General Election 2015

[spring hall convert]

This election is getting so interesting. The LAB/SNP battle in Scotland is going to be fascinating, as is the stickability of the Green and UKIP votes.

Quick question about these polls. Are the people polled asked if they are actually registered to vote?

 

[Machiavelli]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...improve-labours-poll-performance-9988769.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gen...ddle-class-voters-will-finish-off-Labour.html

Thanks for the links. What do you make of this? To me, it's incredibly tenuous; just a hunch expressed by somebody who got something right (when most others got it wrong) in 1992, rather than based on anything more substantial. I think Hayward is just trying to make an intervention to persuade floating 'middle class' voters that the Tories are the 'natural' party of government.
It's very difficult to call, but the overwhelming polling points to no overall majority, with probably Labour as the largest party.

 

[Titanic]

Today's Yougov poll:

Con 32% (N/C)
Lab 30% (-2)
Ukip 15% (N/C)
Greens 10% (+3)
Lib Dems 8% (N/C)

Are the Greens eating Ed's lunch? That is a 5 year low for Labour in Yougov polls. Not good timing with just 106 days till the election and counting!

 

[ROSM]

Today's Yougov poll:

Con 32% (N/C)
Lab 30% (-2)
Ukip 15% (N/C)
Greens 10% (+3)
Lib Dems 8% (N/C)

Are the Greens eating Ed's lunch? That is a 5 year low for Labour in Yougov polls. Not good timing with just 106 days till the election and counting!

As buzzer said, this is why Cameron wants Greens to have airtime

 

[Bozza]

As buzzer said, this is why Cameron wants Greens to have airtime

They seem to be doing quite well without it.

Do Labour want UKIP to have airtime solely because they believe it right and just?

 

[beorhthelm]

Are the Greens eating Ed's lunch? That is a 5[/FONT][/COLOR] year low for Labour in Yougov polls. Not good timing with just 106 days till the election and counting!

i read the Telegraph review of Green policies, i dont think most Labour supporters would be up for it once they get past some nationalisation policies. recommend reading if anyone wants a chuckle, its great being able to hold ideals when you have no prospect of having to implement them. one good policy: all trains and buses to be electric.

 

[Buzzer]

Thanks for the links. What do you make of this? To me, it's incredibly tenuous; just a hunch expressed by somebody who got something right (when most others got it wrong) in 1992, rather than based on anything more substantial. I think Hayward is just trying to make an intervention to persuade floating 'middle class' voters that the Tories are the 'natural' party of government.
It's very difficult to call, but the overwhelming polling points to no overall majority, with probably Labour as the largest party.

I suspect that saying that you intend to vote Tory is a lot less toxic in 2014 than it was in 1992 but that there are an awful lot of floating Tories that have been saying they will vote UKIP but will switch nearer the day. This feels like the first few weeks for a long time when UKIP haven't been in the news and it's noticeable that their vote has been progressively slipping. My gut feeling is that UKIP won't get any MPs in the next parliament but if they do it will be solitary one and no more and their core base is wafer-thin.

What's just as intriguing from those articles is the comment that there are 'shy Greens' too. I would have thought it might be Lib Dems but Hayward seems to think that the Green vote is also understated.

 

[Machiavelli]

I suspect that saying that you intend to vote Tory is a lot less toxic in 2014 than it was in 1992 but that there are an awful lot of floating Tories that have been saying they will vote UKIP but will switch nearer the day. This feels like the first few weeks for a long time when UKIP haven't been in the news and it's noticeable that their vote has been progressively slipping. My gut feeling is that UKIP won't get any MPs in the next parliament but if they do it will be solitary one and no more and their core base is wafer-thin.

What's just as intriguing from those articles is the comment that there are 'shy Greens' too. I would have thought it might be Lib Dems but Hayward seems to think that the Green vote is also understated.

We'll just have to disagree on that 1992/2014-15 point about the Tories; 2009/10 maybe, but not now for me. That said, I'm with you on much of this. I too suspect that many kippers will revert to the Tories when it comes to it; although I still think they'll get a few more seats than you, but even that is a sign of their electoral ineptitude in FPTP electoral systems. I do take your point about media exposure re UKIP, but surely this explains the recent Green rise (which has also led to a significant increase in membership). I really don't see them getting more seats than B Pavilion, but they may well put themselves in the position where they make breakthroughs at the following GE.

 

[Machiavelli]

As buzzer said, this is why Cameron wants Greens to have airtime

Maybe, but also so that Farage gets less airtime, because that's Cameron's greatest threat. And there's no doubting that Farage is a good performer, and will appeal to many in the TV debates.

 

[ROSM]

They seem to be doing quite well without it.

Do Labour want UKIP to have airtime solely because they believe it right and just?

I would say that the Greens have had a lot of focus this last week and a lot of airtime which is good. I think many on the progressive left would like what they say. Except those who live in brighton and hove and have lived the green nightmare this last 3 years

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

We'll just have to disagree on that 1992/2014-15 point about the Tories; 2009/10 maybe, but not now for me. That said, I'm with you on much of this. I too suspect that many kippers will revert to the Tories when it comes to it; although I still think they'll get a few more seats than you, but even that is a sign of their electoral ineptitude in FPTP electoral systems. I do take your point about media exposure re UKIP, but surely this explains the recent Green rise (which has also led to a significant increase in membership). I really don't see them getting more seats than B Pavilion, but they may well put themselves in the position where they make breakthroughs at the following GE.

The problem with first-past-the-post is that I'm certain many people who might vote Green will not do so until they can see it will actually make a difference. If the Greens come close in a few seats then next time round more people will know their vote could really make a difference and they'll finally make the jump.

 

[Machiavelli]

The problem with first-past-the-post is that I'm certain many people who might vote Green will not do so until they can see it will actually make a difference. If the Greens come close in a few seats then next time round more people will know their vote could really make a difference and they'll finally make the jump.

That was one of the points that I was trying to make. The Greens didn't do well enough in their target seats in 2010 (with the exception of B Pavilion obviously) to stand much of a chance in 2015. There next best seat was Norwich South, which went from Labour to Lib Dem in a tight four-way marginal; I suspect that will return to Labour. The Greens best hope in 2015, in my view, is to get into a position where they're close in a handful of seats, so that they become clear targets in 2020/whenever the next GE occurs.
This would replicate how they won B Pavilion. I do see them gradually and solidly picking up votes and, eventually, seats, whereas UKIP are far more of a wild card.

 

[Gwylan]

Maybe, but also so that Farage gets less airtime, because that's Cameron's greatest threat. And there's no doubting that Farage is a good performer, and will appeal to many in the TV debates.

I know that this said quite regularly but I don't believe it's true: Farage shifts everything to the EU (which is low on voters' priorities) and immigration (which is higher but can't be held to dominate debates). When the subject is anything else - the economy, the NHS, education, anything, he either looks shifty or clueless. I reckon he'll get found out a bit in the debates. As I said earlier, Cameron will be more worried about Miliband, who regularly gets the better of him at PMQ.

I think many on the progressive left would like what they say. Except those who live in brighton and hove and have lived the green nightmare this last 3 years

The trouble with that as an idea is that all the opinion polls seem to suggest that Caroline Lucas will increase her majority substantially: we shall see

 

[DTES]

The problem with first-past-the-post is that I'm certain many people who might vote Green will not do so until they can see it will actually make a difference. If the Greens come close in a few seats then next time round more people will know their vote could really make a difference and they'll finally make the jump.

I see what you mean, but I wonder if Caroline Lucas winning last time could make the difference. They are sensibly concentrating on a small number of seats - and if a large part of the campaign is making the argument "We really do have a chance here" I reckon they could well pick up a few seats.

I also wonder whether another hung parliament, possibly with smaller parties having a bigger part to play than at present, could lead to even more pressure for FPTP to be scrapped anyway. If the Tories & Labour both have a claim to lead the next government (same seats would be unlikely, but the Tories having more votes & Lab having more seats?) then offering a new voting system could attract the smaller parties to pick them for a coalition. Yes, AV was a bloody disaster - but offer a more sensible suggestion and it's possible. HT - the German MMPR system seems brilliantly logical to me?

 

[Gwylan]

I also wonder whether another hung parliament, possibly with smaller parties having a bigger part to play than at present, could lead to even more pressure for FPTP to be scrapped anyway. If the Tories & Labour both have a claim to lead the next government (same seats would be unlikely, but the Tories having more votes & Lab having more seats?)

Not sure that will automatically follow: Labour had more votes and fewer seats than the Tories in the 1951 General Election but there was no call at all for a move to an alternative system

 

[Buzzer]

I see what you mean, but I wonder if Caroline Lucas winning last time could make the difference. They are sensibly concentrating on a small number of seats - and if a large part of the campaign is making the argument "We really do have a chance here" I reckon they could well pick up a few seats.

All eyes on Norwich and Oxford, I think, with Norwich looking more likely, I would have thought. Lucas deserves many plaudits for increasing her popularity here in Brighton against a very strong local Labour party and a piss-poor excuse for a local Green party. I'm unsure if it's down to her local and national campaigning or the novelty of an honest politician round these parts. Whatever anyone's political persuasion, UK politics is healthier for representation in Parliament from parties such as the Greens and for politicians like Caroline Lucas.

 

[DTES]

Not sure that will automatically follow: Labour had more votes and fewer seats than the Tories in the 1951 General Election but there was no call at all for a move to an alternative system

By itself, it wont - the 1951 election you mention gave the Tories a majority so they had no motivation to do anything. However if it happens, leaving neither party with a majority then they'll both try to claim they have a mandate to form a government (either a minority one or by forming a coalition). Clegg has already said that if that happened, he'd be likely to side with whichever party won more votes (rather than seats), however he may not be kingmaker this time round.

My point was more that a change in system would massively benefit smaller parties, and hence be very attractive to them if on the plate. Either Labour or the Tories might then decide to offer it as a carrot for the Libs/Greens/Other to choose them. Actually, that might apply regardless of the votes/seats issue. It happened last time, the Tories giving an AV referendum - it might happen again (with a different one).

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I do see them gradually and solidly picking up votes and, eventually, seats, whereas UKIP are far more of a wild card.

UKIP are indeed a wild card and once the issue of the EU, and to a lesser extent immigration, I would imagine their vote will fade away. The Greens will grow, especially as more left leaning voters abandon the more centralist Labour, but they desperately need to ensure that the focus is more on Caroline Lucas rather than their attempt to run B&H Council.

 

[ROSM]

I know that this said quite regularly but I don't believe it's true: Farage shifts everything to the EU (which is low on voters' priorities) and immigration (which is higher but can't be held to dominate debates). When the subject is anything else - the economy, the NHS, education, anything, he either looks shifty or clueless. I reckon he'll get found out a bit in the debates. As I said earlier, Cameron will be more worried about Miliband, who regularly gets the better of him at PMQ.



The trouble with that as an idea is that all the opinion polls seem to suggest that Caroline Lucas will increase her majority substantially: we shall see

Caroline Lucas is a good solid MP and if she increases her majority that would be great and we'll deserved. But that wouldn't make me want to vote green in my constituency of brighton kemptown

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I see what you mean, but I wonder if Caroline Lucas winning last time could make the difference. They are sensibly concentrating on a small number of seats - and if a large part of the campaign is making the argument "We really do have a chance here" I reckon they could well pick up a few seats.

I also wonder whether another hung parliament, possibly with smaller parties having a bigger part to play than at present, could lead to even more pressure for FPTP to be scrapped anyway. If the Tories & Labour both have a claim to lead the next government (same seats would be unlikely, but the Tories having more votes & Lab having more seats?) then offering a new voting system could attract the smaller parties to pick them for a coalition. Yes, AV was a bloody disaster - but offer a more sensible suggestion and it's possible. HT - the German MMPR system seems brilliantly logical to me?

I can't disagree with this. The Greens are doing the right thing and if their big break through doesn't happen this year I feel it will in 2020 for sure.

And yes the AV thing was nonsense. But as we move away from two party politics (proper) PR gets closer and closer IMHO. It's the sensible and modern way forward. It has so many benefits and I think it's fairer. I don't buy the coalition dead-duck idea either; if you have broadly ideologically similar parties in power it works well by keeping a check the more extreme policies. The German system does work well but I support PR regardless of my German love affair.