ICM

[Andrew_S]

Relatively good poll for Labour.

[Vibe]

Nov 4, 2019 17:43:23 GMT Andrew_S said:

Relatively good poll for Labour.

Far better for the Conservatives.

[Deleted]

Nov 4, 2019 17:51:47 GMT Vibe said:

Nov 4, 2019 17:43:23 GMT Andrew_S said:

Relatively good poll for Labour.

Far better for the Conservatives.

really? Its the smallest lead so far and their share is pretty middle of the road

[Vibe]

Nov 4, 2019 17:58:33 GMT @priceofdawn said:

Nov 4, 2019 17:51:47 GMT Vibe said:

Far better for the Conservatives.

really? Its the smallest lead so far and their share is pretty middle of the road

You have to compare it to the previous poll from the same company.
Comparing it to other companies, is like comparing apples and pears.

It is a good poll for the Conservatives as they have increased their lead over the LD's by 4 points - as well as a point over Labour. And still would likely give the Conservatives as a healthy majority.

[justin124]

A Labour share of 31% matches what the party achieved under Ed Milliband in 2015. It represents a 2.3% swing to the Tories from 2017 which would result in 23 Tory gains offset by 10 losses to LDs and 8 to SNP to leave them with 323 seats - ie borderline Hung Parliament territory.

[Vibe]

Nov 4, 2019 18:12:25 GMT justin124 said:

A Labour share of 31% matches what the party achieved under Ed Milliband in 2015. It represents a 2.3% swing to the Tories from 2017 which would result in 23 Tory gains offset by 10 losses to LDs and 8 to SNP to leave them with 323 seats - ie borderline Hung Parliament territory.

Not sure I agree they wouldn't achieve a majority. Even so, it would weaken Labour - maybe down 30 seats.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

The general run of campaigns is that the party in the lead loses vote share during the campaign (though there are plenty of exceptions).

[justin124]

Nov 4, 2019 18:21:43 GMT Vibe said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:12:25 GMT justin124 said:

A Labour share of 31% matches what the party achieved under Ed Milliband in 2015. It represents a 2.3% swing to the Tories from 2017 which would result in 23 Tory gains offset by 10 losses to LDs and 8 to SNP to leave them with 323 seats - ie borderline Hung Parliament territory.

Not sure I agree they wouldn't achieve a majority. Even so, it would weaken Labour - maybe down 30 seats.

A 7% lead in 2010 left Cameron some way off a majority.
In 2017 we did not see Tory leads as small as this until approx. 2 weeks from Polling Day.

[Vibe]

Nov 4, 2019 18:30:06 GMT justin124 said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:21:43 GMT Vibe said:

Not sure I agree they wouldn't achieve a majority. Even so, it would weaken Labour - maybe down 30 seats.

A 7% lead in 2010 left Cameron some way off a majority.
In 2017 we did not see Tory leads as small as this until approx. 2 weeks from Polling Day.

But the LD's were far stronger in 2010 and the the LD's adversely affect the Conservatives far more than Labour.

Agreed in your second part - there is a long way to go and that lead could drop fast.


We don't know how this would all play on a constituency level. LD's may over perform in marginals; Farage could stop Boris winning a lot of seats in the Midlands and North.
So yeah, even 7 points may leave us in a similar position as today!

[curiousliberal]

Nov 4, 2019 18:21:43 GMT Vibe said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:12:25 GMT justin124 said:

A Labour share of 31% matches what the party achieved under Ed Milliband in 2015. It represents a 2.3% swing to the Tories from 2017 which would result in 23 Tory gains offset by 10 losses to LDs and 8 to SNP to leave them with 323 seats - ie borderline Hung Parliament territory.

Not sure I agree they wouldn't achieve a majority. Even so, it would weaken Labour - maybe down 30 seats.

322 votes counting 1 who will becoming a deputy speaker and assuming they get Buckingham. Let's say it's a terrible night for the Shinners, so the UUP takes F&ST and the SDLP takes Foyle and South Down. In this scenario, the Parliament is technically hung, and the Tories have a working majority of 1.

Would Corbyn resign? Could we also face the scenario where MPs prepared to compromise on the deal almost make up a plurality in the House, but ultimately give less support than MPs in the previous parliament would have been prepared to give by its end?

[justin124]

Nov 4, 2019 18:43:32 GMT curiousliberal said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:21:43 GMT Vibe said:

Not sure I agree they wouldn't achieve a majority. Even so, it would weaken Labour - maybe down 30 seats.

322 votes counting 1 who will becoming a deputy speaker and assuming they get Buckingham. Let's say it's a terrible night for the Shinners, so the UUP takes F&ST and the SDLP takes Foyle and South Down. In this scenario, the Parliament is technically hung, and the Tories have a working majority of 1.

Would Corbyn resign? Could we also face the scenario where MPs prepared to compromise on the deal almost make up a plurality in the House, but ultimately give less support than MPs in the previous parliament would have been prepared to give by its end?

Such a scenario would be little different to what we have now! I suspect that the DUP will not return with more than 8 MPS and apparently the SDLP is likely to have 1.The DUP presumably would be less inclined to enter any arrangement with Johnson and residual pro Remain Tory rebels might feel more emboldened post election.

[curiousliberal]

Nov 4, 2019 18:59:41 GMT justin124 said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:43:32 GMT curiousliberal said:

322 votes counting 1 who will becoming a deputy speaker and assuming they get Buckingham. Let's say it's a terrible night for the Shinners, so the UUP takes F&ST and the SDLP takes Foyle and South Down. In this scenario, the Parliament is technically hung, and the Tories have a working majority of 1.

Would Corbyn resign? Could we also face the scenario where MPs prepared to compromise on the deal almost make up a plurality in the House, but ultimately give less support than MPs in the previous parliament would have been prepared to give by its end?

Such a scenario would be little different to what we have now! I suspect that the DUP will not return with more than 8 MPS and apparently the SDLP is likely to have 1.The DUP presumably would be less inclined to enter any arrangement with Johnson and residual pro Remain Tory rebels might feel more emboldened post election.

Why would they be less inclined if he offered what May did? They get paid to prop him up and vote down his deal. It's free money, which is DUP orthodoxy.

[justin124]

Nov 4, 2019 19:01:00 GMT curiousliberal said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:59:41 GMT justin124 said:

Such a scenario would be little different to what we have now! I suspect that the DUP will not return with more than 8 MPS and apparently the SDLP is likely to have 1.The DUP presumably would be less inclined to enter any arrangement with Johnson and residual pro Remain Tory rebels might feel more emboldened post election.

Why would they be less inclined if he offered what May did? They get paid to prop him up and vote down his deal. It's free money, which is DUP orthodoxy.

Johnson would find it difficult to proceed with Brexit on such figures. Some Tory Remainers would reassert themselves. The DUP would oppose. Labour Leavers will have retired or been silenced.

[curiousliberal]

Nov 4, 2019 19:08:21 GMT justin124 said:

Nov 4, 2019 19:01:00 GMT curiousliberal said:

Why would they be less inclined if he offered what May did? They get paid to prop him up and vote down his deal. It's free money, which is DUP orthodoxy.

Johnson would find it difficult to proceed with Brexit on such figures. Some Tory Remainers would reassert themselves. The DUP would oppose. Labour Leavers will have retired or been silenced.

The deadlock might finally provide some incentive for compromise, with fresh faces aware of what might happen if they collectively refused to work together.

[Khunanup]

It's worth stating the elephant in the room here, Labour have already done a campaign launch (indeed they couldn't have done it any earlier) and broadcasting regs have not yet kicked in. If these are the kind of numbers in two weeks time then we could well be looking at at 2017 style squeeze (but unlikely to be quite as severe) but Johnson and Corbyn have got an awful lot of bear traps to negotiate when they get properly scrutinised and when there's a right of reply for everyone else on whatever they do or say.

Our electorate is extremely volatile, to take the current picture as being a permanent one as per the campaign is potentially very foolish.

[Deleted]

Nov 4, 2019 18:02:49 GMT Vibe said:

Nov 4, 2019 17:58:33 GMT @priceofdawn said:

really? Its the smallest lead so far and their share is pretty middle of the road

You have to compare it to the previous poll from the same company.
Comparing it to other companies, is like comparing apples and pears.

It is a good poll for the Conservatives as they have increased their lead over the LD's by 4 points - as well as a point over Labour. And still would likely give the Conservatives as a healthy majority.

there are polls with healthier majorities and larger swings to the tories compared to the previous poll

[Vibe]

Nov 4, 2019 20:44:12 GMT @priceofdawn said:

Nov 4, 2019 18:02:49 GMT Vibe said:

You have to compare it to the previous poll from the same company.
Comparing it to other companies, is like comparing apples and pears.

It is a good poll for the Conservatives as they have increased their lead over the LD's by 4 points - as well as a point over Labour. And still would likely give the Conservatives as a healthy majority.

there are polls with healthier majorities and larger swings to the tories compared to the previous poll

There are(and ones with swings to Labour), but that wasn't the point.

[Deleted]

[casualobserver]

In the dozen or more published ICM polls since the 2017 GE, this is the biggest Conservative lead they've reported.

Since the Euro elections, only two polls have given Labour a share of the vote above 30% - both polls were by ICM

[Andrew_S]