UK General Election - May 7th 2015

[Clyde1998]

More constituency polls are being conducted by Ashcroft in Scotland. The current suggestions are:

East Renfrewshire - Labour held (Lab at Holyrood)
Rutherglen & Hamilton West - Labour held (Lab/SNP at Holyrood)
Lanark & Hamilton East - Labour held (Lab/SNP at Holyrood)
Edinburgh West - Lib Dem held (SNP at Holyrood)
Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath - Labour held (Lab/SNP at Holyrood)
Ross, Skye & Lochaber - Lib Dem held (SNP at Holyrood)

The 'suggestions' are based on Populus (who conduct the polling) are polling people in these areas. However, Labour are also using Populus for internal polling in certain seats at the moment, so they may not emerge as Ashcroft polls.

Usual stuff should be said about local polls, but I'm going to suggest that the SNP will not be doing as well as they were in the last lot of seats polled (as these are 'no' voting areas), but they might still do quite well - especially in seats where they do well in the Scottish Parliament.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As its Monday, a new Populus: Labour 34, Con 32, UKIP 14, LDem 8, Green 5

[YL]

Labour have a candidate in Bradford West again.

[YL]

Back to the Lib Dems again.

I think one reason why a lot of people aren't expecting a total disaster for them (say well below 20) is to do with Ashcroft's polling, which on the headline figures shows them holding several seats which they might not be expected to in the wipeout scenario.

However, whatever you think of constituency polling, the way the questions are asked in the Ashcroft polls needs to be taken into account.  His polls first ask the "standard" question, "If there was a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for?".  They then, to the same respondents, ask a second question, "Thinking specifically about your own PARLIAMENTARY constituency at the next General Election and the candidates who are likely to stand FOR ELECTION TO WESTMINSTER there, which party's candidate do you think you will vote for in your own constituency?"  (Capitals as they appear in the tables; I've no idea what this means in a phone poll.)

In many constituencies, the second question gets pretty similar answers to the first, but the Lib Dems tend to do a lot better on it, and those headline figures with them ahead are always based on this second question.  (I don't think a single Ashcroft poll conducted in the last year has put them ahead on the first question.)  Now, perhaps the second question is better, but it strikes me that asking the two questions in this way might be acting as a prompt for people considering a tactical or personal vote to answer that way, and we know that pollsters are supposed to be careful with order of questions.  So I think it's possible (but don't really have any evidence) that the Ashcroft polls might be giving the Lib Dems too much of a boost.

For example, here are the figures from Carshalton & Wallington, polled last October/November:
First question Con 30, LD 25, UKIP 22, Lab 17, Green 4
Second question LD 44, Con 22, UKIP 17, Lab 12, Green 3.
So 19% of the sample appear to have changed from something else to Lib Dem between the two questions.  Is this a boost we can really believe in?

[Clyde1998]

Back to the Lib Dems again.

I think one reason why a lot of people aren't expecting a total disaster for them (say well below 20) is to do with Ashcroft's polling, which on the headline figures shows them holding several seats which they might not be expected to in the wipeout scenario.

However, whatever you think of constituency polling, the way the questions are asked in the Ashcroft polls needs to be taken into account.  His polls first ask the "standard" question, "If there was a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for?".  They then, to the same respondents, ask a second question, "Thinking specifically about your own PARLIAMENTARY constituency at the next General Election and the candidates who are likely to stand FOR ELECTION TO WESTMINSTER there, which party's candidate do you think you will vote for in your own constituency?"  (Capitals as they appear in the tables; I've no idea what this means in a phone poll.)

In many constituencies, the second question gets pretty similar answers to the first, but the Lib Dems tend to do a lot better on it, and those headline figures with them ahead are always based on this second question.  (I don't think a single Ashcroft poll conducted in the last year has put them ahead on the first question.)  Now, perhaps the second question is better, but it strikes me that asking the two questions in this way might be acting as a prompt for people considering a tactical or personal vote to answer that way, and we know that pollsters are supposed to be careful with order of questions.  So I think it's possible (but don't really have any evidence) that the Ashcroft polls might be giving the Lib Dems too much of a boost.

For example, here are the figures from Carshalton & Wallington, polled last October/November:
First question Con 30, LD 25, UKIP 22, Lab 17, Green 4
Second question LD 44, Con 22, UKIP 17, Lab 12, Green 3.
So 19% of the sample appear to have changed from something else to Lib Dem between the two questions.  Is this a boost we can really believe in?

They appear to be gaining support from the Conservatives in the second question - as well. Doesn't seem right. If it was to do with tactical voting, then you'd expect the Conservative vote to stay solid at least...

[afleitch]

YouGov have given a 3 point Tory lead.

This sort of spread is far more in keeping with what polls should be doing if the parties are actually separated by a cigarette paper in terms of support.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

True enough, though you should also worry when a particularly firm is a bit too bouncy...

[Helsinkian]

At the moment May2015 is indicating that, with Labour and the Tories both getting 33.3 percent of the votes, the Tories would get 17 seats more (263 to Labour, 280 to Tories). It has previously been said that the constituency boundaries favour Labour, but I guess that doesn't matter so much in the scenario where the SNP wipes Labour out from Scotland, which is what May2015 is currently predicting.

[Lurker]

At the moment May2015 is indicating that, with Labour and the Tories both getting 33.3 percent of the votes, the Tories would get 17 seats more (263 to Labour, 280 to Tories). It has previously been said that the constituency boundaries favour Labour, but I guess that doesn't matter so much in the scenario where the SNP wipes Labour out from Scotland, which is what May2015 is currently predicting.

Their forecasting still looks strange in light of earlier results - particularly in comparison with 2005 (when the constituency boundaries in England massively favored Labour, giving them 92 more English seats than the Tories, despite getting fewer votes).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Tonight's YouGov tells the usual picture, but a detail to highlight: LibDems on 5%

[Torie]

Regarding Wales, I remember Cameron at PM questioning time, noting that the Wales had a lot of underpopulated constituencies (almost all Labor strongholds that have seen a population drain as the coal mines shut down), and they needed to be culled for "fairness" sake. Were they, or did the Lib Dems just say no, or did Cameron decide to back off, or what?

[Sol]

Regarding Wales, I remember Cameron at PM questioning time, noting that the Wales had a lot of underpopulated constituencies (almost all Labor strongholds that have seen a population drain as the coal mines shut down), and they needed to be culled for "fairness" sake. Were they, or did the Lib Dems just say no, or did Cameron decide to back off, or what?

In any case, the absurdly underpopulated constituencies of Britain need to be ameliorated at least to some degree--perhaps the only thing I'd ever agree with Cameron on, though 5% deviation is still insanely high.

[Helsinkian]

One thing I noticed: the Isle of Wight has the largest population among the constituencies, and it's reliably Conservative. If it were split into two constituencies, the Tories would have two MPs from there instead of one. But apparently the islanders don't want to split it.

[Gary J]

Helsinkian, the parliamentary representation of the Isle of Wight has long been a problem. The electorate for the Isle is an awkward number, too big for one average size constituency and too small for two. In view of the strong preference of the islanders not to have part of the island attached to a bit of southern Hampshire across the Solent, the Boundary Commission was left with an awkward decision in each boundary review.

Under former laws, about Parliamentary boundary changes, the decision has been to have one oversized constituency. Under the present legislation, when the boundaries are next redrawn, the Isle of Wight will be divided into two undersized seats (as it is treated as a special case and is not subject to the normal rules).

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Reliably conservative may be the wrong word for it. They are flexible enough to have a fully Indy council, and in happier times for the Liberal Democrats they could put up a decent fight.

[Phony Moderate]

The Lib Dems shouldn't worry. Their incumbents are all more popular than Jesus and hence (those who are standing) will all be re-elected even if the party polls 0.4% nationally.

[afleitch]

Ashcroft is having his circus again. Bad news for Labour in his Scottish constituency polls. Even Murphy is only leading by 1%

[YL]

12 polls.  I presume these are based on the "constituency" question.

Scotland - look away unionists

West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine: SNP 14 ahead (of Con; LDs are 5 further back)
Ross, Skye & Lochaber: SNP 5 ahead (Kennedy's seat)
Dumfriesshire et al: SNP/Con tie
Dumfries & Galloway: SNP 4 ahead (of Con; Lab are 2 further back)
Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock: SNP 11 ahead
Edinburgh SW: SNP 13 ahead (!)
East Renfrewshire: Lab 1 ahead
Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath: SNP 6 ahead

Wales

Vale of Glamorgan: Con 6 ahead of Lab

England

Colne Valley: Con 1 ahead of Lab
High Peak: Lab 1 ahead of Con
Norwich North: Lab 1 ahead of Con

[Clyde1998]

12 polls.  I presume these are based on the "constituency" question.

Scotland - look away unionists

West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine: SNP 14 ahead (of Lib Dem?)
Ross, Skye & Lochaber: SNP 5 ahead (Kennedy's seat)
Dumfriesshire et al: SNP/Con tie
Dumfries & Galloway: SNP 3 ahead
Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock: SNP 11 ahead
Edinburgh SW: SNP 13 ahead (!)
East Renfrewshire: Lab 1 ahead
Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath: SNP 6 ahead

Wales

Vale of Glamorgan: Con 6 ahead of Lab

England

Colne Valley: Con 1 ahead of Lab
High Peak: Lab 1 ahead of Con
Norwich North: Lab 1 ahead of Con

For Scotland (using Headline Figures):
Aberdeenshire West: SNP 39%, Con 25%, Lib 20%, Lab 10%, Ukip 3%, Grn 2%
Ayr, Carrick, Cumnock: SNP 42%, Lab 31%, Con 21%, Ukip 3%, Lib 2%, Grn <1%
Dumfries, Clydesdale: SNP 34%, Con 34%, Lab 18%, Lib 7%, Ukip 4%, Grn 2%
Dumfries & Galloway: SNP 34%, Con 30%, Lab 28%, Ukip 4%, Lib 2%, Grn 2%
East Renfrewshire: Lab 34%, SNP 33%, Con 26%, Grn 3%, Lib 2%, Ukip 1%
Edinburgh South West: SNP 40%, Lab 27%, Con 19%, Grn 7%, Lib 4%, Ukip 2%
Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath: SNP 45%, Lab 39%, Con 7%, Lib 3%, Ukip 3%, Grn 3%
Ross, Skye, Lochaber: SNP 40%, Lib 35%, Lab 9%, Con 8%, Grn 5%, Ukip 3%

The only seat where Labour are ahead in is Jim Murphy's seat - who is Scottish Labour leader.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Insert my usual post here (stuck record etc).

[Clyde1998]

Based on the Scottish constituency polls so far:



SNP - Yellow
LAB - Red
Tie - Cyan

[YL]

If these results are accurate, where else might the Unionist parties be holding on?

Away from Scotland, here's another article about Sheffield Hallam.  I walked past that house no. 234 in the photo earlier today; it's in a very studenty area.

[Clyde1998]

If these results are accurate, where else might the Unionist parties be holding on?

Away from Scotland, here's another article about Sheffield Hallam.  I walked past that house no. 234 in the photo earlier today; it's in a very studenty area.

Orkney & Shetland and Berwickshire most likely. Not many Unionist areas left by the looks of things.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Unionist is hardly a neutral term.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Anyway I note that Goodwinandford have managed to reach another low: spinning UKIP's embarrassing immigration U-turn as irrelevant because UKIP are special ickle snowflakes. They are an absolute disgrace.