UK Election 2010

[Democratic Hawk]

On the plus side I have some spare annual leave and flexi I can use if there's a 'snap' election. Likelyhood is I could be bussed down south. No doubt Corby

The great thing about Corby and East Northants is that you can split your time between places like Oundle out in the county and then the Lloyds estate in central Corby, all good fun and games and in November it'll all be about turnout IMHO. 

Seem rather sure, Ben that Gord will go to the country. We're having lovely weather here in Durham at the moment (for October), but it can only get worse. Not to mention dark nights

Dave

[Silent Hunter]

Obviously, we're not going to have a 25 October election. If Gordon wants 1 November, he'll have to go to the Queen on Friday.

[Democratic Hawk]

Obviously, we're not going to have a 25 October election. If Gordon wants 1 November, he'll have to go to the Queen on Friday.

My point was more why Autumn, why not May 2008? It was lovely weather this past April, for the most part. Campaiging being a total joy, as opposed to a chore. No-one is going to want to be canvassed after dark

Dave

[Ben.]

Seem rather sure, Ben that Gord will go to the country. We're having lovely weather here in Durham at the moment (for October), but it can only get worse. Not to mention dark nights

Dave

Dave, in the last few days i've spoken with folks in both the Labour and Conservative parties, MPs and PPCs as well as party workers, agents and organisers... it all seems to be set for November (either the 1st or the 8th), and if it does take place its one of the biggest gambles in modern political history IMHO.   

[Democratic Hawk]

Seem rather sure, Ben that Gord will go to the country. We're having lovely weather here in Durham at the moment (for October), but it can only get worse. Not to mention dark nights

Dave

Dave, in the last few days i've spoken with folks in both the Labour and Conservative parties, MPs and PPCs as well as party workers, agents and organisers... it all seems to be set for November (either the 1st or the 8th), and if it does take place its one of the biggest gambles in modern political history IMHO.   

Are any of the parties really actually ready for a snap election? I'm sure should it come I'll fight the good fight but I don't find the dark nights and trudging in the rain particularly appealing

Wouldn't they all rather wait, truth to be known ?

Dave

[afleitch]

Seem rather sure, Ben that Gord will go to the country. We're having lovely weather here in Durham at the moment (for October), but it can only get worse. Not to mention dark nights

Dave

Dave, in the last few days i've spoken with folks in both the Labour and Conservative parties, MPs and PPCs as well as party workers, agents and organisers... it all seems to be set for November (either the 1st or the 8th), and if it does take place its one of the biggest gambles in modern political history IMHO.   

Are any of the parties really actually ready for a snap election? I'm sure should it come I'll fight the good fight but I don't find the dark nights and trudging in the rain particularly appealing

Wouldn't they all rather wait, truth to be known ?

Dave

I dont think any party is ever ready for an election even when its inevitable.

As for the cold nights it's dark in Glasgow at 4.38pm on Nov 1st and a 4.34 in London. So rush hour in darkness

[Ben.]

Are any of the parties really actually ready for a snap election? I'm sure should it come I'll fight the good fight but I don't find the dark nights and trudging in the rain particularly appealing

Wouldn't they all rather wait, truth to be known ?

Dave

Personally I'd rather wait till 2009 and if the polls are close this weekend then it might be that's what we'll see (I dont buy that Brown might go next May, in my mind its either a "snap" poll now or a poll once this parliament has run its full (ish) course.

That said if the polls are close this weekend (and the "word" seems to be that Labour's private polling has their marginals as "patchy" and "very close") and yet Brown still goes for an election, then he is going because he fears worse and doesnt anticipate ever having a better chance to win his own mandate.

I'm less sure of an election than i was a few days ago, however it's almost got to a "1914" situation with troops having been marched to the top of so many hills that it cant really be put off now what ever the polls say.       

[Democratic Hawk]

As for the cold nights it's dark in Glasgow at 4.38pm on Nov 1st and a 4.34 in London. So rush hour in darkness

Exactly . Last night on Newsnight , Jeremy Paxman with guests Peter Kellner and John Curtiss raised the 'possibility' of a Saturday election. But, from what was said, that hasn't been done since 1918. Of course, from what I could gather, Autumn elections were called in the 1920s and 1930s. Seemingly, dark nights and bad weather weren't barriers to voting back then.

Alas, too many voters can't even be arsed to vote in the best of weather these days , let alone chancing the bad

I'm seriously thinking that voting should be mandatory. Men and women died for the right to vote. It's a civic duty . Not sure who compulsory voting would help on the day, of course, but I'll hazard a guess

In Ipsos-MORI polls, the headline voting intention figure, who score 10 when they say that they are "absolutely certain" to vote, but certainly since 1997, it would seem that all voters naming a party to which they identify has, invariably, favoured Labour (reflecting that Conservative identifiers are more certain to vote than Labour ones). I may be mistaken but I think for the whole 19-month period from Cameron taking the Tory helm and Brown Labour's, only one poll had had the Conservatives ahead on all voters naming a party

Were this accurate, it would seem that Labour's clear advantage, here, would give Labour the advantage should voting be mandatory. Of course, any mandatory voting should give voters the "none of the above" option

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Are any of the parties really actually ready for a snap election? I'm sure should it come I'll fight the good fight but I don't find the dark nights and trudging in the rain particularly appealing

Wouldn't they all rather wait, truth to be known ?

Dave

Personally I'd rather wait till 2009 and if the polls are close this weekend then it might be that's what we'll see (I dont buy that Brown might go next May, in my mind its either a "snap" poll now or a poll once this parliament has run its full (ish) course.

That said if the polls are close this weekend (and the "word" seems to be that Labour's private polling has their marginals as "patchy" and "very close") and yet Brown still goes for an election, then he is going because he fears worse and doesnt anticipate ever having a better chance to win his own mandate.

I'm less sure of an election than i was a few days ago, however it's almost got to a "1914" situation with troops having been marched to the top of so many hills that it cant really be put off now what ever the polls say.       

Well, it's all going to depend on the "marginals". At the end the day, Labour just need to roll down a bank to lose it's overall majority but the Conservatives still have to climb Mt Kilamangaro to get an overall majority. And I don't see a seismic shift on the horizon. That time will, of course, come eventually but I don't see Labour hitting their 1983 nadir (not as long as it remains a 'Third Way' party of the progressive centre-left, which it will) and bottoming-out the way the Tories did in 1997

Should an election be called and Labour win, then legislation is essential to stop the likes of Ashcroft "buying" seats by imposing national and constituency spending limits on parties outside the election period. I'd hold Labour in the same disdain with such practices. I'm not so partisan that I don't believe in fair play [advocate of AV that I am]. The role of money debases politics

I think the worst result for Conservative 'modernisers' (the sincere ones, that is) would be for the party to win a Major-style majority or less because the reactionary wing will bear it's ugly teeth. That's why, even though I'm not a Conservative, I was horrified that the abomination that is John Redwood was REHABILITATED. I struggle to name any Tory who did more during the Major years to make his party unelectable

Not get me wrong Ben, I hold the Tory Left in, relative, affection; in fact, it's not inconceivable that I could have been one myself in a past life (my great-grandfather was a Tory, as well as many of my great-uncles and aunts and their kin). Of course, the huge branch of the Gray family (i.e. my grandfather's) are predominantly Labour. 85% of my great-grandfather's descendents are those of grandfather. Given that 3 of my dad's sisters never reached adulthood, there'd have been even more of us. But it's not the Tory Left the scare the crap out of me. I know they mean well

I've never been anything but brutally honest but what I perceived as the neo-liberal excesses of the Conservative Party effectively killed any chance of me turning . I'm pretty moderate across the board and see the Tories as further right than Labour are left. But, as you know with me, any ideology to the left of social democracy and to the right of Christian Democracy/'One-Nation' Conservatism/Tory Paternalism, I consider too radical and too reactionary for my tastes

Dave

[afleitch]

Quick word about AV, studies show that if AV was implemented all it would do is entrench the disproportionality that exists in FPTP. In 2005 under AV Labours majority would have been 100-150 - a disturbing figure considering the led by just 3%. Instead of needing a 10% lead to get a majority the Tories would need something closer to 15%. Again a disturbing figure. Compared to AV, FPTP is bizarrely more 'proportionate.' I do suspect that Labour will look into changing the system in the guise of 'democracy' but recommend AV with the above in mind.

I could only support STV in multi-member constituencies at the moment. Otherwise retain FPTP but just draw the constituencies a tad better.

[Silent Hunter]

I'd personally prefer the AMS system. Like Scotland or maybe Germany's system.

[Democratic Hawk]

Rumours circulating re-upcoming polls on politicalbetting:

1) YouGov/C4 Labour lead of 3% (source unrevealed)

2) ICM/The Guardian Conservative lead of 3% (source Mrs Dale's Diary)

I'm depressed enough without these being accurate

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If those rumours prove true (and we all know what internet rumours are like) then an autumn election is, probably, off.

But wait and see anyway.

[Democratic Hawk]

Quick word about AV, studies show that if AV was implemented all it would do is entrench the disproportionality that exists in FPTP. In 2005 under AV Labours majority would have been 100-150 - a disturbing figure considering the led by just 3%. Instead of needing a 10% lead to get a majority the Tories would need something closer to 15%. Again a disturbing figure. Compared to AV, FPTP is bizarrely more 'proportionate.' I do suspect that Labour will look into changing the system in the guise of 'democracy' but recommend AV with the above in mind.

I could only support STV in multi-member constituencies at the moment. Otherwise retain FPTP but just draw the constituencies a tad better.

If AV ensures a permanent mildly centre-left government then that's all well and good by me

I could live with a centre-right government, if I thought, for one minute, it was going to be exactly that. Too many uber-righties with no conscience whatsoever still lurking in the Conservative Party for my liking. PURGE THEM!

Dave

[afleitch]

Too many uber-righties with no conscience whatsoever still lurking in the Conservative Party for my liking. PURGE THEM!

Dave

Yes, we need to get rid of those old right wing buffers like whatsisname; Quentin Davies!...oh..wait...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Channel Four/YouGov poll:

Labour 40%
Tories 36%
LDems 13%

Labour lead 4pts; was 11pts in last YouGov poll.

[Silent Hunter]

What's happened to the Lib Dems?

Of course, it's only one poll.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's happened to the Lib Dems?

Of course, it's only one poll.

YouGov always shows them lower than other polls do.

[afleitch]

ICM neck and neck.

Three polls out with Tories 4,3 and neck and neck. Great figures for going into the campaign (should there be one though I think there won't be with some 'getting on with the job' TM or 'Britain first' TM backpeddling ) The Lib Dems are horribly, and indeed more than likely innacurately low; they always climb up in the polls when people realise they exist (to our foreign frieds: yes - really)

But...?

[Democratic Hawk]

ICM neck and neck.

Three polls out with Tories 4,3 and neck and neck. Great figures for going into the campaign (should there be one though I think there won't be with some 'getting on with the job' TM or 'Britain first' TM backpeddling ) The Lib Dems are horribly, and indeed more than likely innacurately low; they always climb up in the polls when people realise they exist (to our foreign frieds: yes - really)

But...?

Stop stooping, Andrew. I expect it of that low-life Cameron, but you're better than that

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Too many uber-righties with no conscience whatsoever still lurking in the Conservative Party for my liking. PURGE THEM!

Dave

Yes, we need to get rid of those old right wing buffers like whatsisname; Quentin Davies!...oh..wait...

I don't mean him. I must admit he was a surprise Tory defection. What has he got in common with Labour besides being pro-Europe? I gather he addressed the conference and got a good reception.

Of course, should an election come and the Tories lose a fourth successive election, I'd like to see more cross the floor. I keep a "big tent"

Part of my political beef (he's made it personal with his appalling conduct) with Dave was rehabilitating Redwood. In fact, given that Cameron and Osborne have 'recanted' on economic stability in favour of "tax cuts", I think he's the leader of your party . Dave's just the lipstick on the pig and even then I've seen through him. But you can keep your right wing whackadoos

Can't blame a kind soul for being wary

Dave

[afleitch]

For the record, the 'Clucking Fist' isn't mine And I really don't see how 'economic stability=tax rises.' It doesn't work like that. Their tax cutting proposals are relatively modest. Indeed the Tory plans in 2005 (which also included tax cuts) would have resulted in a marginally higher level of public spending after 5 years than what is infact planned after Brown's last budget. Besides the economy isn't stable; Darling is lowering growth forecasts for 2008; the economy is not 'stable' it's 'tottering' and we can only hope for the sake of our wallets it goes one way and not the other.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Regional figures from the YouGov poll:

North: Labour 50%, Tories 28%, LDems 15%, Others 6%
Midlands & Wales: Labour 43%, Tories 37%, LDems 10%, Others 10%
London: Labour 40%, Tories 35%, LDems 15%, Others 11%
Scotland: Labour 38%, Tories 14%, LDems 9%, Others 39%
South: Labour 31%, Tories 47%, LDems 14%, Others 9%

Obviously the the sample sizes here are rather small and, as such, results like this should be taken with all the salt in Cheshire.

But some things to note anyway:

1. The Scottish numbers are interesting; most of the surge in SNP support (for this is, of course, the party that the overwhelming majority of "other" voters will actually vote for) seems to have come from a jaw-dropping collapse in LibDem support (which, if this poll be right, has more than halved since 2005). This is also the only region that Labour support is down from 2005, but this is within the MoE.

2. The Labour figure in Southern England will not be that high and the LibDem figure there will not be that low in an actual election; a significant percentage of rural Labour supporters in southern England (especially in the South West) vote tactically for the LibDems.

[afleitch]

I think the Lib Dem figures are unnaturaly low (though to whose ultimate loss: Labour of the Tories) I think these polls are good figures for the Conservatives if we are indeed going into an election campaign with the objective, lets be honest, of overturning Labours majority and forcing Gordon to look 'a bit silly' and forcing another election 6-18 months later.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Random updates; BBC report that the pre-Budget report and Comprehensive Spending Review will be on Tuesday, while both the Times and the Guardian (not seen any other papers) seem to be saying that people have hinted to them that the election is off.

I suspect that there will be even more rumours over the weekend.

I think the Lib Dem figures are unnaturaly low (though to whose ultimate loss: Labour of the Tories)

Labour in votes, Tories in seats. The better Labour do in rural seats in southern England, the more seats the Tories will gain off the LibDems there.

Btw, is the collapse of LibDem support in Scotland plausible or not? (genuine question, btw).