<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: YouGov poll of Londoners</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107</link>
	<description>Opinion polling and political analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:42:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul H-J</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107/comment-page-1#comment-576522</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul H-J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:51:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2107#comment-576522</guid>
		<description>Brett,

The likely victims will need to make a reasoned assesment of their choices:

(1) What is the chance of retaining their seat for Labour ?
(2) To whom are they most likely to lose it ?
(3) Do they have an alternative career / job lined up ?
(4) If they defect, would their new party allow them to stand as its candidate ?
(5) Even if answer to (4) is yes, what is the chance of holding their seat for teh new party ?

Only those who can get a positive response on (3) and / or (5) have any incentive to jump ship or force an early election.

Some may calculate that the answer to (1) is better now than later, but if they force an early election, would that backfire on them ?

One option under (3) is a seat in the Lords - but that will go up in smoke if they rock the boat.

The answer to (2) could be a major factor which limits their options - especially combined with (4). Some may be tempted to defect to LDs in the hope of standing and defeating a Tory threat. However, the track record of defectors standing in their old constituency is not good, while neither Con nor LD are going to allow some failed Lab MP to carpet-bag their most promising targets, still less a safe seat (not that the LDs have any to offer).

So, all in all, don&#039;t expect many defectors or Labour MPs willing to vote against Brown on a confidence motion - however bad things look.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brett,</p>
<p>The likely victims will need to make a reasoned assesment of their choices:</p>
<p>(1) What is the chance of retaining their seat for Labour ?<br />
(2) To whom are they most likely to lose it ?<br />
(3) Do they have an alternative career / job lined up ?<br />
(4) If they defect, would their new party allow them to stand as its candidate ?<br />
(5) Even if answer to (4) is yes, what is the chance of holding their seat for teh new party ?</p>
<p>Only those who can get a positive response on (3) and / or (5) have any incentive to jump ship or force an early election.</p>
<p>Some may calculate that the answer to (1) is better now than later, but if they force an early election, would that backfire on them ?</p>
<p>One option under (3) is a seat in the Lords &#8211; but that will go up in smoke if they rock the boat.</p>
<p>The answer to (2) could be a major factor which limits their options &#8211; especially combined with (4). Some may be tempted to defect to LDs in the hope of standing and defeating a Tory threat. However, the track record of defectors standing in their old constituency is not good, while neither Con nor LD are going to allow some failed Lab MP to carpet-bag their most promising targets, still less a safe seat (not that the LDs have any to offer).</p>
<p>So, all in all, don&#8217;t expect many defectors or Labour MPs willing to vote against Brown on a confidence motion &#8211; however bad things look.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe James B</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107/comment-page-1#comment-576489</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe James B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:15:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2107#comment-576489</guid>
		<description>My gut feel is the Tories will struggle to get much above 40 in Greater London.
There are a number of seats like Hornsey and Wood Green and Streatham which are still going to be in a far worse state than in 1992 (or 1983 when their share was a bit less).

But Brett-Chorley is most likely to be correct, unless there is some unexpected event.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My gut feel is the Tories will struggle to get much above 40 in Greater London.<br />
There are a number of seats like Hornsey and Wood Green and Streatham which are still going to be in a far worse state than in 1992 (or 1983 when their share was a bit less).</p>
<p>But Brett-Chorley is most likely to be correct, unless there is some unexpected event.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brett - Chorley</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107/comment-page-1#comment-576299</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett - Chorley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:14:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2107#comment-576299</guid>
		<description>Whichever way you cut it, looks like labour are well and truly doomed. I guess everyone is just trying to work out who, exactly, is going to lose their seats at the GE. Once they know, will the likely victims turn on the perp?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whichever way you cut it, looks like labour are well and truly doomed. I guess everyone is just trying to work out who, exactly, is going to lose their seats at the GE. Once they know, will the likely victims turn on the perp?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe James B</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107/comment-page-1#comment-576294</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe James B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:39:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2107#comment-576294</guid>
		<description>London

1974 Oct    43.8%  37.4%   17%
1979           39.6%  46.0%    11.2%
1983           29.8%  43.9%    24.7%
1987           31.5%  46.5%    21.1%
1992           37.2%  45.4%    14.7%
1997           49.6%  31.2%    14.3%</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>London</p>
<p>1974 Oct    43.8%  37.4%   17%<br />
1979           39.6%  46.0%    11.2%<br />
1983           29.8%  43.9%    24.7%<br />
1987           31.5%  46.5%    21.1%<br />
1992           37.2%  45.4%    14.7%<br />
1997           49.6%  31.2%    14.3%</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Stidwill</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2107/comment-page-1#comment-576239</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Stidwill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:54:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2107#comment-576239</guid>
		<description>That was in my original post where I thought the figures were 1979 but were actually Oct 74, so Liberals were 17% in Oct 74.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That was in my original post where I thought the figures were 1979 but were actually Oct 74, so Liberals were 17% in Oct 74.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

