Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Seat projection from today’s ICM poll has CON ahead on MPs eve

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited January 16 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Seat projection from today’s ICM poll has CON ahead on MPs even though behind on votes

The latest ICM Guardian poll out and the figures – C40/LB41/LD7 – are included above in the seat projection from Martin Baxter’s Electoral Calculus.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 64,969
    edited January 16
    I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,665
    Nicky & Jezza running the show ;)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839
    edited January 16
    Are we taking polling seriously again?

    Quaint.

    Edit. And universal swing. It'll be tartan trousers next.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Nicky & Jezza running the show ;)

    I’m sure there’s some posters from 2015 that can be recycled.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    What could they do about it ?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,758
    Back at the top of a thread...like the Daily Mail on Virgin Trains.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,293
    edited January 16
    And you think the current government is unstable...

    [When things are as squeaky as that, you really need to separate out the Norn Irn parties.]
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839
    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.
  • DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    Would see a Con to Lib Dem swing though.

    Zac’s majority of 45 is buggered.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,758
    I am really looking forward to my holibobs with Jezza in charge if Justin is to be believed. £500 max spend per two weeks while I am there, going to really be able to splash out, not.

    Not many of the yuff will be going large in Magaful etc.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,506
    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839
    Oh and UKIP are going to find candidates for all the seats again so that they can pick up their 4% instead of the 1.9% they got the last time. Of course they are.

    The point that the current system does not favour Labour as much as some Tories think is well made. As for the rest....
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125

    I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.

    The Conservative vote has become more efficient since 2010, the Labour vote less efficient. Labour got 41 seats in Scotland, on the back of about 3% of the national vote share. Now they get 7 on the back of 2%. The collapse in the Lib Dems worked heavily to the Conservatives' benefit.

    So, a 7% lead in 2010 put the Conservatives 48 ahead of Labour in 2010, but a 2.5% lead in 2017 put them 55 ahead.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,665
    edited January 16

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    Would see a Con to Lib Dem swing though.

    Zac’s majority of 45 is buggered.
    An important fact to remember is this:

    There are now precisely ZERO Lib Dem held Labour facing seats.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,446
    Brr. Snowing again. Trump's right. We really need to burn more coal to encourage global warming.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Corbyn cant win Tory marginals in Middle England because he and his cronies are too hard left. Piling up bigger majorities in seats already held by Labour or capturing university seats is not enough.

    A mere 1 point ahead when Ed Miliband, Neil Kinnock and even Michael Foot in 1980-1 had bigger leads. Until it all disintegrated on election day.

    And even if Corbyn did (unlikely) squeak in as the 73 year old PM of a minority government, what would be the point? He could not get his programme through, he would hold office without power,and the stress of it all would either kill him or lead to him resigning due to ill heath.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    Would see a Con to Lib Dem swing though.

    Zac’s majority of 45 is buggered.
    Well, there's a silver lining to every cloud I suppose. But are we to assume that Tim Farron, for example, won't lose 10% of his votes?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    Thats no good. It wouldnt alter anti Tory arithmetic.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,511

    I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.

    We seem to be moving to a purer two-party system, perhaps even in Scotland. NB leaving the SNP at 3.1% is a huge hidden assumption in Mike's post.

    This ought, theoretically, to make swingometers like Electoral Calculus better predictors.

    But there is a third "party" of DNV within the system, and that could be very volatile. The Tories lost some to DNV last June and Labour gained bundles from them. Will turnout look the same next time?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125

    I've just read a piece in the Times that will stir up everyones' inner revolutionary socialist.

    Barclays pension fund has 250,000 members and a huge deficit. Barclays is ring-fencing its risky investment banking business away from its safe and profitable retail banking business. Most of the pension fund members spent their careers in the retail banking business (or their spouses did).

    Guess which arm of Barclays will be responsible for funding the pension fund deficit in the future?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    stevef said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    Thats no good. It wouldnt alter anti Tory arithmetic.
    Indeed - but Justin keeps carping on about this and I'd like to know if he has more than hope and a prayer to justify it....
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    edited January 16
    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    It is a reason actually - and based on the SNP having been flattered by polls for several years now.The SNP now have very few safe seats and most are vulnerable to a very small swing to Labour. I will be surprised if Labour fail to gain 20 seats next time at their expense.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,511
    stevef said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    Thats no good. It wouldnt alter anti Tory arithmetic.
    It's worse - a poorly performing SNP means probably a few more Tory gains. However it does neutralise the "x-in-y's-pocket" charge.

    But there is so much water to flow under the bridge before we should start reading too much into the current polls, even if their present stability is curious. We're not really in mid-term yet, though it's felt that way since June 9th!
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    justin124 said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    It is a reason actually - and based on the SNP having been flattered by polls for several years now.The SNP now have very few safe seats and most are vulnerable to a very small swing to Labour. I will be surprised if Labour fail to gain 20 seats next time at their expense.
    Got it. They'll do better than expected in Scotland because you think they will.

    Useful insight to your political predictions....
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 1,756
    Arguably this isn't 'the system' but a snapshot of the current popularities of the parties. A different result would change that snapshot but leave 'the system' untouched.

    'The system' remains, for example, Welsh seats covering ca. 10k fewer people than English ones.

    see: researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05677/SN05677.pdf
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    I know we've been through this zillions of times before, but there are two completely independent effects:

    1. Disparities in constituency sizes, which benefits Labour (because people in the NE and Wales get more MPs per 100K registered voters than voters in the SE and elsewhere). That is a systematic bias towards Labour, as it happens, but more to the point it's a systematic bias against voters in some parts of the country.

    2. Differences in the distribution of votes across the country, which is not a systematic bias in either Labour's or the Conservatives' favour, but is the effect of choices made by different voters. In the past, for example 2005, Labour was the big beneficiary of this second effect, which was much bigger than the first. That now seems to have changed, so that the vote distribution of the Conservative vote happens to be slightly more efficient than Labour's, although there's no guarantee that it won't change again.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
    The only seat I could see them picking up in Scotland on those sorts of figures is Fife NE and that would require a fall in the SNP vote which the model does not contemplate. There comes a point when you can no longer assume that losing nearly 10% of your vote will only make a difference in seats that don't matter to you.

    To have 12 MPs on a FPTP system with 7.6% of the vote is actually pretty remarkable. To suggest it would go up on 7% is, I think, optimistic.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    justin124 said:

    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.

    They need to win Tory seats in Middle England.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    It is a reason actually - and based on the SNP having been flattered by polls for several years now.The SNP now have very few safe seats and most are vulnerable to a very small swing to Labour. I will be surprised if Labour fail to gain 20 seats next time at their expense.
    Got it. They'll do better than expected in Scotland because you think they will.

    Useful insight to your political predictions....
    Well I was lampooned last year for daring to suggest that Labour would end up with 4 or 5 seats. In the end Labour managed 7.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    Scott_P said:
    Even by Adam's doleful standards that's awful.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    stevef said:

    Corbyn cant win Tory marginals in Middle England because he and his cronies are too hard left. Piling up bigger majorities in seats already held by Labour or capturing university seats is not enough.

    A mere 1 point ahead when Ed Miliband, Neil Kinnock and even Michael Foot in 1980-1 had bigger leads. Until it all disintegrated on election day.

    And even if Corbyn did (unlikely) squeak in as the 73 year old PM of a minority government, what would be the point? He could not get his programme through, he would hold office without power,and the stress of it all would either kill him or lead to him resigning due to ill heath.

    Who will you vote for at next GE if Corbyn is still leader ?
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Mortimer said:

    stevef said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    Thats no good. It wouldnt alter anti Tory arithmetic.
    Indeed - but Justin keeps carping on about this and I'd like to know if he has more than hope and a prayer to justify it....
    Labour needs to win Tory seats in Middle England.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    Sean_F said:


    I've just read a piece in the Times that will stir up everyones' inner revolutionary socialist.

    Barclays pension fund has 250,000 members and a huge deficit. Barclays is ring-fencing its risky investment banking business away from its safe and profitable retail banking business. Most of the pension fund members spent their careers in the retail banking business (or their spouses did).

    Guess which arm of Barclays will be responsible for funding the pension fund deficit in the future?

    Presumably that's because the regulators don't want the retail bank to be lumbered with the potential liability.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839
    justin124 said:

    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.

    Are you up for a bet on that?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839

    Scott_P said:
    Even by Adam's doleful standards that's awful.
    Yet more evidence for the Private Members (Matt) bill.
  • I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.

    We seem to be moving to a purer two-party system, perhaps even in Scotland. NB leaving the SNP at 3.1% is a huge hidden assumption in Mike's post.

    This ought, theoretically, to make swingometers like Electoral Calculus better predictors.

    But there is a third "party" of DNV within the system, and that could be very volatile. The Tories lost some to DNV last June and Labour gained bundles from them. Will turnout look the same next time?
    I'm still trying to process that analysis from last week said that turnout was actually a lot higher in last year's general election than previously thought.
  • On topic, doesn't this show we need an alternative voting system.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,465
    "Brexit is a collective English mental breakdown"

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/brexit-is-a-collective-english-mental-breakdown-1.3356258

    The EU challenged England not to give up a national identity, but to acquire one – to give up the illusions embodied in a United Kingdom that never was a nation, but was always a device to conceal England’s colonial relation to the other nations inhabiting Great Britain and Ireland. Instead the EU offered England the opportunity for equal partnership in a common endeavour, which is nowadays all that nationhood can mean.

    On June 23rd, 2016, the English rejected that offer and opted to continue living the fiction of splendid isolation that sustained the UK and the British empire before it, and to continue denying the Scots and the Irish a will of their own. Any recovery from this collective mental breakdown will involve treating it in the light of its deep historical causes. Not until there is a separate English parliament, giving England at last the distinctive political identity it has shunned for 300 years, will the delusions that led the country to Brexit finally be dissipated by contact with reality. Perhaps then, with their psychosis healed, the English will apply to rejoin the EU.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,506

    On topic, doesn't this show we need an alternative voting system.

    An alternative voting system or an Alternative Voting system?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.

    Are you up for a bet on that?
    I never bet - but am confident that the Corbyn surge has a fair way to go in Scotland.Labour outperformed there last time - in relation to expectations - in terms of both seats and vote share, and I expect that to happen again. Labour could reach 30 seats there and comfortably be the largest party in Scotland.
    What do you expect there?
  • On topic, doesn't this show we need an alternative voting system.

    An alternative voting system or an Alternative Voting system?
    Either would satisfy me.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,511

    I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.

    We seem to be moving to a purer two-party system, perhaps even in Scotland. NB leaving the SNP at 3.1% is a huge hidden assumption in Mike's post.

    This ought, theoretically, to make swingometers like Electoral Calculus better predictors.

    But there is a third "party" of DNV within the system, and that could be very volatile. The Tories lost some to DNV last June and Labour gained bundles from them. Will turnout look the same next time?
    I'm still trying to process that analysis from last week said that turnout was actually a lot higher in last year's general election than previously thought.
    To be honest it tallies with my overall impression from canvassing, though that's a very biased sample based on who usually opens the door (not to mention access issues to some addresses).
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    In other exciting news, from the Guardian live blog:

    The FT reports that Carillion had reached a perilous financial position by the time it fell into liquidation on Monday morning.

    Well there's a surprise. Who'd have thought that a company entering compulsory liquidation might be in a perilous financial position?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839

    I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.

    We seem to be moving to a purer two-party system, perhaps even in Scotland. NB leaving the SNP at 3.1% is a huge hidden assumption in Mike's post.

    This ought, theoretically, to make swingometers like Electoral Calculus better predictors.

    But there is a third "party" of DNV within the system, and that could be very volatile. The Tories lost some to DNV last June and Labour gained bundles from them. Will turnout look the same next time?
    I'm still trying to process that analysis from last week said that turnout was actually a lot higher in last year's general election than previously thought.
    I agree, that needed more attention. It seemed to me that once you took into account students on 2 registers, young people in rented accommodation moving pretty frequently and those in temporary jobs etc the default assumption that there is a massive variance in turnout between the young and the old might no longer be warranted.

    Of course it might also suggest that cities where all of the above factors apply are being seriously overrepresented on the basis of faulty electoral registers.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,446
    Mr. Glenn, that piece of nonsense from the Irish times, amongst other things, neglects to mention that within the UK England alone has no devolution, Scotland recently had an independence referendum, the Northern Irish chose to remain within the UK, and the Welsh also supported leaving the EU.

    .....

    Apart from that, how was the play Mrs Lincoln?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,511
    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.

    Are you up for a bet on that?
    I might be. What odds will you offer Labour to win all 7 Glasgow seats?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,758

    In other exciting news, from the Guardian live blog:

    The FT reports that Carillion had reached a perilous financial position by the time it fell into liquidation on Monday morning.

    Well there's a surprise. Who'd have thought that a company entering compulsory liquidation might be in a perilous financial position?

    It is about as news as the shock revelation that the body building obsessed terrorist who carried out London Bridge attack had taken steroids....
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,426

    I remember in the run up to ge2015 that the Tories needed a lead of at least 10% to win a majority of 2.

    There’s the theory and then there’s the reality.

    We seem to be moving to a purer two-party system, perhaps even in Scotland. NB leaving the SNP at 3.1% is a huge hidden assumption in Mike's post.

    This ought, theoretically, to make swingometers like Electoral Calculus better predictors.

    But there is a third "party" of DNV within the system, and that could be very volatile. The Tories lost some to DNV last June and Labour gained bundles from them. Will turnout look the same next time?
    I'm still trying to process that analysis from last week said that turnout was actually a lot higher in last year's general election than previously thought.
    But that must be true of previous elections, too. i.e. turnout has been systematically higher for quite a while. The RISE in turnout in the last election is still what it appears and no higher,
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    edited January 16

    Mr. Glenn, that piece of nonsense from the Irish times, amongst other things, neglects to mention that within the UK England alone has no devolution, Scotland recently had an independence referendum, the Northern Irish chose to remain within the UK, and the Welsh also supported leaving the EU.

    .....

    Apart from that, how was the play Mrs Lincoln?

    It was written by a Cambridge professor. It's the same shit, different broadsheet.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,426

    In other exciting news, from the Guardian live blog:

    The FT reports that Carillion had reached a perilous financial position by the time it fell into liquidation on Monday morning.

    Well there's a surprise. Who'd have thought that a company entering compulsory liquidation might be in a perilous financial position?

    I do like how they still attribute it to the FT
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,406
    justin124 said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    It is a reason actually - and based on the SNP having been flattered by polls for several years now.The SNP now have very few safe seats and most are vulnerable to a very small swing to Labour. I will be surprised if Labour fail to gain 20 seats next time at their expense.
    Lol - saying the same wishful thought different ways leaves it unchanged.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,446
    Mr. M, well, quite. An argument of tosh that misses out a bevy of highly relevant facts.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,465

    Mr. M, well, quite. An argument of tosh that misses out a bevy of highly relevant facts.

    Why do you think England alone has no (national) devolution?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125

    "Brexit is a collective English mental breakdown"

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/brexit-is-a-collective-english-mental-breakdown-1.3356258

    The EU challenged England not to give up a national identity, but to acquire one – to give up the illusions embodied in a United Kingdom that never was a nation, but was always a device to conceal England’s colonial relation to the other nations inhabiting Great Britain and Ireland. Instead the EU offered England the opportunity for equal partnership in a common endeavour, which is nowadays all that nationhood can mean.

    On June 23rd, 2016, the English rejected that offer and opted to continue living the fiction of splendid isolation that sustained the UK and the British empire before it, and to continue denying the Scots and the Irish a will of their own. Any recovery from this collective mental breakdown will involve treating it in the light of its deep historical causes. Not until there is a separate English parliament, giving England at last the distinctive political identity it has shunned for 300 years, will the delusions that led the country to Brexit finally be dissipated by contact with reality. Perhaps then, with their psychosis healed, the English will apply to rejoin the EU.

    Amateur psychology at its worst.

    And, as usual, Wales is excluded from the argument.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604

    Brr. Snowing again. Trump's right. We really need to burn more coal to encourage global warming.

    But think of the Next Ice Age we'd already be in if we weren't warming the planet with all that carbon. (Or did I just remember the worry about a new ice age when I was a kid? Maybe it was just Big Oil putting that notion about....)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839

    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.

    Are you up for a bet on that?
    I might be. What odds will you offer Labour to win all 7 Glasgow seats?
    They've got 1 already. The other 6 are indeed all marginal with the largest majority only 2,561: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Parliamentary_Constituencies

    I'm not sure I would offer better than evens.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,649
    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    felix said:

    justin124 said:

    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)
    It is a reason actually - and based on the SNP having been flattered by polls for several years now.The SNP now have very few safe seats and most are vulnerable to a very small swing to Labour. I will be surprised if Labour fail to gain 20 seats next time at their expense.
    Lol - saying the same wishful thought different ways leaves it unchanged.
    Doubtless you expected Labour to win 7 seats in Scotland last June.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,511
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    justin124 said:

    I expect Labour to win all seats in Glasgow next time and many more in the Central Belt.

    Are you up for a bet on that?
    I might be. What odds will you offer Labour to win all 7 Glasgow seats?
    They've got 1 already. The other 6 are indeed all marginal with the largest majority only 2,561: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Parliamentary_Constituencies

    I'm not sure I would offer better than evens.
    I was hoping for 2/1, so I'll pass for now :p Evens sounds about right (if anything I'd be a bit shorter).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604

    Scott_P said:
    Even by Adam's doleful standards that's awful.
    Yes. Surely if it's got Corbyn on three wheels, it has to be a motorbike and sidecar?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,446
    Mr. Glenn, show me the English Parliament.

    Mr. Mark, silence, heretic! Global warming has always been the Truth.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125
    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    If Labour benefit from tactical voting next time in Scotland, then so, in all likelihood, will the Conservatives.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,604
    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    Or... those financially canny Scots (or at least the Tartan Tories lost to the SNP), worried that Corbyn could actually try to implement his crazy Socialist programme, might be one-off tactical Tories.

    I mean, who knows anymore?!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    A lot of truth in that. I also suspect that many pro-Union Labour voters misdirected themslves in the belief that their own party was not in serious contention.They will have been surprised - indeed quite a few shocked - by the extent of Labour's recovery late in the campaign , and I would expect them to return home overwhelmingly next time.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694

    On topic, doesn't this show we need an alternative voting system.

    An alternative voting system or an Alternative Voting system?
    Either would satisfy me.
    You’d be satisfied with that sh!tty little compromise?
  • Mr. Glenn, show me the English Parliament.

    Mr. Mark, silence, heretic! Global warming has always been the Truth.

    We don’t need an English Parliament.

    We have 533 seats out of 650 in the national parliament.

    We’re not the castrated Celts, Scots, and Ulster Scots who need to over compensate with a glorified council.

    We need fewer politicians not more.
  • Sandpit said:

    On topic, doesn't this show we need an alternative voting system.

    An alternative voting system or an Alternative Voting system?
    Either would satisfy me.
    You’d be satisfied with that sh!tty little compromise?
    As with other aspects in my life, I do have standards, they are just lower than anybody else’s standards.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    Sean_F said:

    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    If Labour benefit from tactical voting next time in Scotland, then so, in all likelihood, will the Conservatives.
    Pro-Union tactical Labour voters are likely to return to Labour, leading to possible three-way marginals in places such as East Renfrewshire and Stirling.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    As things stand at the moment, I'd expect Scottish Labour to make quite big gains against the SNP, and the Scottish Conservatives also to gain some seats. However, a lot depends on how Richard Leonard develops as SLAB leader; he's very different from his predecessors. At the moment he looks quite impressive, from afar at least, but I don't really know how Scots see him.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,637

    "Brexit is a collective English mental breakdown"

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/brexit-is-a-collective-english-mental-breakdown-1.3356258

    The EU challenged England not to give up a national identity, but to acquire one – to give up the illusions embodied in a United Kingdom that never was a nation, but was always a device to conceal England’s colonial relation to the other nations inhabiting Great Britain and Ireland. Instead the EU offered England the opportunity for equal partnership in a common endeavour, which is nowadays all that nationhood can mean.

    On June 23rd, 2016, the English rejected that offer and opted to continue living the fiction of splendid isolation that sustained the UK and the British empire before it, and to continue denying the Scots and the Irish a will of their own. Any recovery from this collective mental breakdown will involve treating it in the light of its deep historical causes. Not until there is a separate English parliament, giving England at last the distinctive political identity it has shunned for 300 years, will the delusions that led the country to Brexit finally be dissipated by contact with reality. Perhaps then, with their psychosis healed, the English will apply to rejoin the EU.

    Shows why Brexit is the correct course - the EU partners will never "get it" as to why there is a high level of anti EU feeling in the Uk. Its really not us - it's you..
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,841

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
    I also think the LibDems at the next election will benefit from Labour voters resuming tactical anti-Tory voting in full force at the next election. It was absent in 2015 for obvious reasons, and although it returned a bit in 2017 (particularly in South West London), my suspicion is Tim Fallon's views on LGBT matters were too beyond the pale for a lot of Labour supporters to even throw a tactical vote the LDs' way. Next time, however, there shouldn't be any real barriers.

    If you take the Labour vote back down to 2010 levels in the likes of St Ives and Richmond Park, and transfer those extra votes over to the LDs, then the LDs gain the seats, even without the Tories losing a single vote.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,446
    Mr. Eagles, how can England have equal standing without equal political structures?

    For example, Scottish MPs can vote on income tax for England/Wales which does not affect their constituencies. Meanwhile, English and Welsh MPs cannot do the same for Scottish income tax. There's a democratic deficit as Scottish MPs can vote without being accountable to those affected by the policy.

    The numbers argument is a fallacy. It's not England Versus Scotland, it's a question of the balance of power. An English majority could be overruled by UK-wide MPs on matters that relate to England (and perhaps Wales too) whereas the corresponding problem does not occur for Scotland because of its devolution.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    edited January 16

    As things stand at the moment, I'd expect Scottish Labour to make quite big gains against the SNP, and the Scottish Conservatives also to gain some seats. However, a lot depends on how Richard Leonard develops as SLAB leader; he's very different from his predecessors. At the moment he looks quite impressive, from afar at least, but I don't really know how Scots see him.

    The Tories are also vulnerable to a further Labour recovery in Scotland. Labour could well win a few seats from third place.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    TGOHF said:

    "Brexit is a collective English mental breakdown"

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/brexit-is-a-collective-english-mental-breakdown-1.3356258

    The EU challenged England not to give up a national identity, but to acquire one – to give up the illusions embodied in a United Kingdom that never was a nation, but was always a device to conceal England’s colonial relation to the other nations inhabiting Great Britain and Ireland. Instead the EU offered England the opportunity for equal partnership in a common endeavour, which is nowadays all that nationhood can mean.

    On June 23rd, 2016, the English rejected that offer and opted to continue living the fiction of splendid isolation that sustained the UK and the British empire before it, and to continue denying the Scots and the Irish a will of their own. Any recovery from this collective mental breakdown will involve treating it in the light of its deep historical causes. Not until there is a separate English parliament, giving England at last the distinctive political identity it has shunned for 300 years, will the delusions that led the country to Brexit finally be dissipated by contact with reality. Perhaps then, with their psychosis healed, the English will apply to rejoin the EU.

    Shows why Brexit is the correct course - the EU partners will never "get it" as to why there is a high level of anti EU feeling in the Uk. Its really not us - it's you..
    Whenever an article mentions the 'Empire', I roll my eyes. I'm relatively old - born in 1960, and the Empire was ancient history to my generation. I vaguely remember various flag-lowering ceremonies on the TV, and that's about it. The British Empire is about as relevant to me as phlogiston.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125
    justin124 said:

    Sean_F said:

    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    If Labour benefit from tactical voting next time in Scotland, then so, in all likelihood, will the Conservatives.
    Pro-Union tactical Labour voters are likely to return to Labour, leading to possible three-way marginals in places such as East Renfrewshire and Stirling.
    IMO, the Conservative vote share of 25-30% in Scotland looks pretty solid.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    edited January 16
    [deleted - I misunderstood a post]
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
    I also think the LibDems at the next election will benefit from Labour voters resuming tactical anti-Tory voting in full force at the next election. It was absent in 2015 for obvious reasons, and although it returned a bit in 2017 (particularly in South West London), my suspicion is Tim Fallon's views on LGBT matters were too beyond the pale for a lot of Labour supporters to even throw a tactical vote the LDs' way. Next time, however, there shouldn't be any real barriers.

    If you take the Labour vote back down to 2010 levels in the likes of St Ives and Richmond Park, and transfer those extra votes over to the LDs, then the LDs gain the seats, even without the Tories losing a single vote.
    The Lib Dems will need more than Labour tactical voters to be competitive in most of their former seats. And, in a lot of those seats, Labour has now moved into second place.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,813
    FPT
    justin124 said:



    I think that is quite an exaggeration really. Debit cards - then called Cheque Cards - had been around since the early 1970s. Even today most people do not go abroad on holiday on a regular basis, and I am not sure that a restriction of foreign currency to - say - £500 per person would be particularly badly received.

    In 2016 56% of the population took a foreign holiday according to ABTA and the average number of foreign holidays per year has gone up from 1.2 per person to 1.5 per person.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,649
    Sean_F said:

    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    If Labour benefit from tactical voting next time in Scotland, then so, in all likelihood, will the Conservatives.
    You mean where the Conservatives and SNP are in contention, a switch from SNP to Labour lets the Conservatives in? Maybe in one or two seats.

    The upswing in the Labour vote in 2017 is largely down to ex-Labour voters who switched to SNP because of their support for independence switching back to Labour for the UK election, I think. So it's a combination of them being more in tune with Labour than the Conservatives in the UK context and also deciding independence wasn't the key issue for that election. Will the same apply next time, and more so? Possibly, but they may decide to stick with the SNP. The independence issue is abeyance but it hasn't gone away.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125
    John_M said:

    TGOHF said:

    "Brexit is a collective English mental breakdown"

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/brexit-is-a-collective-english-mental-breakdown-1.3356258

    The EU challenged England not to give up a national identity, but to acquire one – to give up the illusions embodied in a United Kingdom that never was a nation, but was always a device to conceal England’s colonial relation to the other nations inhabiting Great Britain and Ireland. Instead the EU offered England the opportunity for equal partnership in a common endeavour, which is nowadays all that nationhood can mean.

    On June 23rd, 2016, the English rejected that offer and opted to continue living the fiction of splendid isolation that sustained the UK and the British empire before it, and to continue denying the Scots and the Irish a will of their own. Any recovery from this collective mental breakdown will involve treating it in the light of its deep historical causes. Not until there is a separate English parliament, giving England at last the distinctive political identity it has shunned for 300 years, will the delusions that led the country to Brexit finally be dissipated by contact with reality. Perhaps then, with their psychosis healed, the English will apply to rejoin the EU.

    Shows why Brexit is the correct course - the EU partners will never "get it" as to why there is a high level of anti EU feeling in the Uk. Its really not us - it's you..
    Whenever an article mentions the 'Empire', I roll my eyes. I'm relatively old - born in 1960, and the Empire was ancient history to my generation. I vaguely remember various flag-lowering ceremonies on the TV, and that's about it. The British Empire is about as relevant to me as phlogiston.
    Same here. I was born in 1967, and by then, the Empire consisted of a few islands here and there, along with Belize and Aden.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,813
    Sean_F said:


    I've just read a piece in the Times that will stir up everyones' inner revolutionary socialist.

    Barclays pension fund has 250,000 members and a huge deficit. Barclays is ring-fencing its risky investment banking business away from its safe and profitable retail banking business. Most of the pension fund members spent their careers in the retail banking business (or their spouses did).

    Guess which arm of Barclays will be responsible for funding the pension fund deficit in the future?

    That is bloody atrocious.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,002
    "Projections on the proposed new boundaries have the system biased even more to the blue team."

    Gerrymandering UK style!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,637

    Mr. Eagles, how can England have equal standing without equal political structures?

    For example, Scottish MPs can vote on income tax for England/Wales which does not affect their constituencies. Meanwhile, English and Welsh MPs cannot do the same for Scottish income tax. There's a democratic deficit as Scottish MPs can vote without being accountable to those affected by the policy.

    The numbers argument is a fallacy. It's not England Versus Scotland, it's a question of the balance of power. An English majority could be overruled by UK-wide MPs on matters that relate to England (and perhaps Wales too) whereas the corresponding problem does not occur for Scotland because of its devolution.

    Trying to blame the West Lothian Question for Brexit is equivalent to blaming the Carillion collapse on Blue Planet.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,815
    Sean_F said:

    justin124 said:

    Sean_F said:

    FF43 said:

    The key in Scotland is tactical voting. In the 2017 election, the Conservatives benefited from Unionist tactical voting and probably got a couple of extra seats because of it and possibly denied Labour a seat or two that it might have won. This tactical vote seems unlikely to repeat itself next time in current circumstances. There MAY be an anti-Conservative vote next time where normally SNP supporters vote tactically for Labour. This is harder to predict.

    If Labour benefit from tactical voting next time in Scotland, then so, in all likelihood, will the Conservatives.
    Pro-Union tactical Labour voters are likely to return to Labour, leading to possible three-way marginals in places such as East Renfrewshire and Stirling.
    IMO, the Conservative vote share of 25-30% in Scotland looks pretty solid.
    I think the Tories will struggle to poll 25% there next time - 20% - 23% more likely.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,002

    I am really looking forward to my holibobs with Jezza in charge if Justin is to be believed. £500 max spend per two weeks while I am there, going to really be able to splash out, not.

    Not many of the yuff will be going large in Magaful etc.

    That would last me about four days on holiday. We struggle to get through a day on less than £120/day, amazing as that might seem.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,841
    edited January 16
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
    The only seat I could see them picking up in Scotland on those sorts of figures is Fife NE and that would require a fall in the SNP vote which the model does not contemplate. There comes a point when you can no longer assume that losing nearly 10% of your vote will only make a difference in seats that don't matter to you.

    To have 12 MPs on a FPTP system with 7.6% of the vote is actually pretty remarkable. To suggest it would go up on 7% is, I think, optimistic.
    I don't see why you think it's so implausible? After all, the SNP have 35 seats despite just 3% of the UK-wide vote.

    Now, obviously, on first glance, that might not seem a valid comparison, since the SNP don't stand in the vast majority of seats - but in fact, the LDs' support in so many seats is so completely, shockingly derisory (losing their deposits in well over half of seats in 2017) that the arithmetical effect isn't that much different to the SNP's case - not too dissimilarly to them, the LDs are now basically only registering at all in a small % of seats. Their vote is now quite efficiently-distributed, so they will do better than suggested by just voteshare.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,002
    Mortimer said:

    justin124 said:

    In reality Labour would do better - at SNP expense.

    Because......?

    (P.S. Your gut feelings on the matter are not actual reasons)

    You consider yours good enough most of the time.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,125

    Sean_F said:


    I've just read a piece in the Times that will stir up everyones' inner revolutionary socialist.

    Barclays pension fund has 250,000 members and a huge deficit. Barclays is ring-fencing its risky investment banking business away from its safe and profitable retail banking business. Most of the pension fund members spent their careers in the retail banking business (or their spouses did).

    Guess which arm of Barclays will be responsible for funding the pension fund deficit in the future?

    That is bloody atrocious.
    I cannot understand what the pension fund trustees are doing.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,002

    Sandpit said:

    On topic, doesn't this show we need an alternative voting system.

    An alternative voting system or an Alternative Voting system?
    Either would satisfy me.
    You’d be satisfied with that sh!tty little compromise?
    As with other aspects in my life, I do have standards, they are just lower than anybody else’s standards.
    With apologies to Groucho Marx: if you don't like my standards I have other ones.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,665
    edited January 16
    Scott_P said:
    Ann Black !

    My old man's sparring partner at Coventry council.


    Wrong Ann :)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,990

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
    Remind me of how accurate your LibDem predictions were last year?

    As it happens, I think you are probably right - with the caveat that there is only realistic LibDem gain in Scotland, Fife NE.

    And the reason I think you are right is that the LibDem votes are getting more and more concentrated in leafy Remainia. (By which I mean SW London, some parts of Scotland, and a few other seats.) Were an election to be held now, I think they'd probably grab a couple of seats. (But no more than a couple.)

    The two interesting things (to me) about the LibDems are:

    1. Will Brexit still be a live issue in 2022? I suspect it will be, in that there will be parts of the country where there are concentrated Brexit losses and therefore residual "cross-ness". And it so happens, that a lot of those seats are LibDem/Conservative fights

    2. How will the LibDems do in London in the locals this year? I suspect, based on last year's GE, that they will do well in Kingston and Richmond. But are there going to be other areas of recovery? Right now, I don't see it. But it's something to watch out for.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,649
    John_M said:

    Whenever an article mentions the 'Empire', I roll my eyes. I'm relatively old - born in 1960, and the Empire was ancient history to my generation. I vaguely remember various flag-lowering ceremonies on the TV, and that's about it. The British Empire is about as relevant to me as phlogiston.

    "The Empire strikes back" people are over-represented in the Conservative government. Most Leave voters, I am pretty sure, are what are pejoratively and rather unfairly referred to as "Little Englanders". They don't like the EU much and wish it go away so they can get with their lives, without being told what to do all the time. They have very little interest in what goes on beyond their shores and even less understanding of how trade and international relations work. They are doomed to disappointment, I am afraid.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,839
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I see that the Lib Dems would lose nearly 10% of their fairly derisory vote and yet pick up 2 more seats.

    Right.

    As it happens I think they'd pick up more than two on such figures. Electoral Calculus's model assumes no tactical voting in Scotland. That seems unlikely.

    But I also am sceptical about prediction models at present. There seems to be a sorting of voters taking place which doesn't seem to be happening on uniform national lines.
    The only seat I could see them picking up in Scotland on those sorts of figures is Fife NE and that would require a fall in the SNP vote which the model does not contemplate. There comes a point when you can no longer assume that losing nearly 10% of your vote will only make a difference in seats that don't matter to you.

    To have 12 MPs on a FPTP system with 7.6% of the vote is actually pretty remarkable. To suggest it would go up on 7% is, I think, optimistic.
    I don't see why you think it's so implausible? After all, the SNP have 35 seats despite just 3% of the UK-wide vote.

    Now, obviously, on first glance, that might not seem a valid comparison, since the SNP don't stand in the vast majority of seats - but in fact, the LDs' support in so many seats is so completely, shockingly derisory (losing their deposits in well over half of seats in 2017) that the arithmetical effect isn't that much different to the SNP's case. The LDs' vote is now quite efficiently-distributed, so they will do better than suggested by just voteshare.
    I think it is unlikely because the total quantum of votes is falling significantly. As you correctly point out in many constituencies the Lib Dem performance the last time was so atrocious that there are relatively few to lose. If there is a material fall in the Lib Dem overall vote then I think it is likely to come disproportionately from the seats where they do better. That would include some of the seats that they already hold as well as their "target" seats.

    The SNP example is not relevant because they have a dominant position over a certain geographical area. In 2015 this gave them spectacular results but 2017 showed how vulnerable they are to a modest fall. The Lib Dems no longer have anything like that.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,758
    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/953289632975859712

    Why were they needed anyway, we all know the Labour Party doesn’t have an issue with antisemitism.....
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,002

    Mr. Glenn, show me the English Parliament.

    Mr. Mark, silence, heretic! Global warming has always been the Truth.


    The fact that it is snowing somewhere up north does not prove global warming theory to be false; just as the fact that it is bright and springlike in London this afternoon does not prove it to be true.

    Climate and weather are not the same thing.
This discussion has been closed.