on here and elsewhere for how he comes across in the media and in the House. I think some of those critisisms are fair, if often overdone. That said, I take your point that there are plenty on Labour’s front bench who are well below Osbourne’s standard. Even so, while he might be good, but he’s not in the same league (yet) as Hague or Davis - but as shadow chancellor he has to be expected to score as many hits on the government as those two.
Until the IHT announcement, he’d not really done that - and the positive reaction to the announcement wasn’t down to presentation, it was down to policy and timing. In other words, the political strategy was right.
The party chairman tends to be a more public figure when things are going badly, acting as a lightning rod for the leader. In an election or when things are going OK, the leader will take as much of the limelight as possible providing they’re an asset - and Cameron is. The party chairman can get on with making sure the organisation is there, the strategy is right, the various parts are working together, and there is a narrative for the media and public. Osbourne could do those things extremely well.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. I don’t expect everyone to agree and it’s not as if it will make the slightest bit of difference anyway.
8.40am..on a Saturday? God I’d still be in me bed….they had better be bringing a fry up in a polysterene box as compensation.
Congratulations though. I just wonder how many journos use stuff off this site
25. They havent done a better song. Mind you Cash Machine might be a better song for Gordon with all those tax rises.
Congratulations Mike
Just had to say on the BBC website, the “election story has been relgated three further places, is this significant??;););)
Just so, Alex (56). Some Labour MPs have good records over their opposition to ID cards. The ones who favour them and/or just go along with the Government line are clearly identifiable.
Tory MPs, on the other hand, go en masse one way or the other, as their leaders currently dictate. They have no principles. Tory MPs are not to be trusted (with one or two honourable exceptions, of course). But the vast majority of them are totally untrustworthy.
They have to be opposed for all our sakes.
51 Tressage, if you believe ID cards are wrong then you welcome those who agree with you; you don’t try to create divisions and score party political points. Attack the Tories for what you think we are wrong on. “We thought of it first isn’t a great message”.
If Gordon goes for it and is damaged to point of no/low majority an alliance of those opposed might well kill the damn things off.
55 - Of course a pledge is better than nothing but when I am out canvassing (I prefer to see the whites of the eyes) I tend to dismiss 25% as just saying yes to get rid of you. I then apply a 50/50 filter to the remaining responses so you take half of the definite pledges, half the possibles and if you still have around half the total including the quarter you removed earlier then you probably are ok.
51 “If it gets off the ground, it will favour the Lib Dems, of course, who have been consistently opposed to ID cards. It will help some Labour MPs, and harm others, since Labour is very much split on the issue. It will harm the Tories since they are sometimes in favour ID cards and sometimes against, so it is best to vote against them to be sure.”
It may favour the Lib Dems, It most certainly will not favour Labour (I am sorry Nick Palmer you have to go, you are on the list). It is Conservative policy to scrap ID cards and no amount of spin about good labour MPS will make a jot of difference. Safest thing to do is not vote Labour. So Tory or Lib dem whichever is most likely to win against the Labour incumbent.
Sorry to bring bad news but rumours that there may be a raised terror threat in the UK shortly.
No idea if the government will make any moves on the alert status but with a possible election on the go its perhaps an even more opprtune time for something.
53-24 seats switching Tory would more than halve Labour’s majority. Of course, not all UKIP voters revert to Tories but even if, say, 2/3 do, then that’s, say, 15 seats that could have been Tory last time round. Usual caveats: new seats, UKIP voters may not vote, UKIP busted flush, etc, but surely if true cannot make GB’s choice any easier.
I see NP MP still on for an increased majority. Since 1997 your majority has halved. Your % share has fallen by 5%, the Tories pretty much stable. So, you are outperforming Labour nationally by about 3%. But only a 4% majority in 2005. Probably one of the more interesting marginals? I suggest you don’t help out in Tory marginals though, but up to you!
32,40 I’m close to changing my mind for about the fifth time on this one, but I thought Ben Brogan’s latest piece on his blog was quite negative as regards the prospects of a 2007 GE (which I’ve been buying furiously today!) He refers to the first sample of the poll of marginals looking, and I quote, bad for Labour. If this is true and Brown, as reported, is to make a final decision on Sunday, then there isn’t that much time for this private polling to start looking good for him.
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/
62 - N1 - agree it is their best song.
Looks like Gordon ‘Better Do Better’!
70 - Unless they are back spinning to try and recreate a sense of surprise. You never know, things have just got that mad!
70. Peter
I would suggest do any balancing of books and then leave it. Its a mess.
64 - Frankly that’s ludicrous. There are plenty of highly principled Tories who have never wavered in their opposition to ID cards. In fact the reason the Tories went into the last election opposed to ID cards was because David Davis stood up to Michael Howard and insisted on it. The only compromise was over the reasons for the opposition (which centred on cost and practicality, rather than principle).
Whereas the number of Labour MPs who have stood up to be counted on the issue is a proverbial handful.
55 Nick Palmer, how can you say you are of the Light Side?
You are an ex-Communist. It is as much a reference as ex-Nazi. Or perhaps your shade of Communism was lighter than that which executed millions in Europe and Asia(?)
Is an ex-International Socialist any better than an ex-National Socialist Socialist?
Like Phil Jupitus, the ex-NF-Socialist, you were wrong then and you are wrong now.
62 - With Gordon’s back story I still think he will go with Dusty Springfield and “son of a Preacher Man” as a campaign song.
68 - an opportune moment for a terrorist attack, or an opportune moment for the Govt to raise the Terror level?
A couple of questions if I may?
1) What counts as a marginal? 5% maj, 10% maj, 15% maj
2) If there is an election, can I place a recorded wager for the Welsh seats?
3) Is there room in this wide world of blogs for a blog that produces forecasts?
62 & 71. Lots of Hard-Fi here tonight fans I see. What’s the verdict on the new album? I’m from Staines originally and Rich still lives a few doors down from my Mum, so I’ll pass on any comments to him if you like next time I’m over there.
70- peter from putney I’m close to changing my mind for about the fifth time on this one.
Peter-I admire your certainty of mind on this one- I think I have changed my mind at least 2311 times now. On the 2313 time- i.e the most recent I think there will be an election.
77 - Maybe that will be the cover for a hasty retreat. Suddenly raise the threat level and then say “Do you think I’d seriously hold an election under these circumstances?” Quite high risk, because if people rumbled the stunt the retribution would be awful.
81- cynicism!!
Nick P.
I disagree with you. For obvious reasons I listened very carefully (I am number one on the list of seats lost due to the size of the UKIP vote after all) and what he said was that he would ‘obviously welcome’ a call from Cameron over some kind of deal or cooperation on seats because he said it is not in their interest to deprive the Tories of MP’s who would then vote in favour of a referendum on the Constitution which they oppose, too.
Moreover it was the very first time I have ever heard anyone from UKIP’s leadership accept that it is in their interest to see a Tory Government.
That is a very big change indeed.
81-I really would not put any stunt past this lot.
Health Warning
3rd hand news of YouGov in Scotland commissioned by Nats
Labour well ahead of Nats. Tories on 18% and Libs down to 12%.
This is 3rd hand so dont say you were not warned.
Today I paid a courtesy call on the constituency office of the sitting (Labour) MP for Bedford; at 12 noon not only was the office shut, but there was no evidence of any recent life.
Two weeks ago I e-mailed him and just got an automated “out of office” reply.
Clearly some sitting members are playing it cooler than others. If anyone has seen Patrick Hall please do let me know.
78. The classical definition was “a seat where the Labour share of the two-party vote was between 45% and 55%”. That kind of drifted to “any seat with a less than 10%” majority, and I guess now (for the Tories) it means “any seat you need to win to gain an overall majority”!
If the Tories were going to support ID cards, their opposition would have folded under the attacks from the Sun and the Mail on the subject, who kept snarling that Cameron was being soft on crime, asylum seekers and all things nasty. Grr.
Instead, they held the line and fought their corner on it to the point where it being a key part of their home affairs policies last week was seen as a positive (or at least not attacked at all by the tabloids.
This is a rather heartening thing for me as someone vehemently opposed to ID cards - that the Tories have pushed to change the political weather over it.
The Lib Dems (aside from Mark Oaten’s reported dubious dalliance with Nick P’s earlier ID card bill) have held the line throughout and should be proud of themselves over it. On this subject, Blue and Yellow would present a united front in the House; this would scupper the ID cards plans if GB ends up with a small or non-existent majority.
85. Smallish movements in Scotland don’t matter that much to Labour though do they? IIRC, the number of Labour marginals in Scotland is pretty small, and hardly any (1 or 2?) with the SNP.
88 - Of course it’s a lot easier to remain totally principled when you are not fighting for the votes of a majority of the population. (which is the main reason why the Tories had to bring in the issue of cost and practicality when presenting their position to the public)
79 Best band around at the moment in my opinion. The new Album is as good as the old Album, I especially like “Television”, and suspect that will be their next single after “Tonight”
89 - 18% is a pretty good share in a Scottish poll for the Tories, isn’t it?
77. No i think if they had to it might well be genuine. If they did it with a big song and dance..maybe thats odd, they don’t need to.
79. Tell them to get their arse over to Belfast.
92 - 2% up on 2005 so not bad.
Eastern Eye: don’t have much of a sense of humour, do you? You must find life difficult at times.
ID cards are a bit like nuclear power - if one rummages around for past quotes one can find people from all parties in favour and against at different times. When I put my Bill forward there were a number of LibDem supporters, not just Mark Oaten - I just mention him because he was the LD spokesman on the issue. I was also told by two senior Tory front-benchers that they wanted to vote for it but had been told they couldn’t as it was a PMB.
94 - I was specifically referring to Scottish opinion polls though. The polls generally understate their support i think.
Peter the P, Tyson
Well done for admitting to have done what any sensible poster has done on this issue; changed your mind. The politicians about whom we are speculating change their minds all the time.
That Labour spin about their marginal polling is not today’s by the way. They’re raising, lowering, expectations all the time so we have no idea how true that is.
If you look at the material I posted above from the 2005 GE marginal polls I’m not sure I would roll the dice on Sunday’s poll but I’m not Gordon Brown. Surely you should pay attention to the MPs and agents whom you trust at least as much…
Does anyone have any more info on the marginal poll Ben Brogan has mentioned? Which paper and which polling organisation?
96 - I wouldn’t know. All I am saying is that in 2005 the Scottish Tories got 15.8% of the vote so if they were on 18% it would be pretty decent.
Anyway, on the polls scores:
I’ve mentioned before that I like to compare “like-with-like” - that is, compare ICM polls now with eve-of-election ICM polls; Populus polls now with eve-of-election Populus polls, etc.
Of course, a major change of methodology, such as (I believe) YouGov have done) makes that impossible, so comparing YouGov polls now with their eve-of-election one wouldn’t be a defensible position to take. So, with the ICM and Populus ones:
ICM
2005 eve-of-GE: 32/38/22
Yesterday: 38/38/16
3 point swing Lab-Con; 6 point swing LD-Con; 3 point swing LD-Lab.
Populus:
2005 eve-of-GE: 32/38/21
Yesterday: 36/39/15
1.5 point swing Lab-Con; 5 point swing LD-Con; 3 point swing LD-Lab.
Feel free to dismiss this as partisan chuntering (Personally, however, I’ve found that it deals with any (alleged or otherwise) systematic errors in the polls, without having to come up with any off-the-cuff adjustments, and as I’ve mentioned before, it works rather well historically).
I just mention it as food for thought.
97 - Does Gordon trust anyone though?
Great site btw - and congrats on the numbers. First post here- anyway I backed 2007 election at 11/1 back in july when a document called the sub-national review came out announcing the abolition of regional assemblies - thereby undermining the one clear policy the tories had. layed it off on betfair yesterday morning at 8/15. so winner all round. That said - still kicking myself cos he really will do it. And being right is more important to me than being rich. Brown is a fantastic campaigner and incredibly arrogant - in his own mind he knows that he will win (he could be wrong of course). And dont forget - being level in the polls is a lot better than where labour were in June and almost certainly better than where they will be next spring. He just wants to win once. on his own. the stuff about reduced majority isnt relevant. there thats my two penneth!
83. Marcus Wood. If you are correct and a deal is struck that is a very big story.
On the GE decision I have to express my continued astonishment. Clearly Brown has yet to make a decision. He seeks certainty that he will win at least a 40+ majority?
The volatility and sharp reductions in the most recent polls cannot provide him with much certainty. So we are led to believe he waits now for one further poll in the key marginal seats. With this degree of volatility, the fact that he would be asking the electorate to vote in an unnecessary election in November and the fact that most floating voters don’t make their mind up until the last 24 hours, all adds up to a distinct lack of certainty to me.
The bookies last time I looked have a Labour largest party result at 1/2. Thats no certainty in my book.
And still we wait. We will know soon enough.
95 “Eastern Eye: don’t have much of a sense of humour, do you? You must find life difficult at times.”
Did he touch a nerve there Nick
“ID cards are a bit like nuclear power - if one rummages around for past quotes one can find people from all parties in favour and against at different times.”
That may be true but you are a true authoritarian just look at your voting record http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/nick_palmer/broxtowe
95 - gotta say Nick, I know your position, but imho, we’re on the wrong side on this one. Is there no chance that ID cards might be quietly swept under the carpet. Illiberalism is the biggest threat to our big tent don’t you think?
100 - The “eve of election polls” in 2005 didn’t immediately postcede the conferences.
105,
Oh, indeed. This would only be valid if the election were today. But then, so would any estimates of seat shares - we keep seeing statements that GB is pretty much guaranteed a solid majority on even the shares from yesterday. My belief is that if those were the eve-of-election-2007 polls, he’d have a nasty shock.
(By the way: “postcede”. Good word. Remind me to use it myself when the opportunity arises
)
102 - He must have taken notice of the heavy hints of how the media would react to an election result? In that they are not going to be kind to him if he calls an election and gets anything less than a considerably increased majority.
97 Blue Moon - it’s PfP not PtP
98 Check out Brogan’s piece from the link I provided in post #70 above. It refers to private polling for Labour - although I don’t know which firm is involved, I imagine this is in the public domain.
I see 2007 has crept back to Evens with Betfair.
108 - Opinion Leader Research.
Nick
The most important point from the Populus poll in my view was that the Tories were picking up more LD votes than Labour. It’s the first time I remember such a finding and it is just one poll, of course. Given that the LD vote in the two Party marginals will likely drop significantly, who squeezes best could decide whether GB gets his decent majority or not whenever the GE is held.
I think I know the answer but what’s your guess about the split in Broxtowe? Of course there could be a Regional dimension with the Tories squeezing better in the South, particularly after the IHT announcement. That in itself could be dangerous for Labour, though, with all those Southern marginals.
If Ted is still about , I missed a post of yours earlier today where you applied the Mori certainty to vote filter to the Populus unweighted figures and came up with figures showing Conservatives in the lead . You cannot do this because Mori ask 2 questions the second being what they call a squeeze on the don’t know’s to the first question ” how would you vote in a GE ” and include these responses before applying the certainty to vote filter .
Peter from Putney Sorry again! I don’t think that the private polling is in the public domain. It was referred to yesterday in one newspaper at least. Personally I always take any Party’s spinning about their private polling with a sackful of salt.
111 - The Southern marginals point is a highly valid one I think. The Conservatives did spectacularly well in the London boroughs last year and in some parts of the South gave the Lib Dems a comprehensive spanking this year. Is the sense that that is broadly still the state of play? If so there are about a dozen London seats alone that would do the red-blue switch.
To put it all into perspective, here is a list of seat changes for the governing party at each election since 1950.
1950: -78
1951: -20
1955: +23
1959: +20
1964: -61
1966: +48
1970: -77
1974F: -33
1974O: +18
1979: -50
1983: +37
1987: -21
1992: -40
1997: -178
2001: -6
2005: -47
In other words, Gordon’s decision is either going be to very right… or very wrong!
Also… at the last 5 successive elections, the incumbent government has LOST seats…
93. Yokel - I’ll see what I can do. If you see they’ve booked a date sometime next year, remind me and I’ll try and sort you out. OT I had a bundle on them to win the Mercury Prize a few years back at 12/1 and they missed by one vote!
113. Ive seen this referred to on a few occasions in the elctronic and paper press so someone is mentioning it to journos.
111 Populus have only been showing the figures comparing vote in 2005 with voting intention now for a few months . ICM have been publishing them for much longer and pre Brown the Conservatives always were shown as picking up more LibDem votes than Labour .
114: Nonsense, my friend. The Conservative share of the vote rose a minimal amount (0.7%) since 2002 in the 2006 London borough elections. If this is ’spectacularly well’ I wonder what adjectives you have reserved for a vote share increase of more than one percentage point. And while the Conservatives did well in some southern Con/LD areas in 2007, they did poorly in others (Eastleigh for instance).
109 stjohn - Yesterday I was laying a 2007 GE at 11-4 and today I have been backing it at 11-10, in both cases with Hills.
My head hurts, I doing nothing more until there are more polls or other indicative evidence.
My feeling remains that he will go for it, simply because the hurdle for the Tories to win just looks totally impossible, even a hung Parliament would require a miracle. Also by wrapping it within Labour’s manifeso will enable him to make the EU problem go away. Finally, and I know this is childish, but I don’t suppose GB relishes having the entire opposition clucking at him henceforth every time he makes an appearance in the HoC.
117 - Opinion Leader Research. Not members of the BPC
115 - Indeed also I think I am right in saying that the Conservative Party is the only party to gain seats at four consecutive elections since the war. 1950 through 1959
115 - Yes, Rod, but as any financial adviser will tell you past performance does not guarantee future performance. Incumbent government parties (defined as those who had run the government for most of the preceding parliament as 1906 and 1931 are otherwise counter-examples) lost seats (net) in every single election between 1867 (second Reform Act) and 1955 - when suddenly it stopped and government parties gained seats in three out of four elections (1955, 1959, 1966 but not 1964). And if you look at share of the electorate, incumbent governments under threat increased their share in 1987 and 1992.
Argyll and Bute UA, Helensburgh and Lomond South
LD Andrew Nisbet was elected at stage four.
The percentage poll was 37.4% and the quota was 1060.
1st Round
LD 642
Con 627
Ind 493
SNP 356
(SNP eliminated)
Round 2 (with SNP votes redistributed)
LD 752 (+110)
Con 684 (+57)
Ind 606 (+113)
(Ind eliminated)
Round 3 (with Ind votes redistributed)
LD 1014 (+262)
Con 839 (+155)
(Con eliminated)
Result: LD win.
116. Dont mention that prize. I really fancied the Klaxons this year given the whole Winehouse furore and didnt follow through.
119 - If you are right then they managed to get the increase in the right places to tip a large number of councillors across. I suggest that if that is the case then they will be seeking to do the same in a general election, they may not be as successful but it should be worth a few seats.
115. You would have to go back to the 1950s to the last time an incumbent government gained seats - other than for exceptional reasons.
The most recent government gains have reasonable explanations.
1983: Falklands factor combined with ruinous division in the opposition.
1974O: An election in two halves. Merely completing the inconclusive February result.
1966: Likewise, completing the near-inconclusive 1964 result.
So Brown is really looking back to Macmillan or Eden if he expects to increase Labour’s seats…
120. Peter. Well done getting the 11/4 yesterday. As I relayed to you last night I tried to get the 11/4 but missed it. Easy profit for you whatever happens. Say 40 @ 11/4 and 75 @ evens. Profit of 35 for a stake of 115 over a maximum of 3 months. Not a bad return for no risk.
Unlike Yokel I’m not seeking to do any tidy housekeeping. And unlike yourself I still think he will duck it. So I lose on 2007 but win oodles if we go to the ballot in 2010.
123, “ncumbent government parties (defined as those who had run the government for most of the preceding parliament as 1906 and 1931 are otherwise counter-examples) lost seats (net) in every single election between 1867 (second Reform Act) and 1955″
I seem to recall Churchill trying to use that as an excuse to Eden in order to avoid handing over to him. Along the lines of not wanting Eden to be a fag-end Premier, maybe he should let Churchill take the inevitable loss at the election and keep it as small as possible in order to bounce back higher after the handover.
Which goes to show that one of the most experienced politicians of the 20th century can be misled by projecting trends from the past into the future and forgetting that they were trends. Not laws.
Nick Palmer, you shouldnt worry about my sense of humour.
However, communists, socialists and your ilk are indeed darkness.
I have a joke. What is more effective to an Al Queda Terrorist, attacking British soldiers or immigrating and voting Labour?
Funny no?
It isn’t your fault you are socialist, you were born that way. However your judgment lacks.
127 - Wasn’t the opposition in the 1950’s pretty grim which allowed the govt breathing space. The 1959 election held 2 years after the Suez disaster and the govt gets nearly 50% of the vote and a very solid majority.
” Why are we here, that is the question. And we are blessed in this, that we happen to know the answer. Yes, in this immense confusion one thing alone is clear. We are waiting for Gordon”
(with apologies to Samuel Beckett)
Same place tomorrow, same questions, same answers. Off to bed.
p.s. 130 Eastern Eye - your are a bore. This is a site to discuss trends, for some to make money, have a look at Comment is Free, much more your type of blog.
131. No new polls tomorrow, only more details of ones we’ve already had.
111: BlueMoon: I’m absolutely convinced that the LD vote will break more than 2-1 for Labour in Broxtowe insofar as it breaks at all. But we may not be typical: we have a long-running Lib/Lab coalition on the council, relations at all levels are pretty cordial after the inevitable strains at local elections, and much of the LibDem vote is ‘Guardian’ in quality, with a visceral dislike of the Tories - their main grumbles with Labour are that we’re insufficiently generous on asylum, too close to the US, etc.
There is a big exception (Stapleford) which is more Liverpool-like with strong working-class Lab-Lib rivalry going back years, but the Tories have been largely inactive there except at election time and are not seen as a very serious option.
The Tory candidate is making a point that she was once a Liberal party member, but that’s (so far as I can tell) engendering more amusement than support.
“So Brown is really looking back to Macmillan or Eden if he expects to increase Labour’s seats…”
And they were 2nd and 3rd term elections, not 4th….
Ergo, there are no reasonable grounds for believing Labour’s seats will increase…
[don't bother quoting any pre mass-suffrage counter examples, Mr. Toad!]
Out of the Great Fog some things appear to be emerging:
1. For some reason Labour haven’t yet called it off so,
2. The Tory surge was on IHT not Cameron (the latter remains very unpopular) and,
3. Labour are convinced they can pull apart the Tories on IHT
4. On Tuesday they will shoot the Tory fox either by 4.1 offering their own tax cuts or, far more likely, 4.2 explaining why they are not possible
Thanks, Ted.
Had a look at Spreadfair’s Brown weeks figures - they look odd, with a huge gap opened up between sell and buy. I’ve not looked at it since yesterday, but it looks as though someone’s bought up nearly all the sells. Whether anyone knows anything or it’s just a wild speculator, who knows?
133. I thought it was previously reported that the Populus poll was continuing today and the complete poll would be in Saturday’s paper (so should come out tonight).
135 - Rod, the Toad only aims to cast doubt on any of these observed trends being iron laws, including those about 4th terms and gains in seats. Before 1992, after all, there were no observed cases of 4th terms so one could conclude that they didn’t happen, but that wasn’t a reason to a priori dismiss Tory chances of winning! Leadership changes do seem to matter a lot. Bear in mind also that the Labour win in 2005 was on a very low share of the vote on a very low turnout, and that the relationship between votes and seats under FPTP can be a bit… random.
129 - Andy, completely agree.
126 - it was more a matter of Labour’s vote fragmenting all over the place and handing victories to the Conservatives in places where the Conservative vote hadn’t risen at all (e.g. Croydon). In this it was in part a catching-up with what had happened to GE voting between 2001 and 2005. There were a few places where the Conservatives did very well, e.g. Bexley (+24 seats) and Ealing (+20) which two boroughs account for approaching a third of the party’s entire gains. While there are two Labour marginals in Ealing, Bexleyheath went Tory in 2005 already, and there were local issues (as always in big turnovers in local elections).
136 - 1. Seems that way yes 2. It remains to be seen what caused the shift, 23% have changed their mind on Cameron so not remining anything. 3. They would say that 4. Well they will aim to. If they do 4.1 then there will be a row which they may well come off wors from who knows 4.2 is more credible however they have been trying for days and it doesn’t appear to be working with anyone but hardcore supporters so it is unlikely to suddenly start working on Tuesday.
For what it’s worth, the Newsnight 3 panel, Finkelstein et al, vote 3-0 against an 07 election.
Anthony Wells reports that the News of the World will carry an ICM poll on the state of play in the marginals on Sunday.
By the way Danny Finckelstein advised GB to go in the autumn a month or so ago on the same programme! Mind you he didn’t have the polling in front of him that he did tonight.
Brown wouldn’t take any notice of any of those three.
I think he’s gonna do it.
142. The last time NOW did one marginals it wasn’t that accurate.
YouGov for Sun Times as well.
Well done Mike for a great read, and as you say, to everyone for keeping it civilised.
I feel confident Brown will go for it, though he has been upstaged for the time being by the Cameron IHT promise.
Rod 115 and 127 I also seem to think that 1951 / 55 was a case where the incoming Tories in ‘51 had a pretty small majority and 55 just strengthened that. So, in fact that leaves 1959 as the ONLY election without a good explanation (was it the accession of Macmillan as a new Pm after Eden and Suez?) It was the first election I was at all interested in as a kid, and I remember it being thought pretty exceptional at the time. I suppose Gordon could look on it as a good omen if it was about new PM. But then, John Major…. however, as the latter always tells us, he won a greater number of votes for the Tories than any other party leader in history (or some such!)
Nick Boles selected to replace Quentin Davies in Grantham and Stamford I understand
146 - Macmillan suceeded Eden in January 1957 and the election wasn’t held until October 1959 so SuperMac had been PM for nearly 3 years.
Nice to see a liquid 2-way market tonight in the Dec 2007 or Earlier tonight.
The reality here is that Labour bounced to an ICM 14% lead during their conference so the “neck and neck” situation around the Tory conference would suggest a normalised Labour lead somewhere in the middle?
How long until we get to that stage though - too late for Brown to make a decision?
142 - No I don’t! ICM have apparantly got a poll in the NotW and they’ve done marginal polls in the past, so putting 2 and 2 together, it could well be them. But I don’t have any inside knowledge of it.
More details of Scottish YouGov - still with health warning
Nats commissioned poll and had to release it - so I am told.
Again, this is 3rd hand
Lab 42
SNP 27
Con 18
Lib 11
Good for Lab, not at all bad for Tories, ok for Nats, disaster for LDs
44.”Despite the risks, will Brown’s animosity, rather than confidence, push him into an election that could wreck his premiership?”
Ted, I have always been convinced that the best time for Brown to go is now, but I have equally been as convinced that he won’t do it. Everything I have read about Brown the politician would also indicate that his animosity, arrogance and thin skin is his weakest point.
Reports indicate that he has been angered by the attacks from the Conservatives at their conference and by the media, he does not seem to cope well under this type of pressure and that is when he makes mistakes.
It is the reason that he brought forward that ill timed Iraq visit, and just might prove me wrong about an Autumn election.
61.”Even so, while he might be good, but he’s not in the same league (yet) as Hague or Davis - but as shadow chancellor he has to be expected to score as many hits on the government as those two.”
David, I disagree. Hague and Davis do not have the political astuteness of Osborne, if they had, they might have seen their careers paths pan out slightly differently. You are trying to compare apples and oranges because both shadow Foreign affairs and the Home office were more high profile in recent years. Until the power transfer, how many times did you see Brown at the despatch box or in media interviews apart from Budget day?
77.Alex, thanks to the behaviour of this government I have become cynical enough to have reached the same conclusion as yourself. They have got so much form for spinning a story to deflect media heat I would not put it pass them!
102.I think your on the money with your analysis stjohn.