<?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: Populus poll of marginal seats</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499</link>
	<description>Opinion polling and political analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:51:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: FrankG</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499/comment-page-8#comment-609084</link>
		<dc:creator>FrankG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:22:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2499#comment-609084</guid>
		<description>I tried to post this last week, but couldn&#039;t seem to get registered.  So this is my first successful effort of getting a posting here.  So please be kind to this maiden effort.

Some of you may need to look more closely at that marginal poll and not be taken in by the hype. Try checking which constituencies were actually polled.

Firstly all labour marginals where the tories came third were not included. Watford (tory target 40), Edinburgh S (tory target 76), Ochil (tory target 87), Hampstead (tory target 120). On a 6.7% swing all 4 of these go tory!

Secondly the polls 50 - 150 targets seats are different from the tory top 200 target seats shown on this site. Their 50 - 150 poll includes Bury S (11% swing), Ealing Central (notional tory after boundary changes), Coventry NW (11%) swing, Edmonton (11% swing), Lewisham W (15% swing), Stalybridge (11%). Inclusion of these large labour votes within that 6.7% calculation surely means that the swing percentage would have been higher than 6.7% if only those in the tory 200 target list were included. To make up for these additional seats there are  tory top 200 target seats omitted such as targets 111, 114,117,127,129 - all of which would also have gone on even on this swing.

Thus from the tory top 200 target list point of view the swing % is surely higher than 6.7 and there are at least another 9 extra seats that would fall on top of the predicted 97. So it is 97, plus 9, plus even more when the swing is corrected.

.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tried to post this last week, but couldn&#8217;t seem to get registered.  So this is my first successful effort of getting a posting here.  So please be kind to this maiden effort.</p>
<p>Some of you may need to look more closely at that marginal poll and not be taken in by the hype. Try checking which constituencies were actually polled.</p>
<p>Firstly all labour marginals where the tories came third were not included. Watford (tory target 40), Edinburgh S (tory target 76), Ochil (tory target 87), Hampstead (tory target 120). On a 6.7% swing all 4 of these go tory!</p>
<p>Secondly the polls 50 &#8211; 150 targets seats are different from the tory top 200 target seats shown on this site. Their 50 &#8211; 150 poll includes Bury S (11% swing), Ealing Central (notional tory after boundary changes), Coventry NW (11%) swing, Edmonton (11% swing), Lewisham W (15% swing), Stalybridge (11%). Inclusion of these large labour votes within that 6.7% calculation surely means that the swing percentage would have been higher than 6.7% if only those in the tory 200 target list were included. To make up for these additional seats there are  tory top 200 target seats omitted such as targets 111, 114,117,127,129 &#8211; all of which would also have gone on even on this swing.</p>
<p>Thus from the tory top 200 target list point of view the swing % is surely higher than 6.7 and there are at least another 9 extra seats that would fall on top of the predicted 97. So it is 97, plus 9, plus even more when the swing is corrected.</p>
<p>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: IAN MCKAY</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499/comment-page-8#comment-606670</link>
		<dc:creator>IAN MCKAY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:09:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2499#comment-606670</guid>
		<description>Yes, there seems to be very little discussion of trends here. The trend in the marginals over recent months is a declining Tory vote, an increasing Labour vote and a further narrowing. A Tory double digit lead is now a small Labour lead.

If the current trend continues to show similar Labour momentum over the next 8 weeks, the party will hold enough of its marginals. Then we have a Labour govt with an overall majority.

That is where the trend is taking us even if the media, and many others, cannot believe it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, there seems to be very little discussion of trends here. The trend in the marginals over recent months is a declining Tory vote, an increasing Labour vote and a further narrowing. A Tory double digit lead is now a small Labour lead.</p>
<p>If the current trend continues to show similar Labour momentum over the next 8 weeks, the party will hold enough of its marginals. Then we have a Labour govt with an overall majority.</p>
<p>That is where the trend is taking us even if the media, and many others, cannot believe it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John B Dick</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499/comment-page-8#comment-606229</link>
		<dc:creator>John B Dick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:09:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2499#comment-606229</guid>
		<description>Eoin Clarke 

&quot;I wonder how much of politics is down to long term trends rather than short term bullygate or Cashcroft stories.&quot;

You could have something there. The progress of the SNP over the last half century has been so gradual as to be imperceptible. 

They won&#039;t make much progress at this election either, but they may well move into a position where FPTP flips in their favour on a tiny swing at the following one and they take a majority of the Scottish seats unless Labour get in in 2010 and change the voting system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eoin Clarke </p>
<p>&#8220;I wonder how much of politics is down to long term trends rather than short term bullygate or Cashcroft stories.&#8221;</p>
<p>You could have something there. The progress of the SNP over the last half century has been so gradual as to be imperceptible. </p>
<p>They won&#8217;t make much progress at this election either, but they may well move into a position where FPTP flips in their favour on a tiny swing at the following one and they take a majority of the Scottish seats unless Labour get in in 2010 and change the voting system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John B Dick</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499/comment-page-8#comment-606227</link>
		<dc:creator>John B Dick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2499#comment-606227</guid>
		<description>Al J @Sue

&quot;If the Conservatives cannot pull ahead in these marginals after millions spent on them ....&quot;

Have you considered that it might be that the Conservatives cannot pull ahead in these marginals BECAUSE OF THE millions spent on them?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Al J @Sue</p>
<p>&#8220;If the Conservatives cannot pull ahead in these marginals after millions spent on them &#8230;.&#8221;</p>
<p>Have you considered that it might be that the Conservatives cannot pull ahead in these marginals BECAUSE OF THE millions spent on them?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Gardner</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2499/comment-page-8#comment-606107</link>
		<dc:creator>George Gardner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2499#comment-606107</guid>
		<description>The other side of the border is interesting and I dont think Tory gains can be ruled out up there. 

Argyll&amp;Bute, Perth&amp;N.Perthshire and Angus are all possibilities, outside chance of Stirling and East Renfrewshire.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other side of the border is interesting and I dont think Tory gains can be ruled out up there. </p>
<p>Argyll&amp;Bute, Perth&amp;N.Perthshire and Angus are all possibilities, outside chance of Stirling and East Renfrewshire.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

