UK - Election 2015

[LondonJohn]

Came across this BBC article about the polls:

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2015-32572745

According to their numbers UKIP is 3rd after Cons and Labour and ahead of the Lib Dems. Greens are 5th and SNP doesn't even rate a mention, being lumped in with the "others".

Are these poll numbers accurate?

This seems to be different from what I read elsewhere.

As has already been alluded to in another response to this post, the raw percentages of population are relatively meaningless if one is seeking to predict the actual constituency-win distribution of the election (which is the only measure which counts).

To take this concept to its logical extreme, imagine if voters in every single constituency in the UK voted according to the percentage splits in this poll. If that happened, the Conservatives would win every single seat.

Obviously, therefore, one needs to know how to apply these numbers (and, more importantly, any swings implied by the movement of these numbers over time) on a constituency-by-constituency basis, and one also has to take into account local/regional factors. It's an incredibly complex an difficult piece of psephological analysis, which is also notoriously inaccurate.

Polling companies are very good indeed at working out national population splits of voting intentions, and these numbers are usually extremely accurate. Where they run into huge trouble (and it's the kind of trouble that renders their "expertise" somewhat worthless....) is on two major fronts:

1) Working out how people's actual voting patterns (including likelihood of turnout, and saying one thing to pollsters but voting another way on the day) differ from the answers they give to election pollsters;

2) Translating population split numbers onto a constituency-by-constituency analysis, in order to try to predict the only numbers that really matter: the number of seats each party is likely to win in the election.


Nobody can yet get this right on a national basis. The parties themselves know this as well. They also know that the entire election comes down to a small proportion of marginal seats (e.g. Kensington will never ever be anything other than a Tory seat, and Liverpool Walton will never ever be anything other than a Labour seat). They conduct their own private polling in the key marginals, and its this polling - and definitely not the national polls quoted in the media - which best inform the parties themselves of the most likely result.

 

[MikeG]

When you are discussing another "regional" level of government in contexts where Yorkshire and London have been mentioned, then you are mistaken. Scotland is not such a "region". Not only do separatists say that, the leaders of all the Unionist parties say it too. They did NOT tell the Scots: your country is a "region". They said it is a country, and that its interests as such can best be served by remaining within the United Kingdom.

Even if you don't agree with these facts, you can't speak of Scotland as "one region", and even if you do that, you can't call its devolution "hypothetical" since the devolved Parliament was established by the Scotland Act 1998.

You may not like any of this, but that is no excuse for writing nonsense about it.

You would do well to read what people actually write before lecturing them in response. A "region of this island", I wrote. Therefore, obviously, a geographical region. That Scotland is a geographical region of this island, as Germany is a geographical region of Eurasia, and the USA is a geographical region of the Americas, is indisputable.

Please try to twist what I wrote into a form that anyone else on this board might be able to understand as me saying that Scotland's devolution was hypothetical. Go on. Give it your best shot. Explain to us all how me saying:

Regional devolution is a ridiculous idea, and not on anyone's agenda. There is an actual election happening ATM, with actual issues, and I really can't be bothered wasting energy discussing such a silly hypothetical.

is in any way saying that Scotland's devolution is hypothetical. It was said in response to someone suggesting that all of Britain should be governed by regional assemblies. My entire post was devoted to trying to bring discussion of that idea, here, to a close. It isn't on the table at this election.

As I've said many a time about Scots Nats, there seems to be a deliberate policy of seeking out things to be offended by. This goes hand-in-glove with the assumption that every discussion is always about Scotland.

 

[malicus]

I'm getting the supplies* in to stay up most or all of the night on Thursday - I don't think anyone has any certainty of how this election will turn out. Other than we will probably be in some sort of coalition government, it's all to play for.

*wine, crisps, chocolate....

Supplies* here too. Gonna be a long night after along day - got my four hours booked standing at a polling place looking like the Nationalistic Destroyer of Worlds that I am

*mixed kebab, cheese board, Pepsi Max.

 

[anglolawyer]

Other than from the Labour party a decade ago, I have never ever heard anyone ever suggest that what we need now is another layer of politicking and bureaucracy. Regional devolution is a ridiculous idea, and not on anyone's agenda. There is an actual election happening ATM, with actual issues, and I really can't be bothered wasting energy discussing such a silly hypothetical. Why a goodly percentage of one region of this island thinks it a good idea will forever remain an absolute mystery to me, but the rest of us appear to have the sense to repudiate the notion that we'd benefit from an extra tier of government, now or ever.

tut tut

 

[anglolawyer]

I'm getting the supplies* in to stay up most or all of the night on Thursday - I don't think anyone has any certainty of how this election will turn out. Other than we will probably be in some sort of coalition government, it's all to play for.

*wine, crisps, chocolate....

Broadly speaking, this is how I feel about the election. It's basically fun. Of course, it's good to administer a check to the power elite every few years, just to remind them we're here, but the sweep and trends of most major government policy play out over long periods and aren't much influenced by elections.

I have decided to cast my vote for the Lib Dems this time because they:

• aren't Labour
• aren't Conservative
• opposed Iraq
• believe in civil liberties
• advocate PR
• are centrist, or slightly left thereof, which is good

Also, Nick seems a decent chap. I urge you all to do the same before retiring to your living rooms to prepare for government.

 

[MikeG]

.....I have decided to cast my vote for the Lib Dems ....... I urge you all to do the same.......

I would, normally. But not this time.

 

[MikeG]

tut tut

I refer the honorable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago.

 

[Craig B]

You would do well to read what people actually write before lecturing them in response.

OK. Remind me what you wrote.

It was said in response to someone suggesting that all of Britain should be governed by regional assemblies. My entire post was devoted to trying to bring discussion of that idea, here, to a close. It isn't on the table at this election.

That is precisely my problem. If in that context you talk of "one region", with "hypothetical devolution" who could guess that you meant Scotland, which is not a region in the sense under discussion and doesn't have a "regional assembly"; and the psrliament it possesses is not hypothetical.

As I've said many a time about Scots Nats, there seems to be a deliberate policy of seeking out things to be offended by. This goes hand-in-glove with the assumption that every discussion is always about Scotland.

Not offensive, just silly. And discuss anything you like. When I asked what region you had in mind, you said obviously Scotland. So it's up to you to discuss somewhere else, if that's what you want to do.

 

[MikeG]

OK. Remind me what you wrote. That is precisely my problem. If in that context you talk of "one region", with "hypothetical devolution" who could guess that you meant Scotland, which is not a region in the sense under discussion and doesn't have a "regional assembly"; and the psrliament it possesses is not hypothetical. Not offensive, just silly. And discuss anything you like. When I asked what region you had in mind, you said obviously Scotland. So it's up to you to discuss somewhere else, if that's what you want to do.

It might amuse you, Craig, to try to conjure an argument out of nothing to derail a thread about the UK election, but to all those who have to suffer your twisting of words it is surely nothing but a bore. Regional assemblies for all of the UK was the suggestion. The above is my response. Bugger about with my words as much as you like. I can't be the only one who hasn't got a clue what you are trying to say, but who can see clearly why you are trying to say it.

......If in that context you talk of "one region", with "hypothetical devolution" ..........

There's your comprehension problem, right there. I didn't.

 

[Damien Evans]

How can they be?

Well, they are right now. Why would Europe kick them out?

 

[Craig B]

There's your comprehension problem, right there. I didn't [talk of "one region" with "hypothetical devolution"].

You wrote this

Regional devolution is a ridiculous idea, and not on anyone's agenda. There is an actual election happening ATM, with actual issues, and I really can't be bothered wasting energy discussing such a silly hypothetical.

That's exactly right. Nobody is talking hypothetically about regional devolution. But then you go off the rails entirely. You tell us that one region does indeed contain people who do just that.

Why a goodly percentage of one region of this island thinks it a good idea will forever remain an absolute mystery to me, but the rest of us appear to have the sense to repudiate the notion that we'd benefit from an extra tier of government, now or ever.

So, I ask, what is that region? Scotland, you say. That's how this discussion began.

 

[MikeG]

............blah............blah......

Finished?

 

[Agatha]

I have decided to cast my vote for the Lib Dems this time...
Also, Nick seems a decent chap. I urge you all to do the same before retiring to your living rooms to prepare for government.

He is a decent chap*, though I think somewhat disillusioned by the way he and his party were manipulated by the Tories in the coalition. Perhaps he should have realised that Cameron wouldn't play fair.

I have always voted LibDem (well, since they formed a party, I voted Lib or SDLP before that) and will probably do so on Thursday. But there is just that tiny bit of doubt about what will be a wasted vote in this constituency.

* I have met him a couple of times as my three sons went to school in his constituency and he visited the school more than once to talk to the Politics students, plus I met him at a recording of Any Questions. Ed Balls was also at that recording, and a more arrogant person you'd be pushed to find.

 

[anglolawyer]

He is a decent chap*, though I think somewhat disillusioned by the way he and his party were manipulated by the Tories in the coalition. Perhaps he should have realised that Cameron wouldn't play fair.

I have always voted LibDem (well, since they formed a party, I voted Lib or SDLP before that) and will probably do so on Thursday. But there is just that tiny bit of doubt about what will be a wasted vote in this constituency.

* I have met him a couple of times as my three sons went to school in his constituency and he visited the school more than once to talk to the Politics students, plus I met him at a recording of Any Questions. Ed Balls was also at that recording, and a more arrogant person you'd be pushed to find.

Alright, let's play

Nick Clegg
Vince Cable

David Cameron
George Osborne

Ed Milliband
Ed Balls

Nigel Farage

Nicola Sturgeon

The Welsh one

The Green Party woman (not Lucas)

Please mark these with an L (=like) a D (=dislike) or an N (=neutral). I'll start:

Nick Clegg L
Vince Cable N

David Cameron L
George Osborne N

Ed Milliband L
Ed Balls D

Nigel Farage N

Nicola Sturgeon N

The Welsh one N

The Green Party woman (not Lucas) N

and/or add any pet hates or faves as you see fit. Hamilton (UKIP) is a definite D. Grayling is a D but that's to do with policy rather than body odour or similar. Oh, Respect! Galloway is an L. Is he going to get in btw? Caroline Lucas is an L. Theresa May is an L and Michael Gove is somewhere way beyond a D. A double plus D perhaps. And an idiot too. BoJo is a D. Straw is a D (but like BJ, not standing).

So, who winds you up sumfing rotten?

 

[MikeG]

Nick Clegg L
Vince Cable N

David Cameron L
George Osborne L

Ed Milliband D
Ed Balls D (with a passion)

Nigel Farage D

Nicola Sturgeon D

The Welsh one N

The Green Party woman (not Lucas) D

 

[funk de fino]

The perfect result?

The YouGov seat projector now predicts that there will be just four seats between the Tories and Labour.



YouGov seat projection, May 5
Party Seats
Labour 276
Conservatives 272
SNP 52
Liberal Democrats 24
Other 19
Plaid Cymru 3
Ukip 3
Green Party 1

 

[MikeG]

The Financial Times has it rather differently:

Conservatives 281 (-25)
Labour 267 (+9)
SNP 51 (+45)
Liberal Democrats 26 (-31)
DUP 8
Plaid Cymru 4 (+1)
SDLP 3
Ukip 1 (+1)
Greens 1
Other 8

 

[malicus]

The Financial Times has it rather differently:

Conservatives 281 (-25)
Labour 267 (+9)
SNP 51 (+45)
Liberal Democrats 26 (-31)
DUP 8
Plaid Cymru 4 (+1)
SDLP 3
Ukip 1 (+1)
Greens 1
Other 8

That's how I see it. Labour and LibDem sufficiently poor doon sooth that it's turning into a politically mouthwatering dogs dinner. Swing 5 from SNP to Lab and I think the FT has nailed it.

I still think there will be enough anti-Tory votes to allow a Lab-LibDem minority coalition to survive. Not that I think the LibDems are anti-Tory, but a new piece of bread is getting buttered later this week and they are very aware of what side.

 

[welshdean]

The most fascinating thing about this election is that just 8 months ago we nearly docked the dog's tail. In a few days that tail might just be wagging the rest of the dog.
Frightens me it does.

 

[anglolawyer]

The most fascinating thing about this election is that just 8 months ago we nearly docked the dog's tail. In a few days that tail might just be wagging the rest of the dog.
Frightens me it does.

It could be the greatest constitutional crisis since yesterday when 'Wills' (yuk) and 'Kate' failed to call their new blighter Victoria.