Ed Miliband projected to win Labour crown


On the eve of Labour’s leadership conference, Left Foot Forward’s model is projecting a victory for Ed Miliband. Our latest intelligence reinforces the numbers we provided to YouGov on the MPs and MEPs’ section for their shock poll on September 12th.

Assuming YouGov’s numbers are a representative sample of party members and trade union members, the younger Miliband brother will take the crown. Political Betting and Guido Fawkes are both making a similar projection this morning.

Left Foot Forward has gathered information on the first preferences of 261 of 271 eligible MPs and MEPs. They show 41 per cent for David Miliband followed by Ed Miliband (30%), Ed Balls (15%), Andy Burnham (10%), and Diane Abbott (3%). We also have intelligence on the 2nd preferences 32 of the 74 MPs that we believe are supporting either Abbott, Balls, or Burnham.

Supporters of Diane Abbott are splitting 6-1 for Ed M (with 1 unknown); supporters of Andy Burnham are falling 8-2 for David M (with 16 unknowns); supporters of Ed Balls go 8-7 for David M (with 25 unknown). Overall, our sample shows 2nd preferences falling 17-15 for David Miliband (with 42 unknowns).

Without a more representative sample, Left Foot Forward continues to assume that MP’s 2nd preferences will fall 50:50. This would give David Miliband a 56-44 lead in the run-off with his brother among MPs - not enough to prevent Ed Miliband of victory. But as reported by Political Betting:

[Former MP] Nick Palmer reckons after soundings that MPs will split 54-46 in favour of DM – that’s slightly wider than another estimate passed on to me this morning which had a 6% DaveM lead in this section.

The big shift since our last projection is a small upturn in Ed Balls’ support among MPs and MEPs. As reported by Next Left, Mr Balls has secured a first preference each from public supporters of David and Ed Miliband. This momentum makes it increasingly likely that Diane Abbott will come bottom with Ed Balls likely to overtake Andy Burnham and finish third – a projection first made by LFF in August.

Perversely, Diane Abbott coming bottom is likely to help Ed Miliband. A candidate finishing bottom will see their 2nd, 3rd and 4th preferences counted while the candidate in third place will only have their 2nd preferences counted. If Balls came third, a voter giving their preferences in order to Ed Balls, Andy Burnham and Ed Miliband would not influence the run-off between the Milibands.

Join @wdjstraw on Twitter tomorrow from 4pm for live tweets from the leadership conference. We will publish a full analysis of the numbers on Left Foot Forward shortly after the result concludes.

This entry was posted in Left Foot Forward and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Pingback: Martin Day

  • Pingback: Mat M

  • Pingback: Nik Darlington

  • Pingback: Matthew Woods

  • Pingback: Oz

  • Pingback: bashmore

  • Pingback: Jason Keen

  • Pingback: Sarah Winkless

  • Pingback: Andy Reed

  • Pingback: Paul Nezandonyi

  • Pingback: mark palmer

  • Pingback: Shamik Das

  • Pingback: Tom

  • http://brightgreenscotland.org/ Adam Ramsay

    Hello,

    um, unless Labour uses a very odd form of STV, you explanation at the bottom is surely wrong?

    In any normal STV system, an Ed Balls vote with a 2nd pref for someone who has already been eliminated would transfer immediately to the next pref who was still in – on your example, Ed M.

  • http://lansonboy.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default Alex Folkes

    You say:

    “If Balls came third, a voter giving their preferences in order to Ed Balls, Andy Burnham and Ed Miliband would not influence the run-off between the Milibands.”

    But that is wrong.

    AV transfers preferences to the next available preference. So if Ed Balls came third and his votes were being transferred, they would transfer to whichever of the Millibands was most preferred on each ballot paper. Preferences for Burnham or Abbott would simply be ignored as they are already excluded from the race (under your assumptions).

    Please don’t mislead people about how the voting system works (even if inadvertently)

    Alex

  • John Michaels

    Can you publish the info you actually have gathered on who is supporting who? Jon Greg claimed last night David is only 14 votes ahead of Ed in PLP section – which would make 1st prefs 53/47

  • Pingback: Dave Weeden

  • Pingback: Dave Weeden

  • Pingback: Ed Miliband odds-on to be next Labour Party leader for first time « CROWDED VOICE

  • Peter Williams

    A candidate finishing bottom will see their 2nd, 3rd and 4th preferences counted while the candidate in third place will only have their 2nd preferences counted. If Balls came third, a voter giving their preferences in order to Ed Balls, Andy Burnham and Ed Miliband would not influence the run-off between the Milibands.>

    I think you got this wrong. If someone voted Balls, Burnham, Ed M. And Burnham got knocked out before Balls. The balls vote would transfer to Ed M (third pref) straight away. It doesnt just get discarded.

  • http://billyblofeld.wordpress.com Billy Blofeld

    This is a close one….I’m cheering on Ed – but hope my bad luck on the horses doesn’t curse Red Ed’s chances of crossing the tape first.

    If we are going to have a return to the 1980s we may as well have the Union’s man running the Labour Party. That will add to the drama and entertainment.

  • Sunder Katwala

    It won’t matter who goes out when if nobody is at 50%

    If Ed Balls finishes third, a voter who votes (1) Ed Balls (2) Diane Abbott (3) Andy Burnham (4) Ed/David Miliband will still have their fourth preference counted, just as they would have done if their vote had transferred to Abbott then Burnham had Balls gone out first.

  • http://www.order-order.com Guido Fawkes

    To be clear, I switched my bets on to Ed last Friday, I’ll probably close ‘em before the results are out. It is too close for comfort.

  • http://www.order-order.com Guido Fawkes

    By the way the bookies have the first round elimination as you predict:

    https://smarkets.com/politics/uk/official-labour-candidates/first-to-leave?sma=mf2r

  • Will Straw

    Apologies for the error about the reallocation of 2nd, 3rd and 4th preferences. I was given some duff information which I should have checked. Thanks to Alex Folkes and Sunder Katwala for correcting the error.

    Will

  • http://billyblofeld.wordpress.com Billy Blofeld

    I suspect I’ve lined Guido’s pockets in some way in backing Ed at Political Smarkets.

    Come on Red Ed…. you can do it……

  • LC Prestes

    Red Ed and back to the 1980s? what about the coalition’s trenchant marxist business secretary? We’re surely going back to the 1880s? Everything compadre Cable said being contradicted a couple of hours later by a Tory boy junior minister? As Weller might say (keeping the 80s theme going) “now that’s entertainment”! How long can this shower really last?

  • Pingback: Palmer 1984

  • Chris

    I suspect that more MPs will break for David M than are letting on. I can imagine a few MPs keeping their CLP happy by saying that they will vote for Burnham, Balls or even Abbot and then giving the vote that counts to Miliband Snr.

    I think the assumption of 50/50 in the PLP (and Europe) seems unlikely.

  • Pingback: Nick Sutton

  • Jamie Taylor

    well, if it turns out to be true it’ll be a gift to the Tories. Lots of banner headlines about ‘Red Ed’ ain’t going to do Labour any good – think Ed get !”Kinnock”!, and stay lost for a generation.

  • YouGov Tracker

  • Touchstone Economic Tracker

  • Best of the web

  • Archive

7ads6x98y