UK Election 2010

[Filuwaúrdjan]

New YouGov poll:

Tories: 37% (-2)
Labour: 35% (+2)

I think this is one of the one-day-polls, so I suppose its more likely to be wrong. Us being essentially level with 2005 is a little hard for me to believe, however nice it is to see.

[afleitch]

New YouGov poll:

Tories: 37% (-2)
Labour: 35% (+2)

I think this is one of the one-day-polls, so I suppose its more likely to be wrong. Us being essentially level with 2005 is a little hard for me to believe, however nice it is to see.

YouGov's tracker poll is curious. The last company to try this at the last election was Populous, whos figures ended up all over the place. So prior to beginning this one, YouGov reviewed it's methods and changed their poll 'weighting' further in Labours favour. Daily samples are only polling about 800-850 people a daye (which is pretty low given YouGovs potential outreach.

For the record, the unweighed figures for the past 3 days in terms of a party 'share' of a 3 party choice (helluva lot of don't knows) have been consistent. Post 'bullying' Con identifiers rose 7% and Labour fell 4%

An out and out weighting by how people voted in 2005 (33-36-23) gave the Tories a 12% lead with AR on the 21st and a landslide producing 12% swing in the marginals...

This is not to suggest that AR is correct, namely that all pollsters are essentialy polling the same data but applying weighting and redistribution in a varying way.

[afleitch]

New YouGov poll:

Tories: 37% (-2)
Labour: 35% (+2)

I think this is one of the one-day-polls, so I suppose its more likely to be wrong. Us being essentially level with 2005 is a little hard for me to believe, however nice it is to see.

YouGov's tracker poll is curious. The last company to try this at the last election was Populous, whos figures ended up all over the place. So prior to beginning this one, YouGov reviewed it's methods and changed their poll 'weighting' further in Labours favour. Daily samples are only polling about 800-850 people a daye (which is pretty low given YouGovs potential outreach.

For the record, the unweighed figures for the past 3 days in terms of a party 'share' of a 3 party choice (helluva lot of don't knows) have been consistent. Post 'bullying' Con identifiers rose 7% and Labour fell 4%

An out and out weighting by how people voted in 2005 (33-36-23) gave the Tories a 12% lead with AR on the 21st and a landslide producing 12% swing in the marginals...

This is not to suggest that AR is correct, namely that all pollsters are essentialy polling the same data but applying weighting and redistribution in a varying way.

EDIT: Just to note that I am enjoying this. Cameron is displaying the steely nerve (as are those in the party) of someone who knows more than he is letting on. In public at least, Labour cannot play their 'underdog' rhetoric; we've always performed well when that happens

[Harry Hayfield]

What I am doing is averaging all polls that publish details of their poll (something YouGov never do) and then adjusting them by the average change between the date of the poll and the election result since 1950 and so far (and these are the numbers that my maps are based on):

Conservatives 38.58% (+5.36% on Election 2005) winning 367 seats (+157 seats)
Labour 23.95% (-12.23% on Election 2005) winning 183 seats (-166 seats)
Liberal Democrats 20.68% (-1.96% on Election 2005) winning 63 seats (+1 seat)
United Kingdom Independence Party 4.09% (+1.78% on Election 2005) winning 0 seats (unchanged)
Green Party 3.51% (+2.44% on Election 2005) winning 1 seat (+1 seat)
Scottish National Party 3.13% (+1.58% on Election 2005) winning 11 seats (+5 seats)
British National Party 3.00% (+2.28% on Election 2005) winning 0 seats (unchanged)
Other Parties 1.00% (-0.65% on Election 2005) winning 20 seats (-1 seat)
Plaid Cymru 0.99% (+0.33% on Election 2005) winning 5 seats (+3 seats)
Conservative lead of 14.62% (+17.58% on Election 2005) with an overall majority of 84 seats

[afleitch]

I hope Gordon goes to the country tomorrow. I want to take to the streets and say 'right guys; this is it, what do you want in the next 5 years?'

[Phony Moderate]

I hope Gordon goes to the country tomorrow. I want to take to the streets and say 'right guys; this is it, what do you want in the next 5 years?'

It wouldn't suprise me if he does.

[afleitch]

I hope Gordon goes to the country tomorrow. I want to take to the streets and say 'right guys; this is it, what do you want in the next 5 years?'

It wouldn't suprise me if he does.

It would be shot in the arm for the Tories if he does.

[Psychic Octopus]

If we do see another Labour prime minister, why does it have to be Gordon Brown? Why can't it be Jack Straw?

[You kip if you want to...]

If we do see another Labour prime minister, why does it have to be Gordon Brown? Why can't it be Jack Straw?

Or one of the Milibands?

[Psychic Octopus]

If we do see another Labour prime minister, why does it have to be Gordon Brown? Why can't it be Jack Straw?

Or one of the Milibands?

Maybe. If Labour is going to run the country for another 4/5 years, then it ought to be someone other then Gordon.

[Silent Hunter]

I hope Gordon goes to the country tomorrow. I want to take to the streets and say 'right guys; this is it, what do you want in the next 5 years?'

It wouldn't suprise me if he does.

I think he'll wait until after the Budget.

[afleitch]

The Tory website has been relaunched in 'campiagn mode'

[Psychic Octopus]

David Cameron is starting to remind me of Barack Obama...

[Phony Moderate]

If we do see another Labour prime minister, why does it have to be Gordon Brown? Why can't it be Jack Straw?

Or one of the Milibands?

Maybe. If Labour is going to run the country for another 4/5 years, then it ought to be someone other then Gordon.

Dennis Skinner.

[Barnes]

SO what concessions do you guys think that the Conservatives (or Labour) will have to make to the Lib Dems in the event of a Hung Parliament?

[Hash]

SO what concessions do you guys think that the Conservatives (or Labour) will have to make to the Lib Dems in the event of a Hung Parliament?

Hopefully something on electoral reform.

[You kip if you want to...]

David Cameron is starting to remind me of Barack Obama...

Dave wishes.

[Barnes]

SO what concessions do you guys think that the Conservatives (or Labour) will have to make to the Lib Dems in the event of a Hung Parliament?

Hopefully something on electoral reform.

That's what I think is most likely.

[k-onmmunist]

If we do see another Labour prime minister, why does it have to be Gordon Brown? Why can't it be Jack Straw?

Ugh.

Also, if PR gets passed, that would be awesome.

[Silent Hunter]

David Cameron is starting to remind me of Barack Obama...

A man who likes the sound of his own voice?

[k-onmmunist]

David Cameron is starting to remind me of Barack Obama...

A man who likes the sound of his own voice?

A man who calls for change for the sake of change

[Smid]

New YouGov poll:

Tories: 37% (-2)
Labour: 35% (+2)

I think this is one of the one-day-polls, so I suppose its more likely to be wrong. Us being essentially level with 2005 is a little hard for me to believe, however nice it is to see.

YouGov's tracker poll is curious. The last company to try this at the last election was Populous, whos figures ended up all over the place. So prior to beginning this one, YouGov reviewed it's methods and changed their poll 'weighting' further in Labours favour. Daily samples are only polling about 800-850 people a daye (which is pretty low given YouGovs potential outreach.

For the record, the unweighed figures for the past 3 days in terms of a party 'share' of a 3 party choice (helluva lot of don't knows) have been consistent. Post 'bullying' Con identifiers rose 7% and Labour fell 4%

An out and out weighting by how people voted in 2005 (33-36-23) gave the Tories a 12% lead with AR on the 21st and a landslide producing 12% swing in the marginals...

This is not to suggest that AR is correct, namely that all pollsters are essentialy polling the same data but applying weighting and redistribution in a varying way.

This latest poll is great news for the Tories because it may lead to some anti-Labour voters not willing to risk Brown getting back in. I think a poll showing Labour close to the Tories is more likely to increase the Tory vote.

[Mr. Morden]

Forgive my ignorance, but if the Conservatives end up just a few seats short of a majority, then what happens?  Is one allowed to form a minority government, as in Canada, or would there have to be a coalition?

[Phony Moderate]

New YouGov poll:

Tories: 37% (-2)
Labour: 35% (+2)

I think this is one of the one-day-polls, so I suppose its more likely to be wrong. Us being essentially level with 2005 is a little hard for me to believe, however nice it is to see.

YouGov's tracker poll is curious. The last company to try this at the last election was Populous, whos figures ended up all over the place. So prior to beginning this one, YouGov reviewed it's methods and changed their poll 'weighting' further in Labours favour. Daily samples are only polling about 800-850 people a daye (which is pretty low given YouGovs potential outreach.

For the record, the unweighed figures for the past 3 days in terms of a party 'share' of a 3 party choice (helluva lot of don't knows) have been consistent. Post 'bullying' Con identifiers rose 7% and Labour fell 4%

An out and out weighting by how people voted in 2005 (33-36-23) gave the Tories a 12% lead with AR on the 21st and a landslide producing 12% swing in the marginals...

This is not to suggest that AR is correct, namely that all pollsters are essentialy polling the same data but applying weighting and redistribution in a varying way.

This latest poll is great news for the Tories because it may lead to some anti-Labour voters not willing to risk Brown getting back in. I think a poll showing Labour close to the Tories is more likely to increase the Tory vote.

Of course, there's no such thing as an anti-Tory....

Besides, i don't think the vast majority of voters look at polls.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Forgive my ignorance, but if the Conservatives end up just a few seats short of a majority, then what happens?  Is one allowed to form a minority government, as in Canada, or would there have to be a coalition?

They could form a minority government, yes. Most governments that lack a majority (even if they have one normally but don't on certain votes) can buy Unionist support, at least for a while. Coalitions would (probably) only be seriously considered if the largest party was a long way short of a majority. Of course, there's always the option of calling another election in the hope of getting a majority; which is very risky, though has worked in the past (but has never been tried in the age of intensive media coverage).