We now have results from every constituency but Thirsk and Malton, where the election was delayed because of the death of a candidate. The final results in Great Britain are CON 37%, LAB 30%, LDEM 24%, Others 10%. Seats are Conservatives 306, Labour 258, Liberal Democrats 57, Others 28. The MORI/NOP exit poll, despite initial scepticism when it showed the almost total disappearence of the Lib Dem surge, turned out to be pretty much spot on. However, this means the final polls tended to call the Lib Dems wrongly.

CON LAB LDEM Other Av. Error
ICM 36 28 26 10
-1 -2 +2 0 1.25
Populus 37 28 27 8
0 -2 +3 -2 1.75
Harris 35 29 27 9
-2 -1 +3 -1 1.75
Ipsos MORI 36 29 27 8
-1 -1 +3 -2 1.75
YouGov 35 28 28 9
-2 -2 +4 -1 2.25
ComRes 37 28 28 7
0 -2 +4 -3 2.25
Opinium 35 27 26 12
-2 -3 +2 +2 2.25
Angus Reid 36 24 29 11
-1 -6 +5 +1 3.25
TNS BMRB 33 27 29 11
-4 -3 +5 +1 3.25
RESULT 37 30 24 10

(UPDATE – This table includes only those companies who polled in the final 48 hours before the election – genuine eve of election polls. Three companies polled during the campaign, but did not produce eve-of-election polls. RNB, BPIX and OnePoll all carried out their final polls on or over the final weekend of the campaign, meaning that strictly speaking they cannot be compared to the final result. For the record however RNB did very well indeed with figures of CON 37%, LAB 28%, LDEM 26%, BPIX had CON 34%, LAB 27%, LDEM 30%, OnePoll produced a horrific CON 30%, LAB 21%, LDEM 32%. These three pollsters were also the only ones in the campaign not to fully disclose methodology and data tables, so we can draw little in the way of conclusions on what they got wrong or right)

ICM was the closest to the final result, and was within 2 points for every party. Almost all the pollsters were within the margin of error for the Conservatives and Labour (the exceptions being TNS and Angus Reid) and for the first time in decades pollsters were underestimating Labour support! The average error of all but two of the pollsters was within the margin of error. However, this disguises the issue of the Liberal Democrats: every single pollster over estimated their support, by between 2 points and 5 points. Something was wrong here (interestingly enough, the closest poll of all was the penultimate YouGov poll that showed the Lib Dems down at 24, which at the time looked like a rogue to me when Wednesday’s poll showed them bouncing straight back. Perhaps it was indicating something after all).

Before the election most of the comments here expressing scepticism about the polls were people saying they were underestimating the Conservatives (on average they did slightly, but not by much. ComRes and Populus got the level of Tory support spot on), or that the polls couldn’t cope with the huge surge of new support for the Liberal Democrats from new voters and were underestimating it. Reality turned out to be the opposite – the Lib Dem surge was an illusion, that vanished when people arrived at the ballot box. We’ll get a better idea over the next few weeks as pollsters look at their data and recontact people they interviewed before the election to see how they actually voted – the basic question though will be whether the Lib Dem boost was a genuine surge of support that reversed at the last minute – after all, a lot of respondents were saying they might change their mind – or whether it was never really there to begin with and the pre-election polls were wrong.

Ben Page and Martin Boon have both already commented to Research Live – Ben says “On our final poll for the Evening Standard on Wednesday, we had 40% of Lib Dems saying they might change their mind. We’ll all want to look and see what we can do about soft support for the Lib Dems, we’ll have to find a rational and reasonable way of dealing with it rather than just saying Lib Dems tend to overstate. We will all be looking at certainty of vote, voting history – the surge was partly younger people – and late switching, things like that. The Lib Dems were most likely to say they would vote tactically. So the support was there but it didn’t actually manifest itself in votes on the day – Lib Dem support was slowly deflating after initial Clegstacy and on the day fell further.”

Martin said “There are some sizeable average errors out there and we all do need to take a look at our methods. Clearly all polling companies have overstated the Lib Dems, so there has to be something consistent going on. It would be a little bit premature to consider the reasons for this but it’s up to the opinion pollsters to see why it might have been the case. We’re always testing our methods and this is the best time to be looking at methodologies, assumptions and techniques in order to improve them in the future.”

The first part of the post mortem really needs to be for pollsters to re-contact people they interviewed in their final polls – did people who said they’d vote Lib Dem change their minds at the last minute (in which case it’s late swing), or did they not vote at all (in which case, perhaps pollsters need to work on more sensitive methods of predicting likelihood to vote) or will they claim they did go ahead and vote Lib Dem, meaning there was a sampling problem – if so perhaps it’s down to the Lib Dem support being the least well correlated with past vote or party ID. Did don’t knows split disproportionately against the Liberal Democrats? One possiblity that strikes me is whether it could essentially be the opposite to the spiral of silence, a spiral of enthusiasm perhaps! Political pollsters are used to worrying about people being embarrassed to admit voting for unpopular parties, and have come up with ways of dealing with it, but having it suddenly become hugely fashionable to support a party is a new problem. At least it’s one that is unlikely to re-occur too often ;)

Once I get a nice spreadsheet of results I’ll also be interesting to see how accurate the marginals polling was too. Right now, however, I’m going to catch up on some sleep. I expect there will be some polls in the Sunday papers asking exactly who the public think should be the new Prime Minister – so until then…

726 Responses to “An early post-mortem”

1 2 3 15
  1. Anthony, where did you get your share of the vote figures from? The BBC website reports 36.1/29.0/23.0

  2. Rupert – co-incidentally enough, the BBC website :)

    I’ve just subtracted all the Northern Ireland votes from it so that it is comparable with the opinion polls.

  3. Hope you had a good rest after last night Anthony, thanks for all your work getting swings and exit polls for us.

    From a poll follower’s point of view, at least the exit was accurate. All hope is far from lost.

  4. Thanks for all your work Anthony! I was sceptical about the exit poll but it the Liberal Democrats flattered to deceive in the end after all, which personally was a bit of a downer.

  5. Well, I don’t think anyone saw that coming. The LibDem swing almost completely evaporated. In the end they took perhaps 1% each of the Cons and Lab from the start of the campaign.

    There goes Mike Smithson’s golden rule and the idea of permanent poll labour overstatement. It’s a remarkable result.

    The sad thing for the Lib Dems is that they even managed to totally under-perform the swing that did occur, against Labour of all people. Just looking down their list of target seats must make a Libdems heart die. There are seats they should have got so easily and the labour vote collapsed but it just went straight to the Conservatives, leaving the Libs standing and too many Lab MP’s still in place.

    They must be despairing right now. I guess at least they’ve finally got their cherished hung parliament dream. They are presumably comforting themselves with the though they will hopefully never have to fight an election under FPTP again.

  6. Quincel – not yet. I had about 2 hours sleep while the Breakfast Telly lot were in charge, then back to the studio. Lie in tomorrow!

  7. My humble opinion from across the pond in Canada is I suspect that on polling day at the ballot box, there was a combination of voters being persuaded by the Conservative Party rhetoric that a “hung Parliament” would be bad, while Labor-oriented voters in marginal seats there decided they’d back the Labor Party to prevent the Conservative majority, resulting in the Liberal Democrats getting squeezed back to their normal voting percentage by that dual combination.

  8. “I had about 2 hours sleep while the Breakfast Telly lot were in charge, then back to the studio. Lie in tomorrow!”

    I don’t know how Dimbleby et al do it, quite one thing to stay up all night, quite another to still look fresh the next morning and afternoon!

  9. So much to digest. It’s striking how poorly Labour did in the white marginals in East Anglia & the W Mids, and how well in the big cities contrary to most predictions. If anything some safe seats have swung more than the marginals, which is the opposite of what was expected – though there are some major exceptions.

    Some predictions here were very wide of the mark. In all modesty I should point out that I was only 1 per cent out in estimating the Tory lead over Labour. The Tories have still not made the sort of impact they would have liked in the major cities, though there are exceptions (gains in Plymouth, Bristol & Cardiff). But Labour has plenty of work to do to recapture lost white votes, especially in the South but also in some outer suburbs & smaller towns in the North.

  10. I suspect there was a late swing from LibDem to Labour caused by the eleventh-hour improvement in the energy and tone of Brown’s campaigning. I think quite a few people did heed his call to “Come Home to Labour”. This would explain the unusual underestimate of the Labour score and a part of the LibDem overestimate.

    I also think that the performance of Labour in London bucked the trends. I didn’t see any polling during the campaign that suggested the Tories were underperforming UNS in London. If I were a pollster I would start my post mortem in the capital

  11. The Lib Dem decline was a real shock. They probably can’t believe their luck: doing very badly yet running into the arms of a Con-Lib coalition.

    I just wonder if ordinary Lib Dem members can stomach working with a party many will not want to be associated with.

    Can any Lib Dem supporters on this forum confirm if they would be happy with this coalition?

  12. Thanks, Anthony for the early post-mortem. My own suspicion was that it was a lot of late switching. From a Green Party perspective, it is noticable that result after result shows GP share of the vote down (with notable exceptions in Brighton Pavilion, Cambridge and Norwich South). In 2005 there was a lot of dissatisfaction with Labour, but few of those could bring themselves to vote Tory. In 2010, Tory brand de-contamination meant that they were prepared to do so, and Tory rhetoric about a hung parliament meant a couple of percent of voters made a late choice between Labour and Tories, having ruled out other parties because they wanted a majority govt.

  13. Labour has picked up a lot of local election seats and councils – is it possible to see how votes in same seats in local and general compre – may give a handle on tatical voting and how much Brown himself was an issue.

  14. There is also an issue of translating % share of popular vote into seats. Keying 37-30-24 into the UK Polling Report swingometer map results in 289-271-58-31, which DOES overestimate the Lab result and underestimate the Conservatives. Likewise the Electoral Calculus “predictor” gives.291-261- 67-31, also overestimating the LibDems. The BBC’s Election Calculator gives 289-267-65-29 (though it’s not clear whether NI is in the % figures).

    These discrepancies are quite significant . Does there need to be an inquest into this too?

  15. Ugh, I was really cheering for the LibDems. So sad to see them actually succeed in increasing their share of the vote, but lose seats. Now, they have to enter into a coalition with the Conservatives where the Cons will ignore them and refuse to do anything about electoral reform.

  16. Thanks Anthony from Kettering for all your good work.

  17. “Can any Lib Dem supporters on this forum confirm if they would be happy with this coalition?”

    Happy is not the first word that springs to mind, but given the state of the parties – and the country – I would be extremely unhappy with the alternative, which is to prop up a discredited Labour government who would still be a minority administration even with Lib Dem support.

    If NC did that, we’d be back to the days of all the LD MPs arriving at the House in a taxi.

    It all hinges on what sort of commitment to PR they can wring from the Tories – a committee looking into it for the next umpteen months doesn’t cut it.

  18. @GarryK

    I am a Tory voter so not what you had in mind really but I would like to say that I believe a Con-Lib coalition could work especially if Vince Cable was given the Chancellor role in the Cabinet. Yes I know tha proportional representation is a bit of a stumbling block but in fairness i have to say that the Lib Dems polling 23% and only getting 58 seats is not right. Something needs to be done (deep down i dont think I am the only Tory that thinks that either).

    I do have respect for Nick Clegg as he has stuck to his word over the party with the larest votes/seats should have first choice to govern. Interesting times. I hope it works. Its the best shot for the country because at least both parties want change and thats a good starting point.


  19. I am a lib dem, and on balance I think there is an opportunity for them to work in some way with the con’s, but it is a very difficult call. The grassroots libs, such as they exist at all down here (Devon Central), wont like it, but as Ken Clarke says, it could be a grand experiment as to the merits of a more proportional system, which would have thrown up the same equation anyway (just that libs would have had a lot more seats and hence bargaining power.)

    It will however throw up lots of local election dilemas, especially with big council elections coming up next year. I stood for libs against cons 3 yrs ago in West Devon, and was left feeling complete disenchantment with the way national politics has seeped down to the local level, and becomes just a chance for parties to snipe at each other, rather than provide good local government. This was one of the unexplored issues in party politics, which didn’t come to the fore in the national expenses scandal etc, and may be a possible positive outcome of a lib/con deal, as they work out how to square up to each other at a more local level.

    I would also suggest all mps have to automatically put up for re-selection by their parties before each general election, which is what they should have done this time.

  20. Incidentally, I’m going to go pick up my winning for correctly predicting a hung parliament. My deepest commiserations to all the readers of Political Betting who’ve lost money on betting on a Conservative Majority.

  21. It will be interesting to see whether the Tories can offer Clegg enough to get the deal past the Lib Dem Triple Lock. I doubt the initial proposal he made publicly this afternoon would.

  22. Clegg is in a very difficult position. At first sight he can side with either Labour or Conservatives, but the fact is the LibDems, after their surge, have done almost embarrassingly badly. As such it is almost an embarrassment to be in the position of holding the balance of power (although siding with labour still does not resulty in an majority). He might prefer Gordon Brown to resign – so he can work with Cameron in a more relaxed fashion. He has got to be quite modest in his demands I feel, or he will appear sleazy and opportunistic – he needs to be a little careful as regards any PR demands. There is a lot than can backfire on any party. Cameron needs to appear strong and not concede too much or he too might be seen as trying to go for power at any cost. Fascinating in a way but I wonder if Brown will simply resign over the weekend?

  23. @Jay

    PP bookmakers paid out anyway, so not out of pocket!! Enjoy your winnings

  24. To everyone on this site a big thanks

    I watched the BBC coverage on TV with this site on in the background on my PC.

    It was great with all the rumours being posted by everyone and I really enjoyed the conversation.

    Thanks again.

  25. @ Owain

    “It will be interesting to see whether the Tories can offer Clegg enough to get the deal past the Lib Dem Triple Lock. I doubt the initial proposal he made publicly this afternoon would.”

    In fairness to DC I dont think he could give every detail given that he hadnt even spoken to Clegg at that point. We will know more tomorrow morning after the talks have taken place tonight.

  26. @YAKOBS

    ” Fascinating in a way but I wonder if Brown will simply resign over the weekend?”

    May be too late the deal may be done by tomorrow anyway

  27. Maybe some of those missing LD voters are those 18-35s who woke up this morning to discover the election had already taken place (or so one anecdote suggests).

  28. What I have learned is that the conventional approach does not work in terms of seat predictions for FPTP when the third party becomes significant. I think you all have homework to do Anthony. I did note that Bob Worcester’s post at the beginning of the campaign materialised. I think it was 38 30 22 then and he said it would not change much. by the end.

  29. I disagree that the lib’s did ’embarrassingly’ badly.

    Infact they have the perfect result to show the inadequacies of our system when more than two parties are involved. i.e more votes-less seats.
    The truth is their resources are extremely limited for a party that probably expects to poll between 20-25%, with little, if any grass-roots coverage in large swathes of the country. They have been exceptional at finding top-class candidates and fighting strong ,focused campaigns over recent years, but the truth is, that their SW power base is traditionally blue country, and they have struggle to find top class candidates to stand in the increased number of seats they have become competitive in. If they had have one 80-90 seats+, my guess is that the political party as a whole wouldn’t have had a great deal more to offer (although they have sdaly lost some very good mps).

    Their best bet is probably to bite the bullet and get the best out of a con deal, that would see them increase in popularity generally with the country, even if not with themselves! If they prop up labour they can forget ever getting a seat down here for a generation, even with PR.

  30. @Anthony

    Your comments refer to UNS of course. The notable aspect of the evening was the huge spread in swing from one declaration to another (even in neighbouring seats).

    It will be interesting to see what the average marginal differentials were and how they compared to the 1.5-2% premium deduced.

    Thanks again for giving us the opportunity to talk rubbish (or me at least) and congrats.

  31. I am pleased that Labour did well in Scotland; & especially Edinburgh.

    I am desperately sad that Labour was unable to convince other parts of the country; although there was unexpectedly strong support in London.

    I am expecting Gordon to resign fairly soon; I hope that the Labour party recognise how strong he could be in opposition & do not hurry to replace him.

  32. firstly, most Tory voters on here were wrong when saying that Labour share would collapse below 20%. Secondly as I kept saying time and again, Angus Reid was a constant rogue and outlier and why anyone gave it credence is beyond a joke. Just because it confirmed the pro-tories desires, it doesn’t meant it was right and so it has proven to be a totally unreliable source, Also the fact that all pollsters underestimated Labour is astonishing – where was the bias from? And the overestimate of the LibDems … my goodness… commentators with common sense were saying how could the electorate suddenly fall in love with LibDems on the strength of debates …. well they didn’t fall in love did they. And it is ironic that even though they did badly, they are the party that everyone wants to talk to for coalition – where is the democracy in that? A party so soundly rejected (they only got 23% nationally) now being asked to help form government. If anything the interim cabinet should be formed from handpicked Lab and Tory credible intelligent front benchers (and no I don’t mean Osborne) until we are thru the economic criusis and then have electoral reform and deliver a general election in about 18 months to 2 years time

  33. I suspect the Labour boys may be quite chirpy tonight: they haven’t lost nearly as badly as seemed possible a week or so ago; they can now get rid of Brown in a seemly manner; Cameron has been given the ultimate poisoned chalice; Clegg has a) done unexpectedly badly and b) will have blood on his hands for touching the poisoned chalice. So…nicely positioned to regain power at the next election – without even conceding PR.

  34. did people who said they’d vote Lib Dem change their minds at the last minute (in which case it’s late swing), or did they not vote at all (in which case, perhaps pollsters need to work on more sensitive methods of predicting likelihood to vote)

    It seems to me that it should be possible to distinguish between these two options by comparing the actual turnout to that implied by the polls that were giving “surge-y” Lib Dem results. If it was late swing, the poll turnout should be 65%; if it’s a likelihood issue, it should be higher as the extra Lib Dem supporters in the polls were people who didn’t actually turn up on the day, but met the likelihood criteria for the poll. For example, the last YouGov poll has 73% 10/10 likelihood to vote vs the actual turnout of 65%.

    Given the way Cleggmania got people interested in politics who normally weren’t, it seems entirely likely to me that some subset of the people happily telling the pollsters “Oh, yeah, I’m definitely going to vote for that Nick Clegg bloke” didn’t in fact realise they had to be registered, etc., or simply couldn’t be bothered on the day because their interest had already started to wane again by the time May 6th rolled round, or whatever.

  35. @Paul

    Brown clearly was not an issue in the North of England nor Scotland. Indeed in North urban seats Labour held most of the seats and also increased council numbers too

  36. My son found out how they dealt with the enormous number of applications in Bristol West. Despite being well in time, they simply ‘lost’ his and so he could not vote because he was not on the register.
    As footnote he did ‘vote’. A housemate who could vote was not going top bother, so my son just asked him to go and vote for him instead – so he did!

    Youth are easy like that!

  37. I suppose you can rest for a while now Anthony – the next poll probably won’t be for another two or three weeks! :D

  38. One worry (among many!) for me after the results, is the assymetry of Scotland and England in electoral terms. Any new Government must attempt to be inclusive and respond to the disenchantment of most Scots with Westminster politics. Ther fact that there is only ONE Conservative seat in Scotland tells us all we need to know about the extent of the problem. Salmond is a wily old cove and will exploit this. I fear for the Union.
    Take heed Cameron if you succeed in bouncing Clegg into a Con-LIbDem pact. I want to be able to vote in a United Kingdom election next time.

  39. In the end I changed my mind and returned to the Labour fold. I’m so glad I did.
    It not that bad in the end and Gordon Brown can go leaving behind a party with a still healthy number of MPs. It won’t take much of a swing from Con to Lab to get back into power.
    I’m quite relaxed about a Con/Lib coalition. Their policies are poles apart so there will have to be huge concessions which may not appeal to the grass-roots of either party.
    Ultimately the LibDems lost my vote because of Clegg and Ashdown’s arrogance in saying there were only two parties in the race at the back end of the election campaign. What a stupid thing to say. They blew it.

  40. The reason the Lib vote collapsed was down to policies. When the dust settled, the policies didn’t resonate with the public. Most people were impressed with Clegg et. al but the hints of further taxes on pension including taxing employer contributions scared off many that might have given them a go. I know many that liked the spin but were worried by the detail. Big lesson for them is to be more prepared for that Clegg moment in the future and make sure the party has policies that do not scare the mainstream. Given the widespread dislike for Labour and GB, the Lib vote % is quite simply a shocker. No other way to describe it and a big missed opportunity for them!

  41. If lib’s don’t do deal with either, can GB propose queens speech , and just carry on ?

    [Yes, he can. But if he loses the vote on the Queen’s speech he must resign – AW]

  42. @Mac (9.14)

    “Brown clearly was not an issue in the North of England nor Scotland. Indeed in North urban seats Labour held most of the seats and also increased council numbers too”

    IMHO Brown was an issue but not nearly as great an issue as DC and the Tories. North of the Watford Gap, the Tories are still seen as Thatcherite (despite the “apparent ” nice side of DC). Thatcher will never be forgiven up here.

    I would suggest that the Lab surge locally is due to their much greater turn-out caused by the GE.

  43. @Garry K

    You said “…The Lib Dem decline was a real shock. They probably can’t believe their luck: doing very badly yet running into the arms of a Con-Lib coalition. I just wonder if ordinary Lib Dem members can stomach working with a party many will not want to be associated with. Can any Lib Dem supporters on this forum confirm if they would be happy with this coalition?…”

    Garry, hi! I’m not a party member and my association with the LDs is effectively zero, so I’m not sure what (if any) use my response would be. But for what it’s worth, my response would be this:

    A Lab/Lib coalition is not realistic: the numbers are too small (it’d last, what? A year?) and the moral case is zero: Labour lost, and that’s it. A Con/Lib coalition would work and it *is* possible that some of the more fundamental disagreements (Europe!) could be put aside, but I don’t know that Con would pay the price – PR. To put it bluntly:

    * If Cameron can deliver some form of PR, then LIB will swallow in buckets if required and smile whilst doing so
    * If Cameron cannot deliver some form of PR, then LIB will bite, spit it out, and kick him in what remains.

    And no cheaty gobs***e like AV, or AV+, or whatever f***wittery they come up with. Some kind of proper PR system like civilized countries have, instead of that pre-Reform-Act-level travesty we had yesterday. 23% of the vote: 8% of the seats – that’s not democracy.

  44. @Davod

    lib% not shocker in long term scheme of things. They would have taken it before election (24% outside NI).

    They got a bit carried away with their own hype (or more likely the hype of the polls), and had to live with scrutiny they weren’t prepared for.

    Reading between the lines we all should have seen it. The 2 or 3 suggested rogue polls with them at 23/24% over the last couple of weeks weren’t rogues at all.

    Ironically though NC may now be better prepared to sit in deal with blues, and at least has a high public profile that was non-existent before. He was always likely to be king-maker. At least we know who he is now.

  45. @Davod (9.29 pm)

    “The reason the Lib vote collapsed was down to policies. ”

    Davod, I partly agree although I also think there were nerves from some of the electorate. Fear of a victory for lab or Con caused soft LDs to vote for the opposite party. As our candidate said at the results speech, “we need a system where people can vote for what they want rather in fear of what they don’t want”

    I would also disagree re the policies that did not go down well. On the doorstep I found that people who had voted LD locally and Lab/Con nationally did so because of LD policies on Europe and immigration. Unfortunately we did not do a good enough job of explaining our policies on these subjects. In common with the other 2 main parties we tended to cover up these subjects.

  46. NC was quick to push the Tory ‘rights’ , but I wonder if he has an exit strategy if the talks fail? If LDs refuse to jump into bed with blues on the grounds that their PR offering is not good enough then DC can accuse them of being self-seeking and opportunistic, whereas what matters is ‘the national interest’. It may then be difficult for NC to knock on GB’s door without adding to the impression that they will only jump into bed with the highest bidder.

  47. PeterBell
    ‘In common with the other 2 main parties we tended to cover up these subjects.’

    That’s a very good point. Our voting public is very uneducated and I rage at the poor standard of political debate on main TV with needless adversarial interviews conducted by people who think they are Perry Mason.

    Apart from that why do we refer to our ‘gutter press’? Only one reason, our population’s poor education.

  48. Hello Everyone :o

    Wasn’t too far out with my ‘fun’ prediction of:

    40 30 20 10 :o

    DC & NC should be able to work well together on various issues (some not so easy)

    But NC just couldn’t possibly be seen to help prop up a Labour Government and GB that had been convincingly rejected.

    Good luck to DC because he will certainly need it :o

  49. Amber Star

    ‘do not hurry to replace him’

    I agree, if NC and DC do go ahead, the ‘no time for a novice’ may become all too apparent. Having GB in plain sight would be a salutory reminder of what we have lost.

  50. I think the key for camneron was failing to win in any of the three Bolton seats (my home town). basically, under Thatcher, the Cons had 2 out of the 3 seats. Under Blair, all three went red and have stayed red.So in that particular town, it’s not the Thatcher legacy that turns the voters off – I reckon it’s DC himself.

1 2 3 15