UK General Election - May 7th 2015 (The Official Campaign Thread)

[The Other Castro]

So, let's say Tories get the most seats but are unable to form a government because the anti-Tory bloc is too large. Then, the question is whether SNP calls Milibland's bluff or gives him confidence without any deals. But, what happens if SNP doesn't get any deals from Labour and decides to vote down Labour as well? Does Sturgeon get a chance to form a gov then? Does Clegg?

Grand coalition?

Ah...right.

[IceSpear]

Am I correct in assuming Cameron's best chance to hold on at this point is a bunch of UKIP voters tactically switching over at the last minute to stop Labour?

[Blair]

Am I correct in assuming Cameron's best chance to hold on at this point is a bunch of UKIP voters tactically switching over at the last minute to stop Labour?

Yes 100%, he's not actually picking up any voters he's just trying to get UKIP to come home.

The issue is, how many in the marginals he can get back? I mean he needs UKIP voters to come back in certain seats

[Phony Moderate]

There is the assumption that they were ever with him or his party in the first place, though. Certainly if every or even a sizable majority of UKIP voters voted Tory in 2010 then they (the Tories) would be polling firmly in the 20s now.

[morgieb]

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what are the main differences between the UUP and the DUP? And the differences bar IRA links between SF and the SDLP?

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

You can interpret that quote how ever you like...

Then afterwards, Ed calls Nicola and asks: "Do you think they bought it?"

"Yeah, you were awesome. You almost convinced me."

Then they laugh and laugh and laugh.

I tend to think that if there is going to be a SNP landslide in Scotland then a very different behind-the-scenes deal might be in the works, that of a CON-SNP government.  If SNP wins 55-59 seats with a majority of the vote share in Scotland and the CON beats LAB by a solid 15+ seats then a CON-SNP deal might emerge.  The basis of such an alliance would be both a Scotland Independence referendum in Scotland as well as a EU referendum in UK.  CON cannot get LD to agree to a EU referendum and SNP cannot get LAB to agreed to a Scotland Independence referendum.  SNP would in fact benefit from holding both referendums on the same say and would urge Scotland to vote for independence since there was a risk that UK would leave EU.  CON would benefit from a rump UK where it could dominate England.   

While electorally good for the long term, I don't think the Conservatives want their legacy to be the dissolution of the Union.

[Phony Moderate]

Seems like a good time to note this: The Green candidate in Oxford West and Abingdon is Larry Sanders; his brother has been in the news recently.

[Diouf]

To me, Miliband constantly denying he will make any deal on paper or not with the SNP makes sense. If he says he'll deal with the SNP, then Scots can flock to the SNP safe in the knowledge that doing so won't be responsible for putting a Tory in 10 Downing. However, by denying he will (despite the fact that, when push comes to shove, he probably will), it plants a seed of doubt into the minds of some potential SNP voters and might make them think twice before ditching Labour.

Well, he is dangerously close to falling between two stools. By trying to lure back a few SNP voters by rejecting deals with them, he can seem disingenious in England where most voters probably realize that he will at least have to sit on SNP's votes. Hearing Miliband speak out against SNP might actually make them believe that something terrible is really about to happen with Labour-SNP since he won't acknowledge having to rely on them to some extent. And in the end, I doubt how many swing Labour/SNP voters actually believe that Miliband would let in Cameron, and even if they do, aren't they just gonna be even more willing to vote SNP because they have a clearer anti-Cameron profile?

I think Miliband should realize that the Scottish stool is broken, and focus on the English stool by laying out in a clearer way how he would act in a minority government. He could even disown Jim Murphy on the constitutional affairs like they did on financial affairs ("The leader of the Scottish Labour Party will not be in charge of the UK budget"); that might even bring back some Labour voters in Scotland and help save their reputation there in the long run. Then Murphy can stop lying about how a government is formed. These repeated lies will remove Murphy's last credibility if Labour forms a government after the election as the 2nd largest party which remains the most likely scenario.

[BaconBacon96]

There is the assumption that they were ever with him or his party in the first place, though. Certainly if every or even a sizable majority of UKIP voters voted Tory in 2010 then they (the Tories) would be polling firmly in the 20s now.

This really makes me wonder. Where are the largest group of UKIP voters coming from? The Lib Dems? Is it just protest voters shifting their support to the new protest party?

[Joe Republic]

So what exactly is going to be Miliband's line when he inevitably goes into a coalition with Sturgeon?

[DL]

So what exactly is going to be Miliband's line when he inevitably goes into a coalition with Sturgeon?

A coalition means more than one party having seats in cabinet. There is zero chance of the SNP having or even wanting cabinet ministers who would be making decisions for the entire UK.

[Mr. Morden]

So there's no actual vote swinging between the Conservatives and Labour?

[Phony Moderate]

The Guardian has endorsed Labour outright, rather than calling for a 'progressive coalition'. The Guardian (contrary to what some believe) isn't really a naturally Labour paper though; if it were an MP it would be Charles Kennedy or Julian Huppert.

[Vega]

So what exactly is going to be Miliband's line when he inevitably goes into a coalition with Sturgeon?

A coalition means more than one party having seats in cabinet. There is zero chance of the SNP having or even wanting cabinet ministers who would be making decisions for the entire UK.

They would probably get the Scottish Secretary post, though.

[Simfan34]

The Guardian has endorsed Labour outright, rather than calling for a 'progressive coalition'. The Guardian (contrary to what some believe) isn't really a naturally Labour paper though; if it were an MP it would be Charles Kennedy or Julian Huppert.

Not really

[YL]

Final round of Ashcroft constituency polling:

Battersea: Con 12 ahead of Lab
Croydon Central: Con 4 ahead of Lab
Norwich North: Lab 2 ahead of Con
Peterborough: Lab 2 ahead of Con
Pudsey: Con 1 ahead of Lab
Stourbridge: Con 2 ahead of Lab
Wirral West: Lab 3 ahead of Con

North Cornwall: LD 2 ahead of Con

Dumfriesshire et al: SNP 11 ahead of Con
East Renfrewshire: SNP 3 ahead of Lab

Take with as much salt as you want, but there's something for everyone there.

(And also remember that even if you trust the sampling, there's still a margin of error, as conventionally defined, of about 6 percentage points for the lead.)

[Clyde1998]

Final round of Ashcroft constituency polling:

Battersea: Con 12 ahead of Lab
Croydon Central: Con 4 ahead of Lab
Norwich North: Lab 2 ahead of Con
Peterborough: Lab 2 ahead of Con
Pudsey: Con 1 ahead of Lab
Stourbridge: Con 2 ahead of Lab
Wirral West: Lab 3 ahead of Con

North Cornwall: LD 2 ahead of Con

Dumfriesshire et al: SNP 11 ahead of Con
East Renfrewshire: SNP 3 ahead of Lab

Take with as much salt as you want, but there's something for everyone there.

(And also remember that even if you trust the sampling, there's still a margin of error, as conventionally defined, of about 6 percentage points for the lead.)

East Renfrewshire seems to be affected by tactical voting (assuming consistent data).

Labour up 5% on April, Conservatives down 5% - others move within the MoE.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Prognosis as I said in my prediction thread: Labour are doing better in the small towns and provinicial cities than in the suburbs

[Phony Moderate]

Survation: Lab 34, Con 33, UKIP 16, Lib Dems 9, SNP 4, Greens 3

[Tender Branson]

If Scotland and the Rest-UK have similar turnout and the SNP gets 50% in Scotland, it's a certainty that the SNP will get 5% of the total UK vote, for mathematical reasons.

No matter if the polls now say 3%, 4%, 5% or 6% SNP ...

[Phony Moderate]

Turnout will almost certainly be higher in Scotland than in rUK.

[Tender Branson]

Turnout will almost certainly be higher in Scotland than in rUK.

The higher the turnout in Scotland, the better for the SNP to end up near 5%.

I'm currently predicting 4.6-4.8% for them.

[Simfan34]

Mori: Con 35, Lab 30, UKIP 10, Lib Dems 8, Greens 8

Not good for Labour, but also not the first poll in which we have seen a weirdly high Green share.

Oh yeah, and "Others" are on 9...

Please don't be wrong!

The parliament in this case would be truly hung though, no? Neither Con-Lib or Lab-SNP could muster a majority. What would happen then?

[Tender Branson]

Mori: Con 35, Lab 30, UKIP 10, Lib Dems 8, Greens 8

Not good for Labour, but also not the first poll in which we have seen a weirdly high Green share.

Oh yeah, and "Others" are on 9...

Please don't be wrong!

The parliament in this case would be truly hung though, no? Neither Con-Lib or Lab-SNP could muster a majority. What would happen then?

Others at 9% (5% SNP + 4% small/local parties) looks right, based on historical results.

The big question is how the BNP will do: I guess they will only get 0.8-1% in this election, down from 2% in 2010. They already lost badly in the EU elections and most went to UKIP.

But together with the local NI parties, "others" should still get 4%.

I currently predict:

31.5% CON
31.0% LAB
15.0% UKIP
  8.5% LD
  5.0% Greens
  5.0% SNP
  4.0% Others

PS: The Mori poll looks like an outlier, the Greens are never going to win 8%.

[Simfan34]

I mean like this:



Here they have a "Con-Nat" agreement zone... but that's nigh well impossible. So it's really "no overall control". If the result does wind up in that zone, what happens?