Brexit B-35 also House of Stuart Anniversary
Strange Days 🔊
Just picture this: one country has the worst government in living history and a couple of generations before that, knowingly colliding head-on with the consequences of the worst policies of the last seventy years and what is the country's choice? Ready to give that very same government a fourth chance at the next election. Can't happen you say? Think twice it's happening here and now as latest UK polls show. Every time a poll pops up showing Labour in a less desperate situation another one follows that contradicts it. Strange days indeed.
Of course we all know the reason. This rare moment in time when the stars align to gift the UK that unique combination of the worst government since 1945 and the worst opposition ever, the ones who would manage to abstain if asked if rain is wet. The trend has again turned against Labour. But the influx of new regular polls was on the slow side until the Independent Group announcement (more on this later) so maybe a new batch will shed a different light. Or not. Though not necessarily the way you might expect if the latest YouGov is any hint.
We also had the first YouGov poll of the year using their Multilevel Regression and Post-stratification model (MRP) which Wikipedia now has filed under a section of its own. Bear in mind though that, for all its alleged sophistication, MRP remains a statistical approach and relies on uniform swing just as other models do. First instalment of 2019 has a 40k sample UK-wide which means it weighs heavily on the current rolling average and any prediction is likely to deliver results quite close to those published by YouGov.
Then the Weekly Westminster Circus goes on. Even John Bercow seems to have lost his grip on it some days but he also is a gifted comedian so you never know….
Theresa May suffered another humiliating defeat on Brexit at the hands of her own party last week. Meanwhile 42 Labour MPs (technically 41 plus John Woodcock) including 3 Scottish ones (Killen, Murray, Whitfield) threw the Bain Principle overboard and voted for an SNP amendement that would have requested the English Government to seek a three-month extension of Article 50. But MSM seemed to have bigger fishy fish to fry than this at the time. Nothing better than a good old Churchill controversy all over media to distract oiks from what's really important especially when one of Labour's Finest triggers it this time.
People Are Strange 🔊
Current Poll-O'Polls includes the six most recent fielded between 2 and 19 February including two after the Tory-Labour mini-merger known as The Independent Group. Super-sample size is 47,656 with a theoretical margin of error of 0.43%. Of course it is hugely dominated by YouGov's Mega-MRPoll and delivers pretty similar results with Conservatives 5.1% ahead on average to YouGov's predicted 5.2% Tory lead. But of course other polls carry a much more mixed-baggy message and we'll certainly have to reassess the situation once the YouGov MRPoll has been purged out of the system.
This paints a rather distressing picture of the electorate's state of mind. Even classic 'class divide' is blurred. What crosstabs from different polls show is that C2DEs are more likely to vote Labour not because they are significantly less likely to vote Tory but mostly because they are massively less likely to vote LibDem or Green. But they are also more likely than ABC1s to vote UKIP which will come as a surprise only to those who never bothered to understand the true mechanics of nationalistic populism within the working class. Exhibit A: how UKIP's collapse in 2017 benefited Labour as much as and sometimes more than Tories in Labour's Northern Powerhouse heartlands.
Obviously leaders' approval ratings have a lot to do with this. This fortnight's Opinium poll for The Observer has Theresa May on -21% net and Jeremy Corbyn on -27%. Interestingly Nicola Sturgeon does better than both on -15% overall including English and Welsh voters. Then of course nobody gives a rat's fuck how Surrey or Monmouthshire rates Nicola, only Scotland matters and here she gets a +3% net approval (40% approve, 37% disapprove, 23% neutral). These ratings are also reflected in the 'preferred PM' polling:
Again 'None of the above' is the first choice but then May still leads over Corbyn roughly 60-40. Both Labour and the Conservatives should also worry about some other results from the early February Opinium poll that was fielded before the Umunna Split. 27% of people feel represented by Labour and 25% by Conservatives, significantly lower than either's vote share. 38% feel than neither Lab nor Tories represent them and 40% think some new party would be a better option to represent them. What shape that then-hypothetical new party should take is carefully avoided so don't jump to the conclusion it should be the now-revealed English Macronism even if this is what Observer-Guardian clearly imply and support. That it could be some sort of true English Socialist Party sounds just as credible to me. Just sayin. And the first polls including The Independent Group do not contradict my view (teaser as I will deal with this a bit later).
The Soft Parade 🔊
Here is what current polling would deliver on the current 650 seats and on the infamous 600-seat gerrymander. Not quite fitting a predictable pattern as you would expect something closer to a repeat 2015. But the LibDems surgelet probably deprives Conservatives of the handful of seats that would give them a majority and paradoxically also helps Labour in a number of marginals.
I fed the polling average data into Electoral Calculus and Election Polling to see what they make of them. As usual their projections are quite close to mine as can be expected with models working on variants of uniform swing. The noticeable difference is that my model is slightly more favourable to the LibDems probably because of the weight of the proportional swing component. But here a handful seats make the difference between Tories a few seats shy of a majority and them enjoying a majority even it's the weest and most fragile.
For good measure I also added YouGov's own projection from their Mega-MRPoll. YouGov's voting intentions results are pretty close to the current rolling average as their sample makes up 84% of the current super-sample, so the comparison is valid. Their projection is really close to what uniform swing variants deliver so maybe the YouGov Model is not that harrypotterishy magicwandy thing they claim it to be. Right now we have no hard evidence it does better than the classic projections based on uniform swing, especially if you factor in the limitations even a massive 40k sample is bound to have.
A GB-wide sample of 40,119 amounts to 63 per constituency. When Ashcroft polled individual constituencies in the run-up to the 2015 GE their samples were usually 1,000 yet they still missed quite a few. So YouGov's claim that their model 'allows to produce a fairly accurate estimate of the number of voters in each constituency intending to vote for a party on each day' sounds like a smitch of an exaggeration. And while they always remind you they were the only ones to predict a hung Parliament in 2017, they fail to mention they got the number of seats right only for the LibDems and Greens. Their biggest miss was predicting the SNP on 44 seats, which is roughly what a standard uniform swing model would have predicted with what Scottish polls were available in the last week before the election. For the record my own model said 43 seats then.
When The Music's Over 🔊
On current polling a mere 27 seats are projected to change hands which is a rather low point in reliably recorded parliamentary history and explains the quasi status quo result. Recent trends are confirmed that showed only LibDems and SNP having some reasons to celebrate though their gains are well below what would have constituted a political earthquake. Only the distinct possibility of Nigel Dodds losing to Sinn Féin by a hair would make good headlines the day after.
The summary of gains and losses and the transfer matrix do not show any obvious and consistent pattern. Rather it goes in many directions at once with only Labour likely to be an overall loser and a mixed bag for Conservatives ending with a net loss of one seat. It's not event 100% satisfactory for the SNP this time as they're projected to lose North East Fife, the closest 2017 result UK-wide, to LibDems.
27 seats changing hands would be the lowest since 2001. Only in 1951 before that did such a low number of seats change hands and this was the only time when so few switching seats were enough to bring on a change of government.
Riders On The Storm 🔊
48 seats would be in the danger zone with only a minor swing needed to change the result. 27 Conservative seats would be concerned versus only 13 Labour seats. At opposing ends of the spectrum Conservatives could bag an extra 15 seats and Labour an extra 21.
Interestingly two of the new Independent Group would find themselves in the danger zone: Anna Soubry in Broxtowe, Angela Smith in Penistone and Stocksbridge. I fully expect Soubry would make it thanks to even a minimal transfer from 'moderate' Labour voters and a few LibDems. But Smith would certainly go down as the 2017 result was already close and core Labour voters would undoubtedly turn against her even at the risk of switching the seat to Tories, and the 'funny tinge' gaffe wouldn't help.
Take It As It Comes 🔊
The alternate Commons you get after reallocating marginal seats to the runner-up are not really more satisfactory than the direct projection. What current polling says is basically status quo, as what matters is not really the exact make-up of the oppositions, but how well the governing party does, or doesn't. So right now the likely outcome would be a Conservative minority Government propped up by DUP. Old boss, new boss, new tricks, old tricks.
A small swing (1-2% depending on the region) towards Tories would give us the 'Back To 2015' Commons we have seen many times already in recent projections. While a similar swing to Labour would once again deliver the kind of unmanageable 1910ish situation that was the norm for a while in last year's projections. Even the Unicorn Coalition of Labour and SNP would fall short of a majority.
Ship Of Fools 🔊
At Last They Are Free 🔊. After months of posturing and unbearable suspense the announcement of The Independent Group splitting from the English Labour Party came as a massive surprise. But only because more than four of them were involved. Or were there actually only six? As Luciana Berger definitely won the Political Comic Award Of The Year with her introduction as 'I am the Labour and.. (silence)…. oops…. (laughs)… uh…. (more laughs) I am the MP for Liverpool Wavertree'. This lot certainly are a 'funny tinge' of centrism especially now that pro-austerity Tory reinforcements have cranked then Up To Eleven. Will TIG become the Spinal Tap of UK politics? My tenner says they will sooner than later. Because of course kicking off English Macronism is a sure winner seeing how well the original version works in France.
Back to the original Seven Dwarves' motivations, their obsessive pounding at 'far left taking over Labour' just made me wonder which side they would have chosen in the days of Attlee and Bevan when far left ideology shaped the UK's future. Of course their sudden urge to secede from Labour had nothing to do with four of them (Chris Leslie, Joan Ryan, Angela Smith, Gavin Shuker) having already lost votes of no-confidence by their own CLPs. While Luciana Berger escaped one only by shamelessly playing both the pregnancy and antisemitism cards, and Leslie faced almost certain deselection. Just as Soubry's decision to pander to centrist voters had nothing to do with self-preservation when facing strong odds of being unseated at the next GE.
May right now has far more reasons to rejoice than Corbyn, all things considered. Westminster Grapevine has it that the odds of a snap GE being called in the near future have increased. May could gamble triggering it either by choice (capitalizing on Labour's weaknesses) or under duress (for fear other Tories might cross the aisle). Only detail is that dissolution needs 434 votes, so Labour support which I think they are highly unlikely to grant in the current climate. Or May could resort to the Schroeder Manoeuvre, a self-orchestrated vote of no-confidence as German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder tried in 2005. Of course his SPD lost the snap GE that followed to Angela Merkel's CDU. But history does not always repeat itself, or does it?
Finally I will walk the dug on thin ice about the Gang Of Seven's fixation on Labour's alleged antisemitism which at face value you'd believe was the chief reason for the breakaway. Unless it wasn't and they used it only as an attention-grabber to hide the vacuity of the rest of their statement. Luciana Berger certainly went one stunt too far when describing Labour as 'institutionally antisemitic'. People easily see through that kind of overkill and the immediate backlash was to remind them that exaggerated allegations of antisemitism are usually just cover stories to demonize anyone who criticizes Israel's expansionist policies and negation of Palestinians' rights. Ironically Berger herself was targeted early in her parliamentary career for not being supportive enough of Israel.
The Independent Group are right on one thing: the Westminster System is broken and needs fixing. They're wrong on the conclusion: they are not the solution.
Break On Through 🔊
The real question now is how much real electoral potential TIG have. There is no easy or obvious answer to this. Between themselves Umunna's Eleven bagged 337,441 votes at the 2017 GE, 1% of the UK-wide vote and more to the point 1.2% of the English vote as TIG for now is an England-only thing. The only way to know their real influence would be if they all resigned to trigger by-elections, an option they instantly ruled out minutes after their initial announcement. Level One of irony is that they demand a People's Vote on Brexit but won't submit themselves to one in their own constituencies. Level Two is that now-forgotten Tories-turned-Kippers Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless hold the moral high ground here as they at least had the dignity to submit themselves to popular verdict by by-election.
Truth is Tiggers have every reason to fear by-elections as most of them would end up woodchipped and quartered. My best educated guess is that Umunna, Soubry and Gapes would make it on their own merits, if this is the appropriate term. Berger, Coffey, Leslie, Ryan, Shuker and Smith would be lyed down the pipes. Allen and Wollaston would probably face even odds with a fair chance of surviving if LibDems didn't stand in the hypothetical by-election. Just remember what happened to the SDP. When Commons disbanded prior to the 1983 GE they had 30 MPs and only 6 came back despite them being in the Alliance with the Liberals.
Opinium were the first to test TIG's electoral viability in their mid-February fortnightly poll for the Observer, actually fielded the week before the Tiggers broke free. Observer-Guardian were quick to headline about '59% of Brits ready to vote for new centrist party'. Not a big surprise as they are the main propagandists of English Macronism but of the course things are a bit more complex than this. Only 15% of respondents said they were definitely ready to vote for the new party, closer to what later polls found.
Interestingly SNP voters were the least likely to listen to the centrist sirens probably because they already have the party they need and who adequately represents them. Unsurprisingly the greatest support came from LibDem voters who probably had not thought it through as the intention is not for TIG to replace LibDems but to supplement them. Strong UKIP support is more surprising unless you count it as willingness to disrupt the Westminster Powerplay no matter how.
Later polls by YouGov, Survation and Sky Data then asked about actual voting intentions. YouGov and Survation tested both TIG-in and TIG-out scenarios while Sky Data tested only TIG-in which makes it impossible to quantify transfers from other parties, and is why I will only use the YouGov and Survation data here. For the record Sky Data found TIG on 10% which is consistent with the other two polls. On average TIG would bag 11% with 5% coming from Labour, 3% from LibDems and 2% from Conservatives.
It must be stressed though that the two polls differ wildly with YouGov seeing Labour as the major contributor to TIG while Survation's results are more of a mixed bag with LibDems likely to lose the most to TIG. But all three polls confirm TIG having just limited appeal in Scotland (2% for Sky Data, 8% for YouGov, 3% for Survation) with Scottish Conservative voters identified as the main contributors to the potential Scottish TIG vote.
Sad truth is that, whatever polls say, it is actually impossible to predict how many Tigger MPs would be returned at the next GE. We have absolutely no idea what a 'notional TIG vote' would have been in 2017, and no idea either where TIG would field candidates at the next GE. So it is quite a challenge to find the proper algorithms to process them in a uniform swing model, even a slightly tweaked and improved one. Their theoretical vote share also hints at fuck all actually as 13% UKIP in 2015 meant just one seat while 7% LibDems in 2017 meant twelve seats. Besides TIG are not yet organized as a proper political party and probably would lack the necessary electoral machine except in a few select seats.
Unless of course Tiggers finally decide to eat their hats and negotiate their own brand of the Auld Alliance with LibDems they are currently ruling out. Thus they could benefit from LibDems' electoral machine, however weak it is in most parts of the UK, and also from LibDems sitting out a select number of constituencies. Based on current and provisional polling LibTig could bag 5 to 10 more seats than LibDems on their own. Let's say this is for now the best assessment of Tiggers' real weight until we have means to project a more precise number. Definitely not a game changer of epic proportions.
Waiting For The Sun 🔊
Speculation again abounds about a possible Snap Election of 2019, with 6 June even mentioned as the date it might happen. Which is as close to 'two years to the day' after the 2017 GE as the convention of holding elections on a Thursday will allow. If this is to actually happen the dissolution vote in Commons would have to be scheduled in the second half of April. Technically the deadline would be 30 April as the Fixed-Term Parliament Act requires 25 working days between dissolution and the election. But acting on it a wee smitch earlier wouldn't hurt.
Though why would anybody actually want a snap GE is open to debate. The No-Deal-Brexit fallout would make it extremely risky for the Conservatives and it could be even more of a setback than 2017. Labour would be hurt too not just by TIG, but probably also by some of their pro-EU voters switching to LibDems and Greens, and major losses in Scotland also predicted by recent polls. Though there is no way to predict how voting intentions would be actually impacted by TIG or change during the campaign, as James Kelly pointed out at the end of his recent article on the YouGov mega-poll. So maybe even the SNP should be careful what they wish for.
I will seriously believe a snap election is in sight when DUP publicly and unambiguously announce they stop propping up a failed English Government. But so far all they have done is obfuscating with their 'the-dug-did-it' talking points blaming everything and the kitchen sink leaking on the European Union and the Republic of Ireland. There is a sure way though to know if Tories really have plans for a snap GE. Will they rush their massive gerrymandering through Privy Council and Commons? If they do, get ready for the snap GE as the atrocious gerrymander is their only way to stay in power while losing the election.
What's past is prologue and the hour is getting late so stay tuned for the unexpected.
History is the nightmare from which I am trying to awake
No comments:
Post a Comment