Some more specific psephological points:-
1. The latest polls are not big enough to pick up the position in Scotland, where persistent rumour is that Labour’s position is bad.
2. Now that the Liberal Democrats are established as the main alternative to Labour in the North and to the Tories in the South and West, the regional figures are crucial: in fact the LibDems almost have to be treated as two separate parties. For instance, a swing from LibDem to Tory in Northern seats may cost a couple of seats as anti-Labour tactical voting becomes less efficient, but in the South and West it could deliver a swathe of LibDem marginals to the Tories.
4. If there is a “snap” election, will there be fewer minor party and “fringe” candidates? If so, will this just reduce turnout still further, or will votes go to the major parties instead? And if so, which major party or parties will gain, and which lose, from the absent candidates?
5. People are referring to the electoral implications, presumed unfavourable to Labour and particularly strong in the North. But what have psephologists actually established, and hopefully quantified, about how, other things being equal, the seasons affect voting. For instance, has anybody compared council bye-elections held immediately before and immediately after the Autumn and Spring clock changes?

Levaing aside wider political preferences, there are a number of important failings in the politcal system, including the West Lothian question and deficiencies in postal voting arrangements, that I would like to see addressed before the next General Election. If there is a snap election this cannot happen. I am also constitutionally unhappy if a General Election curtails adeqate consideration by Parliament of a Public Spending Review.

The number of claimants (DWP 1st quarterly figures, 2007) follows, the number on incapacity benefits at 2.66 million of which 1.19 million are Income Support based i.e. claiming a disability premium, the number of lone parent benefits is 770 thousand and persons claiming Disability Living Allowance 2.86 million. True Income support figures appear to be closely guarded.

That is an awful amount of votes to be weary of when choosing an election time particularly should it be held in 2008.

My concern is that this proposed tax on non-domiciles could bode very bad for the economy. What happens if they say F-You and take their money elsewhere? Brown, as far as I’m aware had considered this as far back as 1995, and I suspect this is the reason he never proceeded with it. It’s time the whole IHT tax thing was unspun too (it’s not Gordon Brown’s Inheritance Tax, it was a Conservative tax, in it’s current form, introduced in 1985). All this spin has surely got people thinking they’d have to pay it, as it currently stands, when they won’t necessarily at all. I’d favour modest increases in thresholds, year in, year out, and possibly more progressive rates (10% to 50%) depending the size of the estate, but only if it made sound fiscal sense to do so. Given the non-domicile thing is potentially flawed, the costs would, ultimately, fall elsewhere. Why should people with estates valued at less than £300,000 (the vast majority) subsidise those with estates exceeding that but below £1m?

Glad to see you have perked up now that the Tories are doing well in the POLLS – just as i predicted you would / you should remain strong like Cameron !!”

I was never down and didn’t need perking up, I said all along wait until the end of the Conference season. Like I said last time, I don’t know why you thought I was being divisive or down when what I said was “we haven’t had our conference yet so the current polls are not right” and that “I don’t trust local council by-elections at all”. The first was right and the second is my long-held opinion.

James: “Surely one big danger of a November polll is that weather/cold/dark evenings will be worse the further north you go. So those more likely to be put off voting because of the weather are voters in Labour’s heartlands in the North and Scotland.

Will that benefit the Tories?”

I doubt it that much. It might benefit them on a national aggregate figure but that figure is meaningless. Don’t forget that we vote in constituencies and candidates in one constituency are competing in fact against other candidates in the same constituency. A lower turnout North v South doesn’t in itself affect anything at all, so long as the lower turnout doesn’t change individual constituency results.

If it affected things it’d be based on the notion that a lower turnout supposedly helps the Tories, not North v South.