MORI puts Ken 2% ahead
April 9th, 2008
A trade union sponsored poll out this morning from Ipsos-MORI on the London Mayoralty put Ken Livingstone in the lead and add further to the polling confusion over the race.
Amongst first choices the split amongst those “certain to vote” is JOHNSON 40%: LIVINGSTONE 41%: PADDICK 10% 14%. This is very similar to a survey by the pollster in February which had been commissioned by the Labour party.
If you include all those naming a choice Ken had an 8% lead. This is not the figure that the firm, which lone amongst the national pollsters does not seek past vote or party ID weight, uses as its headline figure.
The poll involving a telephone sample of 1000 was carried out from April 1st - 7th and was for the Unison public service workers union.
UPDATE - Overnight after the Newsnight debate I closed almost all my Boris positions down on IG, SI, Spreadfair and Betfair - at a profit. I did not find Boris convincing whereas I thought that Ken did well.
Latest mayoral betting is here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Strange that Labour and their fellow travellers are so keen to commission MORI to do their polls. I wonder why that could be?
This is going to be a very close contest. Both candidates should be 4/5.
From a beting perspective, Paddick does not exist.
Mike. According to the ‘Gruntfutock’ Paddick’s score is 14% not 10%.
Last night after the Newsnight debate I closed all my Boris positions down on IG, SI, Spreadfair and Betfair - at a profit. I did not find Boris convincing whereas I thought that Ken did well.
UK Polling Report has a different set of figures.
Don’t believe a word of it, of course.
Either that, or I’ve been canvassing a hell of a lot of liars recently…
Tories are using populous for their internal polling. Wish we could have a sneak at those figures.
Isn’t it a bit worrying that parties are using their pet pollsters to try to ramp up their candidates?
Stewards Enquiry announced !
8. What would be the point of doing otherwise?
[6] Martin, the punters, bless them, ALWAYS lie- the secret of good canvassing is that after a while you get a sense of what they really think and won’t tell you…
Not sure if I should invoke Smithson’s law, but I did wonder about the strength of BoJo’s numbers. We shall see.
6. I’m with you on this, Martin. Also, it won’t do our efforts on the doorstep any harm at all to have evidence that it’s a close race and Ken could even sneak back in.
Also, remember this is the school hols, so responses could be skewed either way. (Is that the right way to spell skewed?)
10. My point is that if pollsters know they can get steady business by leaning in a certain direction, their independence will be completely undermined…
This is very interesting indeed. It is unfolding as the most unpredictable election since the 1992 GE one, where most pollsters put Labour ahead and Harris gave the Tories leads of up to 8%.
I will be putting a bit back on Ken.
(11 O/T Many thanks for the periodic updates on Zimbabwe: do you have personal contacts there?)
Looking at the UK Polling Report analysis (Mike, can we please have the direct link to Anthony Wells on the sidebar fixed?) the shift is actually in second preferences - Johnson is ahead (and up slightly) on first preference, but gets overtaken by transfers. This sort of makes sense: there’s the Green endorsement, the open wooing of Paddick second preferences by Livingstone, and the negative effect of the BNP endorsement for Johnson, which I’d think will put off more people than it gains (despite his swift and creditable rejection of their votes). Boris and the Tories are both doing well, but London is not a city with a right-wing majority, and if Livingstone can keep gathering second prefs he’s in with a chance.
Caveat: not everyone actually bothers to put in a second preference. What proportion did last time, does anyone know?
Who did they ask union members?
I expect the tories now to come out with a poll showing them ahead.
The Welch WIND-UP poll of polls shows 44% Johnson 39% Livingstone and 11% Paddick. But actually I prefer MORI…
I used to be a member of Unison, so I’m a little sceptical as to the efficiency of anything to do with them!
However, as this was done by a reputable polling organisation, we have to give it some credence.
It could be the, ‘Kinnock Effect’ the nearer the actual decision, the less convinced of the alternative, voters become.
I also think, ‘BoJo NoShow’ might be having an effect, if you are a candidate, you’ve gotta get in and mix-it, you can’t pic-n-mix your events.
11. By and large, most people, in my experience, who say they’ll vote for you, do so.
This poll was taken at about the same time as the Yougov poll, so someone is going to end up with egg on their face. However, even this poll does show the gap narrowing, compared to the last MORI poll.
My gut feeling is that it’s closer than Yougov suggest, but not as close as this.
16 - Oh dear, a single “Boris”! Will Tessa allow you to pay the £5 fine to the Broxtowe kitty-woos?
20. If Jonhson does end up winning by a clear majority, will MORI still be considered ‘reputable’?
22 - ditto Ken winning and YouGov.
13: harry, that is an extreme example of Smithson’s law and downright paranoid (”I don’t like this result, the pollsters might have rigged it”) - pollsters would instantly go out of business if they were caught fiddling figures, far too big a risk for any vague hope of pleasing customers. But polls commissioned by a partisan group do have a caveat: they only release them if they’re good. Conversely, we’ve not heard of the Tory private polls for a bit, which may be significant too - a dog that doesn’t bark is always interesting.
24 - i.e. Livingstone and anything YouGov…
13. But their credibility would also be undermined, if they are consistently wrong, which of course we won’t know for a few more weeks yet.
16: I had to go and check myself in case I’d made a typo :), but no - I’ve also got Johnson 40%, Livingstone 41%.
A left-wing union sponsores a poll that puts Livingstone ahead. Is that a rat I can smell?
16 No, Livingstone is 1% ahead in first preferences.
13 A market research company that gave its clients inaccurate information would go out of business quite quickly.
For the sake of completeness or confusion….
The figures reveal that while Livingstone’s lead was 2% among those certain to vote, it increased to 8% when all those who expressed a preference were included.
Johnson had a strong lead among the over-55s, while Livingstone was ahead among younger voters and women.
22 It’ll be the eve of poll that determine that for each company.
Suppose the actual outcome is something like Johnson 44%, Livingstone 39%, each company would be able to claim they’d performed respectably.
I also watched the newsnight debate last night and if anyone wants proof that this site has been overwhelmed by a whole bunch of very young (I hope!) Tories read last nights thread subtitled ‘Boris was Brilliant’.
As to the poll unfortunately all might not be as it seems
30 Almost every MORI poll will give Labour the lead among those expressing a preference. It’s a figure that should be ignored.
31 - And vindication for the poll-of-polls?
4, Mike is there a chance that the Conservative party could lose a major election for the first time in living memory when 12% ahead with 6 weeks to go.
I know you said historically its never happened.
24. I’m not suggesting they ‘fiddle’ the figures, they don’t need to. They have a methodology that has been shown to consistently overstate Labour, so all they have to do is stick to it and a steady stream of business comes their way.
There could of course be another form of collusion along the lines you mention - do several private polls, hope to get a favourable (probably rogue) result and then release it. Thanks for the suggestion Nick, as I hadn’t considered that possibility before.
As for their ‘reputation’, has MORI suffered from its previous inaccuracy? Apparently not.
24: I think all parties try to keep their private polling private. I know cases of party private polls having been released not as part of some determined media strategy, but because some blabbermouth MP has got the figures on their pager and stuck it front of a journalist.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Ken Livingstone released the earlier figures from Labour’s polls off his own back, rather than as a planned release.
35 - Dez - how much do you think Ken will win by?
When was this poll carried out?
31. Yes, and what’s the betting all the polls will mysteriously converge at that point, conveniently airbrushing out the dubious ones published earlier on? If challenged, the pollsters will claim there was a ‘late swing’…
O/T mortgage market
great PR stunt by HSBC?
“we are more liquid than everyone else”
“we’ll take all the premium mortgage business, thanks very much”
“we’ll charge big fees for doing so”
getting plenty of coverage on the BBC, at least
As too canvassing.
On the night of the ‘97 election when the first indications of the Labour landslide where coming in, they were interviewing the chairman of the Mitcham and Morden Conservative Party. He was emphatic that nothing like that was happening in,’His constituency’ canvassing returns etc. He was confident of holding the seat, the result was then read out, it was one of the biggest swings to Labour of the night.
This is shaping up as a real test between the pollsters.
If Mori has called this right then they may find newspapers paying for their regular polls again. If not Mori’s reputation will suffer a further fall and there will be no takers.
35 There’s a chance, but not likely.
If Boris really is neck and neck, then I suggest that the Conservative’s far better campaign on the ground in London will get him in.
39 1st to 7th April.
42 More honest canvassers, like Peter Golds in Brent North, knew precisely what was about to hit them in 1997.
42 - I remember Andrew Marr talking about the 2001 election. A prominent but unnamed Tory MP had heard the early results, but said “You wait till you see Torbay though” expecting to retake it, as apparently the canvass returns had been very good. The LDs romped home by 6,000.
24
” Conversely, we’ve not heard of the Tory private polls for a bit, which may be significant too”
The public polls have been very good for the Tories, so there’s no need for them to shovel positives polls to their PR department. Labour on the hand…
Anecdotally, in canvassing in a few wards in Southern England there is a noticeable anti-Labour feeling on the doorstep compared to the 2007 locals.
Last year it was indifference, this year there is some anger.
Sportingbet have cut Ken from 9/4 to 9/5. You can still get 2/1 on him with bluesq.com. That looks very, very generous. I’d make Ken a 6/5 shot at most.
O/T - Could this become the most viewed clip of the year?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7338385.stm
@45:
I’m just not finding any enthusiasm for Livingstone on the doorstep, and a great deal of anger. There’s something about this poll that doesn’t ring true with my personal experience.
Anyone who thought we were going to win in 1997 must have been suffering from advanced schizoid delusions.
But if Livingstone were to win May 1st, I would genuinely be shocked.
49 - he’s hovering around 3 (2/1) on Betfair.
38, MB, I don`t think he will, but not living in London its hard to get any insight.
However from what I have seen he certainly is a fighter, as can be seen from last night.
The more exposure he can get on the national media could help.
So it could be closer than we were led to believe.
Perhaps there’s now a feeling Bors might win and the left has united. Only Ken can beat him and they’ll hold their noses?
Q:
Which pollster called the 2004 mayoral election best and worst?
52 - things are moving. best price 2.82 on betfair, but big spread between bet and lay at the moment.
IIRC hasn’t Ken slightly underperformed in the previous two Mayoral polls, on this basis he hasn’t got much wiggle room.
54 Both Yougov and ICM show Lib Dem second preferences breaking in favour of Boris, although Green second preferences will go heavily for Ken.
55 IIRC Yougov did best.
58 That said, I expect Lib Dems in places like Southwark, Brent, Islington, and Haringey will heavily favour Ken, while Lib Dems in Richmond, Kingston, and Sutton will heavily favour Boris.
54 - that would not explain why Paddick is polling better with MORI. This election is indeed shaping up into a real test of the different methods of pollsters.
59 - true. But I’d expect Richmond etc to have a far higher turnout. There will be more LD votes to switch to Boris in these areas.
59. Do you think there will be pressure on Paddick to give an indication about his second preference, and if push came to shove who do you think it’ go to? He ducked it on the debate last night but I thought he looked a berk pretending that there was nothing to distinguish between Boris and Ken.
One thing that all the polls show is that Paddick has zero chance of winning. I assume there will be lots of ingenious disfigured bar charts suggesting otherwise, but anyone voting Paddick who doesn’t second preference may as well not vote.
@62:
I think that it’s clear that Paddick would prefer Livingstone if given the choice, but he knows that his supporters are breaking for Boris so he’s keeping schtum.
51
Hmmm delusion, Hesaltine, Tory Majority, ‘Sixty and rising’
If the Conservatives had picked a candidate, of good character, with a solid background in local and national government, we wouldn’t be having this, ‘converstation’ Ken would be toast!
(It amazes me that with a population of eight million or something, that the major parties can’t find a candidate, who most Londoners could feel totally confident about.)
Livingstone, jaded past his best etc, but a known quantity, like it or lump it Boris is a risk, and its coming down to, ‘Flaky Ken or Risky Boris’.
62 What does he gain by favouring either?
@65:
Risk eh? We don’t like that round these parts.
62. Has Boris said who his second preference is for?
Though he may not have a vote in London, of course.
65 - Like who?
65 - It comes down to media profile. The problem is that all the parties realise you have to have someone with a pre-extant profile. Frankly you don’t get a profile by being a worthy on a London Borough, harsh as that sounds.
Paddick will give no indication on his own personal second vote. It would be silly and would alienate supporters one way or the other.
He is even less likely to give a lead on how his supporter should vote. Such silly stuff is solely confined to Tory wet dreams.
@68:
Since Livingstone and Boris will be the top two, their second prefs wouldn’t be counted anyway.
The question is only of interest when directed to no-hopers like Paddick.
63. Nonsense Henry, Paddick is going to ‘come through the middle’.
Brian Paddick was quite right. There is absolutely nothing to choose between Livingstone and Johnson: both are dreadful.
In the same way that Cameron and Brown are both dreadful, may I add….
74. Yet still fare more popular than Paddick.
69. Malcolm Rifkind? Seriously.
Weight of money that counts, Cuddles (76), I’m afraid.
78, You might as well pack up completely then. It would be a relief, for sure.
76 - Hogwash, even if Paddick was rolling in money he would still be miles behind. The guy makes a blank space look interesting.
80 - I of course refer to 78, I swear the numbers change!
32 - Roger, what kind of Labour supporter are you? The moment there is some good news for Ken, you come on here and say “As to the poll unfortunately all might not be as it seems”
Thanks a million.
Can we get away from the “you’re so crap it’s unbelievable” football terrace chant type of post please?
Today should be a very interesting day for the betting markets for mayor.
Betfair have also introduced markets for the GLA seats. No money on them yet, but any ideas who will win which of the FPTP ones? (All were Labour or Tory last time.)
78. nothing to do with Paddick being another extremely dull Lib Dem candidate then?
82. 1st prediction - no Lib Dem wins
Blue Square have just cut Ken from 2/1 to 13/8. Top price with trad bookmakers now 7/4. Make sure you use Mike’s link for placing any bets to help finance the site.
http://politicalbetting.bestbetting.com/specials/politics/uk/mayor-of-london/next-mayor-of-london
80 Last nite was the first time I’d seen him, James, and on the evidence of his performance I think you rather overstate his appeal.
The total amount traded so far on Betfair’s Mayoral market has been £195,516 - of that £6026 has been mine. That’s in excess of 3%.
Thankfully I’m now all in the green - a winner whatever happens.
84 They could win Lambeth/Southwark.
85 - 7/4 is roughly what betfair has (2.76). As bookies tighten their prices, Ken’s odds will drop more on betfair.
re 85 - Thanks Henry.
I was very underwhelmed by Boris last night. I could not believe that he had been so badly prepped or would have so much difficulty communicating in a lucid effective manner. That’s why I closed down my betting.
69
If I’d been Cameron, I’d have made this guy offers he couldn’t have refused to run, perfect profile for a London Tory, he’d have walked it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope
82
Brent/Harrow Con Hold
Barnet/Camden Con Hold
West Central Con Hold
Havering/Redbridge Con Hold
Bexley/Bromley Con Hold
Croydon/Sutton Con Hold
Ealing/Hillingdon Con Hold
Merton/Wandsworth Con Hold
South West Probable Con Hold (but Lib Dems close)
Enfield Haringey Probate Con gain from Labour
North East Lab Hold
City & East Lab Hold
Greenwich/Lewisham Lab Hold
Lambeth/Southwark too close to call.
91 - Small problem being that few people know who he is. The London Mayoralty perfectly refracts the problem of good candidates not necessarily making good people to do the job and vice versa.
92 - seems reasonable to me.
91 - And he would get the Tory vote out?!?!?
92 - Probate? Something on your mind Sean?
@92:
I’m really not so sure about City and East you know, Sean. It really depends on what the BNP are doing in Dagenham and Barking. Unfortunately, there’s no way we can have Margaret Hodge’s mouth sewn up.
90. The bit about not literally having any figures about his bus policy was a low point for someone who wants control of £11 billion of public money. His throwaway remark and tone about ‘these people who use buses’ was revealing. Clearly Boris has never been one to use public transport, so why put him in charge of it?
16. “Caveat: not everyone actually bothers to put in a second preference. What proportion did last time, does anyone know?”
Of voters supporting the eliminated candidates, the proportion exercising an effective second preference (i.e. Tory or Labour) were.
2004: 42%
2000: 36%
I didn’t see the debate. Boris is going to win this election handily.
97 The BNP are bound to poll well in Barking and Dagenham, but they only have pockets of support left in Tower Hamlets (around Bow) and in Newham (Canning Town, and the Docks).
96 Yes. Should have said probable.
Never really believed polls, but do think the Mayor race is closer than polls suggest. Polls should not be sponsored by any one political group because this is where over confidence sets in. Unions may be linked to the Labour Party so should keep away from polls.
99 - in 2000 Labour was not an effective second preference. Dobson did not make the top two.
99. Of course in 2000, it was Tory or Ind. For effective second preference, read “Top Two”…
Are PMQ’s on today?
93
He’s pretty well known in London!!
100
How’s Tony Lit, Test, is he enjoying being an MP?
Hillary has picked up a tad on the Iowa Exchanges, trading now up from the low to mid teens :
http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/Nomination08_quotes.html
103 - francis. Did you email Mike or Peter the Punter about our £10 bet?
Londoners at last coming to their senses. They’ve had a good old laugh at Boris but with only three weeks to go they realize they’re looking for a mayor not a clown.
104. Yes, corrected that. Sorry for the confusion. The figures are correct, it was the description that was wrong.
92 Assuming a number of people are going to vote for Johnson in spite of him being a Tory, rather than because he is one, then I wonder if we might see some surprises.
I agree with Mike that few people who watched the debate will have gone with Johnson - but then again few people will have watched it.
This doesn’t look good for Ken -
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23476127-details/Ken%27s+secret+donation+by+property+boss/article.do
“..The Mayor received the £30,000 knowing it was from multi-millionaire Sharad Patel, who wants to build a £120 million theme park and leisure complex in north-west London, then claimed he knew nothing of who his donors were…”
Yes I wondered about Paxman’s attack on Ken and his donors last night and his denial of any knowledge sounded a bit limp.
Sean T, in case you need an ego boost (as if!!) you may be glad to know that your post has made the front page of the Prodicus website:
http://prodicus.blogspot.com/2008/04/lovely-pair.html
I’m presuming the site isn’t one of your side projects….??
110, I suppose that’s why MORI show Ken’s lead falling from 4% to 1% then, since the campaign started.
99. Almost every leading politician has no experience of claiming state benefits, so why allow them to run the welfare system?
On a more partisan view, how many senior Labour figures have any military experience? Why should such people be put in charge of the armed forces?
This kind of reasoning gets very silly, very quickly.
re 45 previous thread - Cicero it comes to something when Zuma can be seen to be more statesman-like that Mbeki.
@110:
I think that’s what’s known as a false dichotomy.
Boris was crap in that debate. Let’s wait and see what the polls say after this.
I think Mike is overstating how bad Boris was last night, apart from the routemaster cost thing he was reasonably good, much better than Paddick and only slightly less than Ken. Not that it makes much difference either way.
113. In the pockets of rich developers. It’s all a far cry from calling for ‘armed brigades of workers to defend the factories’….
116. I remember Stephen Byers was Minister for Transport when he couldn’t drive a car. I accept your point, but I guess what I meant is that I get a strong sense is that Boris is talking about public transport because he has to, rather than because he wants to.
I delight in the young Tory luvvies on here. They must be sooooooo in luv [infatuation?]with Pretty Boy David that when a poll emerges showing Ken Livingstone leading they have proof it was all a fiddle and that any poll that shows Mr Livingstone in the lead must be good for their variation of the Tory Party.
Us old’ns have seen it all before. Whatever happens happens. We don’t need Mystic Megs and Crystal Balls [isn't he a member of HMG?] We just sit around and wait for the results, say ‘mmmmmmmmmm’ and then get back to the Racing Post or Opera Magazine or whatever. Actually I’ve been listening to Saverio Mercadante’s “Il Bravo” whilst scanning the blog and writing this piece of nonsense. Far more intellectual value than navel gazing about whether a tousle-haired shagger becomes mayor of the Smoke or whether it’s an old grey shagger that gets the job.
Malcolm
It’s wide open again isn’t it? I thought Boris did OK last night but Ken was better. Boris outperformed my expectations of him but I had probably set these too low. He did bluster and personally I think I allowed my betting positions to influence my judgment. Again!!
Bearing in mind Mike’s analysis of Boris’ performance and the state of the polls, which are all over the place, I have followed Mike’s lead and am now GREEN on both Boris and Ken. I still favour Boris to win but I’d put it 4/6, 6/4 now. If Boris engages in any more media debates his chances should lengthen further.
Is there a Question Time special planned? Someone last night suggested that there was.
121 - there is something in this. I remember successive Education Secretaries insisting the state schools were good and well funded but not sending their children to one. (The exception being John Patten.)
Now there is no reason why they should, but it does not give you confidence in their words.
121 Back in 2004, I got through to the final round for selection for City and East, for the Conservatives. A friend did tell me afterwards that he knew I wasn’t remotely interested in public transport issues but I hid it very well.
Roger Simon of ‘Politico’ looks at Iowa as the start of the rot for Hillary :
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9474.html
122. Don’t you think Alistair Darling was talking about the economy today because he had to, rather than wanted to, as well Henry?
Does anyone know why PMQ’s isn’t on today?
re 106 it amazes me that someone who professes and interest in politics would be unaware that parliament is in recess.
129 - Recess!
107 I hope Tony Lit sticks with it as I think he’d be an excellent MP. He should stand for council somewhere like Reh Chisti.
130. Asking a lot of my friends including those in Cambridge, they still did not know why it wasn’t on.
I am in recess too though
127. i.e. as soon as that pesky voting part of the election began?
David Alexander of ‘Reuters’ looks at the trading markets :
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080408/tpl-uk-usa-politics-predictions-20b2d2f.html
133 - The economy will be soon too!
Ken now down to 2.64 on Betfair. Somebody somewhere thinks there is something in this poll.
123 “… They must be sooooooo in luv [infatuation?]with Pretty Boy David that when a poll emerges showing Ken ….”
Your homophobia is showing.
100. Although in 2004 85% of voters overall expressed a second preference.
Just goes to show how crazy SV is.
On the London assembly, I’ve done a seat calculator
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/Londonassembly.xls
139 - Well it is a contingent voting system, in many ways a discrete two-round system would be better.
“If Boris engages in any more media debates his chances should lengthen further”
LOL! Not exactly the most compelling argument for a profile office but you’re spot on!
Livingstone is pretty odious, unlikeable and allied to corruption but he has the benefit of his largesse from his time as mayor.
As someone who doesn’t live in London I have had no benefit from that so have no reason to support Livingstone but I can understand how some might vote out of fear for having that largesse taken away.
If an election is won out of fear, however, then the situation that exists will never improve, you merely retain the existing schisms, perfectly exemplified as on here with the division of ‘us’ and ‘them’.
Moving away from the main issue, the big problem with democracy is that schisms are inherent and majorities do not need the minority to perpetuate their power. No proposed voting system will change that (which is why I would like a wholesale change of the system rather than tinkering) but it is our political system’s greatest shame.
As a result we have politicians like Livingstone who thrive by division. I have no idea what Boris would be like but unless we move on from the old battles then the old wounds will still fester.
59 - don’t agree Sean I’m afraid. While I suspect Lib Dem second votes in outer London would probably prefer Boris over Ken - it won’t be by a lot.
Four years ago Ken won some very Conservative wards (like Tudor in Kingston) on the back of tactical Lib Dem votes. I suspect he won’t this time, because of previous Labour voters either switching or staying home - not necessarily because Lib Dems are now more likely to favour the Tory.
91. Mike, have you seen Boris debating before? I’ve been to a few of the hustings and compared to those, Boris was much better last night. I was actually surprised at how relatively well prepped he was.
The polls are all over the place, but the trend would suggest a small lead for Boris at the moment. That could tighten as time goes on and the ‘Kinnock effect’ kicks in, or Boris could convince people that he and his team will be serious and he could extend it. However, given the blanket positive coverage he is getting in the London press and the blanket bad coverage Ken is getting, any other Tory candidate would be miles ahead by now. It is testament to Ken and not to Boris, that this is the case.
If this gem hits the media it has to assist Boris’s cause !
Gord just can’t survive much more of this,or can he?
From Bloomberg.com
April 9 (Bloomberg) — U.K. consumer confidence fell to the lowest in almost four years in March as the housing-market downturn worsened, and former Chancellor of the Exchequer Nigel Lawson said the economy is heading for a recession.
Nationwide Building Society’s index of sentiment declined 1 point to 77, the least since records started in May 2004. The result is based on a survey of 1,204 people conducted by Taylor Nelson Sofres between Feb. 18 and March 20, Britain’s fourth- biggest mortgage lender said in an e-mailed statement today.
I await the next opinion poll,even after tomorrow’s base rate cut,with much anticipation.
I see Shadsy’s gang have cut Ken to 6/4. I hope they can come up with some good specials.
141. I missed a ‘high’ (again!)
Yet again MORI favour the Labour candidate.
How soon will it be before we have to start to discount MORI totally due to their inherent bias which is obviously built into their methodology?
146-What have they pushed Boris out to?
148. If it’s so obvious Timmo, perhaps you could explain what the bias is?
I just saw this in the comments section on Iain Dale’s Diary:
“Everyone knows that Libdems are great lovers - they are so good at coming last.”
Made me spit out my olive laughing
149. 8/15.
148 - plenty of Tories already discount MORI. Just as Labour supporters dismissed Harris in 1992.
145. If Nigel Lawson-the worse Cchancellor except for Howe and Lamont since the war-thinks we’re heading for a recession we should listen.
Boris will always perform terribly in debates. But I think people underestimate how much; (a) most people won’t watch them (b) how much people don’t care.
Anyone remember how crap he was on HIGNFU and how much the audience loved it..??
Boris’ appeal is not based on his articulation or ability to erudite a position.
It’s based on being “not Ken” and being a popular maverick character who will be less reckless with their money.
I have closed down one of spread-bets nonetheless. I will buy in again if Boris’ price moves out further..
153. Big difference - MORI are always wrong.
148 Possibly true but perhaps we should Replace MORI by Yougov and Labour by Conservative in your statement , we will not know until May 1st .
FWIw , having seen the debate last night I would now give a different answer to the Yougov poll I answered on Sunday and give my theoretical 2nd pref vote to Ken rather than noone at all . Academic as I don’t live in London .
155. ‘I have closed down one of spread-bets nonetheless.’
That’s what I like about Politicalbetting. The money will always supercede partisanship and/or spin. I find it a great indicator in fact.
99 As a person without a car licence,mainly through long-term anxiety,neuroses (I do not feel mentally stable enough to drive a car),and as a bus user,without grinding a political axe,I feel within my rights to take offence at Bozza’s words about ‘those people who use buses’.
Furthermore,as someone with knowledge of the bus industry,via friends and my previous membership of a preservation society,I feel distnctly queasy at the thought of BJ taking charge of a very excellent public transport sysyem in London,so were I a resident of London,albeit with qualms,I would vote for Ken Livingstone
154 “If Nigel Lawson-the worse Cchancellor except for Howe and Lamont since the war-”
Wot? No Barber? No Darling?
And with twenty or thirty years of distance, that title might still belong to one Gordon Brown.
150-That is what i would like to know from their methodology.
Bob Worcesters company has always favoured Labour if you look back historically.I just want to know why.
159. I’d be genuinely interested to know how bus drivers will be voting in this election.
150 - I think we need to understand that on pb.com, the words “obviously” and “clearly” mean “I assert”.
148-So your comment is somewhat irrelevant in that you have not had to live in the “Kingdom of Ken” for the last 8 years.
137. Market overreaction. As Sean says, this poll shows a decline in Kens lead from the last MORI poll. I’m sure Mike will digest the detail over the next 48 hours or so and show it up for what it is.
I’m also very suspicious of the fact Unison sponsered it.
144. “…any other Tory candidate would be miles ahead by now.”
No. They wouldn’t. Ken would have won against Boff/Lightfoot etc..
91/144: Yes, I try not to be rude about fellow-MPs, but I’ve been saying gently for some time that those of us who regularly see Boris in action are puzzled by the theory that he’s actually any good.
148: We need a snappy nickname for people who embody Smithson’s theory that we tend to suspect bad polls of being rogues…
159 - “I feel within my rights to take offence at Bozza’s words about ‘those people who use buses’.”
Only if you misemphasise the word those. It really comes to something when a candidate is attacked for a rather pedestrian sentence construction.
Sorry 148 i meant Marks comment on 157.
Apologies
@157:
If, as we suspect, Mori have got it completely wrong, will you be gracious about it on the 2nd May, Mr Senior?
Something along the lines of “my own desparate delusions made be believe, against all sanity, a rogue poll by a known flawed pollster. I now realise that I was a fool, and accept Boris as my one true Lord and Master. I shall now bend over whilst Mike Smithson gives me six of the best for gross violations of Smithson’s Law” would do.
165. I agree regarding the Boff/Lightfoot comment. I can’t think of anyone who could win against Red Ken other than Boris. Is there a more popular Tory?
158. HenryG - Let me make myself clear.
I have closed it in order to profit on the price movement. *NOT* because I think Boris will lose..
What pi$$es me off to high-heaven is that this poll has been published mid-morning, when I’m at work, and can’t bl00dy access Betfair or SPIN quickly to take advantage. It costs me some serious money when this happens… GRRR!!!!
EDW - you around?
What are the latest SPIN spreads and Betfair prices on both Ken & Boris?
148: by Nick Palmer MP “We need a snappy nickname for people who embody Smithson’s theory that we tend to suspect bad polls of being rogues…”
A “Senile Mark” poll?
Anyone hazard a guess at London Assembly vote shares (second vote)?
Here’s mine.
Con 34%
Lab 22%
LD 14%
BNP 8%
GRN 7%
UKIP 5%
Others (fragmented) 10%
“148: We need a snappy nickname for people who embody Smithson’s theory that we tend to suspect bad polls of being rogues…”
‘Tory Ultras’
170. Thatcher.
169 I don’t believe that Mori is correct but nor do I believe that Yougov are either , I suspect the real position is somewhere in between . As I don’t live in London I don’t particularly care whether it is Ken or Boris . If I did on the basis of what I saw last night I would want anyone but Boris .
This has the potential to be a great betting heat. Support for Ken this morning at 7/4 on the back of today’s poll suited ladbrokes book on the event very nicely and, as mentioned above, we are now 8/15 Boris, 6/4 Ken.
I hope to have some extra markets on this up later this evening and I’ll post them here as soon as they are available.
166. How about a snappy nickname for those who desperately talk up obviously inaccurate polls in order to convince themselves their party isn’t actually doing incredibly badly?
175. If only! I wonder if she could win a general election again.
167. He wasn’t being attacked for being pedestrian, well only in the sense of pedestrians not being bus users.
179. Against Brown, definately.
173 Seems about right. We haven’t had any surveys on London list voting intentions, although I suspect that Yougov’s second preferences for the Mayoralty (showing 25% Second Prefs for Others) give you a good indication of how the minor parties will fare in the London list vote.
Ken drifting again - now 2.9 on betfair.
@176:
Tish and fipsy. Of course you care.
If BoJo wins, it will be a high-profile Tory victory, and will cement in the public mind the culmination of our Long March back to political acceptability.
And that’s something your lot should fear immensely.
182 The Yougov poll I completed on Sunday had London Assembly Voting Intentions and a voting intention question for those who did not live in London but from memory it was not clear where this referred to local or a GE election .
I can exclusively reveal that the question asked in the Unison bought Ipsos-MORI poll was “On May 1st, will your vote for Mayor go to:
1. workers champion Ken Livingstone,
2. Baby-eater Boris Johnson, or
3. some other person who has no chance of winning but that wasted vote risks letting in the Baby-eater (who if elected will come after your first-born with knife and fork and a glint in his eye)?”
Probably.
I’ve just checked the Democrat odds for the first time in ages. Obama best priced 1/5 and as short as 1/10. What a great feeling that must be for those swines with the 50/1 tickets.
As opposed to bandying around odds,do any of you guys like an actual bet ?
I am currently offering the lion’s share of 1.6 if you want to lay Boris and 3.1 if you want to lay Ken.
This morning I have read various statements including “I make Ken a 5-1 shot” and”It’s 4-5 each of two.”
Help yourselves !
I don’t think anyone is under the illusion that Boris plans to actually _use_ the public transport, or in fact any of the public services, that he would be in charge of. Or that he can identify with people that will.
166 - Nelsons?
@189:
Boris plans to cycle to City Hall.
138
Not at all. Pretty Boy David, happily married, is a pretty boy.
Surely a man can love a pretty boy without being gay. My wife loves pretty boy actors and will say so. In November we go out to Thailand to stay with some gay friends.
You see,I just love to needle the Tories [of all three parties] occasionally, sometimes they respond by calling me names but most of the time I’m ignored.
As my friend Rocky says ‘ if I was going to be a shop-lifter or a bank robber I’d be one now, us old’ns are invisible.’
That is so true; but thanks for replying, it’s nice to be noticed now and again.
Malcolm
This is a week of startling revelations. Clown Brown thinks that interest rates should be cut as inflation is low, Darling thinks the economy is in good shape and Nick Palmer thinks Boris is useless.
Next week the Pope declares Catholocism is the right way and Norman Tebbitt praises Margaret Thatcher.
184. By the same token if Boris loses after all the work of the right-wing press and expectations fostered by Yougov it’ll be seriously bad news for both Bullindon boys-possibly even the beginning of the end. At the very least an other ‘Tony Lit’ moment.
If we can ignore the London mayor polls and look at some fundamental voting demographics, Boris has always had it all to do and logically so. It is always something that has prevented me from getting heavily involved in this race.
What has been shown though from the polls is that he can do it.
171. EDW - where are you? Need those prices!!
I stand by what I’ve said previously.
If the Conservatives can’t win London *NOW* with a popular candidate, facing a corrupted and unpopular opponent, with a whopping lead in the national polls, with CCHQ focussed 100% on London, with all the boots on the ground, with a superior media operation, terrible national news and an energised supporter base - they will *never* win the London Mayoralty.
In fact, I’d even go as far as to say - if we can’t win this, we can’t win the General Election.
We’d lose all credibility.
Is there a man amongst you, or are just a talking-shop ?
Come one,come all !
189. Bikes aren’t public transport.
194. roger in predicting doom for the tories shock.
191. not really a public service? although i am strongly in favour of cycling
do you happen to know where he stands on the cycling schemes that Ken has put forward?
the radial cycle routes seemed like an excellent concept to me (although i’m not sure how they were supposed to work in detail).
197. I’ve already helped myself to the 9/4 on Ken thank you.
“148: We need a snappy nickname for people who embody Smithson’s theory that we tend to suspect bad polls of being rogues…”
A Rundstedt? In commemoration of Field Marshal von Rundstedt refusal to believe that the D-Day landings were the real invasion and desire to wait for the real landings near Calais. This is actually a bit unfair as he wasn’t wholly to blame for it, but the name has something of a ring to it as a derogatory term.
If anyone wants a laugh scroll back to March 21st 2007. It was budget day and read the comments from Roger, Palmer and Coldstone amongst others.
My favourite says the 2007 Budget was the work of a genius who would become more popular than Blair and lead Labour into greater landslides.
A thread of the best of Roger with relevant dates could be one of the funniest ever.
Is there any indication from the polls of the likely turn-out? I just get the feeling that with a close mayoral election there is more excitement and a greater willingness to vote. Not sure who this will help, if anyone?
196, Expectations are so high that it would be a serious blow if Johnson doesn’t win.
I think he will.
194. Two words:
The economy.
It still is in hard work mode for the Average Joe by 2010 and Labour will be out
If it shows signs of life for the economy, they could potentially do it but still have to beat a 3 term incumbancy problem which shoudlnt be underestimated.
202. Rundstedt is perfect.
@206:
The Economy didn’t save Major in 1997. 1992: deep recession, narrow victory. 1997, economy booming, landslide defeat.
190. I thought of ‘Nelsons’ or ‘to copenhagen’ to describe deliberately ignoring inconvenient information, but I decided against it as Nelson knew that the order to withdraw from battle was genuine, but a bad one, whereas Rundstedt / German High Command didn’t believe the information they were given - or put the wrong interpretation on it - even though it was accurate.
A thread of the best of Roger with relevant dates could be one of the funniest ever.
But who could assemble such a magnum opus without laughing themselves to death in the process?
Mike, aside from your stated comments about trading around these polls - what is your view on who will win and by how much?
As a poll specialist why do YOU think Yougov’s results are so different to the others?
Cheers,
PC
The way I see it is that if Yougov were the most accurate poll in 2004, it is their results we should accept for the time being. Having said that and watched the debate last night, the more Ken gets media attention the better for him and probably the opposite is true for Boris. Question time on April 24th should be interesting and probably quite crucial.
I don’t think the debate on Newsnight will change a single vote.
I thought it was a complete farce and pretty much what i expected. Paddick was interesting in that he had the persona of a copper - serious and no-nonsense. It was interesting that Paddick declined to endourse Ken Livingstone as well.
Livingstone was so desperatly trying to hoover up lib dem votes it was funny - from his golden tie to the “supporting Paddick” with his second vote. A bit disingenuis really as he is in a pact with the greens but nice try.
In essence it was a complete load of tosh and i still think Boris is on for a famous victory!
Am I right in thinking that landslides only occur when the people who do not normally vote are forced to through intense hatred or optimism for a party? I can’t see as many other reasons how a government who had won the previous election can lose by a landslide.
Are thee a lot more undecided voters in elections than I realise that can cause a landslide? I can’t imagine that Labour could do anything now that could cause a Tory landslide.
Was the turnout in 1997 a lot higher than the elections before?
re 187. “A great feeling holding the 50/1 tickets” - It is Henry!
I wonder two things on this MORI poll…
(1) Why did the fieldwork take a whole week? That’s only around 140 calls a day… I imagine just 2 staff could do it working an 8-hour day.
(2) How did they sample their calls?
(3) What was the wording of the questions asked?
(4) Why is Kens lead *still* down from the last MORI poll on 12th February from 4% to 1%?
Answers to these would be good from the “neutral” punters would be good.
214. Lower!
210 To be fair to Roger he has called the markets very well; Labour are riding high in the polls. the Conservatives are rubbish and despised by the population and barclays shares have risen 3 fold.
208. Combine the two..stale government and crap economy and the Tories would have to be subject to a totally unexpected downfall to lose. Have an economy coming out of trouble and there is always a chance that the natives will feel a lot calmer. Labour right now are not quite in Tory 1997 territory as regards sheer dislike though its going that way.
Secondly, in 1992 Labour had a vote prevention weapon…his name was Neil Kinnock.
214 - Turnout in 1992 was 77.7% turnout in 1997 was 71.5%.
182. Mine’s a projection based on the national opinion polls.
Applying the same to the Mayoral Election first prefs I get.
Con 34.7
Lab 32.8
LD 13.1
Surely all the Mayoral polls are significantly overestimating the combined Con+Lab 1st pref vote?
Anyone care to comment?
211/212 The turnout in 2004 was around 37% . The Yougov polls are based on a forecast turnout of their panel respondees of around 80% . This indicates their panel is not representative of Londoners as a whole but may of course be representative of those who will vote .
219. his name was Neil Kinnock
Awwwrighhht!!!! 
215. Here we go again!
202. Very good
An “Ali” - he/she (or it) is an “Ali”
…as in Comical Ali of Iraqi “we’re whipping their asses” fame!!
219. Brown has an excellent chance of going the way of Kinnock, in my view. Personally, he is even more repellent, and now his competence has been called severely into question as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/7338151.stm
Poor residents
214 - “Am I right in thinking that landslides only occur when the people who do not normally vote are forced to through intense hatred or optimism for a party?”
No. In 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992, the Tory vote was about steady at 42-43%. 1983 and 1987 were landslides because of how the opposition vote split.
1983 - the biggest of the Tory landslides was also a relatively low turnout (for those days).
223. That man needed a punch in the face. At least he got a political one.
I think that unless a politician admits to enjoying child p*rnography, or something similar, debates on Newsnight or Question Time won’t sway many votes.
214 - I think it’s more likely to be the other way round - landslides occur on lower turnouts, when some of even a party’s most natural supporters cannot bring themselves to vote for them.
Labour haven’t reached this point yet, but they might.
227 - Further to that 2001 was a landslide on the lowest turnout since universal suffrage!
227. Exactly.
I think it’s +90% likely that as long as the UK stays together with the same electoral system, the maximum ceiling for a Tory majority is about 60.
The only way it will go higher is if Labour/Lib-Dems split again.
190-How about a “Fish” after Michael Fish and his famously inaccurate weather report in October 1987 when he proclaimed there would not be a hurricane!!!
221 I’d be inclined to say yes, usually, but perhaps in this case, voting intentions have polarised around Johnson and Livingstone.
230. A valid point. I couldn’t bring myself to vote for anyone else if the Tories messed up badly. Similarly in the Mayoral elections, I couldn’t pick a 2nd preference.
221 - yes, polls are surely doing that. The idea that the top 3 candidates will get 95% of the vote is laughable.
I feel the same when I hear Tories saying they expect to get over 40% in the next Euro elections. Last time Labour and the Tories got less than 50% BETWEEN THEM!
219. It is interesting that you mention Neil Kinnock: In many ways Nick Clegg is a lwss important version of Neil Kinnock. Like Neil Kinnock, Clegg was talked up as being a really good leader by their own side. Nobody else can see it but the partisan hacks were still blind to it. I think that Clegg’s Sh*g’s comment is the equivelent of Kinnocks falling in the sea. Another interesting parellel is the fact that a new face ala Kinnock/Clegg took over from Foot/Skeleton both of whom were Nuclear unilitarilists and deeply unpopular with the electorate.
Definitely is definitely spelled D.E.F.I.N.I.T.E.L.Y.
Definitely.
Malcolm
236 - but since the last Euro elections UKIP have diminished as a credible force. The prospects of the Conservatives getting above 40% are quite favourable.
237 - you are quite wrong about Kinnock. A poor potential PM, but the state the Labour party was left in, and Blair was fortunate enough to enjoy in terms of elections, was down to Kinnock.
Was Ming really a unilateralist like Foot?
239 Up 14%? I don’t think so. UKIP will still probably get a resepctable vote in 2009.
Another thought. If Boris narrowly pips Ken on the first prefs, but is then overhauled by second preferences, will this amount to QED for Labour changing Westminter voting to AV?
‘Political Wire’ have advance notice of a ‘Strategic Vision’ Presidential and Primary Poll for Pennsylvania :
McCain 42% .. Clinton 45%
McCain 48% .. Obama 41%
Clinton 47% .. Obama 42%
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/04/09/strategic_vision_clinton_leads_by_5_in_pennsylvania.html
240. Thats what he was advocating whenever the trident vote went through H of C!
Wait a minute, I haven’t heard Boris’s team complaining about this MORI poll and reporting it! What’s going on, it might be that they’re being grown up and accepting it, rather than whinging to all in sundry and trying to tattle.
229. Boris has described himself as a ‘polymorphous pervert’ but that’s about it.
241. really? UKIP’s coverage has collapsed since the last euro elections. The party is split and has a chronic lack of cash, the tories are back up in the press and making some headway.
241. Around 5-7% I would say, if they are lucky.
245. If only a dictator loving, leatherfaced, leftie could follow suit.
Those mocking Roger are really being cruel.
Roger is the best at cultural forecasts which are close to his profession. He has won a few quid for those of us who followed his recommendations.
Alas at politics…..
243. That’s a mighty gap in Pennsylvania for McCain. If he can win that and hold Ohio and Florida I should think it unlikely Obama would win.
Interesting. Ken Livingstone strikes back! Personally I don’t rate MORI much and I think it would mean much more if it was an ICM, Populus or YouGov poll, but nevertheless it does add some fuel to the fire.
Going back for a second to the discussion in the last thread about poll averaging: let’s break the WSJ’s objections down into separate categories.
Among the pitfalls:
1. Polls have different sample sizes, yet in the composite, those with more respondents are weighted the same.
2. They are fielded at different times, some before respondents have absorbed the results from other states’ primaries.
3. They cover different populations, especially during primaries when turnout is traditionally lower.
4. It’s expensive to reach the target number of likely voters, so some pollsters apply looser screens.
5. Also, pollsters apply different weights to adjust for voters they’ve missed.
6. And wording of questions can differ, which makes it especially tricky to count undecided voters.
7. Even identifying these differences isn’t easy, as some of the included polls aren’t adequately footnoted.
Points 1 & 2 are the reason why programs such as Samplemiser are superior to polls of polls as they adjust for the time of the survey and the number of respondants.
Points 3 through 6 are disputable. Most pollsters (in the US) have pretty similar screens measuring likely voters with an unweighted sample (though the original population may been screened) with pretty similar questions. There are differences, most notably between robo-polls (like Survey USA and Rasmussen) and companies with human interviewers, but they are smaller than people tend to believe.
Point 7 is wrong as most reputable companies give basic information about the date, the population and the sample size.
All in all, only ‘comparing like with like’ has its advantages. However, in an environment with polls from the same company conducted at best every fortnight and at worst once a month, you will have to use some form of poll averaging if you want to look at the day to day polling trends.
234/236. They have to be, surely, else win or lose, Ken is significantly more popular that he was in 2004, when he garnered 35.7% of the first prefs?
Does that sound right? Not to me….
I think Mike had better factor this in, pronto!
242 Yes. Unless they’re within 10,000 or so in first preferences, I expect whoever leads on first prefs. will win.
I think that Ken Livingstone, just lloked tired and clapped out! I don’t think he is as potent as he once was politically although his socialism is just as virelent.
Sorry to mention it again, but what actually will happen after the complaint(or whinge) made by Ken’s team about yougov? Will they be investigated?
241 - I think the UKIP vote could halve to about 8% most of which would either stay home or go to the Conservatives, Labour vote may shift up a little and the Lib Dems who seem to underperform in Europe comparitive to their poll ratings will probably decline somewhat from the 14% they scored last time. (In 1999 they got 12%) So I think that the Conservatives could well be at or around 40%.
244 - I think scrapping all existing nuclear weapons during the Cold War is rather different from retaining Trident for the rest of its useful life and adopting a wait and see policy.
Your “parallel” is banana shaped.
256. He’s a very old man now
260. Has he ever been investigated as a communist sympathyser or soviet agent during the cold war?
258 - There are a lot out there who want the UK to leave the EU. Whilst many of these vote Tory in a GE, the Tories will not win many of these over in an Euro election.
Some will stick with UKIP, some in urban areas may move to the BNP - but the rest won’t vote. So the Tories will not gain a huge amount of the 10% UKIP may lose - perhaps only 3%. They might gain 3% from the LDs if they are lucky. There is not a lot the Tories can gain from Labour who only got 22% last time.
40% - no.
I don’t understand the sheer dislike many on the Tory right have for Kinnock. You might not have wanted to vote for him or his policies, but is the guy deserving of such abuse. He defeated the militant tendency and for Benny to say he needs a punch in the face says more about himself.
263 - Vote share is calculated on votes cast. If a chunk of UKIP’s support simply stays at home and all other things being equal then the Conservative share would increase…
265 - “If a chunk of UKIP’s support simply stays at home and all other things being equal then the Conservative share would increase…” - yes, but by far less than it would increase by if that whole chuck had switched straight to the Tories.
253. Matthew, who do you think will win the London Mayoral election?
262. What’s to investigate? His comments from the time speak for themselves.
266 - True but all other things won’t be equal, and some votes will change UKIP to Conservative, some will change Labour to Conservative, Lib Dem to Conservative, Respects 1.5% will practically disappear and all sorts of churn. I think 40% is a realistic target to aim at, after all in 1999 the Conservatives managed nearly 36% IIRC and they were a lot less popular, and UKIP still had a sizeable vote.
251 Noisy. That’s a good Pennsylvania poll match-up for McCain against Obama. However at this early stage McCain is struggling in too many ‘Bush states’ - Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Colorado, North Dakota, Virginia, N & S Carolina and Georgia.
To take the mayoral polls at face value, you would have to believe the Other vote (ex Lab,Con,LD) have collapsed by 62%-91% since 2004.
That sounds like nonsense to me…..
269 - so how low will Labour poll if they lose votes to the Tories - and possibly the BNP too? Labour got 22% last time.
242 - That is exactly what people like Peter Hain are arguing. Indeed because he thinks AV will benefit Labour nationally, he is arguing that LibDem supporters should vote decisively for Ken on second preferences, because that will strengthen the likelihood that Gordon etc will want to go for it. Ie. it’s all about party advantage.
If Boris wins on second preferences then the whole thing’s dead in the water.
272. Excellent chance they will get below 20%. What a laugh that would be.
271 - The extent of any collapse will be determined by the turnout. Higher turnout = lower “others” vote.
271 - Rod - I agree that the share of ‘Other’ will be much higher than any of the polls predict, but is there not a degree to which it will shrink because minor parties get squeezed when there is a genuine fight for first place? I know the Mayoral second round should eradicate this reason, but I doubt it does.
What do you think ‘Other’ will actually get in the 1st round?
264 Frank Booth
Good point, Frank. I remember the days when I used to go into party meetings in the north west of England and have to pass Militant Readers who would jeer, jostle and spit. Strange because I was an old-fashioned Bevanite Socialist, still am. They seemed to hate us more than the rightists.
Now we have three Tory parties they have fewer targets. Like many of their ilk, on the so-called hard left, they never attacked Tories directly. In the district where I was a councillor they never canvassed and hardly ever contributed to elections except when one of their own was the candidate. To me they were a bunch of right wing thugs. I wonder if any of them are BNP now.
Malcolm
264 Hear,hear-Neil Kinnock dragged the Labour Party from the ultra-left abyss of 1983,facing dwon Militant.He did not receive fair tretament from many sections of the media;IMHO he should have moved faster ie ditched unilatarilism sooner,but recalling his conference speeches,he had a paternalisitic tone,of decency-I do not deny that by 1992 he had changed his position from 1983 on so many issues he was open to the charge of grubbing for votes.
One more point-the ‘Alright?’ moment.A middle-aged friend said that Kinnock should have arrived at the rally,and acclimatised to the atmosphere for half an hour or so;put yourself in the position of:
(a)Being,according to polls,9 days from being elected PM
(b)Facing a crowd of 10000 screaming,cheering,adulating fans
How would you react? I personally feel anyone,left,right,centre,with a pulse would show normal,human emotion-I know it looked bloody awful,and if you recall Kinnock himself quickly said ‘We’d better do some serious talking here’,as if acknowledging he had dropped the biggest howler of his life-BUt,if David cameron did something similar during the next election campaign,I would NOT hold it against him
272. based on national opinion polls, assuming they stay roughly where they are now, it would imply a Labour share of about 19.7%, but if UKIP implode it could be significantly higher.
Afternoon all, I said during the debate ‘get ready to sell Boris’ and the price moved during and a bit after but the poll has had a top up effect.
BF
Bojo 1.58
Smeagol* 2.74
Spin
19-20
15-20
*Wicked, tricksey, false. We ought to wring his filthy little neck. Kill him. Kill him. Kill them both, and then we take the Precious and we be the master.”
15-16, sorry.
277. Quite a few people from that group are MPs or are in other senior positions. It seems that they got what they really wanted, one way or another.
….someone’s been at the pipe-weed again….
202 - ‘Rundstedt’ would be ok, but I think the further away we stay from Nazi names the better.
In Act II, scene iv of Shakespeare’s Henry IV (part II), Falstaff attacks pretty much everybody who doesn’t agree with him as being a “rogue”, and accusing them of “roguery”.
I hereby commend to you ‘Falstaff(s)’ as the (plural) term for people who break Smithson’s Law.
275/276. In 2004, the Others got 21.3% of 1st prefs. I can’t see that halving, never mind vanishing…
Say 15%?, giving Lab+Con combined about 72%?
Something like
Con 37%
Lab 35%
285 - cheers Rod.
284 - On reflection, I wonder if ‘Falstaff’ is the singular, whether ‘Falstaves’ would be the plural?
280. Blast, I was hoping for SPIN to move slightly lower than that – to 18.5/19.5.
I’m not buying in unless it drops lower!
“I don’t understand the sheer dislike many on the Tory right have for Kinnock”
You nean like he has for us? ‘Grind the into the ba***rds dust?’
289 refers to 264
The French Presidential Election is a good example of Minor Parties support dropping dramatically.
I guess Kinnock was a bit too temperamental for voters to take. I remember hearing him ranting on the radio about the waste of the oil money etc. I’m not sure people would ever have trusted him with the nuclear button. Not a bad guy, though.
And for those who say he’s got no principles - ie Europe, House of Lords and so on. Look at it this way. He was prepared to admit his mistakes and move on. Unlike Gordon………….
291 - Though with a corresponding rise in the Third-Party vote
(oh Francis Bayrou, where are you now? If you had won, you too could have married an Italian Singer-Supermodel, whereas in fact, you ended up losing a local election in Pau)
Not going to happen for Paddick the same way, is it?!
289 hmmm, the sentence structure didn’t turn out as I’d intended
273: In fairness to Peter Hain, he’s a keen supporter of a change from FPTP from way back and has not suddenly embraced it to mess up the Tories. So am I, but as a politico I suggested he drop it from his deputy leadership manifesto since it really winds some people up - why rub it in? He declined, saying he believed in it too strongly to be willing to hide it.
As things turned out, perhaps it’s just as well he didn’t win, but he’s a lot more principled than some think.
289,294 Yeah,but we (allegedly) have freedom of sppech;although one thing I perceive is the creeping,pernicious political correctness,one thing that is turning me off the incumbent government
295 - Without expressing an opinion either way, the fact that he’s supported it “from way back” doesn’t mean he doesn’t see attractions in it for his own party
288
Long way to go yet.
I wonder if they are any more TV debates planned. Boris should not take part in any more, they serve as a platform for Paddick and Smeagol to gang up on Boris. It’s quite pathetic the way the Libdems are now campaigning for Smeagol rather than their own man.
BF latest
1.67
2.66
Smeagol was 3.25 before the debate.
285. Based on those admittedly rough assumptions, if Boris was ahead on 1st prefs by X%, Ken would have to win the 2nd prefs (assuming an effective 45% transefer rate) by Y% to overhaul him..
X……..Y
0.25….2.0
0.50….4.0
1.0…..8.0
2.0….16.0
3.0….24.0
4.0….32.0
293 - not significantly. 2002 top 3 was 52%, 2007 top 3 was 75%
(Top 2 went from 35% to 57%)
298 - I thought the LibDems wanted a by-election in Henley??
298 Yes Keep Boris hidden away from the voters before he loses himself the election .
OT: Cannvassing
For those of us at the coal face, how has the canvassing gone?? Up here in a northern town, in one of the Tories top 100 target seats (just), we are seeing an on the ground swing in the marginal wards. We are seeing numerous straight switches, direct from Labour to Conservatives, the 10p tax change has in the last few days become a talking point on the door. People are very aware of it, (if slightly confused as to what it means) with a number of switchers coming about purely because of it.
We are seeing double digit switches, and as we know local elections is about GOTV, checking the canvass sheets against the marked register doesnt look good for Labour.
Of course we will all find out in a few weeks if it was just a bit of fuss and poor canvassing….
285 - that’s thew sort of ballpark I’d go with. The idea that both Ken and Boris will get 40%+ is ludicrous. I’d be surprised if Boris got 40% of first votes (not preferences) and there is almost no chance Ken will do better than last time.
I’m surprised that YouGov hasn’t picked up more than 2% for the others as they are usually able to replicate the ballot paper. I guess it’s all about the pollsters trying to be too clever with their ‘1st vote/2nd vote’ questions. A simple - ‘here are the candidates who will you vote for?’ is much more likely to pick up peoples’ true preferences on the first vote.
292.It’s remarkable how many one-time angry critics of ‘privilege’ become firm defenders of it, once a knighthood, peerage or lucrative sinecure job is given to them.
If you are a Stop-Ken or else a Stop-Boris voter, is there much risk in putting Paddick first and then your other preference between Ken and Boris second choice? The likelihood is that Paddick fails to get into the final round so your vote goes to your prefered candidate of the obvious two anyway.
Assume the Mori poll is accurate for a moment and that Paddick’s 2nd preferences split 50/50 to the other 2 candidates while their 2nd preferences split 66/33 in his favour then the outcome becomes
First round Ken 41%, Boris 40%, Paddick 14%
Second round Ken 47%, Boris 47%. Decided by others’ second preferences.
But say 1/4 of Ken(Stop-Boris) and 1/4 Boris(Stop-Ken) supporters decided to put Paddick on the ballot first, then the result becomes
First round Ken 30.75%, Boris 30%, Paddick 34.25%
Second round Ken 40.75% Paddick 51%.
If in the run up to the vote the public decide that they want neither of the front two, is the above scenario remotely possible?
295. Pity he wasnt quite as diligent when filling in his declarations and donations for his leadership campaign.
306 - No because it’s a complete myth that Paddick would win if he only had the chance.
A bit late due to work/family stuff. But Boris hadn’t done his homework last night. Very weak, just an amateurish rhetoric machine IMO.
He deserves to lose if that is his level of engagement with the issues.
Ken was surprisingly good!
Latest Rasmussen Presidential and Primary Trackers :
McCain 47% .. Clinton 44%
McCain 45% .. Obama 46%
Clinton 41% .. Obama 50%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
277
Can you name some of the Militant Tendancy who are MPs? I’m not being unpleasant, I really would like to know. I do know one who accepted a knighthood but never became an MP.
Malcolm
My mum knows one of the checkout ladies at asda, and I popped in last night on the way home to pick up some stuff. She asked me what the 10% abolition would mean. I told her what I could and she just went off on a rant about it. Then the lady in the queue behind me started off as well, as did the next checkout along. It was rather surreal, usually large scale whinging about the government doesn’t happen like that anymore. All of them seemed very unhappy with the government, a few said they’d give DC a go, but most were just whinging.
303 gaz “how has the canvassing gone”
Compared to 2007 the “true blue” vote looks firmer with signs that the Dacre/Heffer sniping has failed. Labour supporters have almost disappeared and I have found some very determined angry voters that “want to kick Labour/Brown out”. LD support also down about 1/5th.
If Labour MPs find the same then next month it could get awkward for Brown.
306 - Mathematically, yes. Practically, no. I would be surprised if more than 1% of the electorate tactically altered their first choice in such a fashion.
This of course ties in to Rod’s stuff about Condorcet winners etc. - IMO it’s very easy for Lib Dems to be Condorcet winners in the context of an actual system where people know they can’t win…
312. follow on. slowed the queues up no end, but no-one seemed to be that bothered. Brown got called a wide array of colourful names too.
What is happening with polls of states currently holding primaries is the ‘bad loser’ effect. As Clinton is seen to be losing the race nationally those who support her want to make it appear that this is ‘a bad thing’, they are therefore claiming that they will not vote Democrat in far greater numbers than her opponent’s supporters.
As the presumptive nominee Obama supporters have little need to attempt this.
When the primary moves away from the state you will see the results becoming much more trustworthy.
315 - Brown is a colourful name.
295 “As things turned out, perhaps it’s just as well he didn’t win, but he’s a lot more principled than some think.”
This is a comment about Peter Hain, possibly the most corrupt, cowardly and disgraceful politicians of modern times.
A man who happily took the job of his principled boss (robin cook), voted for the war, voted against an inquiry into the war, then pronouced he thought his government (and g bush policies re iraq) were unhinged simply to try and become the deputy leader of the labour party is a moral disgrace.
This is why Labour will be wiped out at the next election - when supposedly ‘decent’ people like Nick Palmer can rationalise the criminal and disgusting behaviour of w@nkers like Hain then the game is up.
Mike Smithson,
you got a namecheck on the Guardian website.
Other verdicts
For more discussion on the debate try Mike Smithson at politicalbetting, who thought Ken did well, LabourHome, where - not surprisingly - Ken also gets good reviews, Liberal Democrat Voice, where there is some criticism of Livingstone, or Iain Dale, who thought it was an appalling advertisement for the mayoral election.
299. On effective 2nd prefs Ken beat the Tory by 4% in 2000, and by 7% in 2004, so that would imply (assuming a similar pattern), anything up to about a 1% Tory lead on 1st prefs could be overturned by Ken.
123 Could this be the same Malcom who posted this yesterday ?
“As for the childish nonsense currently being spouted here, I feel it has very little or nothing to do with betting; I feel awfully sorry for Mike as his site is being taken over by political zealots. As someone who has no time for all of our mainstream parties and the attempt to turn their sad leadership into an ugly person celebrity culture I am feeling that I don’t want to read 90%+ of the sickly rubbish written here.
Perhaps they will stop obsessing after May 1st, but I doubt it. We’ll see. When we get back to odds and chances I’ll look in and attempt to contribute.More in sorrow than in anger.”
311 As I recall Malcolm there were only three MPs who were open about Militant “membership” - Pat Wall (Bradford), Dave Nellist (Coventry) and Terry Fields (Liverpool Broadgreen).
Obviously there were many other Labour MPs who sympathised with the Militant Liverpool councillors, such as Eric Heffer, Tony Benn, Bob Parry, Jeremy Corbyn etc
Going back to the GE polls, Anthony has reported that Comres have changed their methodology recently and have gone from weighting that was generous to the Tories to excatly the opposite. Its’s difficult therefore to look to them, even a trend. All we can say is that the last poll with ‘unfavourable’ maths saw them with a 7 point lead.
253.
My internal handicapping sheet suggests that Boris Johson has a 55% chance of winning. There is some value in betting on Ken but not that much.
I meant ‘Boris Johnson’ of course. In any case both candidates have run poor campaigns.
322 - As someone involved in the LPYS at the time those are the three names that I remember, I believe Terry Field spoke at the conference I attended, not sure about Nellist.
320 - the key words there are “assuming a similar pattern”. That’s simply dangerous in the current context and indeed polls point the other way.
Until last night I had a very high opinion of Paddick - but he was dreadful. Obviously his thoughts come across better on paper than in person, as the things he said whilst in the Met were always pretty much spot on.
Boris was also truly awful - can people really want this guy to run London? He couldn’t run his nose!
Ken was far and away the most reasonable and sensible person on the show, but allowed himself to descend to Boris’ level a little too often, with the talking over each other and false exasperated reactions.
Paxo should have held a more respectable debate too - he tried hard to get some ‘killer’ points in, but should have kept better control.
I think people will say they’ll vote for BoJo because he’s the opposition, but as another poster suggested, it’s 1992 and kinnock again! Maybe…
327. I agree. It was meant as a caveat, not a prediction…
However, Ken must have something of a head start with the Green pact (again, assuming it delivers.)
Cuddles, this sort of complaining about the government has gone on ever since there have been governments.
in this case it is fairly impotent as the party most likely to support these people is already in power.
329. really? I thought labour had abandoned any pretence at being the working class party years back.
New thread - The MORI detail: Has Ken benefited from the rounding?
If no other reason NuLabour will get a “pasting” at the council elections when this IMF warning makes the popular press.
IMF slashes world growth forecast
Analysts forecast the US will briefly go into recession
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has said that the world economy will grow much more slowly in the next two years as a result of the credit crunch.
In its latest economic forecast, the IMF says that world economic growth will slow to 3.7% in 2008 and 2009, 1.25% lower than growth in 2007.
The downturn will be led by the US, which the IMF believes will go into a “mild recession” this year.
Growth in the UK will slow sharply to 1.6% in both 2008 and 2009.
It said that the UK economy would be affected by a weakening housing market, the contraction of the financial sector, and the impact on UK exports of weaker growth in the US and Europe.
Its UK forecast is substantially below the Treasury forecast of around 2% growth this year and 2.5% next year made at the time of the March Budget.
322 - While Tony Benn and Militant were allies on occasion, they weren’t firmly tied by any means. Militant regarded him as a relative right-winger who might be useful, up to a point, and then be discarded (hence the fact that some of them referred to him as “Kerensky”).
Upthread, questions have been asked about canvassing. My experience (wearing an orange badge in two LD/Lab marginal wards in the South East) is as follows:-
Distinct anti-Labour sentiment in evidence. Their core vote is solid, but those we canvassed as “Soft Lab” last year are easily swayed. I found one straight Lab to Tory switcher, though, even though the Blue cause is hopeless in that particular Ward.
Quite a lot of anti Labour feeling. This is redressed in one Ward by a fairly good Councillor up for re-election, but he will struggle to overcome the national sentiment. The level of political ignorance amongst the electorate is, as usual, staggering - we have to remind people constantly that the seats are marginal, and that there really is some purpose in voting this time. Squeezing the Greens and Tories will be easier than usual for us this time, and I think we will do it. Outside my own little patch, though, I have no idea, although there are rumours of herds of Tory canvassers roaming the streets in places.
155. Ian Hislop said Boris was the most popular choice to take over from Angus, to the general agreement of the room. Still, there is a difference between being mayor and a quizz show host.
332 - Having to read the report for my job and being just a few pages in it makes rather depressing reading and points to further issues that could emerge.
330. i didn’t say that they were particularly likely to support these people, just more so than the other options.
“….after the Newsnight debate I closed almost all my Boris positions down on IG, SI, Spreadfair and Betfair - at a profit. I did not find Boris convincing whereas I thought that Ken did well.”
I couldn’t agree more - Boris seemed hopelessly ill-prepared and just couldn’t cope with Paxo’s grilling on the costing of his proposals for replacement Routemaster buses - frankly it was embarrassing.
I’m following you Mike, I’m out. Talk about clutching defeat from the jaws of victory.
92: If I’d been Cameron, I’d have made this guy offers he couldn’t have refused to run, perfect profile for a London Tory, he’d have walked it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope
According to that article, Chope pioneered the council house sell-off. If the Tories had put him up for Mayor of London, he’d have been toast on the strength of that alone. Add to that, he’s a barrister, a devout Christian and a supporter of the death penalty: he’d have done even worse than Norris. He’d probably be a good candidate for Kent, but anywhere inside the M25 and he just isn’t electable.
I was under the impression that council house sales were popular. Nor do I think that barristers Christians, or the death penalty are necessarily unpopular.
214. Am I right in thinking that landslides only occur when the people who do not normally vote are forced to through intense hatred or optimism for a party? ….
…Was the turnout in 1997 a lot higher than the elections before?
On the contrary: the % turnout in the 1997 general election was the lowest since 1935.
I heard on the radio that the figures from the opinion poll were in fact
Livingstone 41%
Johnson 40%
Paddick 14%
Berry 5%
which means that it is inherently flawed and unreliable because (a) it allows for 0% for all others, suggesting that only those 4 were given as options, (b) it has the top two on more than 40% each, which is hardly credible in light of previous results.