If you'd be a bit more specific (and preferably a bit more civil) then we could actually see if you have a point.

I'm going to take a guess and presume you mean the bit where he said 'a Green vote is the best way of keeping out the BNP in many constituencies'.

You're right to flag up the huge discrepancies in the relative popularity of the Greens and BNP in different constituencies.

But even in the BNP's target areas they're still beatable. The latest Yougov poll shows that among those certain to vote, the BNP and Greens are level on 8 percent each in the North, and it's a 7:5 split in the Midlands and Wales (god, why don't they split the poll results over the actual constituencies?).

Among those with the full range of intentions to vote, it's 7:4 split in the North, and 6:3 in Midlands and Wales.

With 14 percent on 'don't know', there's a lot to play for even before decided voters switch allegiance. And the recent BPIX poll had 40% of Labour, 36% of Tories and 43% of Lib Dems saying they were 'very likely' to cast their ballots for a smaller party in the European election.

Mind you, the Yougov poll also has only 10 percent saying they definitely won't vote. The idea of a 90 percent turnout is a joke (last time it was 38). Then again, that means if we only mobilise another few votes, with a low turnout we have a big impact.

You're right that a vote for someone who gets less than the BNP is a wasted vote. The big three and UKIP are sure to beat the BNP. But the thing is, that is unlikely to be enough to stop them. As I've already said, swing 3 percent of the vote to any of them and it won't make much odds. Swing that to the Greens and it will almost certainly make the difference between the final seat of a constituency going Green or BNP.

Like Jim, it seems clear to me that the greatest leverage - the ability for a few votes to make the most difference - is with the possibility of the Greens pushing BNP into sixth place

I'm not interested in hoodwinking anyone. The News item in U-Know links to last time's results and an online calculator so you can type in any result you imagine is possible and see how it would translate to seats.

And a good day to you too. Glad you could stop by for a civil chat. Oh wait a second, you didn't, did you?

I disagree. That's not to say that you're talking horseshit, merely that there may be more than one way of interpreting the polling data. I'll not reiterate Merrick's points as he's spent more time analysing the polls than me. But if you can tell me why he's talking horseshit, then I'll be happy to change my position.

=======
One suggestion though; try to be a bit less insulting in your choice of language. I have a problem with many of the conventions of academia, but one thing I have learnt from the academy is that discussions are always more fruitful if you avoid antagonistic language. The very first line of your post made me want to dismiss the rest of it. Unless you're a troll, that's not a rational strategy for getting your point across.