UK General Election - May 7th 2015

[Gary J]

Helsinkian, there is still time to nominate another candidate. In the UK you only need the signatures of ten electors to nominate a parliamentary candidate (a proposer, a seconder and eight assentors) apart from paying a £500 deposit and filling in a few forms. You can deliver a nomination paper to the local constituency returning officer between the publication of notice of election and the close of nominations.

I am taking dates and times from the Combined Timetable for elections on 7 May 2015, which the Slough returning officer has issued, based on the Electoral Commission guidance.

Parliament is to be dissolved on Monday 30 March. A writ (a royal command to elect a member to the new Parliament) will be sent to each returning officer.  The writ is received on Tuesday 31 March. The returning officer then has to publish a notice of election, which must be by 4 pm on Thursday 2 April but may be earlier. The close of nominations, which is a very rigid deadline, is 4 pm on Thursday 9 April. If a prospective candidate has not delivered valid forms by that time, they will not be a candidate in the election.

[YL]

I asked this question in the Canadian 2015 elections thread, and I will ask it here: could what happened in Israel happen in the UK? Polls are showing the contest as neck-and-neck, but could the final election result see the Conservatives actually increase their seat totals in Parliament, and strengthen their hold on government, enabling PM David Cameron to stay around at least until the end of the decade?  Does anyone see that happening?

Hopefully not.  But the polls could indeed be wrong, as they were last time (over estimating the Lib Dems), and also it's possible things can change in the campaign.

[Blair]

I asked this question in the Canadian 2015 elections thread, and I will ask it here: could what happened in Israel happen in the UK? Polls are showing the contest as neck-and-neck, but could the final election result see the Conservatives actually increase their seat totals in Parliament, and strengthen their hold on government, enabling PM David Cameron to stay around at least until the end of the decade?  Does anyone see that happening?

Yeah Cameron could surge, I mean he's got everything in his favour (I'm a labourite as well!) An economy that is improving, strong leadership ratings and the incumbency factor. However they've been telling us that this surge is going to happen for the last year-they were suppose to pull ahead in the polls in the Autumn according to there leadership team.

If it was like 1992- a normal lab vs con race they could, but there's too many other factors (UKIP,SNP, post-expenses scandal, nasty party image, Miliband debate etcs)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What happened in Israel wasn't so much a late swing to the government as a late swing from a smaller government party to a larger one (and in the context of proportional representation in a heavily pillarised society with a notoriously fragmented electorate: none of these things are true of Britain) so I'm not sure if it's an especially relevant (potential) comparison.

The general pattern, and I must stress pattern rather than rule here, is that real swings - that is, those that show up at the ballot box - during the campaign period proper are normally against the government (the key government recovery period is normally in the months prior to that - a stage we're still in actually) and also that late swings are rare. Of course 1992 reminds us that a pattern is not the same thing as a rule.

[You kip if you want to...]

The problem with forecasting the UK election is surely that, with another record number of undecideds (again) and the main party leaders all being about as popular as a dentist appointment, things are vulnerable to a late swing. Also things like the new voter registration system which could invariably affect the #GreenSurge and parts of the SNP's new found support, in a similar way that young, hipstery LibDems in 2010 didn't show up for them on the day.

I mean, the polls overstated the Libs and understated Labour by a couple of % last time. Not by much in the final few days, but definitely by enough to affect the narrative on election night and to shape the coalition talks.

[afleitch]

2010 was also, based on canvass chatter, more likely to have been a genuine swing to the government from Lib Dem voters rather than polling error. It was a 2:1 split Labour/Tory but probably cost the Lib Dems up to 20-30 seats.

[Phony Moderate]

Agreement on debates reached. One seven-way debate on ITV on April 2nd, a 90-minute grilling of Cameron and Miliband on Channel 4/Sky News on March 26th, a five-way opposition leaders debate on the BBC on April 16th and a Question Time special on April 30th with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg each appearing individually (which is something that has happened in the past).

Presumably there will be a 'Chancellor's Debate' at some point too.

[afleitch]

Very good news for the SNP who otherwise would get lost in the campaign. By default Sturgeon 'represents Scotland' which although entirely unintentional will help them, particularly as Farage is expected to go full on tw@t.

[You kip if you want to...]

Agreement on debates reached. One seven-way debate on ITV on April 2nd, a 90-minute grilling of Cameron and Miliband on Channel 4/Sky News on March 26th, a five-way opposition leaders debate on the BBC on April 16th and a Question Time special on April 30th with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg each appearing individually (which is something that has happened in the past).

Presumably there will be a 'Chancellor's Debate' at some point too.

Cameron the coward.

Imagine if Gordon Brown had tried to pull this one.

[afleitch]

Agreement on debates reached. One seven-way debate on ITV on April 2nd, a 90-minute grilling of Cameron and Miliband on Channel 4/Sky News on March 26th, a five-way opposition leaders debate on the BBC on April 16th and a Question Time special on April 30th with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg each appearing individually (which is something that has happened in the past).

Presumably there will be a 'Chancellor's Debate' at some point too.

Cameron the coward.

Imagine if Gordon Brown had tried to pull this one.

Actually I agree with Cameron's view on this one. If you're going to have debates, they have to be grounded in the fact that this is not a two party system. The 2010 format was fine, now there are more parties that are showing up support in the polls which adds UKIP, Greens and the SNP into the mix. Plaid are added for equal measure. The idea for a 'head to head' between the Tory and Labour leaders as if that was the only decision that mattered, was actually quite un-democratic.

[DL]

So then do you oppose head to head US presidential debates? There are typically about 50 odd people actually on the ballot - why not let them all have equal time on stage with the Democratic and GOP nominees?

[afleitch]

So then do you oppose head to head US presidential debates? There are typically about 50 odd people actually on the ballot - why not let them all have equal time on stage with the Democratic and GOP nominees?

No because the USA is a two party system and when a third party has challenged (1992) consideration can be given for their inclusion in debates. The UK is not a two party system as different parties challenge in different areas.

[DL]

I think they have a good system in Germany - two nights of debates - one between the leaders of the CDU and SPD and one between leaders of the Greens, FDP and Linke (and maybe now AfD).

Having seven people on staqe at once is NOT a debate - its just noise pollution.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yet there are only two realistic candidates for Prime Minister. An argument could certainly be made that the public ought to see them duke it out. The reality is that the 'democratic' argument can be used to push for almost any position and that most positions that have been taken are inspired (to a considerable extent) by perceived partisan interest. We all know that notoriously sh!tty debater David Cameron's endlessly shifting final demands over the debates are probably not unconnected to the fact that he is a notoriously sh!tty debater.

[afleitch]

We all know that notoriously sh!tty debater David Cameron's endlessly shifting final demands over the debates are probably not unconnected to the fact that he is a notoriously sh!tty debater.

Of course! Why else would he have stuck to what he wanted to do? He will be facing a den involving a politically castrated Nick Clegg and everyone else perceived as a baying mob against him/the government. And he is more popular than all of them, and has maintained a relative popularity that no Tory predecessor has had since Macmillan and in this showdown he will be the 'underdog' and only has to hold his own to 'win' it.

It's the only winnable position for him. The more opponents the better. Even if Miliband isn't crap, he'll be lost in the melee. For the same reason it's a win-win for Nicola 'Voice of Scotland' Sturgeon who can politically take a step back from it all, try to 'out labour Labour' except this time in front of the entire country and return north.

[You kip if you want to...]

We all know that notoriously sh!tty debater David Cameron's endlessly shifting final demands over the debates are probably not unconnected to the fact that he is a notoriously sh!tty debater.

Of course! Why else would he have stuck to what he wanted to do?

Oh come on now, you're better than that. Do you not remember how he treated GB last time when he spent a while making up his mind on the debates? EdM and the PM will be in the same studio and the same time, but they won't debate. What kind've farce is that?

He knows that the debates shot his chances at a majority in the arm last time and he's scared of that happening again.

[afleitch]

We all know that notoriously sh!tty debater David Cameron's endlessly shifting final demands over the debates are probably not unconnected to the fact that he is a notoriously sh!tty debater.

Of course! Why else would he have stuck to what he wanted to do?

Oh come on now, you're better than that. Do you not remember how he treated GB last time when he spent a while making up his mind on the debates? EdM and the PM will be in the same studio and the same time, but they won't debate. What kind've farce is that?

He knows that the debates shot his chances at a majority in the arm last time and he's scared of that happening again.

Err. I'm agreeing with Al actually; Cameron set up what would benefit him debate wise and got it. The broadcasters got ahead of themselves in proposing things without getting agreement. With respect to the 'head to head', there wasn't one in 2010, so why should there be now?

[Clyde1998]

I think they have a good system in Germany - two nights of debates - one between the leaders of the CDU and SPD and one between leaders of the Greens, FDP and Linke (and maybe now AfD).

Having seven people on staqe at once is NOT a debate - its just noise pollution.

STV did something similar for the 2007 Scottish Election. They had the parties with ten or more seats (Labour, SNP, Lib Dems, Conservatives) in separate debates from the parties with less than ten seats (Greens, Socialists, Solidarity).

The only issue with it was that the smaller parties were wiped out, apart from the Greens who lost five of their seven seats - probably as much more people watched the debates between the larger parties than the smaller parties.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What the hell?!?!?!!?!?!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this some kind of baroque wind-up?

[Phony Moderate]

YouGov/Sunday Times: Lab 35, Con 33, UKIP 14, Lib Dems 8, Greens 5

Also, Opinium has the Tories ahead by 3, while Survation has Labour ahead by 4.

[afleitch]

ICM Scotland

SNP 43
LAB 27(+1)
CON 14 (+1)
UKIP 7
LD 6
GRN 3 (-1)

So, same again.

[afleitch]

Interesting, Ed Miliband is in Clydebank today in front of Scottish Labour supporters but sounds like he's addressing a non Scottish audience who seem to think Alex Salmond is still SNP leader. Something all parties have been guilty of in recent weeks; Salmond bashing is contagious. At least it's caused Scottish Labour to finally shut up about Thatcher.

[Torie]

Are the Brit polls in the run up to the election normally this static?

[ChrisDR68]

Are the Brit polls in the run up to the election normally this static?

Nope this is quite unusual.

In past elections it's normally the Lib Dems who creep up in the opinion polls (usually to regress back to near where they started from on polling day). Obviously their association with the Tories in the coalition means they're going to take a kicking in this election.

If there is to be movement this time round I suspect it will happen quite late when all these undecided voters make up their minds.

[Phony Moderate]

It may be due to the YouGov daily tracker, but poll movements seem to have been relatively gradual in this parliament. In the last parliament we saw several speedy movements - Labour taking a handy lead after the Brown takeover, the Tory surge and Labour decline immediately after the Election That Never Was, a further Labour decline and Tory surge after the 10p tax fiasco and the 2008 locals, a sharp Labour recovery after the financial meltdown, a decline for both Labour and the Tories (but more so Labour) during the expenses scandal and then of course the Cleggmania surge after the first debate.