Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,199
|
YouGov
Jun 30, 2022 12:27:41 GMT
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 30, 2022 12:27:41 GMT
A rapid correction. We've seen this before, an outlier swiftly followed by a new poll from the same company safely within "normal" boundaries.
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Jul 2, 2022 7:53:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jul 2, 2022 8:28:46 GMT
They have included tacticsl voting explicitly in the MRP here. How exactly they have done it (based to a variable extent on recent by-elections, they say) is not clear. By elections clearly overestimate GE tactical voting. But you could look at the Labour and Green vote shifts from 2017 to 2019 in demographically comparable no hope seats for Labour where the Lib Dems started second and campaigned hard, and where they started third and did not campaign much
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Jul 2, 2022 9:53:23 GMT
I was looking for recent Conservative-Lib Dem battleground polling this week and came up short. I note their model has 11 additional seats within 5 points of flipping to the Lib Dems (and 7 the other way). Also this is before any campaigning, which could further benefit the Lib Dems. Of course, there’s the usual comments about MRP projections.
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jul 2, 2022 11:08:39 GMT
The 24 Lib Dem gains are: Cheltenham Winchester Eastbourne Esher and Walton St Ives Guildford Hazel Grove South Cambridgeshire Lewes Taunton Deane Wimbledon South West Surrey Woking Carshalton and Wallington Wells Cheadle Wokingham Hitchin and Harpenden Chippenham Harrogate and Knaresborough Thornbury and Yate Mole Valley North Cornwall North Devon
The two Labour gains: Cities of London and Westminster Kensington
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jul 2, 2022 13:11:55 GMT
I'll believe Jeremy Hunt losing SW Surrey when I see it. Or the Tories losing Mole Valley.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 19:57:25 GMT
Post by graham on Jul 2, 2022 19:57:25 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses.
Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 20:07:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by Merseymike on Jul 2, 2022 20:07:13 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. There may be some seats both Labour and the LibDems contest seriously. Sheffield Hallam, perhaps. Maybe Cambridge. As Labour hold both it's likely to stay that way. For this seat, if both Labour and the LibDems contest it seriously then the likely outcome will be a Conservative hold.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jul 2, 2022 20:12:35 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. There may be some seats both Labour and the LibDems contest seriously. Sheffield Hallam, perhaps. Maybe Cambridge. As Labour hold both it's likely to stay that way. For this seat, if both Labour and the LibDems contest it seriously then the likely outcome will be a Conservative hold. That does not follow if the Tories are on 28% - 30%. . It effectively becomes a 3way contest and the parties simply fight it out.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,783
|
Post by iain on Jul 2, 2022 20:15:17 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. No matter what you hope for, Labour aren’t going to win Wimbledon. Sorry.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 20:51:02 GMT
Post by graham on Jul 2, 2022 20:51:02 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. No matter what you hope for, Labour aren’t going to win Wimbledon. Sorry. That may be true - but I don't doubt you would have said something similar in 1997.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 2, 2022 20:52:57 GMT
No matter what you hope for, Labour aren’t going to win Wimbledon. Sorry. That may be true - but I don't doubt you would have said something similar in 1997. But this is certainly not 1997
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Jul 2, 2022 20:56:23 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. Not really clear why you think Wokingham and Woking are specifically unlikely - they are numbers 16 and 22 on the list of English Con facing LD targets, requiring 6% and 9% swings respectively. Neither have demonstrated any particular unexpected Conservative resilience at local level in the last couple of years.
Of course it's quite reasonable to suggest MRPs as a whole might be less than helpful, or that the distance to any GE means that the actual outcome would be very different to this. But I don't see why either of those two would be specific evidence of those.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 21:01:22 GMT
Post by graham on Jul 2, 2022 21:01:22 GMT
That may be true - but I don't doubt you would have said something similar in 1997. But this is certainly not 1997 Indeed - though Labour polled nearly 36% there in 2017!
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Jul 2, 2022 21:03:10 GMT
No matter what you hope for, Labour aren’t going to win Wimbledon. Sorry. That may be true - but I don't doubt you would have said something similar in 1997. I think it is fair to say that the reason someone might have thought Labour wouldn't win Wimbledon in 1997 would have been rather different to the reason they might think they won't win today.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 21:06:02 GMT
Post by batman on Jul 2, 2022 21:06:02 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. There may be some seats both Labour and the LibDems contest seriously. Sheffield Hallam, perhaps. Maybe Cambridge. As Labour hold both it's likely to stay that way. For this seat, if both Labour and the LibDems contest it seriously then the likely outcome will be a Conservative hold. I tend to think that the Lib Dems would take Wimbledon even in the event that Labour seriously contested it. You are right about Sheffield Hallam & Cambridge, and perhaps Bermondsey & Old Southwark is another although it's hard to see a Lib Dem gaining it now that Simon Hughes is off the scene
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jul 2, 2022 21:08:28 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. No matter what you hope for, Labour aren’t going to win Wimbledon. Sorry. Graham has a bee in his bonnet about Wimbledon which has been flying around in his bonnet for quite some time & hasn't flown away yet. We (Labour) had our chance & blew it in the 2018 local elections, for a number of reasons - but we blew it.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 21:13:46 GMT
Post by graham on Jul 2, 2022 21:13:46 GMT
Wokingham and Woking also strike me as unlikely Tory losses. Thw Wimbledon data is quite interesting. The MRP poll comes up with LD 39 Con 28 Lab 24 - though that is after making assumptions re- Labour voters being willing to vote tactically. It imples that the underlying LD vote share is lower than 39% and that Labour is above 24% - maybe LD 36 and Lab 27. That is far too high a vote share for Labour to simply concede the seat. Not really clear why you think Wokingham and Woking are specifically unlikely - they are numbers 16 and 22 on the list of English Con facing LD targets, requiring 6% and 9% swings respectively. Neither have demonstrated any particular unexpected Conservative resilience at local level in the last couple of years.
Of course it's quite reasonable to suggest MRPs as a whole might be less than helpful, or that the distance to any GE means that the actual outcome would be very different to this. But I don't see why either of those two would be specific evidence of those.
The Tories have never come close to losing those seats. Moreover, re- Wokingham in 2019 the LDs are likely to have benefitted from having a Tory defector as their candidate.
|
|
|
YouGov
Jul 2, 2022 21:19:50 GMT
Post by graham on Jul 2, 2022 21:19:50 GMT
No matter what you hope for, Labour aren’t going to win Wimbledon. Sorry. Graham has a bee in his bonnet about Wimbledon which has been flying around in his bonnet for quite some time & hasn't flown away yet. We (Labour) had our chance & blew it in the 2018 local elections, for a number of reasons - but we blew it. I simply don't believe that local election results transfer that directly to a parliamentary election - certainly not a GE.
This reminds me somewhat of Stevenage back in the 1980s. The Alliance with Ben Stoneham as their candidate came close to winning in 1983 - and retained second place in 1987. Despite that Labour went on to win convincingly in 1997.
The Alliance was second in Wimbledon in both 1983 and 1987 - yet Labour won in 1997 and 2001.
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Jul 2, 2022 21:39:01 GMT
The Wokingham and Woking question is the converse of the Workington and Sedgefield question. With Brexit becoming, in theory, less of an issue, will the move away from one party and towards another slow down or reverse, or was it part of a long term realignment which will continue.
The 2019 Tory coalition of votes looks hard for them to sustain. It was built on holding enough support in the wealthy Remainy South East whilst simultaneously gaining enough support in Brexity small town Northern England. If they are very unlucky and/ or bad they could lose out on both fronts, which is certainly a possibility. Other possibilities are that something happens eg replacing Johnson as leader, where they then do relatively badly in the North and lose all the small towns back to Labour ,but comfortably hold or even improve their position in Woking and Wokingham, or that they stick with Johnson and they do relatively well at holding the Northern 2019 gains but do really badly against the Lib Dems in the South
I would say that all 3 of those are at least reasonably possible.
|
|