Poll: General election voting round 5 (final one)

Voting intentions in the General Election?

  • Alliance Party of Northern Ireland

    Votes: 3 0.3%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 403 42.2%

  • Democratic Unionist Party

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 59 6.2%

  • Labour

    Votes: 176 18.4%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 67 7.0%

  • Not voting/will spoil ballot

    Votes: 42 4.4%

  • Other party (not named)

    Votes: 8 0.8%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Respect Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Scottish National Party

    Votes: 37 3.9%

  • Social Democratic and Labour Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • UKIP

    Votes: 154 16.1%
  • Total voters
    956
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Freddie1980 said:
He has actually, last Sunday he issued a press statement clearing stating there would be no deal between Labour and the SNP. I wouldn't worry if your in favour of a pact as I made a comment to my Dad, 'Yes I'm sure that will remain a promise for all of 5 minutes when the SNP dangle the keys to number 10 in front of Ed's face.'
Click to expand...

I think your misumderatand, Labour don't even need a deal, they just need snp to vote no for a tory government, which they will
 
jimjamuk said:
but my point still stands Ok maybe it has caused reduce growth - but our plan has still cause more growth than anyone else and the austerity has cut into the deficit. I guess you could say one is inversely proportional to the other as one goes up the other goes down. The proportion we seem to have taken seems pretty good - yes we could have had a bit more growth maybe but at the expense of reducing our borrowing rate, and eberyone knows what you borrow you have to pay back with interest
Click to expand...

Actually depending on the measure, many countries have recovered far more strongly than ours. Have a look at some charts for yourself comparing GDP per capita (ironically one of measures Gideon has used recently to show how well we're doing :rolleyes:)

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-per-capita
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-per-capita
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/gdp-per-capita
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/gdp-per-capita
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-per-capita
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/france/gdp-per-capita

Notice that many countries took a dive in 2008-09 and bounced back to levels in excess of earlier peaks? France is a bit worse, but better than the UK, which has sat stubbornly at around 2007 levels. (I'd hazard that much of our GDP growth is a result of immigration, so you don't see it when dividing by population.)

Also you're right that borrowing accrues interest, but if you hadn't noticed, interest rates have been at record lows (even negative) for several years now. It would have been "free" for the government to borrow money to invest in the country, stimulating the economy, but instead they've been cutting!

The only explanation I can find is that the Conservatives hate public services and used the recession as a fortuitous opportunity to cut them.
 
ubersonic said:
In all honesty I would expect him to turn his back on said keys, accepting them would guarantee he was voted out in 2020 and cause his party potentially irreparable damage south of the boarder. Refusing them would put him in an even stronger position in the 2020 election and five more years of Cameron would reduce the Torys standing further.
Click to expand...



That would require either Labour or SNP voting yes to a Tory led government. How likely do you think either of those parties will publicly vote to let the Tories run the country? That would be a monumental PR disaster, I can see the headlines now "Even labour think the Conservatives should run the country".


The Reality Labour don't even have to say a word to each other, both will vote no to a proposed Tory government at the Queens Speech, and eave things wide open for Labour to walk in to #10.
 
Moses said:
Not necessarily. It could survive if the SNP were allowed to do pretty much what they want in Scotland in exchange for pretty much not interfering in rUK. It would work for both, given the SNP could play it to their electorate as 'you chose us over Labour, who then refused to go into a coalition with us... but by choosing the SNP, you're now getting our policies'. I'm not saying that's likely, but I wouldn't rule it out. There would have to be changes to how funding is affected in Scotland by changes to funding in England in certain areas, but that's not an insurmountable task.

You will say that wouldn't go down entirely well, but neither would 'vote SNP, get Ed Miliband... and no one in government'/potentially less positive change for Scotland than under a Tory government which lets the SNP do what it wants.



I'm really not sure you can say that with such certainty. Unless you know what's going on inside the top level meetings of the SNP and Tory party. See the rest of this post.
Click to expand...


So you think their will be a Tory SNP coalition? seems unlikely to me.
 
They could also get all of that out of Labour without being seen to co-operate with a party that the majority of Scots hate and that the SNP leader has already ruled out working with.
 
Moses said:
They don't have to vote yes. They just have to abstain. And it's not an impossible thing to spin from the SNP's perspective, if they get a lot of power out of it/significantly closer to devo-max, with English votes for English laws on the other side. 'England voted Tory, Scotland voted SNP. But now we're getting the powers we want in Scotland and the English are getting what they want in England'*. Even the most rabid SNP nationalist could see that's actually not so bad.
Click to expand...

That's quite plausible actually. And they'd get to tank the Tories EU referendum aspirations too so that could work for both parties.
 
D.P. said:
The SNP and DUP poll nationally less than the greens and UKIP, which is why they later 2 appear in polls of polls.
Click to expand...

Polling nationally is a poor way of prediction. getting 50000 people in one constituency to vote for you will give you one seat whereas 50000 over 600+ seats gets you nothing. Adding the greens and ukip who will gets a max of 4 but probably less seats while ignoring the DUP and SNP who will get 50-60 seats between them does not make sense.
 
Moses said:
Not necessarily. It could survive if the SNP were allowed to do pretty much what they want in Scotland in exchange for pretty much not interfering in rUK. It would work for both, given the SNP could play it to their electorate as 'you chose us over Labour, who then refused to go into a coalition with us... but by choosing the SNP, you're now getting our policies'. I'm not saying that's likely, but I wouldn't rule it out. There would have to be changes to how funding is affected in Scotland by changes to funding in England in certain areas, but that's not an insurmountable task.

You will say that wouldn't go down entirely well, but neither would 'vote SNP, get Ed Miliband... and no one in government'/potentially less positive change for Scotland than under a Tory government which lets the SNP do what it wants.

I'm really not sure you can say that with such certainty. Unless you know what's going on inside the top level meetings of the SNP and Tory party. See the rest of this post.
Click to expand...

No, any pact/agreement with the Tories is electoral suicide for the SNP no matter how they try to dress it up. Another reason against it is the next Scottish Parliament election is 2016.
 
I'm predicting a Belgium-style scenario where there's no official government for two years while everyone fights for control. :p
 
Moses said:
a) does the average voter have any idea about constituency polling?
b) wouldn't it similarly motivate the cba Lib Dem vote/the Tory vote to consider tactical voting/etc?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the knowledge that he's behind will spread throughout the constituency, my eldests college are doing a mock election with all parties represented except UKip and libdem because all the students refused to represent those two.
 
Moses said:
Which is a smaller gap than before. And Ashcroft polling doesn't give the names. And the Lib Dem canvas polling is looking favourable (so they say, so that comes avec salt :p).
Click to expand...

Private party polling has a terrible record since they selectively release the information. How accurate the Ashcroft polling will prove to be remains to be seen but it is well conducted and has a good sample size. It uses the proven dual question method to illicit local response, my hunch is that the named candidate dual question approach overstates local support but we'll have to wait and see.

A lot of the model based predictions are putting great store by Ashcroft so if his method turns out to be flawed the result could be a long way from where it is predicted to fall. I guess we'll know soon enough :)
 
Moses said:
A special needs college, presumably? Or just one with terrible, biased citizenship programme?
Click to expand...

Neither actually, while 16 year olds may not be as sophisticated as yourself their thoughts are indicative of clogs prospects and denial of this fact will only make you look like a drooling special needs chap with a gay on for Nick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom