UK Election 2010

[afleitch]

Yes, new boundaries come into effect on Wednesday.

As for predictions, a hung parliament is likely on paper, but I think people will vote to ensure that doesn't happen, particularly if a hung parliament is the 'talk' of the election. Should there be a significant movement to the Conservatives in the polls, I expect a small Conservative majority even if on paper it shouldn't be enough to gain one. If there is not, even if the swing would, on paper deliver a hung parliament, I would expect Labour to hold onto it's majority. Of course once again there will be localised swings each way which will confound any predictions.

I expect significant Liberal Democrat losses.

[afleitch]

I expect significant Liberal Democrat losses.

Why? Does Menzies Campbell have something to do with it?

Yes and no. There was movement against the Lib Dems in some of their 'old' seats in 2005 in an otherwise a good year for them. The Lib-Con marginals are not strong for them, unless they can get their vote out. Likewise I expect a good few pickups from Labour to swing back to Labour.

[afleitch]

I'd much rather we had a referendum on the EU constitution this year or early next than a GE.

[afleitch]

What happens in the UK if there's a hung parliament?  Could either Labour or the Cons form a minority government, as in the current situation in Canada?  Is there any chance of the Lib Dems forming a coalition government with either of the other two parties?

Anyone want to answer this?  What happens if there's a hung parliament?  Can a minority government be formed?  Would the Lib Dems form a coalition with either of the other parties?

It is, numerically speaking, very possible infact probable. While the Conservatives didn't advance spectacularly in 2005, alot of marginal and supermarginal seats were 'set up' that make it very easy for them to wipe out Labour's otherwise healthy majority.

But I have a feeling we will end up with a majority government due to nationwide variations in swing. If the wind moves in the Conservatives favour, they may have a national swing that would leave them say 25 short of a majority, but in reality would probably aquire a small majority. Likewise, if Labour do all right they may see a nationwide swing that should see them loose their majority, but end up retaining a small majority.

I cannot see the Lib Dems enter any coalition, only work on an issue by issue basis as a formal coalition, I believe, would open the party up to a serious split.

[afleitch]

Btw, how much of the LibDem vote in Scotland at the last General Election is likely to collapse into the SNP?

Too early to say; though it does offer up the most promising gains for the Conservatives.

Of course, and SNP strengthening in Scotland could deprive Labour of seats they really need to keep.

[afleitch]

How exactly do you figure out the seat numbers?

There are many different ways, each one broadly innacurate. Theres a good Excel swing calculator I'll try and find a link for. It uses the same methods that allowed the BBC to get their Exit Poll of 66 spot on (while other calculators had Labour at over 100)

Using that calculator on the rolling average of the last 3 polls, Labour increase their notional 44 majority to 61. The Conservatives also gain seats overall. This comes at the expense of the Lib Dems.

[afleitch]

A snap general election this year  is unlikely.

1. The economic climate is too varying, and the economic short term future too cloudy for Gordon to risk it.

2. Labour cannot finanically afford to fight a general election; they cannot match the Tories in funding where it counts and need time to build a war chest and convice the party faithful. unions and donors to cough up. They also need to boost their own grasroots membership.

3. The Tories have been fighting the marginals already using a local candidate and party based strategy (The 'Cameron Conservative' tag is really only a national label used in national campaigns and media saturated by-elections)

4. Labour need time to allow policy review groups to get rolling. Gordon says he's a details man and that's exactly what Labour needs to deliver.

5. It's impracticle to call an election before conference season. Labour need the exposure and need the policy discussion. Calling an election during the conference, forcing the Tories to abandon theirs would be probable media suicide and against the spirit of fair play. Leaving it until November cuts it too close to the Christmas shutdown

6. The 'Salmond leap.' The SNP in Scotland are, in Holyrood voting intention between 10% and 18% ahead of Labour (as believeable as a 10% Labour lead nationwide) While this won't translate into a lead, if any in Westminster voting intention, Labour cannot afford to lose safe seats in Scotland, and certainly not in the PM's backyard.

[afleitch]

Labour GAINS
Dumfriesshire from Conservatives
Inverness, Dunbartonshire East from Liberal Democrats

SNP GAINS
Gordon, Argyll from Liberal Democrats
Dundee West, Ochil, Kilmarnock from Labour

Summary
Conservatives GAIN 0 HOLD 0 LOSE 1 NET: -1
Labour GAIN 3 HOLD 38 LOSE 3 NET: Unchanged
Liberal Democrats GAIN 0 HOLD 7 LOSE 4 NET: -4
Scottish National Paty GAIN 5 HOLD 6 LOSE 0 NET: +5

While I disagree with that assesment you're along the right lines. What happened in 2007; with seats like Stirling and Argyll flipping will have an effect on results that 2005 notionals and predictions based on them, often don't take into account (Im sure the same is true for Wales) I think Labour are likely to loose seats in Scotland (between 3 and 6) and I dont quite expect the Lib Dems to fall that far back unfortunately.

[afleitch]

One neglected nugget of info (although it is very difficult and sensitive to measure) was Labour's leakage of the working class 'protestant' vote to the SNP most noticably at council level in the 'weathervanes' of Airdrie and Larkhall and Irvine (Bridgeton held steady due to the Catholic vote in Calton; still difficult to prise them out of that 'funk')

As for the SNP's 'new town' strategy it was a mixed bag; strong gains on the councils, but wanting elsewhere. Labour held onto East Kilbride and Cumbernauld (where it swung in its direction) It did suffer a larger than expected swing against it in Irvine (Cunninghame South) and the SNP of course won in Glenrothes (Fife Central) and in Livingston (a boost - it's close to hitting the 100,000 and will merit two seats in the next review but one)

[afleitch]

Heres some graphics from the '92 vote one week before the election.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTUWM84If6c

''Almost certain to be on the opposition benches; the Conservatives''

Oh and part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPHSCW_Mr10&mode=related&search=

[afleitch]

Autumn election is probably off the cards. After the internal Populus poll showing a 1 point gap, and the, once reliable YouGov's rogue poll there are rumours that a poll out tomorrow has Labour and the Tories neck and neck again. The most interesting figures, again, will be the Lib Dems and others.

I have a non-partisan feeling that should Labour lose it's lead in the coming weeks, it won't get it back again (excluding those 3 weeks of the conference season) before the next election.

[afleitch]

After the internal Populus poll showing a 1 point gap,

Which, for those that don't know, was a poll commissioned for the Tories.

Indeed - thats why I called it an internal poll

I think the Tories have the advantage of the fruits of the ongoing summer policy review; they are being announce, yes some are being attacked but they are out there for discussion and debate.

The questions I've posed since June is, what are Labour's policies under Gordon Brown? I know he doesn't want a referendum on the EU consti-treaty and would find it hard to back down as that would be a u-turn (yes), of a u-turn (no) of a u-turn (yes). I don't have a scooby as to what he plans for the health service (barring politically AandE closures avoiding the marginals if possible) or for education - hopefully onward with Blair's direction or (another) u-turn? I don't know what he's going to do about tax, or poverty. People may, rightfully, not agree with Conservative proposals - but they are beginning to be 'out there.' Labour have left a bit of a void that makes it difficult to fight an election without a policy platform. And replacing the 'we're not the Tories' rhetoric of the past 2 elections with a 'I'm not Tony Blair' rhetoric just wont cut it.

[afleitch]

Worth bearing in mind that historically there are very few polls conducted in August anyway. 

And with good reason; August polls tend to be even more worthless than normal polls.

I prefer to put my faith in the polls conducted over the weekend of 1st-2nd of September

In other news David 'Lurch to the Right' Cameron has been accused of doing the...well complete opposite; of abandoning core-Tory/Thatcher (interchangable here) values. For those like me who believe true conservatism suffered a punch in the gut after Thatcher's first term it's a welcome indictment.

Mr Ancram was not the only politician to praise Thatcher today. Gordon Brown showered praise on her at todays press conference. He also refused a debate with Cameron should there be an election despite being on the record as demanding a debate between Thatcher and Kinnock twenty years ago.

[afleitch]

Of course bear in mind Labour were polling so highly because of their landslide and first few months in government. Considering the 1997 election could not have been held any later than it was and I doubt Blair would go to the country so soon (though in retrospect, knowning Blair...) after his election I think the polls then were more than a tad inflated

[afleitch]

The Tory M.P for Croydon Central (Andrew Pelling) has been arrested for wife-beating.

It's technically called 'domestic abuse' - sorry to sound pedantic, but wife beating as a term just bugs me (particularly if the victim isn't married, is a man or part of a same sex couple)

[afleitch]

What constitutes a landslide?

With that poll suggesting a Labour majority of over 100, the term "landslide" is being used in some quarters, but I would like to know in a 650 member House, what would count as a landslide?

While Labour would hold its majority if it went to the country now, a majority of over 100 is way off (like those 200+ majorities predicted between 2002 and 2005 by people who can't read polls to save themselves) It may even improve on it's notional 40 something majority, but not by more than a dozen.

[afleitch]

To call it before the Conservative conference is mean spirited; costing the party money, their supporters money, catering staff, hotels and the whole town money from the party and media circus. But I have grown to expect that of Brown; he has to go to the country before the new parliamentary session, as that is where he got off to a shaky start before the summer break  and where his ability to get legislation through parliament would be tested. The unions should give him a bit of a tough ride over closing down half of the Remploy factories for the disabled and the failure to secure equal pay for low paid female workers. But, again I expect them to roll over and let their bellies be tickled.

The sooner the unions disaffiliate (and I'm saying this as a union man myself) and stand on their own two feet, the better it will be for workers.

[afleitch]

Nick Robinson is claiming that he was been told that there is no chance of an election on the 25th of October.

After that speech I would think that would be the case.

[afleitch]

I don't think so. Although many rank-and-file Conservative voters seem far from happy with Cameron, I'd guess the parliamentary party and party members are, for the most part, behind him

That's true. Despite the media plugging any contest as between 'Brown and Cameron', Conservative members and most voters I have too add, tend to understand that any election is between 'Labour and Conservative.'

The polls reflect that too, particularly the YouGov Poll which showed a negligable change in Conservative support (it's been fairly steady) but a sharp decline in the Lib Dem vote to, probably unrealisitic levels. Going into each poll in depth, Labours support stems from the fact more people say they are going to vote than last time. If you look at the support of those who voted in 2005, you tend to find very few direct Con to Lab switchers.

Browns speech was designed to appeal to conservative orientated voters (creaming off most of the Tories 2005 manifesto for example ) but, on first instance, appears not to have attracted them with the Lib Dems taking, again i'll point out, an unrealistic battering. The Tories also suffer from a high 'others' tally, including the continuing 'protest poll' with people saying they will vote UKIP (I doubt UKIP will scratch above 2% in any election) but realistically wont.

Finally, having a November election after the clocks change (where it will be getting dark around 6) is potentially damaging. In 2005, IIRC the Tories led Labour in the BBC/ITV exit poll right through the day until the rush hour. If the rush hour is dark, and the weather potentially drab only the most hardened voters could be inclined to turnout.

[afleitch]

BBC seems to have had their coffee (or a strong tea) this morning, after letting it die down a bit there's a fresh story about both Labour and the Conservatives reguarding a snap poll, what's up with that?

It's the 'Westminster Village' they want an election and salivate when fed any information that might suggest their will be one. Labour's helping; after all it helps unsettle the Tories (teasing is an old political game afterall) but it seems the public are not too keen on an election right now. I think they will get irritated if an announcement of an election (or not) is not made soon and rightly so. It can be tolerated during silly season, but not when parliament comes back from the break when the business of government should be attended to.

[afleitch]

Finally, having a November election after the clocks change (where it will be getting dark around 6) is potentially damaging. In 2005, IIRC the Tories led Labour in the BBC/ITV exit poll right through the day until the rush hour. If the rush hour is dark, and the weather potentially drab only the most hardened voters could be inclined to turnout.

Labour voting hours have been after 5pm or so since the 1920's at least (and maybe earlier). It's the main reason why I don't think an autumn election ('cos late October isn't much better than early November) is especially likely, though I suspect that we'll see some stunts next week even if no election is called (for instance; the P.M might have a little chat with the Queen and let the media know about it beforehand... Harold Wilson did this in 1965).

I'm also assuming that Labour does well in the 7am to 9am 'off to work' vote, times which will also be fairly dark. I'm only assuming as I was advised to do my own meet and greet on May 3rd during the day between 9 and 5 as it would be most 'effective' (not that these sorts of things really are; you're just thanking the clerks and making them the odd cuppa)

[afleitch]

It was said Gordon was paying close attention to todays council by-elections. They won't make for good reading in the morning.

[afleitch]

Curiously for the BBC, the by-elections make the Politics News page on the website. Based on the results the Tories would have a 6.2% national lead

[afleitch]

Gordon doesn't have much time for fair play; he'll announce before the Tory Conference if he wants to aware that the 5-5-4 airtime rule kicks in on the BBC News. He's seeking a personal mandate for his personal party. Of course Oct 1st is the day tax on petrol goes up so the headline in the red tops.

However regradles the concern is turnout could dive; it's been two years since the last GE, several months since Scotland and Wales went through a relentless campaign. I'm willing to take time off work and help and I'm sure the same is true of other pary workers but the public may be a bit pissed off.

Problem is the election has been talked up so much I think Gordon will have to go to the country in the next few weeks and hope things won't go tits up.

[afleitch]

Is it me, or does David Cameron seem like a turkey voting for Christmas?

You mean calling for a GE? Well he's consistent (unlike Brown) in that regard; he's backed a GE throughout good times and bad since Blairs plans to step down were announced last year. While I don't feel there is a need for GE, I am confident we can obliterate Browns majority. The polls are very volatile and the day in day out, on the cuff spotlight during a campaign suits Cameron to a tee.

Besides, I'm sure if Brown did go and got his majority wiped out, it's probably the biggest knock to his credibility and ego that could possibly happen.