Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Combination therapy. An occasional reminder that using seat pr

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited August 11 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Combination therapy. An occasional reminder that using seat predictors on current polling is stupid

You see it happen regularly, on here and on twitter. A new opinion poll comes out, showing dramatic news. Immediately, we decamp to Electoral Calculus and Flavible, to discover that such a poll, if replicated at a general election, would produce a hung Parliament with Plaid Cymru the largest party, able to form a coalition with the Greens and Lady Sylvia Hermon. The oracles have spoken. “Cor blimey”, we expostulate.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630
    Cracking article, Alistair.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Second! I am sure the article will be good.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630
    The great imponderable is the performance of the Brexit party in an actual general election. It’s quite possible it will get nowhere near the support it seems to have in opinion polls - and possible (though less likely, I suspect) that it might get those votes.

    Have we ever had a large scale nationwide protest vote in a general election ?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Whenever I run these models, the BXP seat is usually Thurrock, with Hartlepool next. Or on one permutation (a low one for Labour, IIRC) a handful in Derbyshire.

    The attraction of these models, of course, is that we have an absurd voting system where knowing the levels of support for the parties tells you remarkably little about how they are likely to be represented.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,432
    Very interesting, thanks Alastair. Perhaps it would be worth repeating this analysis for the 2005 election when the Big 2 got (in GB):

    69.4% of the vote
    88% of seats
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Yes, it’s a good article, with perhaps two weaknesses. It doesn’t say anything about the changing drivers of voting behaviour, and doesn’t give the latest models enough credit for at least trying to adapt UNS to something more appropriate. Flavible in particular are trying to solve the very problem the lead is expounding. And a third issue is the possibility of alliances between at least some of the parties (or among at least some of their voters).

    The reason why these models are likely to be less reliable isn’t solely because we are expecting dramatic falls in the level of support for both major parties - it is also because the demographic and hence geographical basis of support for both of them is changing.

    If the level of party support shifted dramatically, but still along the same lines as the previous GE, the models would be more reliable. Yet we can see that UNS has already broken down - because it’s a model that *ought* to work backwards as well as forwards (on the same boundaries), yet you can key the 2010 or 2015 election results into a UNS model and get nowhere near the actual result.

    In particular the models are struggling with identifying where the possible 10-15% extra vote share for the BXP and LibDems and the possible extra 5% for the Greens might fall. The one thing that is unlikely is that it arrives as a straight swing (after all, in the LibDem’s case it didn’t depart as one).

    The Liberals did exceptionally well in 1974 (esp February - indeed Feb 74 remains the third party high water mark in many southern seats), yet, not having a core constituency beyond the then-called Celtic fringe, their seat tally was barely into double figures.

    An undercommented observation on recent polling is that, just as the Conservatives lose their base in the middle class of all ages and move toward a more evenly spread vote across the census categories, the LibDems are acquiring a base of educated working age people which has some of the same geographical characteristics. At vote shares into the 20%s, this ought to offer a sounder basis for winning seats across a broad swathe of the south.

    A further feature of the more even distribution of Conservative support is that, at lower vote shares, they start to run into similar problems as the LibDems. This was beginning to show in some of the polls prior to the ascent of Bozo, which gave significant Labour seat leads for relatively small vote leads. There is a tipping point opening up beneath the Conservatives in the high 20%s-30% that is broadly the same as the one that always eluded the LibDems coming from below.

    If Project Fear is even partly true, Bozo may get to explore that for himself.


  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 34,681
    Amen.

    As Rob Ford pointed out, anyone doing seat projections off current polling is either a fool or a knave.......

    .....and as for those doing seat projections off hypothetical polling questions ("Imagine Britain has left the EU with/without a deal and Jeremy Corbyn is still leader of the opposition, and there's an 'r' in the month... - extremely dodgy at the best of times) a cad, a scoundrel and a poltroon to boot (or a tramp, a tart and an unfit mother, as the case may be.)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Nigelb said:

    The great imponderable is the performance of the Brexit party in an actual general election. It’s quite possible it will get nowhere near the support it seems to have in opinion polls - and possible (though less likely, I suspect) that it might get those votes.

    Have we ever had a large scale nationwide protest vote in a general election ?

    Surely UKIP 2015?
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 158
    Go onto the Guardian website and read the article by Sajid Javid calling for ref2... shocking but not for the reason you might imagine!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 34,681
    Scott_P said:
    Trust she makes a complete recovery - and although it was diagnosed well after she decided to divorce Johnson, it doesn't look great.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169
    JonWC said:

    Go onto the Guardian website and read the article by Sajid Javid calling for ref2... shocking but not for the reason you might imagine!

    Yes - a bit of an “oops” moment by the Guardian there!
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 1,989

    Scott_P said:
    Trust she makes a complete recovery - and although it was diagnosed well after she decided to divorce Johnson, it doesn't look great.
    But the story was squashed from front page in latter editions replaced by photo of HMQ. I can’t imagine why!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,586
    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    Go onto the Guardian website and read the article by Sajid Javid calling for ref2... shocking but not for the reason you might imagine!

    Yes - a bit of an “oops” moment by the Guardian there!
    Yes; misspelling taken to a new level!
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 158
    edited August 11
    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite. I suppose if they leave it a bit longer it can spawn 50 articles about how unconscious racism affects the best of us.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    I looked but couldn’t see it. Is is the article by Sadiq?
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169
    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 158
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    I looked but couldn’t see it. Is is the article by Sadiq?
    It's still very much by Sajid on the homepage.. guess they hadn't realised there is more than one issue.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 158
    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 34,681
    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:
    Trust she makes a complete recovery - and although it was diagnosed well after she decided to divorce Johnson, it doesn't look great.
    But the story was squashed from front page in latter editions replaced by photo of HMQ. I can’t imagine why!
    The 2AM edition is the later (possibly last) edition - the earlier editions carried the full page queen story.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 34,681
    IanB2 said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    I looked but couldn’t see it. Is is the article by Sadiq?

    The only 'Sadiq' article I can find is the Khan one:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/10/sadiq-khan-boris-johnson-parliamentary-poker
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 1,989

    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:
    Trust she makes a complete recovery - and although it was diagnosed well after she decided to divorce Johnson, it doesn't look great.
    But the story was squashed from front page in latter editions replaced by photo of HMQ. I can’t imagine why!
    The 2AM edition is the later (possibly last) edition - the earlier editions carried the full page queen story.

    Ok I got them the wrong way round then looking for a conspiracy that probably isn’t but odd you would put that story in a latter edition when it must have been available earlier.
  • JonWC said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
    Can't find it now.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,572
    Good morning, everyone.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,757

    JonWC said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
    Can't find it now.
    ditto
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169

    JonWC said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
    Can't find it now.
    Guardian front page - scroll down past Sport to Opinion - on the right below Brown link.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 1,989
    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
    Can't find it now.
    Guardian front page - scroll down past Sport to Opinion - on the right below Brown link.
    You need to be in UK edition not international to see it and it’s stll there.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,274
    Can’t remember even seeing a PC/Green/Hermon prediction on Baxter.

    Flavibile is a spotty student in a bedsit and regularly predicts the Lib Dems sweeping screeds of Scottish seats from 3rd place. I’ll pay attention when the site owner needs to buy a razor.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    nichomar said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
    Can't find it now.
    Guardian front page - scroll down past Sport to Opinion - on the right below Brown link.
    You need to be in UK edition not international to see it and it’s stll there.
    Not on mine it isn't. UK edition, below Brown is Alistair Burt. The only Javid story is the one higher up about his stupid 50ps.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,757
    its not there.. why doesn't someone post the link1
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,432
    nichomar said:

    nichomar said:

    Scott_P said:
    Trust she makes a complete recovery - and although it was diagnosed well after she decided to divorce Johnson, it doesn't look great.
    But the story was squashed from front page in latter editions replaced by photo of HMQ. I can’t imagine why!
    The 2AM edition is the later (possibly last) edition - the earlier editions carried the full page queen story.

    Ok I got them the wrong way round then looking for a conspiracy that probably isn’t but odd you would put that story in a latter edition when it must have been available earlier.
    Newspapers often hold back scoops so they cannot be copied by rival papers.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,801
    Fascinating header Alastair.

    ....Smelling salts for HYUFD please
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169
    edited August 11

    its not there.. why doesn't someone post the link1

    Gone now, I think.

    Picture

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,988

    Can’t remember even seeing a PC/Green/Hermon prediction on Baxter.

    Flavibile is a spotty student in a bedsit and regularly predicts the Lib Dems sweeping screeds of Scottish seats from 3rd place. I’ll pay attention when the site owner needs to buy a razor.

    I think Flavible was the most accurate on the Euros.

  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,274
    Sunday Herald: Scottish Labour income has dropped 60% in one year, and is now at lowest level since records began.

    And Lord (George) Foulkes is getting medieval on Shadow Scottish Secretary Lesley Laird. The right-wingers smell Corbyn blood.

    Income 2018: 259,425
    Income 2016: 1,073,108

    Donations I Leonard’s first year fell from 153 thousand to 36 thousand.

    PPCs in full panic mode, fearing snap elections.

    Move by HQ to prevent SLab branches selecting their own candidates: HQ wants to do selecting.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 1,989
    IanB2 said:

    nichomar said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    alex. said:

    JonWC said:

    I'm a bit surprised they haven't corrected it yet given the present version would be political dynamite.

    Before clicking on the link I was genuinely trying to work out what angle the article was going to be putting. I couldn’t think of one - possibly an old tweet or something! Takes “click bait” to a new level!
    Snap. Tells you a lot about what is wrong with journalism even at the rarified level of the Guardian when your first thought is, how the hell can they have got that headline from whatever this person has actually said?
    Can't find it now.
    Guardian front page - scroll down past Sport to Opinion - on the right below Brown link.
    You need to be in UK edition not international to see it and it’s stll there.
    Not on mine it isn't. UK edition, below Brown is Alistair Burt. The only Javid story is the one higher up about his stupid 50ps.
    They’ve rejigged the page now but interesting article on rivers turning blue in Somerset.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,988
    Congratulations to Dick Braine, but who knew UKIP had a leadership contest at the moment? I remember when they were a thing.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,801

    Amen.

    As Rob Ford pointed out, anyone doing seat projections off current polling is either a fool or a knave.......

    .....and as for those doing seat projections off hypothetical polling questions ("Imagine Britain has left the EU with/without a deal and Jeremy Corbyn is still leader of the opposition, and there's an 'r' in the month... - extremely dodgy at the best of times) a cad, a scoundrel and a poltroon to boot (or a tramp, a tart and an unfit mother, as the case may be.)

    My favourite was an early Yougov for the Mail. 'Does Cherie Blair being married to the prime minister make you more or less likely to vote Labour?'
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    edited August 11
    Foxy said:

    Can’t remember even seeing a PC/Green/Hermon prediction on Baxter.

    Flavibile is a spotty student in a bedsit and regularly predicts the Lib Dems sweeping screeds of Scottish seats from 3rd place. I’ll pay attention when the site owner needs to buy a razor.

    I think Flavible was the most accurate on the Euros.

    And predicted B&R within a whisker.

    Maybe a statistics/politics student is what is needed to break away from broken UNS.

    Don't we owe much of the stuff on the internet to such people?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,801
    Foxy said:

    Congratulations to Dick Braine, but who knew UKIP had a leadership contest at the moment? I remember when they were a thing.

    That's something to leave off his CV
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    Foxy said:

    Congratulations to Dick Braine, but who knew UKIP had a leadership contest at the moment? I remember when they were a thing.

    Desperately unfortunate name. Even Ed Balls is poking fun at it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,757
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    and its not fascinating either
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,801
    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Spot the deep blue around Hartlepool
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,988
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    Hard to see SLAB surviving. SCon will probably retain one or two.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    I don't really get all these pacts, formed purely on the basis of opposing something (Tories, Brexit...) often between parties who have vast areas where they lack common ground. It just reinforces the idea that the Conservatives are the default option for power and gives the impression of the expectation that that will continue. Because if they weren't in power, the "pact" parties would have limited mandate to go forward with their own policies.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    Swinson would be crazy to go for such an alliance, and as she's not crazy and is Scottish so will doubtless has a good grasp of electoral currents I doubt if she will. It would make the Tories pretty much the sole Unionist option in Scotland and that must be worth ten points on its own in the current febrile atmosphere.

    What Swinson needs to do is convince people the Liberal Democrats are the only meaningful and sane Scotland-wide alternative to the SNP and best placed to both protect the divers unions the people of Scotland voted for and deliver the promises made in 2014 and since ignored. Helpfully the Tories and Labour are doing a very good job of making this a reality without her having to lift a finger.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    Swinson would be crazy to go for such an alliance, and as she's not crazy and is Scottish so will doubtless has a good grasp of electoral currents I doubt if she will. It would make the Tories pretty much the sole Unionist option in Scotland and that must be worth ten points on its own in the current febrile atmosphere.

    What Swinson needs to do is convince people the Liberal Democrats are the only meaningful and sane Scotland-wide alternative to the SNP and best placed to both protect the divers unions the people of Scotland voted for and deliver the promises made in 2014 and since ignored. Helpfully the Tories and Labour are doing a very good job of making this a reality without her having to lift a finger.
    +1

    Flavible's predictions of some LibDem Scottish gains from third place could easily be realistic in such circumstances.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 1,989
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
    Apart from them not being in the EU but missing Poland because the sheep wouldn’t stand still long enough to be counted.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    edited August 11
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
    Cattle in those countries, rather than sheep. But also I think it's just the EU. There must be sheep in Serbia, for example.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Roger said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Spot the deep blue around Hartlepool
    Isnt that the Borders?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,572
    Mr. Doethur, pretty easy line for her. Just so she's the only one consistently pro-union.

    For the UK, for the EU.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
    Cattle in those countries, rather than sheep. But also I think it's just the EU. There must be sheep in Serbia, for example.
    But Iceland has sheep on the map and not in the EU.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169

    Mr. Doethur, pretty easy line for her. Just so she's the only one consistently pro-union.

    For the UK, for the EU.

    If you think Brexit was a sh*tshow...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,988
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    Swinson would be crazy to go for such an alliance, and as she's not crazy and is Scottish so will doubtless has a good grasp of electoral currents I doubt if she will. It would make the Tories pretty much the sole Unionist option in Scotland and that must be worth ten points on its own in the current febrile atmosphere.

    What Swinson needs to do is convince people the Liberal Democrats are the only meaningful and sane Scotland-wide alternative to the SNP and best placed to both protect the divers unions the people of Scotland voted for and deliver the promises made in 2014 and since ignored. Helpfully the Tories and Labour are doing a very good job of making this a reality without her having to lift a finger.
    An alliance with the SNP isn't really viable, but a pitch for the double unionist vote in Scotland (UK and EU) is a viable, abeit niche position.

    PC is a slightly different kettle of fish, as I think even PC think Welsh independence is some way off, and LDs have long been pro devolution and geographic economic redistribution.

    All alliances fall apart on local egos. It seems that no one hates a politician from X more than his neighbour with slightly different politics.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514

    Mr. Doethur, pretty easy line for her. Just so she's the only one consistently pro-union.

    For the UK, for the EU.

    And that has the merit of being consistent. Unlike the SNP, who are mostly pro-EU and yet anti-UK, or the Tories who are officially pro-UK, and increasingly hysterical about being anti-EU.

    I think the Liberal Democrats need to show right now they are strong enough to be a serious force on their own. If they cuddle up to the SNP in an anti-Tory pact it could easily be counterproductive. There must be a number of seats where a Unionist vote decisive in the last elections for the Liberal Democrats swinging behind the Tories would topple an incumbent.

    But tbh, I think this is like yesterday's ridiculous claims. It's kite-flying by people who very much want it to happen, and believe it worked in B&R because hey are pig ignorant of what happened there, but have no understanding that it wouldn't work where the dynamics are not solely Leave/Remain - which is basically Scotland, Wales, the semi-rural Norh of England and the West Country (or 'most places' for short).
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,988
    nichomar said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
    Apart from them not being in the EU but missing Poland because the sheep wouldn’t stand still long enough to be counted.
    The linked article does state that Eurostat doesnt have data for some countries.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    Swinson would be crazy to go for such an alliance, and as she's not crazy and is Scottish so will doubtless has a good grasp of electoral currents I doubt if she will. It would make the Tories pretty much the sole Unionist option in Scotland and that must be worth ten points on its own in the current febrile atmosphere.

    What Swinson needs to do is convince people the Liberal Democrats are the only meaningful and sane Scotland-wide alternative to the SNP and best placed to both protect the divers unions the people of Scotland voted for and deliver the promises made in 2014 and since ignored. Helpfully the Tories and Labour are doing a very good job of making this a reality without her having to lift a finger.
    An alliance with the SNP isn't really viable, but a pitch for the double unionist vote in Scotland (UK and EU) is a viable, abeit niche position.

    PC is a slightly different kettle of fish, as I think even PC think Welsh independence is some way off, and LDs have long been pro devolution and geographic economic redistribution.

    All alliances fall apart on local egos. It seems that no one hates a politician from X more than his neighbour with slightly different politics.
    Plaid Cymru have said they would hold a referendum on Welsh independence. Whether they actually believe they could win it is a different question. I think it's more probable that it's Adam Price pitching to Leanne Wood's supporters.

    As for a niche position, I'm not sure I agree. There are studies suggesting as many as a third of SNP supporters voted for Brexit including a substantial number of MSPs. Which implies here must have been a fairly solid vote for the EU among Unionists. Probably many of them Labour - but Labour is rapidly abandoning both unions. The Liberal Democrats could easily hoover up support from there, as they are already doing over what appear to be a number of issues.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,906
    Yes, it's utterly pointless trying to predict seat totals from polls in the current climate. Has to be done though. Which got me thinking. Are there any other examples of things which are simultaneously pointless yet have to be done? Memorizing derby winners since 1975? Chatting about holidays to your hairdresser? Life?

    And what about leading UKIP? That surely counts.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Braine_(politician)

    A thin public CV, very thin, but went to King's, which is not too shabby. Perhaps he will surprise and do great things in the populist far right space.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
    Cattle in those countries, rather than sheep. But also I think it's just the EU. There must be sheep in Serbia, for example.
    But Iceland has sheep on the map and not in the EU.
    Good spot. Hadn't thought of that. Perhaps this is the more convincing explanation:
    Foxy said:

    nichomar said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    The gaps are interesting. I'd have thought there'd be sheep in Norway and Switzerland.
    Apart from them not being in the EU but missing Poland because the sheep wouldn’t stand still long enough to be counted.
    The linked article does state that Eurostat doesnt have data for some countries.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,988
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    It could easily be Tory-free without them having to bother.
    Swinson would be crazy to go for such an alliance, and as she's not crazy and is Scottish so will doubtless has a good grasp of electoral currents I doubt if she will. It would make the Tories pretty much the sole Unionist option in Scotland and that must be worth ten points on its own in the current febrile atmosphere.

    What Swinson needs to do is convince people the Liberal Democrats are the only meaningful and sane Scotland-wide alternative to the SNP and best placed to both protect the divers unions the people of Scotland voted for and deliver the promises made in 2014 and since ignored. Helpfully the Tories and Labour are doing a very good job of making this a reality without her having to lift a finger.
    An alliance with the SNP isn't really viable, but a pitch for the double unionist vote in Scotland (UK and EU) is a viable, abeit niche position.

    PC is a slightly different kettle of fish, as I think even PC think Welsh independence is some way off, and LDs have long been pro devolution and geographic economic redistribution.

    All alliances fall apart on local egos. It seems that no one hates a politician from X more than his neighbour with slightly different politics.
    Plaid Cymru have said they would hold a referendum on Welsh independence. Whether they actually believe they could win it is a different question. I think it's more probable that it's Adam Price pitching to Leanne Wood's supporters.

    As for a niche position, I'm not sure I agree. There are studies suggesting as many as a third of SNP supporters voted for Brexit including a substantial number of MSPs. Which implies here must have been a fairly solid vote for the EU among Unionists. Probably many of them Labour - but Labour is rapidly abandoning both unions. The Liberal Democrats could easily hoover up support from there, as they are already doing over what appear to be a number of issues.
    Yes, I think the Unionist vote in Scotland is mostly double Unionist, and that will be a problem for Boris. I agre that there is a significant Leave vote for the SNP, a double Leave.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 11,259
    The Lib Dems in Scotland lost a shed load of voters in certain seats to Team Ruth. Now that Team Ruth is a shattered husk of a distant memory with Bojo in charge they are well poised to hoover up those previously lost votes.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 947
    edited August 11
    IanB2 said:

    Yes, it’s a good article, with perhaps two weaknesses.

    ...................................

    An undercommented observation on recent polling is that, just as the Conservatives lose their base in the middle class of all ages and move toward a more evenly spread vote across the census categories, the LibDems are acquiring a base of educated working age people which has some of the same geographical characteristics. At vote shares into the 20%s, this ought to offer a sounder basis for winning seats across a broad swathe of the south.

    A further feature of the more even distribution of Conservative support is that, at lower vote shares, they start to run into similar problems as the LibDems. This was beginning to show in some of the polls prior to the ascent of Bozo, which gave significant Labour seat leads for relatively small vote leads. There is a tipping point opening up beneath the Conservatives in the high 20%s-30% that is broadly the same as the one that always eluded the LibDems coming from below.

    If Project Fear is even partly true, Bozo may get to explore that for himself.



    Sorry but I have had to delete some of Ian's comments to get this in, which I really didn't want to do.

    Agree good article, but also very much agree with Ian's points. Exactly my thoughts.

    UNS assumes the parties have the same make up of voters as before with the edges flaking off to other parties as percentages go up and down. But we don't know that is the case this time and there is evidence that it isn't. Both the Labour and Tory party may well have changed their core vote with Momentum and Brexit and who is to say the LD vote of 20% is made up of the same 20% they had before they plunged to 5% for nearly a decade, particularly as although they have always been pro EU they are very, very much more clearly defined as the Remain party now. just look at their support in London now. Clearly very different to the past when they were on the same percentage

    As evidence of this look at Scotland. When I was young Scotland was Tory. It became solid Labour, now it is solid SNP. Apply UNS in the past did not produce those changes. Something else happened.

    UNS works when the voters are basically the same and you apply the percentage changes to those voters. If the voters change it doesn't work.

    Now Justin might be right in JRM seat as might HYFUD in all the analysis he does. After all they at least have the starting position right so the probability is on their side. However I don't think the probable results are anywhere near as high as they think they are. We would be in a different world.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 642
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    Here's a handy (pre-Brexit) map of where our continent's sheep live:

    Shouldn't there be an enormous dot over Strasbourg?

    Or are the MEPs in Brussels right now?
    UK lamb must be the most under rated product at home. We won't starve if we eat it instead of exporting it all.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Doethur, pretty easy line for her. Just so she's the only one consistently pro-union.

    For the UK, for the EU.

    And that has the merit of being consistent. Unlike the SNP, who are mostly pro-EU and yet anti-UK, or the Tories who are officially pro-UK, and increasingly hysterical about being anti-EU.

    I think the Liberal Democrats need to show right now they are strong enough to be a serious force on their own. If they cuddle up to the SNP in an anti-Tory pact it could easily be counterproductive. There must be a number of seats where a Unionist vote decisive in the last elections for the Liberal Democrats swinging behind the Tories would topple an incumbent.

    But tbh, I think this is like yesterday's ridiculous claims. It's kite-flying by people who very much want it to happen, and believe it worked in B&R because hey are pig ignorant of what happened there, but have no understanding that it wouldn't work where the dynamics are not solely Leave/Remain - which is basically Scotland, Wales, the semi-rural Norh of England and the West Country (or 'most places' for short).
    Rumours are still circulating that the LDs have three defections (Wollaston, Lee and Allen most often mentioned) for September, either early on or for Conference. These rumours have been around for a while, but we know nothing is going to happen this month.

    Meanwhile the LDs have won every single local by-election in which they've stood for three weeks' running now.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,757
    kinabalu said:

    Yes, it's utterly pointless trying to predict seat totals from polls in the current climate. Has to be done though. Which got me thinking. Are there any other examples of things which are simultaneously pointless yet have to be done? Memorizing derby winners since 1975? Chatting about holidays to your hairdresser? Life?

    And what about leading UKIP? That surely counts.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Braine_(politician)

    A thin public CV, very thin, but went to King's, which is not too shabby. Perhaps he will surprise and do great things in the populist far right space.

    very judgemental of you.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,011

    Has Meeks not noticed that Electoral Calculus (after all run by a mathematician) predict the PROBABILITIES of seats being won by each party ?

    E.g., Belfast North has a probability of 0.6 DUP and 0.4 SF ?

    Not DUP 1 and SF 0.

    Brecon and Radnorshire has LibDem 0.4, Tories 0.36, TBP 0.18, Lab 0.05, PC 0.01

    Not LD 1, Others 0.

    When you construct the seat totals, it is better to weight by the probabilities in the adding.

    That is another guide to the number of seats likely to be won by each party.

    I would guess the "truth" lies between the total number of seats weighted by the probabilities and the total number of seats taking 1 for a win and 0 for a loss.

    Of course, Baxter probably has the full pdfs, so he could do a still better job, but there is enough data on Electoral Calculus to do better job than implied in the wordy header.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 30,697
    Meanwhile, we have learned this weekend that No Deal Brexit = Business bailouts, emergency airlifts and higher prices. The Tories are stuck in the low 30s in the polls while all this is abstract, not real. They cannot wait too long for a general election. They need one in early November at the very latest.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,572
    Mr. P, very unfair of Lord Heseltine.

    Why, only today we have the Clown Prince promising more money for this and that.

    What? No alternative proposal for leaving the EU beyond "You come up with something"? Look, another spending pledge!

    [There is a case to be made for leaving with no deal, namely that the backstop prevents us leaving it without the EU's permission. The way the Clown is proceeding does not fill one with confidence in his abilities].
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 9,111
    edited August 11
    Current projections show there has been essentially no movement since 2017 between the Lab (+LD+Green etc) block and the Con (+BXP+UKIP) block, where the parties in brackets weren't much of a feature last time, but will be this time.

    Given this, I think we need to break the prediction down into four groups:

    1. Labour marginals (Con 2nd): How much bigger is the 2017 Lab voter switch to LD switch than the Con to BXP one? This determines the number of Cons gains.

    2. Cons marginals (Labour 2nd): The opposite. This determines the number of Labour gains.

    3. Cons (LDs second) By-election style tactical voting squeeze leads to LD gains. Similar possibilities for the Brexit Party.

    4. Any Cons seat in Scotland: How many 2017 Cons voters will switch to other parties leading to a loss of that seat, typically to the SNP?

    Add up the group gains and losses to get to the net loss or gain

    On current projections, I suggest 1 will happen with Cons gains at the expense of Labour; 2 won't happen; 3 will happen but perhaps not huge numbers and very little for the BXP; 4 will happen with the loss of most of most Con seats in Scotland.

    The question is whether (1) > (3) + (4)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 48,427

    Meanwhile, we have learned this weekend that No Deal Brexit = Business bailouts, emergency airlifts and higher prices. The Tories are stuck in the low 30s in the polls while all this is abstract, not real. They cannot wait too long for a general election. They need one in early November at the very latest.

    Needs to be before the first airlift
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,526
    Alistair said:

    The Lib Dems in Scotland lost a shed load of voters in certain seats to Team Ruth. Now that Team Ruth is a shattered husk of a distant memory with Bojo in charge they are well poised to hoover up those previously lost votes.

    Tories on 23% in latest Yougov in Scotland, LDs on 14% and Slab on 12%
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Mr. Doethur, pretty easy line for her. Just so she's the only one consistently pro-union.

    For the UK, for the EU.

    And that has the merit of being consistent. Unlike the SNP, who are mostly pro-EU and yet anti-UK, or the Tories who are officially pro-UK, and increasingly hysterical about being anti-EU.

    I think the Liberal Democrats need to show right now they are strong enough to be a serious force on their own. If they cuddle up to the SNP in an anti-Tory pact it could easily be counterproductive. There must be a number of seats where a Unionist vote decisive in the last elections for the Liberal Democrats swinging behind the Tories would topple an incumbent.

    But tbh, I think this is like yesterday's ridiculous claims. It's kite-flying by people who very much want it to happen, and believe it worked in B&R because hey are pig ignorant of what happened there, but have no understanding that it wouldn't work where the dynamics are not solely Leave/Remain - which is basically Scotland, Wales, the semi-rural Norh of England and the West Country (or 'most places' for short).
    Rumours are still circulating that the LDs have three defections (Wollaston, Lee and Allen most often mentioned) for September, either early on or for Conference. These rumours have been around for a while, but we know nothing is going to happen this month.

    Meanwhile the LDs have won every single local by-election in which they've stood for three weeks' running now.
    Yes. And they have a chance to continue this trend. But not if they start cuddling up to the SNP.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,526
    edited August 11
    Roger said:

    Fascinating header Alastair.

    ....Smelling salts for HYUFD please

    All very well and seat predictors will never be 100% accurate but they are likely to be not too far off as are at least 1 or 2 polls they draw data from.

    Overemphasing tactical voting is also not wise as most voters are not that politically astute, they will vote for the party they support or have always supported, only a minority of generally highly educated voters will tactically vote.

    Plus Electoral Calculus reflects the rise of third parties as much as the pollsters if they get a big enough swing
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169
    I think one other thing people need to remember about the polls at the moment is that they are likely to be massively biased towards the Government. We have basically had 2-3 weeks of almost non-stop announcements - whether it be 'more' money, new initiatives etc, most of it going almost completely unchallenged. Even more so than would be normal at this time of year. Things could look very different come the autumn with opposition guaranteed airtime and the focus being on what the Media wants to report on, not what the Government spoonfeeds them.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,572
    Mr. Alex, maybe. But the new PM doesn't seem to have a personal bounce in the polls, so maybe there isn't a new government style honeymoon either.

    I think most people believe both front benches are rubbish.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 947
    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Fascinating header Alastair.

    ....Smelling salts for HYUFD please

    All very well and seat predictors will never be 100% accurate but they are likely to be not too far off as are at least 1 or 2 polls they draw data from.

    Overemphasing tactical voting is also not wise as most voters are not that politically astute, they will vote for the party they support or have always supported, only a minority of generally highly educated voters will tactically vote
    I probably agree with your point re tactical voting, but haven't you missed the whole point of the article otherwise.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    The Lib Dems in Scotland lost a shed load of voters in certain seats to Team Ruth. Now that Team Ruth is a shattered husk of a distant memory with Bojo in charge they are well poised to hoover up those previously lost votes.

    Tories on 23% in latest Yougov in Scotland, LDs on 14% and Slab on 12%
    Only the two Borders seats look safe on those numbers. And farming seats like that are just the sort where there'll be fear about no deal Brexit, just like Brecon.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,060
    Scott_P said:
    Would the SNP really stand down in favour of the Lib Dems, or vice versa?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,526
    edited August 11
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    The Lib Dems in Scotland lost a shed load of voters in certain seats to Team Ruth. Now that Team Ruth is a shattered husk of a distant memory with Bojo in charge they are well poised to hoover up those previously lost votes.

    Tories on 23% in latest Yougov in Scotland, LDs on 14% and Slab on 12%
    Only the two Borders seats look safe on those numbers. And farming seats like that are just the sort where there'll be fear about no deal Brexit, just like Brecon.
    Nope, Tories hold 8 out of their 13 seats on those numbers actually as the SNP are only on 39%. Plus if Remain voters there go LD rather than Nationalist as in Brecon that only boosts the Tories by splitting the anti Tory vote.

    The Borders seats also had amongst the highest Leave votes in Scotland as did seats like Moray the Tories would also hold

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/08/08/voting-intention-con-31-lab-22-lib-dem-21-brex-14-

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/snp
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,906

    very judgemental of you.

    Of 'Richard' Braine? No, I'm saying let's give him a chance. Too easy to write him off because he has a comical name. Comical name does not equate to clown. There was a Chinese girl at my uni called Lo Y Kew and she came top at most things.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536

    Meanwhile, we have learned this weekend that No Deal Brexit = Business bailouts, emergency airlifts and higher prices. The Tories are stuck in the low 30s in the polls while all this is abstract, not real. They cannot wait too long for a general election. They need one in early November at the very latest.

    I said yesterday that the attraction of a GE for Bozo is as much postponing his day of reckoning for the oncoming fiasco, as it is getting it done.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,060
    IanB2 said:

    Yes, it’s a good article, with perhaps two weaknesses. It doesn’t say anything about the changing drivers of voting behaviour, and doesn’t give the latest models enough credit for at least trying to adapt UNS to something more appropriate. Flavible in particular are trying to solve the very problem the lead is expounding. And a third issue is the possibility of alliances between at least some of the parties (or among at least some of their voters).

    The reason why these models are likely to be less reliable isn’t solely because we are expecting dramatic falls in the level of support for both major parties - it is also because the demographic and hence geographical basis of support for both of them is changing.

    If the level of party support shifted dramatically, but still along the same lines as the previous GE, the models would be more reliable. Yet we canne thing that is unlikely is that it arrives as a straight swing (after all, in the LibDem’s case it didn’t depart as one).

    The Liberals did exceptionally well in 1974 (esp February - indeed Feb 74 remains the third party high water mark in many southern seats), yet, not having a core constituency beyond the then-called Celtic fringe, their seat tally was barely into double figures.

    An undercommented observation on recent polling is that, just as the Conservatives lose their base in the middle class of all ages and move toward a more evenly spread vote across the census categories, the LibDems are acquiring a base of educated working age people which has some of the same geographical characteristics. At vote shares into the 20%s, this ought to offer a sounder basis for winning seats across a broad swathe of the south.

    A further feature of the more even distribution of Conservative support is that, at lower vote shares, they start to run into similar problems as the LibDems. This was beginning to show in some of the polls prior to the ascent of Bozo, which gave significant Labour seat leads for relatively small vote leads. There is a tipping point opening up beneath the Conservatives in the high 20%s-30% that is broadly the same as the one that always eluded the LibDems coming from below.

    If Project Fear is even partly true, Bozo may get to explore that for himself.


    The concentration in Conservative support is not based on income, now, but on support/opposition to Brexit. Yougov has 14% of Remainers voting Conservative, compared to 51% of Leavers. By and large, I don't think many Conservative seats that voted Leave are in danger (bar a handful where TBP will challenge). The danger comes in Conservative Remain seats.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 48,427
    Sean_F said:

    Would the SNP really stand down in favour of the Lib Dems, or vice versa?

    That's the "fascinating" bit
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,526
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Fascinating header Alastair.

    ....Smelling salts for HYUFD please

    All very well and seat predictors will never be 100% accurate but they are likely to be not too far off as are at least 1 or 2 polls they draw data from.

    Overemphasing tactical voting is also not wise as most voters are not that politically astute, they will vote for the party they support or have always supported, only a minority of generally highly educated voters will tactically vote
    I probably agree with your point re tactical voting, but haven't you missed the whole point of the article otherwise.
    Nope, see my third paragraph
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    kjh said:

    IanB2 said:

    Yes, it’s a good article, with perhaps two weaknesses.

    ...................................


    A further feature of the more even distribution of Conservative support is that, at lower vote shares, they start to run into similar problems as the LibDems. This was beginning to show in some of the polls prior to the ascent of Bozo, which gave significant Labour seat leads for relatively small vote leads. There is a tipping point opening up beneath the Conservatives in the high 20%s-30% that is broadly the same as the one that always eluded the LibDems coming from below.

    If Project Fear is even partly true, Bozo may get to explore that for himself.



    Sorry but I have had to delete some of Ian's comments to get this in, which I really didn't want to do.

    Agree good article, but also very much agree with Ian's points. Exactly my thoughts.

    UNS assumes the parties have the same make up of voters as before with the edges flaking off to other parties as percentages go up and down. But we don't know that is the case this time and there is evidence that it isn't. Both the Labour and Tory party may well have changed their core vote with Momentum and Brexit and who is to say the LD vote of 20% is made up of the same 20% they had before they plunged to 5% for nearly a decade, particularly as although they have always been pro EU they are very, very much more clearly defined as the Remain party now. just look at their support in London now. Clearly very different to the past when they were on the same percentage

    As evidence of this look at Scotland. When I was young Scotland was Tory. It became solid Labour, now it is solid SNP. Apply UNS in the past did not produce those changes. Something else happened.

    UNS works when the voters are basically the same and you apply the percentage changes to those voters. If the voters change it doesn't work.

    Now Justin might be right in JRM seat as might HYFUD in all the analysis he does. After all they at least have the starting position right so the probability is on their side. However I don't think the probable results are anywhere near as high as they think they are. We would be in a different world.
    Thanks for the comment. Yes, uncertainty is the thing.

    The London effect for the LibDems could be a weakness - it is possible that they might stack up a shedload of votes with good second places across Camden, Islington, Haringey, Lambeth, Southwark and the like with no seats to show for it.

    We just need to remember the incredulity that the YouGov model predictions for Canterbury and Kensington produced (from me as well) before ruling out a larger batch of similar surprises next time.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 48,427
    What if Priti brings back hanging, and BoZo is the first customer...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536
    Sean_F said:

    IanB2 said:

    Yes, it’s a good article, with perhaps two weaknesses. It doesn’t say anything about the changing drivers of voting behaviour, and doesn’t give the latest models enough credit for at least trying to adapt UNS to something more appropriate. Flavible in particular are trying to solve the very problem the lead is expounding. And a third issue is the possibility of alliances between at least some of the parties (or among at least some of their voters).

    The reason why these models are likely to be less reliable isn’t solely because we are expecting dramatic falls in the level of support for both major parties - it is also because the demographic and hence geographical basis of support for both of them is changing.

    If the level of party support shifted dramatically, but still along the same lines as the previous GE, the models would be more reliable. Yet we canne thing that is unlikely is that it arrives as a straight swing (after all, in the LibDem’s case it didn’t depart as one).

    The Liberals did exceptionally well in 1974 (esp February - indeed Feb 74 remains the third party high water mark in many southern seats), yet, not having a core constituency beyond the then-called Celtic fringe, their seat tally was barely into double figures.

    An undercommented observation on recent polling is that, just as the Conservatives lose their base in the middle class of all ages and move toward a more evenly spread vote across the census categories, the LibDems are acquiring a base of educated working age people which has some of the same geographical characteristics. At vote shares into the 20%s, this ought to offer a sounder basis for winning seats across a broad swathe of the south.

    A further feature of the more even distribution of Conservative support is that, at lower vote shares, they start to run into similar problems as the LibDems. This was beginning to show in some of the polls prior to the ascent of Bozo, which gave significant Labour seat leads for relatively small vote leads. There is a tipping point opening up beneath the Conservatives in the high 20%s-30% that is broadly the same as the one that always eluded the LibDems coming from below.

    If Project Fear is even partly true, Bozo may get to explore that for himself.


    The concentration in Conservative support is not based on income, now, but on support/opposition to Brexit. Yougov has 14% of Remainers voting Conservative, compared to 51% of Leavers. By and large, I don't think many Conservative seats that voted Leave are in danger (bar a handful where TBP will challenge). The danger comes in Conservative Remain seats.
    And age (and to some extent uneducation) has replaced income.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,801
    HYUFD said:

    Roger said:

    Fascinating header Alastair.

    ....Smelling salts for HYUFD please

    All very well and seat predictors will never be 100% accurate but they are likely to be not too far off as are at least 1 or 2 polls they draw data from.

    Overemphasing tactical voting is also not wise as most voters are not that politically astute, they will vote for the party they support or have always supported, only a minority of generally highly educated voters will tactically vote.

    Plus Electoral Calculus reflects the rise of third parties as much as the pollsters if they get a big enough swing
    I'm not sure about tactical voting. There's plenty of evidence that in 2017 voters primary motive was to vote against Mrs May's Conservatives rather than for a particular opposition party. The next election if it's soon is likely to see anti Tory/Johnson voting on an unprecedented scale. Where that'll take you is difficult to predict.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,906
    FF43 said:

    Current projections show there has been essentially no movement since 2017 between the Lab (+LD+Green etc) block and the Con (+BXP+UKIP) block, where the parties in brackets weren't much of a feature last time, but will be this time.

    Given this, I think we need to break the prediction down into four groups:

    1. Labour marginals (Con 2nd): How much bigger is the 2017 Lab voter switch to LD switch than the Con to BXP one? This determines the number of Cons gains.

    2. Cons marginals (Labour 2nd): The opposite. This determines the number of Labour gains.

    3. Cons (LDs second) By-election style tactical voting squeeze leads to LD gains. Similar possibilities for the Brexit Party.

    4. Any Cons seat in Scotland: How many 2017 Cons voters will switch to other parties leading to a loss of that seat, typically to the SNP?

    Add up the group gains and losses to get to the net loss or gain

    On current projections, I suggest 1 will happen with Cons gains at the expense of Labour; 2 won't happen; 3 will happen but perhaps not huge numbers and very little for the BXP; 4 will happen with the loss of most of most Con seats in Scotland.

    The question is whether (1) > (3) + (4)

    Fascinating election in store, that's for sure, if it takes place before Brexit.

    Will Remainers vote 'smarter' (i.e. more tactically) than Leavers?

    Will Remainer turnout % be higher than that of Leavers?

    I think Corbyn's chances of replacing Johnson as PM depend on there being a clear YES to both questions.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,169
    Sean_F said:

    IanB2 said:

    Yes, it’s a good article, with perhaps two weaknesses. It doesn’t say anything about the changing drivers of voting behaviour, and doesn’t give the latest models enough credit for at least trying to adapt UNS to something more appropriate. Flavible in particular are trying to solve the very problem the lead is expounding. And a third issue is the possibility of alliances between at least some of the parties (or among at least some of their voters).

    The reason why these models are likely to be less reliable isn’t solely because we are expecting dramatic falls in the level of support for both major parties - it is also because the demographic and hence geographical basis of support for both of them is changing.

    If the level of party support shifted dramatically, but still along the same lines as the previous GE, the models would be more reliable. Yet we canne thing that is unlikely is that it arrives as a straight swing (after all, in the LibDem’s case it didn’t depart as one).



    An undercommented observation on recent polling is that, just as the Conservatives lose their base in the middle class of all ages and move toward a more evenly spread vote across the census categories, the LibDems are acquiring a base of educated working age people which has some of the same geographical characteristics. At vote shares into the 20%s, this ought to offer a sounder basis for winning seats across a broad swathe of the south.

    A further feature of the more even distribution of Conservative support is that, at lower vote shares, they start to run into similar problems as the LibDems. This was beginning to show in some of the polls prior to the ascent of Bozo, which gave significant Labour seat leads for relatively small vote leads. There is a tipping point opening up beneath the Conservatives in the high 20%s-30% that is broadly the same as the one that always eluded the LibDems coming from below.

    If Project Fear is even partly true, Bozo may get to explore that for himself.


    The concentration in Conservative support is not based on income, now, but on support/opposition to Brexit. Yougov has 14% of Remainers voting Conservative, compared to 51% of Leavers. By and large, I don't think many Conservative seats that voted Leave are in danger (bar a handful where TBP will challenge). The danger comes in Conservative Remain seats.
    Conservatives are building up a coalition of voters which will not endure long past Brexit (either because Brexit will go badly, or because the Conservatives are just a temporary home to get what they want). Storing up a lot of trouble for the longer term.

This discussion has been closed.