Very interesting debate. I feel that local elections whilst providing a yardstick are not always indicative of a General election.
In local elections it is about voting for your voice in local affairs and the day to day things that affect you, in effect you vote for the individual you feel can best represent you in local matters rather than a specific manifesto or set of ideals.
General Elections are an entirely different matter. This concerns the governance of the Country and people will vote according to how they feel party a, or party b will carry out that responsibility.
It's quite possible that a person would vote for a Lib Dem Councilor and a Labour M.P. or some other such combination.
Therefore I don't feel that a direct correlation is an accurate method of prediction.
Very interesting debate. I feel that local elections whilst providing a yardstick are not always indicative of a General election.
In local elections it is about voting for your voice in local affairs and the day to day things that affect you, in effect you vote for the individual you feel can best represent you in local matters rather than a specific manifesto or set of ideals.
General Elections are an entirely different matter. This concerns the governance of the Country and people will vote according to how they feel party a, or party b will carry out that responsibility.
It's quite possible that a person would vote for a Lib Dem Councilor and a Labour M.P. or some other such combination.
Therefore I don't feel that a direct correlation is an accurate method of prediction.
I dont know if you looked at the video. If not, its worth a watch. The guy is on straight after Mark Harper. What he has done is gone back 38 years, and recorded the local election results, and how these results affect the subsequent general elections. He says it is a projection, and not a forecast. I can see that he will pick up stuff that polling doesnt. No doubt we will see how accurate it is before very long. I thought that he made sense. I have listened to experts in this country saying that by-elections, and local elections are different, and have no bearing on general elections. Yet they always immediately go on and project the vote share, as though it did.
Well worth a read. Not least because the Headline is seriously misleading. The Telegraph tries to dress it up to suit its own political ideology.
This makes the same point about Scotland. It just seems strange that you could produce a projection without taking it into account.
No, the local elections don’t point to a hung parliament – but Sunak could still make it happen Could the prime minister copy Gordon Brown, who came back from the depths of unpopularity to deny the opposition a majority in 2010?
It was even worse than ignoring Scotland. It was deliberately stating that it operated in the assumption that Scotland would follow English predictions using just Labour/Conservatives, totally ignoring likely Labour gains from the SNP. And totally ignoring the SNP
Then, when challenged, stating that Labour gains from the SNP "on their own" would not make the difference on his projections.
Which is really, really, poor.
I don't pretend to be an expert on such things. So if I can spot this straight away, then an "expert" shouldn't come out with this stuff. Or, at the very least, qualify his comments afterwards.
It was even worse than ignoring Scotland. It was deliberately stating that it operated in the assumption that Scotland would follow English predictions using just Labour/Conservatives, totally ignoring likely Labour gains from the SNP. And totally ignoring the SNP
Then, when challenged, stating that Labour gains from the SNP "on their own" would not make the difference on his projections.
Which is really, really, poor.
I don't pretend to be an expert on such things. So if I can spot this straight away, then an "expert" shouldn't come out with this stuff. Or, at the very least, qualify his comments afterwards.
Here is an interesting one from the Times letters today.
Letter of the day On the letters page today, a response from Adrian Cosker to Rishi Sunak’s claims that the UK may be headed for a hung parliament.
Adrian Cosker, Hertfordshire: Rishi Sunak seems to speak of a hung parliament as something to be feared. Many voters, however, might welcome one, with the Liberal Democrats perhaps forcing a coalition government to a more moderate and pro-EU stance, to the benefit of our economy. Indeed, had tactical voting given us a hung parliament in 2019, when a mere 43.6 per cent of the vote gave the Tories a majority enabling them to do “whatever we liked”, as Johnson put it, we might well have had a far less extreme Brexit deal, and could probably also have handled the pandemic better (and almost certainly less corruptly).
Here is an interesting one from the Times letters today.
Letter of the day On the letters page today, a response from Adrian Cosker to Rishi Sunak’s claims that the UK may be headed for a hung parliament.
Adrian Cosker, Hertfordshire: Rishi Sunak seems to speak of a hung parliament as something to be feared. Many voters, however, might welcome one, with the Liberal Democrats perhaps forcing a coalition government to a more moderate and pro-EU stance, to the benefit of our economy. Indeed, had tactical voting given us a hung parliament in 2019, when a mere 43.6 per cent of the vote gave the Tories a majority enabling them to do “whatever we liked”, as Johnson put it, we might well have had a far less extreme Brexit deal, and could probably also have handled the pandemic better (and almost certainly less corruptly).
Cant argue with that. Except the bit about getting a hung parliament, as that currently looks unlikely.
I agree with every word of that. But then I am neither a Tory voter or 1 that they would target.
But many natural Tory voters, and several newspapers, are desperate to avoid a Hung Parliament. Because they believe that a Hung Parliament will somehow unleash the forces of evil. Not sure if that is the Lib Dems or the SNP.
It amuses me that the self same people who claim that a vote for Reform is a vote for Labour fail to see that, right now, a vote for the Conservatives could only, at best, result in the very Hung Parliament the leadership pretends to be desperate to avoid.
Still quite a way to go. In what is likely to prove to be a very interesting General Election.
Will Labour win? Probably. But not definitely How many Tory MPs will be left? Does the Tory Party lurch (further) to the Right? Will Farage continue to successfully ride both the Reform and Tory horses?
PS-great gag from Penny Mordaunt last night. Speaking at an RAF club, she urged unity. And said she hoped the RAF club would agree in the concept of needing both wings....
I agree with every word of that. But then I am neither a Tory voter or 1 that they would target.
But many natural Tory voters, and several newspapers, are desperate to avoid a Hung Parliament. Because they believe that a Hung Parliament will somehow unleash the forces of evil. Not sure if that is the Lib Dems or the SNP.
It amuses me that the self same people who claim that a vote for Reform is a vote for Labour fail to see that, right now, a vote for the Conservatives could only, at best, result in the very Hung Parliament the leadership pretends to be desperate to avoid.
Still quite a way to go. In what is likely to prove to be a very interesting General Election.
Will Labour win? Probably. But not definitely How many Tory MPs will be left? Does the Tory Party lurch (further) to the Right? Will Farage continue to successfully ride both the Reform and Tory horses?
PS-great gag from Penny Mordaunt last night. Speaking at an RAF club, she urged unity. And said she hoped the RAF club would agree in the concept of needing both wings....
Got to admire the chutzpah of the likes of the Daily Getsworse and the Daily Fail.
Apparently, another MP crossing the floor to leave the Tories and join the Labour Party is proof of splits in the Labour Party.
You couldn't make it up. Either these papers are incredibly stupid. Or they believe their readers are the sort of people that would believe you if you told them the word "gullible" wasn't in the Dictionary.
Comments
In local elections it is about voting for your voice in local affairs and the day to day things that affect you, in effect you vote for the individual you feel can best represent you in local matters rather than a specific manifesto or set of ideals.
General Elections are an entirely different matter. This concerns the governance of the Country and people will vote according to how they feel party a, or party b will carry out that responsibility.
It's quite possible that a person would vote for a Lib Dem Councilor and a Labour M.P. or some other such combination.
Therefore I don't feel that a direct correlation is an accurate method of prediction.
If not, its worth a watch.
The guy is on straight after Mark Harper.
What he has done is gone back 38 years, and recorded the local election results, and how these results affect the subsequent general elections.
He says it is a projection, and not a forecast.
I can see that he will pick up stuff that polling doesnt.
No doubt we will see how accurate it is before very long.
I thought that he made sense.
I have listened to experts in this country saying that by-elections, and local elections are different, and have no bearing on general elections.
Yet they always immediately go on and project the vote share, as though it did.
This is his opinion on the idea that Labour are not currently doing enough to get a majority:-
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/reform-could-hand-labour-a-majority-at-general-election-says-prof-sir-john-curtice/ar-BB1lTdGQ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=1c9c2eb2a5384a5186452b326014d020&ei=43
Well worth a read. Not least because the Headline is seriously misleading. The Telegraph tries to dress it up to suit its own political ideology.
It just seems strange that you could produce a projection without taking it into account.
No, the local elections don’t point to a hung parliament – but Sunak could still make it happen
Could the prime minister copy Gordon Brown, who came back from the depths of unpopularity to deny the opposition a majority in 2010?
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sunak-hung-parliament-tory-local-elections-labour-starmer-b2539681.html
Then, when challenged, stating that Labour gains from the SNP "on their own" would not make the difference on his projections.
Which is really, really, poor.
I don't pretend to be an expert on such things. So if I can spot this straight away, then an "expert" shouldn't come out with this stuff. Or, at the very least, qualify his comments afterwards.
Letter of the day
On the letters page today, a response from Adrian Cosker to Rishi Sunak’s claims that the UK may be headed for a hung parliament.
Adrian Cosker, Hertfordshire: Rishi Sunak seems to speak of a hung parliament as something to be feared. Many voters, however, might welcome one, with the Liberal Democrats perhaps forcing a coalition government to a more moderate and pro-EU stance, to the benefit of our economy. Indeed, had tactical voting given us a hung parliament in 2019, when a mere 43.6 per cent of the vote gave the Tories a majority enabling them to do “whatever we liked”, as Johnson put it, we might well have had a far less extreme Brexit deal, and could probably also have handled the pandemic better (and almost certainly less corruptly).
Except the bit about getting a hung parliament, as that currently looks unlikely.
I agree with every word of that. But then I am neither a Tory voter or 1 that they would target.
But many natural Tory voters, and several newspapers, are desperate to avoid a Hung Parliament. Because they believe that a Hung Parliament will somehow unleash the forces of evil. Not sure if that is the Lib Dems or the SNP.
It amuses me that the self same people who claim that a vote for Reform is a vote for Labour fail to see that, right now, a vote for the Conservatives could only, at best, result in the very Hung Parliament the leadership pretends to be desperate to avoid.
Still quite a way to go. In what is likely to prove to be a very interesting General Election.
Will Labour win? Probably. But not definitely
How many Tory MPs will be left?
Does the Tory Party lurch (further) to the Right?
Will Farage continue to successfully ride both the Reform and Tory horses?
PS-great gag from Penny Mordaunt last night. Speaking at an RAF club, she urged unity. And said she hoped the RAF club would agree in the concept of needing both wings....
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/lord-kinnock-leads-backlash-against-160011266.html
Apparently, another MP crossing the floor to leave the Tories and join the Labour Party is proof of splits in the Labour Party.
You couldn't make it up. Either these papers are incredibly stupid. Or they believe their readers are the sort of people that would believe you if you told them the word "gullible" wasn't in the Dictionary.