UK General Election - May 7th 2015

[EPG]

Harry Hayfield's prediction is clearly a joke. Don't take it so seriously.

Correct. A 600-seat Grand Coalition!

[EPG]

Accounting for Sinn Féin's 5 abstentionist MPs, the tipping point of a majority government is 323 seats. Labour could almost surely rely on the support of the 3 SDLP MPs for important business, which means their tipping point is 320. But in practice, these numbers would lead to an inter-party agreement or a new election pretty soon.

[EPG]

Conservatives 36%
Labour 33%
Liberal Democrats 14%
UK Independence Party 9%
Others 8%

Tories 294 seats, Labour 291, Lib Dems 36, UKIP 0, Others 29

Anyone's guess what will happen if the result is anything like this. Clegg would probably step down though to be replaced by Farren as another coalition with Clegg there would do the LibDems nothing but more harm.

294 + 36 = 330 = very tenuous continuation of the coalition. Both Clegg and Cameron have the benefit of incumbency. Cameron could probably quit in his own time under those numbers if he keeps his promise to hold an EU referendum, which will encourage Conservative MPs to keep backing him and the coalition; Clegg steps down once the Lib Dems quit government, to serve as scapegoat for the sins of the coalition. Therefore, Labour and Lib Dems would vote against a Tory minority. I think if the Lib Dems get 36 seats, they'll be delighted, not in a mood for decapitation. I think they are more likely to get about 20 seats.

[EPG]

Is there any coalition that LibDems could be apart of and not completely destroy themselves?

Yeah, sure. It's not at all clear yet that they will have destroyed themselves after the current coalition. They are still more popular than the typical European centrist liberal party, they still have powerful forces in a few county councils and they run some urban council areas like Stockport and, ahem, Portsmouth. They didn't destroy themselves after getting tiny seat totals in the past, and I think there are enough people who like them still out there.

As for UKIP, they could win Eastleigh and Farage's seat, and beyond that, I find it hard to see how they will be resilient in a general election.

[EPG]

Speculation about a possible 2015 gain for the yellows.

[EPG]

They thought similarly about DUP -> Alliance votes in Belfast East in 2010. They reckoned it'd elect Ringland for the UUP. That was on a much bigger gap between second place and Alliance. Sinn Féin will intervene with a candidate in Belfast South in 2015.

Sinn Féin's recent comments suggest they will not stand aside for the SDLP anywhere in 2015. This would itself hurt McDonnell.

It's just about possible to see Alliance with 2 Westminster seats, probably 0, perhaps 1 (though we don't know where!), which is a remarkable state of affairs compared to a decade ago.

[EPG]

They thought similarly about DUP -> Alliance votes in Belfast East in 2010. They reckoned it'd elect Ringland for the UUP. That was on a much bigger gap between second place and Alliance.

I don't remember much RW speculation about Ringland getting in, but I do remember that Long was being supported by Dawn Purvis of the PUP, which gave her a credibility in loyalist areas that won't be there next time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Slugger spent the year before the 2010 election bigging up UCUNF, to no RW effect. I just don't give Fealty's analyses much credence: there's always too much wishful thinking about the triumph of moderate unionism over nationalism. On the plus side for Slugger, the insufferably tedious Pete Baker doesn't seem to be around anymore as ubiquitous as he was.

I don't know what this has to do with Fealty. It's his blog, but every argument can and should be analysed on its own merits rather than dismissing them because of their source. It's too easy a criticism.

Objectively, Robinson was wounded with numerous scandals in 2010 and UCUNF were second. Similarly, McDonnell faces likely SF opposition and an amazing nationalist-immigrant fusion Alliance party candidate, and the DUP are second. UCUNF did not win in 2010, and the DUP may not win in 2015.

[EPG]

Exactly right. There is a recognisable belt of Lithuanian settlement stretching across each side of the border - though yes, immigration is a lot lower overall in the north of Ireland.

They thought similarly about DUP -> Alliance votes in Belfast East in 2010. They reckoned it'd elect Ringland for the UUP. That was on a much bigger gap between second place and Alliance.

I don't remember much RW speculation about Ringland getting in, but I do remember that Long was being supported by Dawn Purvis of the PUP, which gave her a credibility in loyalist areas that won't be there next time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Slugger spent the year before the 2010 election bigging up UCUNF, to no RW effect. I just don't give Fealty's analyses much credence: there's always too much wishful thinking about the triumph of moderate unionism over nationalism. On the plus side for Slugger, the insufferably tedious Pete Baker doesn't seem to be around anymore as ubiquitous as he was.

I don't know what this has to do with Fealty. It's his blog, but every argument can and should be analysed on its own merits rather than dismissing them because of their source. It's too easy a criticism.

What it has to do with Fealty is the fact that it's his speculation that's forming the basis of this conversation.

And as far as the maths of the situation go, I find it difficult to see unionist voters switching to "an amazing nationalist-immigrant fusion Alliance party candidate" when the DUP are second.

Particularly given that many of these voters would be living in areas like Sandy Row and The Village where considerable, em, "popular", efforts are made to keep out nationalists, immigrants, or indeed any amazing fusion of the two.

McDonnell may be pompous and not a particularly good party leader, but he's not mired in scandal, so I don't see the incentive for SDLP voters to kick him out and run the risk of electing a unionist.

Now tell me where I predicated anything on Alliance getting the racist vote. Sinn Féin will bleed 3k votes from the SDLP without trying too hard. Then Alliance will try to win, as political parties do. They will seek to take chunks of the 2010 McDonnell and Paula Bradshaw votes, two middle-class and liberal bloc relative to the province, not particularly hostile to immigration, not linked to loyalist paramilitaries. Belfast South SDLP people are not really traditional nationalists, as the history and demography of the constituency demonstrate. Is it likely? No. Is it possible? Yes. (My "amazing" comment is not praise, by the way, but bemusement that this combination within one candidate exists and is at all prominent outside Sinn Féin, given what we know about Belfast.)

[EPG]

I think the DUP would struggle to improve much here. Their outlook works really well in Protestant provincial areas. But it does not suit here. And they are "in government". If they get the entire loyalist paramilitary and hardline unionist local election vote, and double it, they will be back to 9k which is where they have been recently. That is very unlikely to be enough to win a seat. But, yes, by the same token, an agreed Unionist (not DUP) would probably win against anyone else in 2010.

[EPG]

These are the four most marginal LD-Lab seats, all won with smaller than 5% majorities. If Labour were not winning these, something would be seriously wrong with national polling. My guess is that Alexander and Hughes should be safe for the Lib Dems in this category but maybe not Featherstone. Still, thanks to post-97 tactical voting, there aren't that many seats Labour can take from the Lib Dems (maybe 10 on a good day).

[EPG]

These are the four most marginal LD-Lab seats, all won with smaller than 5% majorities. If Labour were not winning these, something would be seriously wrong with national polling. My guess is that Alexander and Hughes should be safe for the Lib Dems in this category but maybe not Featherstone. Still, thanks to post-97 tactical voting, there aren't that many seats Labour can take from the Lib Dems (maybe 10 on a good day).

It's not that Labour are winning these seats in this poll that is notable, it's the size of the swings.  On those swings, even on the second question Hughes and Mulholland would indeed be in trouble if their seats were to behave the same way.  Two of the seats show 19% swings from Lib Dem to Lab, a size of swing I am very keen on for some reason.

Yes. But the informed observer would have guessed there would be big swingback to Labour in these seats. They are mainly first-time, notional pick-ups for the Lib Dems, in what was their closest-ever election to Labour by a distance. You can categorise Redcar and Burnley in that bracket too, even though they're notionally safer, whereas the big Manchester, Withington swing is more interesting - Labour and the Lib Dems are back to their 2001 figures there. Anyway, this will be very much the tertiary battleground of the election. About a handful of seats are really up for grabs between the two parties. The net beneficiaries of the Lib Dem deflation will be the Tories if, as I think is likely, they end up with 20 to 30 seats.

[EPG]

Labour's net gain from Lib Dems is just % margin Lab - C. Lots of Lib Dems will be going to NOTA, some to UKIP and some to Greens, which are all useless to Labour. And some will even go Conservative. There is some reason why these people didn't vote Labour in 2010 and, often, for many years previously. (A classic example is Sheffield, Hallam, right? They've never chosen a Labour MP for years, if ever?)

[EPG]

Yes. But the informed observer would have guessed there would be big swingback to Labour in these seats. They are mainly first-time, notional pick-ups for the Lib Dems, in what was their closest-ever election to Labour by a distance. You can categorise Redcar and Burnley in that bracket too, even though they're notionally safer, whereas the big Manchester, Withington swing is more interesting - Labour and the Lib Dems are back to their 2001 figures there. Anyway, this will be very much the tertiary battleground of the election. About a handful of seats are really up for grabs between the two parties. The net beneficiaries of the Lib Dem deflation will be the Tories if, as I think is likely, they end up with 20 to 30 seats.

There are 17 Lib Dem seats which would fall to Labour on a 10% swing with other parties standing still, plus Bristol West just beyond that threshold and perhaps a couple of longer shots.  (See the list in my post on the first page of this thread.)  Now, I don't expect Labour to win all 17 of those, and the SNP might have something to say about some of them, but most of them are worth watching.

I agree with the maths; my divergence is over swing. It's useful if one seat is like another. Lib Dem seats are more heterogenous than those of the other two parties. Redcar and Hornsey are almost equally safe against Labour on swing, but one is nailed-on Labour and the other looks like a real battle. Redcar's a more likely Labour gain than some of those <5% seats. This year of all years, other parties won't stand still. Lib Dems could lose lots to UKIP in the South West and the SNP in Scotland. Several of the 17 are more likely Conservative or SNP gains as the local Lib Dems are a fractious anti-Conservative coalition, often in anti-Labour rural territory. The Conservatives would come up through the middle and the SNP would fill the anti-Conservative role in the same manner as the Lib Dems. (My implicit assumption is that they could lose more to UKIP than the Conservatives in some seats. Lib Dems and UKIP represent different ideologies, of course. Politics is not about ideology.) Still, it's a good list to watch.

[EPG]

But UKIP will rarely win (m)any seats. Thus its only importance is, which of the 2 big parties will see more potential votes wasted and to what extend!

The latest Polling Observatory average poll numbers are 35 (+6), 31 (-5), 15 (+12), 9 (-14). In summary, UKIP aren't just gaining from the Conservatives, and Lib Dems aren't just losing to Labour. Labour will lose votes to UKIP in some circumstances, though I think they will lose no seat to UKIP, and Lib Dems will stay at home or vote UKIP in surprising places.

[EPG]

I should have noted that the Polling Observatory average is very similar to the 2005 outcome - but with a 13% net migration from Lib Dem to the new anti-party, UKIP.

[EPG]

You'd have to say any Lib Dem retirements from now on won't give their successors enough time to campaign well. Less important for other parties.

[EPG]

LD will probably loose only 5-10 to CON and surely 14 to LAB: NorwichS, BradfordE, BrentC, Withington, Burnley, EastDunbartons, Yardley, EdinburghW, Redcar, Hornsey, CardiffC, Cambridge, Bermondsey, BristolW and perhaps LeedsNW. The seats in rural&remote Scotland&Wales are endangered more by SNP&PC.

This means Lib Dems would win about 35 seats, which seems high to me if you think current polling numbers of about 9% will continue or fall. Over a dozen "LD > Con" marginal constituencies have less than 10% majorities, after decades of tactical voting that brought Labour down to as little as 4%. Labour people seem to really hate the Lib Dems this time, so they might vote their true preference, ultimately in favour of the Tories. So I think 10 losses in that category is understated. 35 seats is probably the sweet spot for Labour that maximises their net gain versus Conservatives (in Lib Dem constituencies). The Lib Dems and, by extension, Labour will probably do worse than that.

[EPG]

The Conservatives are now polling about 30-34%. They got 37% (GB) in May 2010. There is not much more lost ground for them to regain. As for the Lib Dems, they will do much worse on seats than they would under any PR system.

[EPG]

(Can someone explain how the Lib Dems got so strong in Yardley in the first place?  It doesn't have much in common with the Lib Dem strongholds in other major cities.)

I do not know am going to guess: 1. because John Hemming chose to be a councillor there, and 2. because it is White British enough to not be a Labour stronghold in Birmingham terms. Ergo Lib Dem MP after fifteen years of trying.

They seemed to do OK in Birmingham, Yardley in the local elections earlier this year, well enough to retain a strong second and challenge Labour in 201?.

The LD/Con battle is unpredictable

Yes.

[EPG]

If the Tories form another government and it looks like sticking around, they couldn't possibly give Miliband another five years.

[EPG]

In fact, Burnham did better among MPs than the other two electorates.

Unlike 2010, Ed Miliband will not be a candidate and it's hard to see how David Miliband could be. That's 70% of the FPV up for grabs.

[EPG]

There is really people liking Chukka Ummana? I mean, he sounds like a right-wing version of Tony Blair.

Weird how the only two leaders that have won Labour a general election since Clement Attlee in 1950 are held in such low esteem by so many.

At the same time most of the Labour leaders that failed at the ballot box are generally quite fondly remembered such as Gaitskell, Callaghan, Foot and even Kinnock.

To be fair, they also dislike the people who led their happily-forgotten governments of the 1920s. I think the subtext of this comment is that Labour's intellectual-history base holds to principles too far left to win a majority in the country.

[EPG]

As for decapitating Ed - forget the structural effects if you must - Labour still has a very good chance of winning a majority. Why risk it by ditching Miliband with less than a year to go?

[EPG]

As long as the unions pay for it, it may as well be called Labour.

David would probably have done better than his brother among 2010 Conservative voters. To neglect the traditional two-party swing pool, in favour of focusing on the approximately 6pp gain from Lib Dems, is convenient for the current Labour leadership. And of course rubbing it in the Lib Dems' noses will always be popular among the grassroots.

[EPG]

Does that mean that Miliband's future son/daughter-in-law will become President of the European Council?

He already has a high-powered relative who'd love it...