butchersapron
Bring back hanging
We'll see soon.I expect so.Presumably this had named candidate methodology?
We'll see soon.I expect so.Presumably this had named candidate methodology?
Was only a week ago, or so, that someone was criticising the pollsters of 'herding' based on that Nate Silver shite.they're all over the place. 4 Labour (smallish) leads, five now; four Tory (bigger ones) but ComRes haven't had a Labour lead all year, have dropped online polls now apparently, which mostly show Labour leads (consistent Tory leads by different pollsters are all phone polls)
also UKIP has been between 12 and 18% today..!? Survation had Tories ahead of Labour in North of England?!....many thinking Labour 29% with Tories down and Libdems up could be Red Libs going back, maybe tactically and regionally south-west.
and survation now have Farage up by 9% over Tories in South Thanet..
didn't Guardian have them third two days ago?
Seems to have been named.We'll see soon.I expect so.
Yeah, unlike that 'neck and neck' one from last week.Seems to have been named.
Looking at reactions on social media there are lots of people getting excited or dismayed by getting two Conservative four point leads in short succession. There is always a temptation to look for movement in the random variation of polls (especially when there has been so little genuine movement to get excited over!). However, there are four polls today – two Conservative leads, two Labour leads. The time to pay attention would be when the balance of the polls consistently starts showed one party or the other ahead, right now they still seem pretty evenly balanced.
Sorry that's utter nonsense, it doesn't even make any sense.The polls cannot be an accurate prediction of the election because they are based on proportional representation and the real elections are fptp.
Is there any political subject about which you don't not know anything?The polls cannot be an accurate prediction of the election because they are based on proportional representation and the real elections are fptp. My guess is that we end up with another hung parliament. Someone asked me yesterday what the politicians would do if nobody voted for anyone as a protest. The idea appeals to me. The idea that is of there being no government at all. Is it too late to organise a complete boycott of the General Election?
I know nothing, I am from Barcelona.Is there any political subject about which you don't not know anything?
In Bristol North West, Charlotte Leslie is well ahead in the seat she won for the Conservatives in 2010 in a three-way fight with the Liberal Democrats. Elsewhere in the city, the Green Party has been heavily targeting Bristol West, a seat the Lib Dems won in 2010 with a 20-point majority over Labour. I found the Greens in second place with a 25% vote share, with more voters attracted from the Lib Dems than from any other party. This, combined with the fact nearly three in ten 2010 Lib Dems have switched straight to Labour, would be enough for Labour to take the seat with a swing of 19% if the result were repeated on 7 May.
racistI know nothing, I am from Barcelona.
I really don't think you have.
For clarity, what exactly do you disagree with here?
If no party secures a majority, an alliance of more than 322 MPs could probably survive a confidence vote
wonder how far back you'd have to go to find Lab just 9% ahead of the vermin?
Well, I'm sticking by 321 tbh, but clearly the Guardian think 323 is required to "secure a majority". I think I'll try to ask them how they've got to that figure, because if my assumptions about SF and 'Denison's rule' applying to all 4 speakers/deputies are correct, then 321 would suffice. This sort of stuff could become very important."More than 322" = at least 323, right?
nowt new. Lots of Labourites working their arses off - an endorsement from a former Tory candidate, Coppard refusing to turn up to a Save the NHS demo, but popping along at the end for a bit of canvassing.Latest on Sheffield Hallam? Anyone?