My UK Election Predictions

[Peter]

Nice to see the tiny (and ultra-militant) Kent coalfield gets a mention :-)

I thought you'd like it.

[Ben.]

South East England

I am moving back home over this weekend, I should have another region by the end of next week. I'm not particularly bothered what I do, so I'll take requests.

East Midlands!

[minionofmidas]

Put in a mention of Windsor.

[Peter]

Put in a mention of Windsor.

Windsor won't move at this election, even if it does have a black Tory candidate. The majority is reasonable, and this is the sort of area where Labour voters from 97 will move back to the Tories. I'm not aware of a particularly big effort by either the Lib Dems or UKIP in the constituency, though I'll keep half an eye on it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Put in a mention of Windsor.

Windsor won't move at this election, even if it does have a black Tory candidate. The majority is reasonable, and this is the sort of area where Labour voters from 97 will move back to the Tories. I'm not aware of a particularly big effort by either the Lib Dems or UKIP in the constituency, though I'll keep half an eye on it.

I hope you're right but...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Bethnal Green & Bow Update...

I've made a map of % Islamic in each ward of Tower Hamlets LBC:



I've found out that both the Tories *and* the LibDems are running Bangladeshi candidates...
If the Bangladeshi community is seriously split, Galloway will lose.

[Silent Hunter]

BG&B and Hornchurch will be THE seats to watch in East London this time around.

Hornchurch is a bellwether- it was last on the losing side in 1964.

The borough it's in, Havering (the reason behind the name of the borough can be found here http://www.civicheraldry.mcmail.com/great_london.html) is a Tory minority administration and very, very white.
http://www.londonelects.org.uk/resources/boroughs/havering-5.html
http://www.londonelects.org.uk/resources/boroughs/havering-6.html

Romford and Upminster are safe Tory seats (for the time being- Rosindell gets Labour Harold Hill in his new boundaries next time).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

(for the time being- Rosindell gets Labour Harold Hill in his new boundaries next time).

Ahahaha! :-)

[Peter]

Sorry to all those who have been eagerly waiting.

East Midlands Predictions

Fire away.

[Ben.]

Peter, First off good analysis… on Leicester South did you make a typo? Or does it read as it should it just seems a bit confused, my take would be as follows…

Boston-Skegness : Pretty much agree, if Kilroy-Silk runs then he could win even if he does not UKIP will invest a fair bit of capital in the seat and should do well (10-15% without Kilory, more like 25-35% with him!), a strong UKIP performance could well lead to the seat flipping to Labour (St.Edmunds and Norfolk Mid are two other seats where this could happen).

Chesterfield: went to the LDs on a 60.7% turnout (down 10 points on 97) however the choice of the radical left-winger Reg Race as the Labour candidate was largely responsible for the loss of the seat. That said the LDs have performed well here in local and European elections and Labour’s national resources will be stretched to thinly to bother with any mission to retake the seat. Any Labour campaign will largely be a “local affair” and the state of the Labour Party in Chesterfield is not something I’m familiar with but the LDs look ok in the seat, that said I wouldn’t rule out an upset win for Labour. LDs win in 97 was largely due to Labour’s candidate this time around that should not be a problem, in short an overlooked seat but one which the LDs should hold, but nothing is certain.

Harborough: Traditionally a safe Conservative Seat however redistricting and the anti-conservative tsunami of 1997 reduced the Tory majority from its traditional 15-20,000 range to a mere 6,000 and then 5,000 in 2001. A strong UKIP effect is possible in the seat as is the likelihood of more Labour voters either voting tactically or positively for the Liberal Democrats, Conservative hopes must rest with a national trend that gives Edward Garnier a boost however with the Tories looking much as they did prior to 2001 it will be a tough fight for this conservative MP. Help could come for him if the conservative party targets the Northamptonshire seats won by Labour in 1997 and held in 2001 providing some “spill-off” perhaps. But traditionally the seat has been the LDs regional target and with a low level feud between the county and city parties in Leicestershire plenty of LDs will be campaigning in the seat.

High Peak: Any Conservative improvement would probably mean taking this rural seat back from Labour, the sitting MP is fiercely anti-hunting which will not go down well and will mean he will no doubt be targeted by the hunting lobby. An erosion in Labour support more than a national swing to the Conservatives should see the seat back in their hands.

Kettering: Pretty much agree with you, an uber-marginal seat that Labour has no real right to be holding the seat will become more friendly towards labour under proposed boundary redistricting, however despite an attentive and affable local MP the seat (Like High Peak) will no doubt revert to the Conservatives this time at least and will be hurt all the more by the likelihood that the Labour targeting that occurred in Northamptonshire in 2001 will probably not be present and instead the Conservatives will be targeting the seat along with the rest of Northamptonshire’s Labour holdings.

Leicester South: An intense by-election campaign saw the LDs run-away with the seat against a competent conservative and muddled Labour campaign. Parmjit Gill however has not endeared himself to his constituents however and has proven a very lacklusta MP. With Labour’s Peter Soulsby having already opened a campaign office and already campaigning in a low level way the LDs will have a fight on their hands to hold the seat especially without the resources of the national party at their disposal and the enmity of many LDs in the county and in Northamptonshire. 

Leicestershire Northwest: Despite a majority of 8,000+ (down from 13,000 in 97) this seat was Conservative from 1983-97 and yet saw the largest majority of any Labour gain eight years ago. The local MP David Taylor is fairly popular (With that small section of the public that know who their representative actually is!) and made national news by offering £5 to everyone who though he wasn’t worth the money he earned as an MP. A very likely Labour hold and is destined to get safer still after the 2006/07 redistricting but its not inconceivable that the Tories will claw back a fair chunk of their vote here.         

Loughborough: As with Kettering a seat which will become safer for Labour in the 2006/07 redistricting however unlike Kettering a seat which will probably stay Labour. A small student population as well as a tiny Asian community could mean a slight boost for the LDs this time around but locally Labour are doing well and will be in a stronger position by 2009. That said the LDs could make this a three-way in the future, or even displace the Tories completely, but not this time around.

Northampton South: Agree

Wellingborough: Agree     



That about it really              

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think that NW Leics "Reagan Democrat" phase is over now... when a seat's largest town is called Coalville it's hard to see how we lost it in the first place...

[Ben.]

I think that NW Leics "Reagan Democrat" phase is over now... when a seat's largest town is called Coalville it's hard to see how we lost it in the first place...

Oh I agree, that said depending on tunout the majoity will hover around the 6-7,000 mark IMHO, in 2009 though it may be more like 9-10,000

Al, Do you still think Letwin's a gona? I think May will go, think Davis and Howard will definatly stay but Letwin I'm not sure about.   

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Al, Do you still think Letwin's a gona? I think May will go, think Davis and Howard will definatly stay but Letwin I'm not sure about.   

I know the seat very well... if enough rednecks (I mean this in a nice way, BTW) in the NW Dorset vote, Letwin loses. He also needs as many of the retired people and south east transplants in the SE of the seat to vote as is possible.
He's in deep, deep trouble... he's not out of it yet but if I was a betting man, I'd bet against him.

[Silent Hunter]

Here's my overall prediction:
Labour get 37% of the vote and a majority of 75-100.
There's a good deal of anti-Labour tactical voting, which helps the Liberals more than the Tories.
The Tories get just under 200 seats.

[Democratic Hawk]

Here's my overall prediction:
Labour get 37% of the vote and a majority of 75-100.
There's a good deal of anti-Labour tactical voting, which helps the Liberals more than the Tories.
The Tories get just under 200 seats.

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

The biggest threat Labour faces is not so much defecting voters - but Labour voters not turning out

On the bright side, even if Labour and the Tories are tied, Labour will come out on top. At the end of the day, Britain is working, se we can't let the Tories wreck it!

A recent poll had Labour on 42% and the Tories on 31%. I reckon that overestimates support for Labour by around 3 and underestimates support for the Conservatives by around 3.

My guess at this stage is Labour 39% and the Tories 34%, with little electoral gain for the Tories

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

Liam Fox said (with a straight face) that the Hartlepool by-election was not a disaster for the Tories... I think it's safe to ignore anything the oily bastard says

[minionofmidas]

Peter, First off good analysis… on Leicester South did you make a typo? Or does it read as it should it just seems a bit confused

I guess it's a typo.

[Ben.]

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

Liam Fox said (with a straight face) that the Hartlepool by-election was not a disaster for the Tories... I think it's safe to ignore anything the oily bastard says

...you've got to admire his gaul

Tories enter the contest on 30-31% of the vote end up with 33-34%, LibDems enter with 19-21% end up with 21-22% and Labour enter with 38-42% and come out with 37-38%... Labour majority of 70-100, my guess is 88.

[minionofmidas]

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

Liam Fox said (with a straight face) that the Hartlepool by-election was not a disaster for the Tories... I think it's safe to ignore anything the oily bastard says

...you've got to admire his gaul

Tories enter the contest on 30-31% of the vote end up with 33-34%, LibDems enter with 19-21% end up with 21-22% and Labour enter with 38-42% and come out with 37-38%... Labour majority of 70-100, my guess is 88.

Tories moving up during the Election campaign? No, I doubt it. Not with their current set of MPs.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

my guess is 88.

IIRC the Whips reckon 70-80 is an ideal majority

[Ben.]

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

Liam Fox said (with a straight face) that the Hartlepool by-election was not a disaster for the Tories... I think it's safe to ignore anything the oily bastard says

...you've got to admire his gall

Tories enter the contest on 30-31% of the vote end up with 33-34%, LibDems enter with 19-21% end up with 21-22% and Labour enter with 38-42% and come out with 37-38%... Labour majority of 70-100, my guess is 88.

Tories moving up during the Election campaign? No, I doubt it. Not with their current set of MPs.

Don't think they'll move up, but they always poll lower than the result they eventually achieve in the end, last time under Hague they where hovering around 30-31% and ended up with nearly 33%, this time 33-34% seems about right. That said in terms of seats 180-190 is the most likely outcome and Howard might not be able to survive that, unless the Tories decide that there’s little other choice in terms of who can lead them. If he goes David Davis is very likely to get the leadership as he’s about the most credible and effective member of the shadow cabinet especially with Letwin gone (Willitts “two brains” a likely replacement), Davis however must be worried that by the time his opportunity for the leadership emerges the likes of Cameron and Osborn may have positioned themselves as potential rivals.       


   

my guess is 88.
 

IIRC the Whips reckon 70-80 is an ideal majority

I think the present 160 odd majority is very hard to manage, it amazing when you look at the rebellions under Blair then see how long Callaghan survived without any majority

A majority of 60 or less means that the government would end up having to rely on the Hard Left “Campaign Group” and the carder of disgruntled MPs and former ministers who feel hard done by and so have ended up in almost permanent opposition to the present leadership at least.

A majority of more that 90 or 100 leads to lots of MPs thinking that they can risk rebelling without potentially damaging the government and as a result their own careers

But a majority of 70-90 means that while you don’t have to rely on the more unreliable elements of the Labour Party or at least bargain with them from such a position of weakness, the idea that a significant rebellion could harm the government and its MPs chances for re-election is sufficiently credible to mean that most MPs won’t risk wrecking both their party’s and their own future chances by rebelling and as a result a Whips job is much simpler.

[minionofmidas]

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

Liam Fox said (with a straight face) that the Hartlepool by-election was not a disaster for the Tories... I think it's safe to ignore anything the oily bastard says

...you've got to admire his gaul

Tories enter the contest on 30-31% of the vote end up with 33-34%, LibDems enter with 19-21% end up with 21-22% and Labour enter with 38-42% and come out with 37-38%... Labour majority of 70-100, my guess is 88.

Tories moving up during the Election campaign? No, I doubt it. Not with their current set of MPs.

Don't think they'll move up, but they always poll lower than they achive in the end, last time under Hauge they where hovering around 30-31 and came up with 33, this time 33-34 seems about right   

Oh, alright.
That was because even fewer Labour voters in rocksolid constituencies bothered to vote than the pollsters had expected, btw. As a result, the increase didn't happen in the marginals...which explains the Tory net gain of a single seat.
Might happen again, but only if turnout drops even lower.

[Ben.]

Liam Fox reckons Labour and the Conservatives will go into the election "neck-and=neck". He says the Blunkett business has hit Blair and will send Labour voters directly over the Tories! [I somehow don't see that happening]

 

Liam Fox said (with a straight face) that the Hartlepool by-election was not a disaster for the Tories... I think it's safe to ignore anything the oily bastard says

...you've got to admire his gaul

Tories enter the contest on 30-31% of the vote end up with 33-34%, LibDems enter with 19-21% end up with 21-22% and Labour enter with 38-42% and come out with 37-38%... Labour majority of 70-100, my guess is 88.

Tories moving up during the Election campaign? No, I doubt it. Not with their current set of MPs.

Don't think they'll move up, but they always poll lower than they achive in the end, last time under Hauge they where hovering around 30-31 and came up with 33, this time 33-34 seems about right   

Oh, alright.
That was because even fewer Labour voters in rocksolid constituencies bothered to vote than the pollsters had expected, btw. As a result, the increase didn't happen in the marginals...which explains the Tory net gain of a single seat.
Might happen again, but only if turnout drops even lower.

Fair point, had turnout been a few points higher many (mostly labour) voters who stayed home because the contest looked like such a forgone conclusion would have voted and the Tories could have suffered a catastrophic defeat indeed…

This is how the average of all the polls forecast Party vote shares in April…

 Lab 50%, Con 30%, Lib Dem 14%, Nationalists 3%.

Assuming that the LibDems had, as usual improved to the 18% they did achieve in 2001 then it would have run something like…

Lab 46%, Con 30% Lib Dem 18%, Nationalists 3%

…such a score would have translated in a Labour majority of 200-210 (with a again of 25-30 seats from the Conservatives). At the same time the LibDems might well have performed better ending up with perhaps 60 or so seats rather than 52.   

[Silent Hunter]

Latest Guardian/ICM Poll
Labour 40 (I was wrong, we have hit 40 again)
Conservatives 31
Lib Dems 21

Which equals a majority of 156, with a Tory net loss.

[Ben.]

Latest Guardian/ICM Poll
Labour 40 (I was wrong, we have hit 40 again)
Conservatives 31
Lib Dems 21

Which equals a majority of 156, with a Tory net loss.

With Conservative targetting, LD targetting, less pro-Labour tactical voting and the traditional overestimation of Labour in the polls probably means its a majoirty of 100-120 is more likley with 40% than a 150+ majoirty.