Predictions for UK elections

[borderlinegenius]

In fairness, isn't this the same lady who wrote the "Hold your nose and vote Labour" in the Guardian a week or two back? Hardly a slavish following of Labour campaign slogans unless I missed that one!

So what? The polls aren't going to record the number of voters wearing pegs on their nose.

There was never any doubt but that Polly was going to plump for Labour, and I believe her appeal was, in fact, a cynical exercise in Blairite propeganda.

To be honest, there has been some re-distribution of wealth going on in the UK since 1997, so er yes I would agree with calling Labour "progressive". Although, I would accept the criticism that they haven't been progressive enough!

It is my understanding that the gap between rich and poor has increased under Labour. Labour have also created an underclass of immigrants with no rights and no representation. They have made magic mushrooms a class A drug. They have taken Britain to war against a country which posed no threat whatsoever.

If that's progressive, Thatcher must have been a communist.

[mjcoughlan]

Yes and the Conservatives would instantly become more popular.

How do you figure?
[/quote]

I think a move to the left wouldn't be the best move for either Labour or the UK. It was their socialism that kept them out of power in the past. At least now people can vote for them and know that the economy is in safe hands because there is an economic consensus in the UK that Labour's hard left still haven't picked up on.

[Opus]

Hi Borderlinegenius,

"It is my understanding that the gap between rich and poor has increased under Labour."

With respect, I don't think that analysis is correct, studies by the Institute of Fiscal Studies indicate that significant proportions of the UK population have been lifted out of the poverty trap (particularly pensioners and children). In addition, the poorest sectors of society (eg single parents have had their income increase the most by social category since 1997 and the richest have had the smallest increases. If that isn't re-distribution well.....

Mind you, I'm not saying the job is done yet (by no means!), but at least it's a few steps in the right direction.

"Labour have also created an underclass of immigrants with no rights and no representation."

A small generalisation here perhaps? Could you be a bit more specific?

"They have made magic mushrooms a class A drug."

I'd accept there appears to be a loophole in the law currently. However, did they not also reclassify cannabis as a class C drug?

"They have taken Britain to war against a country which posed no threat whatsoever."

A bit simplistic, but to be fair to you, I would agree with the sentiment - I do think Blair should go for this, but then I was always more of a Brown fan myself.

"If that's progressive, Thatcher must have been a communist."

No, she was a bit of a nutter who amongst other things overdid the overhaul of the UK economy with disastrous social consequences. The issue now is who manages the macro-economy in a better (efficient yet inclusive) way? I believe the answer to be Governments of a Social Democratic hue (or Progressives if you prefer)

Regards,

Opus.

[BarryW]

I suspected enough. So, it's okay to moan about the fact that the system is stacked against the Tories, but it's not okay to make the system more democratic. Why, because the Daily Mail says it ain't okay, that's why

Kudos for your ability to debate as a mature adult!

The system is stacked against the Tories at the moment, but only because of massive population shifts since the last boundary revision (1996 I think?). As a result it takes a lot more votes to elect a Tory MP than to elect a Labour MP. The result being that the Tories would have to be at least 2% ahead to draw level on seats.

But this imbalance has absolutely nothing to do with PR or the lack thereof - and it will be sorted out at the next boundary revision of England and Wales in 2 years time

And by the way, I've never read the Daily Mail to the best of my knowledge.

[KingKane]

Soooo, the only ones to give a seat estimate were

Casual bets
Labour 362
Conservative 183
Liberal Democrat 68
DUP 11
SF 6
SDLP 1

Observer
Labour 378
Conservative 174 (including 1 seat where the election has been postponed)
Liberal Democrat 63
SNP 6
Plaid Cymru 4
Independents 2
Speaker 1

Ulysses
Labour 359
Conservative 198
Liberal Democrat 60
Others 29

Harpey
Labour 310
Tory 243
Liberal 62
Others (including northern parties)31

Kingkane
Labour 347
Tories 196
Lib Dem 71
NI 18
Others UK 13

And it looks at the moment that Ulysses might have it.

[Ulysses]

And it looks at the moment that Ulysses might have it.

Looks like my guesses about tactical voting paid off!

I managed to get the vote shares fairly close - but the credit for that goes to the opinion polling organisations who published on May 5th.

I had Labour 36, Conservative 32, Liberal Democrat 22, Others 10.

The actual shares were Labour 35.2, Conservative 32.3, Liberal Democrat 22.0, Others 10.5 - based on 645 results.

I'm well pleased about my guesses at seat numbers.

I had Labour 359, Conservative 198, Liberal Democrat 60, Others 29.

With 645 declared, it's Labour 356, Conservative 197, Liberal Democrat 62, Others 30.

I reckon the "battle of the pollsters" was won this time by NOP. They went with 36-33-23-9 on the day. If you're interested in comparing the pollsters' performances, check out the link below.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2...olltracker.stm