Discussion in 'UK politics, current affairs and news' started by brogdale, Mar 6, 2013.
Where does Ashcroft have the Tories massively beating Labour in Scotland?
in davidson's dreams
Ruth Davidson's actually really quite popular and if she wasn't hamstrung by Cameron and Osborne the Tories might do a lot better in Scotland.
brogdale : Something tells me I should have checked the link myself instead of just taking another poster's word for it ....
But then she wouldn't be a tory, would she?
The Ashcroft Scottish focus groups from this week make interesting reading in general, specifically though this is the only mention the Tories get in the whole thing
which doesn't strike me as 'massively beating Labour'. Labour are nosediving but the Tories are still beneath them, except maybe in one or two Borders seats.
Seems to me most of the (non-Scottish) polls are registering very small changes either way for the Tories/Labour with little overall statistically significant movement of late. Does anyone know if there's somewhere which separates out the percentage of undecided voters, particularly in key marginals? What chance of the 'late deciders' having a significant effect on the overall result?
None of the national polls would have any kind of useful constituency level data, and there's only Ashcroft doing any significant marginal polling. All of them publish their workings if you go looking though, I think.
The vermin are hanging onto the belief that DKs break roughly 2:1 to the incumbent. I'm not aware of any fieldwork that explores that meme.
Smithson has been looking at the variability of DK across the pollsters and the gender gap..
But there is some comfort for Labour in the even smaller sub-sample of the poll that comes from battleground seats in England and Wales. These are defined as those that Labour won by no more than 10 percentage points in 2010, or the Conservatives won by no more than 15 points.
Labour is running at 40% in these seats, which is up four points on 2010, while the Tories are on 36%, which is down two points. Some caution is needed because the sample in this case is fairly small, but this would suggest the swing to Labour is slightly stronger in these swing seats than across Britain as a whole.
This has been the case for ages. I can't remember a constituency poll that looked good for the Tories.
Cheers, yeah this page usefully collates all the data from the various polling orbs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#2015
Last few polls taken 24-26 April:
You Gov/Sun: 12.3% undecided
ICM/Guardian: 21% undecided
Populus: 13% undecided
Ashcroft: 9% undecided
So quite a big variation in "don't know"s. Whether it's significant or not is another thing...
Or checked the link and seen that the poster was taking the word of ICM?
another prediction from Nate Silver - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32488206
he really has no idea
Well maybe, but his predicted outcomes look remarkably similar to most current predictions....
exactly, he has no idea who is going to win
Just watching the full Panorama programme ('kippers have a 90% chance of 0, 1 or 2), and they have made a lot of his last two American predictions, but absolutely no mention of his attempts at our last one.
Christ, this is awful - he's just told us sometimes we need to name the local candidates to get an accurate poll! basically, it's all stuff our pollsters worked out several years ago
Well his numbers say he does.
All of the conservative parties combined come to 320. Not enough.
But with a great margin of error. And 324 isn't really enough for the anti-tories either.
Of course MoE etc....but 324 could be made to pass a QS.
aah, then it could all come down to who they can set up as a deputy....
More importantly, it'd be about as stable as francium
Yeah, unstable alright...but this shows why our discussion about 321/323/324/326 etc. could be so important. The alternative to a QS/VoC vote is another GE.
e2a : I don't think there will be a DPM. Without a coalition there's no need to make up such a non-post.
actually, the right-wing parties seem to come to 316. 283 tories, 24 libs, 8 DUP, 1 kipper. Where are you getting the others from?
e2a: The rest are: Lab 270, SNP 48, and 'Others' 16. That must be 5 SF, 3 SDLP, 1 alliance, 1 TUV, 1 Speaker, 1 Green, but the other two? 1 for that doctor chap, and...
286 + 24 LD + 8 DUP + 1 UKIP + 1 UUP = 320
aah, he's just said 283 on the programme!
But even that 'grouping' makes many assumptions about minors willing to back the vermin.
I could just have looked at your picture for the figures, couldn't I?
His site now has a tory side on 317- 281/26/9/2/1. I bet he's got NI wrong
And is there really any point counting the doctor bloke (who will presumably be the other independent) as likely support either side?
Oh, and his site is only hosting the data, it's compilation is actually nothing to do with him
Separate names with a comma.