Both Labour and the Tories up 3 with ComRes
March 2nd, 2009
CONSERVATIVES 44% (+3)
LABOUR 28% (+3)
LIB DEMS 17% (-5)
But for Nick Clegg’s party it’s back to normal
The big news in the last ComRes poll a fortnight ago was a sensational boost for the Lib Dems which had them at 22% - only three points behind Labour.
Tonight they are back at 17% which is broadly in line with the other pollsters - the question is whether this represents a change of opinion or is partly down to the way ComRes works out its past voting weightings. I’ve been doing some analysis on this and will be writing a piece in the near future. I suggested that this might be an issue when that 22% share came out.
No doubt people will seek to read into the numbers the impact of last week’s tragic news about David Cameron’s son and what was generally agreed to have been an authentic and heartfelt response from Brown. Who knows? But certainly this was dominating the news in the period up to the fieldwork starting.
Getting back into the mid-40s is a real boost to Cameron while Labour will be pleased to be away from that dreadful 25% figure.
The Independent in the morning is likely to make great play that the poll detail suggests that Cameron is winning over former LD voters supporters with one in five (21 per cent) of those who voted Liberal Democrat in 2005 say they would vote Tory now.
Alas this proportion would be even more significant but for the fact that in its most previous survey ComRes found that barely 6% of 2005 LD voters said they had switched to the Tories. So the LD switching proportion has moved from 6% to 21% since mid-February. There’s something wrong somewhere. I believe the higher figure because that’s what other surveys have suggested.
Overall ComRes reinforces the other polling with only the online-firm, YouGov, being slightly out of alignment. The Tories are in a strong position to win a comfortable majority.
So Brown Bounce II is really over. Could this week’s events in Washington DC provide a springboard for Brown Bounce III? It is on that eventuality that Labour’s hopes rest.
Next General Election Betting.
MessageSpace Advertising
wow
Excellent poll for the Tories.
Terrible poll for Labour.
Lib-Dems - Oh dear.
First?
Your clock is 6 minutes fast.
First, hopefully.
Brown Bounce 111 !!! More like ‘when the cat’s away Harriet Mouse will play..’
She is going to be cooking something up , that’s for sure…
Labour core vote territory but I just dont think they are quite that low in reality, yet.
Will we ever know what lead to some pollsters picking up on that Lib-Dem Bounce in February?
OMG -5…a rather prophetic comment under the circumstances?
“The Lib Dem vote will collapse, where? it doesn’t matter.”
by Mike Smithson March 2nd, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Baxter gives a landslide Tory majority of 128. The fact Labour could be “pleased” with this shows how dire things are for them. Heh.
10. Thrashed but not annihilated. Well done Gordon.
how many bounces is Brown going to have?
8. Something for a slow news day perhaps. The snow causing changed demographics, underlying issues of the past week or any other possibilities you can think of.
Excellent poll but is it even Nick Clegg’s party anymore? He is utterly anonymous as leader. When is he ever on television? It’s all Cable.
Its all unravelling. I dont think the nation is prepared to listen to Labour spin anymore. BYW Mike I was spot on on the Tory Labour figures……………
167 44 28 16? seems a possibility
by Maggie Thatcher Fan March 2nd, 2009 at 6:26 pm
I was wrong about the LD figure.
Alas this proportion would be even more significant but for the fact that in its most previous survey ComRes found that barely 6% of 2005 LD voters said they had switched to the Tories.
Surely that last poll was a rogue and this part of it just corrects that rogue nature? IIRC the circumstances were inclined toward LD’s - Lots of Snow: Public sector workers being a key component of the LD coalition staying at home. Surely you need to look at the same polling organisition but go look at a few results prior to the “22″% poll?
Has Brown got himself a mini-bounce because he was able to not be a complete jerk last week?
Hmmm so much for the Brown bounce being over, the Clegg bouncelet also seems to be so….
FWIW Baxter shows Labour on the cusp of winning 200 seats based on this poll.
That 3/1 from Hills against them winning 150-199 seats continues to look tasty imo.
On a side note, there is a small tipping point in these figures. There is a difference between Tory leads of 10-15% and Tory leads of 15-20% (or beyond).
The former imply a solid Tory majority, with maybe a glimmer of hope for Labour that they could claw back to a hung parliament, somehow, if all went amazingly well in the campaign.
The latter margins imply a landslide Tory win, and Labour teetering on the edge of calamitous meltdown - i.e. the possibility of their winning fewer than 150 seats.
It was the perception that Labour were heading for that second calamitous result that provoked the Labour leadership war last summer. If we get a few more of these polls - with the Tories more than 15 points ahead - I suspect we will hear the sniping once again.
16. Martin Day making a sensible, reasoned post on Lib Dem polling. No smileys, no mention of taxis of any colour or Corporal Jones impressions?
Are you ill, or should we prepare for the rapture and start selling ice skates to Satan?
19. I think its hard to see them fall inder 28-29% in a GE based on what we can forsee.
So it looks like whatever caused the LD blip was very much temporary. I’d characterise this one as “return to status quo ante”.
More when I’m at a PC.
BBC News again not comparing like with like on Dow and FTSE. Brown goes to the USA and the markets collapse.
As for Balls’s claims the FSA was ineffectual, packed with placemen just like the BoE.
I posted this at the end of the last thread. In view of this poll, here is what I said in relation to Scotland:
375 Mike the interesting thing is that both the Scottish Tory and SNP PBers are saying exactly the same thing from personal experience and in respect of virtually the same seats. The one common feature in both Glasgow East and Glenrothes was how badly the LibDem vote was squeezed. In both cases by far more than 50%.
I don’ think the Scots are as open in pollng questions as our cousins down the road. Right up until the day of the 2007 election, we were being told the Tories would be lucky to keep 5 or 6 seats and of course in reality we went from 18 to 17, close on 3 times as many. In many of the seats which will count at the GE there is a stronger Tory grassroots presence and except in Edinburgh, we are either the largest party or running the relevant council either alone or in coalition.
by Easterross March 2nd, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Specifically,
Roxburgh, Selkirk etc: LibDem held, Tory target
Dumfries and Galloway: Labour held, Tory target
Dumfries-shire etc: Tory held likely to become safe Tory
These 3 seats lie within Borders Council and Dumfries and Galloway Council. The Tories as largest party in both lead the coalitions in both.
East Renfrewshire: Labour held, Tory target
Tories largest equal party on council after years in wilderness
West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine: LibDem held, Tory target
Aberdeenshire Council is a LibDem-Tory coalition but the LibDem group is in turmoil having lost 4 members due to a major internal split and the neighbouring Aberdeen Council, LibDem run (now in coalition with SNP) is proving to be the basket case of Scotland and the LibDem leader refuses to resign even though the council is having to make £50 million cuts.
21. You should have seen the one i typed out and just deleted!
I thought better of it! What is there to gloat about the LD’s have plunged from 22% to 17% in a few weeks!
o/t. Any more news about the missing ballot papers from Glenrothes, have they ended up as landfill or cavity insulation?
Would somebody please explain to me how this or any other poll will change anything?
Which idiotic government policies will change as a result of this poll? Which Minister will resign as a result of this poll? Which banker will act differently as a result of this poll?
All this poll does is dramatically increase political masturbation by Tories and add a little gloom to the NuLabour [wankers anyway]and LibDem supporters, and that in itself will offer new wanking opportunities for Tories.
Polls so far from an election to the mass of humanity are boring; only political junkies are excited by them. Sadly it seems that the forthcoming death of Ms Goody and the latest exploits on Eastenders offer so much more for Joe and Mrs Public and little Johnny Public.
Meanwhle in the real world the Israeli Government continues to illegally blockade Gaza, Mugabi ignores international pressure and bankers get fat on taxes, whilst watching the not very good ship UK slithering speedily below the waves.
Perhaps another opinion poll will make all the bad things go away; opinion polls as dildo or comfort blanket?
23. Best poll figures for the Conservatives on Comres since September.
20 Very true. There are a hell of a lot of Labour seats with leads of 10-20% over the Conservatives; safe enough, if the parties are level-pegging, horribly vulnerable if the Conservatives have a big lead.
28. Hello there Sunshine!
20 seanT - there are some very sexy odds available from Hills & Ladbrokes against Labour winning fewer than 150 seats. Maybe it’s time for you to consider one of your very rare forays into the political betting markets.
28. Yawn.
What is it with ultra-lefties being unable to understand why polls matter?
The more Gordon Brown is on the telly, the worse Labour do, and the more his lieutenants are in the news, the more it compounds this rule. The more they try and spin the agenda, the more likely it is that the voters will desert. That said Brown bounce 2 was a reaction to horrendous economic circumstances. Now the voters undersdt and now want to blame… Not exactly encouraging for Labour is it
details are up: http://www.comres.co.uk/page190742715.aspx
I guess this shows that the 22% was just a one off, I more Lib-Dems inside and ready to answer the phones. I guess it is hard to go out in the snow wearing Quorn sandals. Still it is good news for the Tories and bad for Labour.
re 28 Polling sets the whole environment in which political activity takes place. If a party is down then there’s pressure on the leader - if up then the leader is more powerful.
ICM polls, certainly, have an excellent record of predicting election outcomes this far out.
ComRes’s methodology is still untested.
25 I was too late to take part in the previous thread discussion, my tuppence opinion is wait until the last week of the election then make a prediction. Too much can happen between then and now. Based on this poll I would be worried if I was a LD in Berwickshire & Roxburgh, Argyll, Aberdeenshire West, possibly Gordon, and East Dunbartonshire. The last seat could mirror the result in 1979 when the late Margaret Ewing (Bain then) lost with her vote going to all the other opposition parties. Being an effective member is no defence when your party is not that poular.
33 - QE. I am sorry to differ Ken - as you generally make very good contributions. But your list of points on QE (Quantitative Easing) is pure nonsense put out by a highly inept government.
For a start don’t call it QE – it’s so vague it could mean almost anything. Call it ‘printing money’ – which is very specific and clear in meaning.
Through hiding what we mean through meaningless technical sounding phrases like ‘Quantitative Easing’ we are playing the lawyers trick of obfuscation, so beloved of the civil servants depicted in ‘Yes, Minister’ – we also reveal the state of mind of those using this trick. Quacks trying to sound like experts through using obscure language.
So we are talking about ‘printing money’.
We can now see that the numbered list of points which seems to have been got from either Gordon Brown or his quack-in-chief – Charlie Bean, is pure nonsense.
Printing money is the cause of the current depression. Centrally controlled interest rates were set too low year after year – encouraging massive printing of money by the banking sector through issuing of loans – this caused over-expansion of sectors that drained resources from the rest of the economy, in turn causing a huge structural imbalance. The economy then wants to restore equilibrium and this is why we get a recession. The problem was wholly government caused.
Gordon Brown’s ‘no more boom and bust’ and ‘permanently low interest rates’ was like pouring petrol on the flames. We now know he was having private meetings high level bankers at RBS, HBOS, and others and directly ordering them to ‘print money’ in order to create the illusion of an economic miracle and help Labour to win the 2001 and 2005 elections. Insiders that saw the disaster coming where sacked or silenced.
That is the narrative.
On the economic theory explanation. The free market was never allowed to raise interest rates as risk rose to reflect assets becoming over-valued and over-priced. In conjunction with this the government set an explicit ‘inflation target’ for the BofE to encourage inflation, while at the same time changing the rules on CPI, RPI, etc to seriously falsify the inflation figures from 2003 onwards (in the US this was done in the 1990’s) to get a lower reported figure than the real level of inflation.
The serious criminal act was excluding housing from CPI, which means it cannot actually be described as an ‘inflation figure’ – this is a blatant fraud, and a serious criminal act on the part of the government. A future government may want to prosecute on this as the fraud caused the current collapse of the UK economy.
Now if ‘printing money’ caused the bubble, how can the same medicine cure the illness. It can’t – it will kill the patient.
The only one solution to the current problem is the following.
First restore the gold standard, and make the printing of money impossible – today, tomorrow, forever. Second abolish centrally set, government controlled interest rates, and allow the market to set them, so they can rise as risk rises. Third, identify the worst affected banks and allow them to collapse – so the over-expanded banking sector can contract, and redistribute economic resources back to the rest of economy, formally ending the recession.
This analysis is based on revolutionary new economic theories.
The one of many reasons that I and Mervin King are at cross purposes, is that he is not aware of the ‘measuring problem’. There is a fundamental fallacy in how he and others define and understand macroeconomic variables. It’s all based on the Keynesian models of the 1930’s. Itself influencing the inaccurate and ludicrously misleading ‘Great Crash’ of Galbraith – a notorious work of fiction, not fact.
Keynesianism (ISLM) analysis was widely discredited in the 1970’s and derided by most of the world’s academics since then.
Stagflation is impossible under the Keynesian model. Yet it occurred through the 1970’s, in 1990-91, and early 2007. Keynesianism has been repeatedly falsified. So why are Ben Benanke and Charles Bean endlessly going on about a dead theory – the truth is they are both quacks and they think no one will point it out.
But there is a problem. No new theory was created to replace Keynesian macro-economic models – the monetarists tinkered around with them but never wholesale replaced them with better theories.
That replacement is coming. It’s a giant – a super-theory. The above is just the tip of the iceberg.
by Will L March 2nd, 2009
28/33 Oh dear Malcolm…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rachel_sylvester/article5834825.ece This title is grim reading to the eye. Is it derived from the roman phrase?
If these poll figures were to be replicated in Scotland at the GE it would see 12 Tory gains. I appreciate we are unlikely to take Perth and Angus from the SNP but I could see us taking one of them. Clearly if nationally the Tories are back in the mid 40s and Labour down around 30 and the LibDems around 18 then we would get a decent clutch of Scottish gains.
Quoted on Conhome Thread:
“When asked to put their party allegiance aside and name the party they trusted most to steer Britain through the crisis, 35 per cent opt for the Tory team of David Cameron and George Osborne, 28 per cent for Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling and nine per cent for the Liberal Democrats’ Nick Clegg and Vince Cable.”
33. If the numbers where reversed I’m sure they would be praising them to the hills.
28
News might be another social service failure for the next few days. Govt won’t like that.
28. Governments, particularly long standing ones used to power, that see polls offering no glimmer of hope act differently. If this pattern sets in, and it seems to be, they’ll be one part Better Angels and two parts Wounded Animals. Can anyone explain the current High Risk behaviour ?
We have better angel/legacy thinking like the third runway and Post Office part privatisation. Do Governments that think they have a hope in hell of winning do long term pain like this 15 months before an election ?
We have wounded animals like Harman with her simply exttraordinary ” Court of Public Opinion ” interview over fred the Shreds pension. Do Governments that don’t face imminent existential obliteration, imminent death behave like this ?
Believe me we are going to see labour do some truely extraordinary things over the next 15 months that we would never see from a party just 5% to 7% down.
Who the hell is STILL prepared to vote Labour??? FFS!
Is the interviewing being done by Jack Boot Straw whilst holding a Luger to the head of the unfortunate punters?
So 28% of the population are TERMINALLY STUPID ! God help us. LOL
37 Mike, you wouldnt be questioning your own golden rule by any chance?
43 Only 9% for Saint Vince? From the LibDem reactions to him on here, you’d think that would be north of 90%…
As Victor Meldrew would say………..
” I DON’T BELIEVE IT”
@Will L - interesting on housing and the CPI - I’m broadly sympathetic and have followed this debate for some time. How *do* you include it though? Wouldn’t it make more sense to have a specific official housing index which policymakers are expected to take into account?
Because while the CPI affects people differently, say, if they don’t ever buy cars, or if they have an expensive rail season ticket, but housing is a huge proportion of people’s income, yet affects them completely differently - do they rent? privately or from the council? do they own, or are they looking to buy, or sell? do they have a mortgage? fixed or variable?
I think it would come to dominate the figures in an uniformative way - we could just add in house prices, which would provide the right indicator for where interest rates need to go - but for individuals it would be even less of an inflation index than ever before.
Very good Tory figures. Disappointing for the Lib Dems. Labour must be used to this by now.
Re previous thread and bets on FDR
Ladbrokes have confirmed that they will pay out if its Roosvelt that’s mentioned.
42 - we will try and make sure you don’t win either seat, it will depend on where the former LD and Labour vote go to, if replicated in this poll. As I have said before, don’t count our chickens yet.
42 Easterross - last time I looked the SNP were being offered at 7/4 against retaining Glasgow East. How do you see this seat going at a 2010 GE?
nine per cent for the Liberal Democrats’ Nick Clegg and Vince Cable:
This is my view Vince may make some potentent points but the LD’s are seen as nothing but a joke! Potentially this is where the LD’s could suffer big time despite carpet bombing voters with two horse bar graphs and advocating the cleaning of dog shit from the streets! Labour are still doomed but what i find interesting is the sheer re-alignment possible at the next election. It will be as dramatic as 1997 should the Tories win the election with a majority (I am sure they will).
39. Getting off the Gold Standard helped us to avoid the worst of the Great Depression, just as leaving the ERM was also a boon to the economy. Personally I cannot see how fixed exchange rates (like the gold standard or ERM) can be much good, the best tool we have for finding the value of anything including currencies is a market, so lets use it rather than letting government bureaucrats decide. However I agree that the printing money strategy is very risky.
28 Malcolm are you applying for the role of SNP answer to Sean T? It has to be said that Sean T has a certain something when he compares political issues to body parts or sexual acts.
So Gordon Brown and Alas Dire Darling are seen as more competent with the economy that Vince Cable & Cleggover, by 28% of the British people.
How do these people cross the road by themselves without getting themselves killed? LOL
56, Cable’s changes his mind at the drop of a hat. He reckoned the government should give Fred 27k a year and he could sue if he disliked it, and then disagreed with Harman’s COPO idiocy which is virtually identical.
58 - wrong Malcolm ?????…………. our SNP man is Malcolm G
Also, someone should tell LabourList that the embargo time has passed
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/4929018/Alistair-Darling-We-made-mistakes-on-the-economy.html
Darling has always struck me as being fairly honest and being far less partisan than others, despite an often woeful command of detail. Brown could learn a few lessons in humility from him.
59.
That was a good one! 
Toenails bigging up the Obama Brown meeting in a big way. Almost as if Brown asked him to report it like that.
37 Mike I forgot to add that unlike previous elections the Scottish Tories have had candidates in place for a considerable time in not only key seats but in most seats. Only Argyll has had to change candidates and that was because my friend who was PPC was finding it a strain being PPC for a huge rural seat, mother of 2 small boys and wife of a senior army officer. In addition most if not all candidates in key seats are well known local figures from business or politics and have a local track record.
I wonder if Gordon Brown will ask Obama for an autograph?
Essentially a return to status quo poll alas. I’ll reiterate my preference for the big marginals polls and look forward to the next one.
53 Mike - Ladbrokes have confirmed that they will pay out if its Roosvelt that’s mentioned. In which case “FDR” would have been a good bet - except that the odds have now halved to 4-1. Also “Keynes” has now halved to 10-1.
25 Easterross Dumfries & Galloway was previously Tory, and we have high hopes of a return
Also in the Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/4929712/Gordon-Brown-advisor-says-City-all-important—and-rest-of-the-country-can-be-turned-over-to-tourism.html
53. Still not sure there is much value at 4:1, the entire market is dependant on the whims of one man. In retrospect probably more value than ‘god’ which is in my bundle though. It may be a used a lot by US politicians but I now realise I cannot think of Gordon Brown ever talking about belief in a deity at all, other than himself of course. Oh well.
39. “Second abolish centrally set, government controlled interest rates, and allow the market to set them, so they can rise as risk rises.”
From my understanding it’s central banks getting the base interest rates wrong that cause a lot of these problems. How feasible is it to have floating interest rates?
65. Of course - it must be difficult living in a cramped smelly cave - full of shit!
60 Yes Vince is becoming a bit Rentaquote which is beginning to blunt his effectiveness IMHO.
The only legal way the £27k could apply is if RBS is declared insolvent, pension fund wound up and Pension protection comes into play - so to take revenge on Sir Fred all other RBS pensioners should suffer, creditors lose cash and the whole injection of finance into RBS to “save the banks” thrown away.
Anything else would be illegal.
and then he attacks Harman for suggesting the court of public opinion should override the law……
68
Mike What were the main polls saying the last time the big marginal polls were done/ Does it give any clue to what they might say now? If you can tell me when the marginal poll was done (sept??) I’ll look it up myself.
58 Easterross
My name may have a Scottish ring to it, but my Homes are in England and the US.
37 Mike
The polls may be interesting, even to gamblers, but they just don’t change a bloody thing! Slimy Mandelson is still touting the sell off of the Post Office, the UK is offering 30 million to Gaza which the Israelis won’t let in and Mugabe still eats cake whilst his people can’t buy bread and this poll will not persuade one minister to make a truly momentous decision that will change for the beter our lives or the lives of others. Keep your eyes on the issues, they change voters minds and votng only happens on election day.
71 could it have been Shriti Vadera?
53. Mike - how about Gerald FORD if he is mentioned?
77. They aren’t just interesting to gamblers, they are the driving force behind the spread betting markets. Position yourself correctly before a poll comes out and you can make a lot of money very quickly, or lose it.
54 Marcia, common sense would say huge increases in SNP majorities in both Perth and Angus. However common sense in 2007 said easy victory for Alasdair Morgan the ex SNP MP and MSP in Galloway and Upper Nithsdale in what was the most marginal seat in Scotland. As we know it became safe Tory with the majority increasing from 90 to 3333. I just have a feeling Pete Wishart could get a shock.
55 SNP to hold Glasgow East this time I think but probably lose it back to Labour in 2014.
The LibDem bounce seems to have been genuine (because repeated in several polls) but transient. It baffled most of us at the time, since even LibDems couldn’t identify much that they’d done that caught the public eye recently. We’ll never know, I guess.
As for Labour’s 28%, I’m not surprised (I predicted the result within 1 point on the last thread). The core vote is in fair shape(one of our tellers on Thursday was even kissed by an enthusiastic voter, and I met plenty of keen Labour people), but the floating vote is AWOL and I think will only start to return if and when people think the Government is successfully getting them through the worst.
I’m glad that the Cameron tragedy and Brown’s response to it seems not to have had an electoral effect either way - some things should be free of the tyrnanny of poll-fixation.
On topic: Poll much as expected, I believe. Conservative and LibDem shares much in line with expectations, Labour a shade lower than I would have thought, but all well within MOE.
The last ComRes poll seems to have been a bit of an outlier, either because of statistical noise or because of the little-understood ‘Martin Day’ effect of bad weather on the sampling.
82 NickP - Blimey! We’re used to canvassing anecdotes, but a teller being kissed is a political bellwether too far, methinks.
81 - due to the boundary changes in P & NP their organisation was a bit of a shamble in parts of the ‘new’ seat. The reduced majority was the wake up call they needed and it is now far better organised. The Tayside North part just took it for granted that they would win. Nothing is certain in politics. One of the unknown elements will be the Labour vote in Perth. If this drops where does it go to?
LDs = cheerio!!!
71. Disgraceful, when will the people of these isles wake up to the fact we are being sold down not only the river but the rapids. We have had to endure harmful social enginerring policies not to mention open door immigration. Whats it going to take?? Riots?
70 Maisie, are you a fellow Tory when you say we”? The present seat of course has not been Tory and when created in 2005 was notionally Labour by about 250 votes. Peter Duncan had a bad result last time but to be fair Russell Brown was a relatively popular Labour MP from the Dumfries end of the seat. In 2005 Labour held it at Holyrood but we suffered because Murray Tosh’s wife had a terminal illness so untiljust before the election he did no campaigning. With hindsight he should have stood down and let Derek Brownlie stand as I am sure he would have won the seat.
82. Interesting - the LD volitility IMO was down to the snow - teachers and the like told not to attnd etc.
As for Labour i doubt you will see much of rival - I think Labour are seriously looking at 32% and below at the next election. I would say though Labour have a lower limit in a GE of about 28% or so IMO - Given the current economic environment it could be towards the lower end of of the scale i advocate. That said - I think some Labour folk will vote for the party whatever happens even if they disagree with the party because they don’t want a blank cheque like Labour got in 1997.
82
The reality is that the worse it gets, and its going to get a lot worse, the lower Labour will sink in the polls. What has Gordon done bar create a national debt approaching two trillion pounds?
£325 billion just trips off the tongue whilst Mandleson tried to spin it away on Fred the Shred. Its apalling politics and I sincerely hope Labour will pay dearly for their mismanagement of the economy. What happened to “no more boom and bust”, what happened to “prudence” when £325 billion can be signed off as though it was petty cash. The economy is in dire straits. meantime Gordo tries to hold onto Obama’s coat tails. Just dreadful, absolutely dreadful. in fact its shameful.
78 Ted
It sounds like ths sort of thing she would say. If it can be pinned on a government minister it’s bad news for Labour outside London and among the working class.
88. rival = revival!
Malcolm, to understand why Conservatives are so obsessed with opinion polls, I think you first have remember that for a long time the Tories never lead an opinion poll. And when I say a long time, don’t just mean a few months or a year or two, I mean 13 years!
The effect of spending 13 years in the political wilderness has made Conservatives jittery, unsure and still, even now, a lot of Tories are not quite able to believe the party they support has got a large and consistent lead in the polls. Added to that, for an opposition theres not actually much else to do but sit and watch the polls, and you have the reason so many Tories seem to take an unhealthy interest in the opinion polls.
Of course with government come differant priorities, so after they win the election I’m sure we’ll see this slightly unhealthy obssesion with the polls that most Conservative supporters have fading slightly, and then of course it’ll be Labours turn to sit a watch the polls.
39.The only one solution to the current problem is the following.
First restore the gold standard, and make the printing of money impossible – today, tomorrow, forever. Second abolish centrally set, government controlled interest rates, and allow the market to set them, so they can rise as risk rises. Third, identify the worst affected banks and allow them to collapse – so the over-expanded banking sector can contract, and redistribute economic resources back to the rest of economy, formally ending the recession.
This analysis is based on revolutionary new economic theories.
Will L.
Well Will L, will not reverting to the Gold Standard (at what value?) stop growth in it’s tracks while the economy of the world adjusts to this new/old set of conditions?
And will not growth, when it eventually restarts be sluggish and snail like due to lack of flexibilty of gold.
Personally I’m all for ending the rush to growth for growths sake, but it will entail hardships for much of the world’s population, and indeed force a contraction of population numbers in the long run. No bad thing you may say, but there are surely better methods of ensuring the same goal.
Printing money may indeed see the end of the current version of the Capitalist system, (the best system mwnkind has ever had), but going back on Gold, is IMV, not the way to do it.
I have just seen Chris Huhne on Newsnight - Does he ware a wig?
Am I the only person who wonders whether part of the fall back in the LibDem vote is because we are seeing far less of Dr Cable on the news commenting on economic issues and government woes?
Someone may have statistics to the contrary but my perception is that since David Cameron brought back Ken Clarke, the media have been keener to have Ken on slamming the government rather than Dr Vince. Ken of course has the advantage of being the Chancellor who gave is most of the first 20 quarters of growth which Gordon Brown used to shockingly take credit for.
Martin, calm down and go and watch Chris Huhne being interviewed by Paxo on Newsnight. We Tories do not promote our case by being rude to the LibDems. Save it for the Labour Party.
47 - while my heart shares your annoyance that 28% of people are still prepared to vote for this terrible government, my head tells me that a lot of that will be the payroll vote - e.g. people employed by the government, especially in jobs created by New Labour, who are afraid anyone else might scrap their jobs, and dependents of such people.
One of the reasons it would be better for the health of democracy to vote the present government out now is to stop them making the payroll vote so large that it becomes hard to remove them.
There are also still an awful lot of people who could never bring themselves to vote anything other than Labour because they see anything else as treachery to their origins. Mind you, those are exactly the sort of people who are feeling let down by the present government, as the recent thread argued, and who may be less willing to vote than usual. That sense of betrayal and disappointment is strong, and will not be quickly forgotten.
I presume the proportion telling pollsters that if they vote it will be Labour will actually by higher than 28%, but that the polling companies are rightly taking account of differential turnout.
It will make be very hard for Labour, under Brown or anyone else, to rectify the alienation of their own base in time for the next election. I still think that the Conservatives cannot afford to take outright victory for granted, and I’m sure David Cameron doesn’t, but it would take something quite extraordinary to produce a Labour overall majority from where we are now.
Paxo just described Brown as “otherwise saviour of the Western World” clear sarcasm and asking if he is going to prevent “American jobs for American workers”!!
After polls like this, you frequently see speculation about what might be Labour’s core vote. 30%? 25%? 20%? But is this a sensible way to assess Labour’s minimum result in the first place?
We are led astray by the way in which opinion polls are reported. They produce an headline figure in terms of absolute percentages. However, percentages don’t vote, people do – and while all voters are people, not all people are voters. Some people are sometimes voters, sometimes not.
All of this might seem too obvious for words, but the consequences are much overlooked. Some will turn out for their parties come hell or high water. In absolute numbers, these are the core votes of their parties. Then again, there are plenty of people who will always vote but who do not always vote the same way. When considering opinion polls, it is natural to think about voters comprising these groups.
But not everyone always votes. There are potential voters who may or may not vote and who may or may not vote for any given party. Some of these potential voters will definitely vote for one party if they vote, but will not necessarily vote.
I have no proof, but I expect that the number of people who will never vote in any circumstances is rather small. Many people do not vote, but that is because they are not motivated to do so.
All of this is laborious, but there is a point. The number of Labour voters who will turn out to vote come hell or high water is fixed, even if it is unknown. The number of potential voters who actually turn out to vote for other parties is not fixed.
What this means is that a core vote may score very different percentages, depending on how motivated the potential voters are. In 2005, turn-out was 61% and Labour polled 35.3% of the vote. If turn-out rose to 70% at the next election, then with the same absolute number of voters, Labour would poll 30.8%. To get the same result, it would need to convert enough of the extra potential voters who turned up on polling day into Labour supporters.
When parties are performing broadly comparably with the previous election, changes in turn-out do not make that much difference. But where a party is on a downward slide, any increase in turn-out is likely to reinforce the decline. If potential voters are turning out to vent their fury while potential Labour voters switch sides or stay at home, the collapse in percentage share could be dramatic. If turn-out went up to 70%, a quarter of Labour’s voters from the last election decided to vote for another party and Labour picked up only a fifth of the voters representing the increased turn-out, its share of the vote would be under 25%. Sounds unlikely? In 1997, Conservative votes went down by nearly a third, while turn-out was at 91% of its 1992 level.
This presents a challenge for all parties. Labour needs to make sure that its more casual voters can be persuaded to turn up to the polling booth, while the other parties need to wind up the casual voters who are less sympathetic and make sure that they register their feelings with an X in the box. In rough times with an unpopular leader, Labour face the bigger challenge.
94. Very probably.
we may need to show ID to vote soon
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5835407.ece
Michael Crick wedged somewhere near Brown’s colon on Newsnight.
100 - The system does need tightening up somewhat.
100 How does that overcome postal voting?
James Rubin lets the cat out of the bag the UK means nothing now!
Mr Rubin is a democrat after all! Tony Blair was much more of an interesting and acceptable PM!
Another excuse to force ID cards on people!
96: Chris, yes, though the difference isn’t as great as one might think (or wish) - the same poll shows the Tories on a 13% lead if differences in certainty to vote are ignored. There are quite a lot of supporters of all parties dubious if they’ll bother.
Marcia: “We may need to show ID to vote soon”
Bit late now for Glenrothes
82 NickP “the floating vote is AWOL and I think will only start to return if and when people think the Government is successfully getting them through the worst.”
Sort-of-true, Nick, but they aren’t going to return. Not to Labour, anyway.
It has been said many times in the past, and it will no doubt be said many times in the future, but it won’t sink in until the morning after the election: It’s the non-voters who are key to the next election
There seems to be a widely-held idea that Labour under Blair in 1997 was popular in a way that the Conservatives under Cameron today are not, and that therefore the Conservative vote is vulnerable. This is complete rot.
1992 Votes for Conservatives under John Major: 14,093,007
1997 Votes for Labour under Tony Blair: 13,518,167
The big winner of the 1997 election, in terms of the total vote, was the StayAtHome party.
The same will be true in 2010, except that the voters staying at home will be ex-Labour, rather than ex-Conservative. On the other hand, some of the voters (or their successors) who previously didn’t vote will come out this time.
(I’ve just seen antifrank’s excellent post at 98, which makes a similar point in a different way).
28 - Malcolm
Why are your posts such utter bull@@it and you sound such a complete mentally incontinebt t**t?
Leave off the falling down water, there’s a love. PB is for the big boys.
106. Nick (i ask nicely) - Do you really think Labour will win the next election or even come anywhere near?
I don’t - I think the rot has spread through the whole of the Labour party since the Goodwin Pension deal (You have done nothing wrong personally - some may say you voted for it!). But Labour seem to have lost it completly the Harmen rubbish is the icing on the top of the cake.
I don’t think this is a good thing from a democratic point of view because i think this is potentially worse for Labour in the next election than 1997 was for the tories.
Rachel Sylvester not impressed by Gordon’s Grand Bargain and Global vision - thinks he should concentrate on real help now in fact rather than oratory.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rachel_sylvester/article5834825.ece
Consevatives need to follow this through - Brown flying hither & tither while nothing is really being done other than Harriet & Mandy striking poses.
GIN
Thanks for your kind words. I’m in my sixties. I was a member of the Old Labour Party for 37 years, councillor, deputy leader of the group, political hack on various bodies.
Having stepped back from all of that garbage I feel I might just have a tiny insight into the political mind, particularly the typical Tory mind. There are buttons that are so easily pressed.
Used to do it all the time at council meetings.
The Tories on here are such good fun. Probably have an average age of about 22 and a half [IQ double that], more money than sense and believe everything they believe [if you see what I mean.]
As for the NuLabour wankers, they have enough pain. Well almost enough, they could always do with a little more. LibDems, hearts of gold, brains like peanuts. Not, Vince though.
Off to our place in the States next week to meet warm friendly people of a variety of ethnic origins. Its like being in the whole world without travelling, bit like the UK, I suppose, but this country is just becoming a bit of a dump. No-one smiles, no-one speaks. Sad bloody place. But for the NHS…..
oh Bloody hell - Barry Arse-lick sherman on newsnight: Why does the turkey just not throw the towl in? Pathetic! We talk about Robinson as being Toenails but Sheerman is stig of the f*cking dump up Bron’s arse!
Shame Labour cannot allow MP’s to change seats as Barry would be told to pi$$ off and someone from say Nottinghamshire takes the candidicy!
108 - As you say, you make the same point as me in a different way. I’m not sure that non-voters are the key to the next election, but they’ll certainly have a big influence on the margin.
My advice to Labour would be to enlist Ken Livingstone as their campaign director. In highly adverse circumstances, he managed to increase his vote. It wasn’t enough to win the mayoral election, but Labour put up a very respectable show by energising the base. Labour’s national team is doing nothing like as well.
110 A thumping majority whilst bad generally is going to be an absolute necessity come the GE. Labour cannot be allowed to get anywhere near any policy decision. A majority of 80 would suffice.
Sheerman Sheerman Sheerman - Out Out Out!
Nick Gibb - what is wrong with the poor man, such a shame.
114 antifrank - Except that Ken Livingstone is too much of a maverick. Good at energising the pro-Livingstone vote, but not a team player.
110: Martin - I go largely with the polls, with the reservation that they are capable of greater change than partisans think. If the Tories are ahead by 16% as we approach an election, of course they’ll win. Do I think that’s inevitable? No.
At a personal level, my seat becomes electorally interesting (i.e. susceptible to turnout differential tactical voting, personal votes, etc.) if the national Tory lead drops to around 6-7%, so I simply work on the assumption that it will. If it doesn’t, c’est la vie.
115. Maybe you are right! The economy is in such a mess now after Labour’s tenure of office, that a decent majority is required - indeed a landslide one to ensure change. It is not just about winning the election now for the Tories but ensuring they can adjust the H of L as Labour did in 1997. An intirim H of L will have to be appointed before election of what ever type.
Martin Day: “I think the rot has spread through the whole of the Labour party since the Goodwin Pension deal”
I think he’s a means to shore up the core vote. The bogey man of capitalism as the workers party pursue him. (Hypocritical of course since he was Gord’s mate during the good times)
I suspect the “all legal means” and threat of legislation will be repeated ad nauseam up to June to see how this line works for the Euros.
Regardless of how that goes it will be dumped as quietly as possible and - Euro result dependent - they’ll move on to something else (if this works in stabalising support) or find another scapegoat to try and reboot the class war theme to get the base back on board.
My hunch is that it is cack handed as holding that line till June can’t last and bored meeja types will be scouring the archives for any Brown-Goodwin links to start having fun at Brown’s expense.
A photo of them smiling and laughing would be gold dust.
112
The only good thing you can identify in this country is the NHS? Why don’t you stay in the states when you get there.
HOLY SH*T
Darling is going to pump 150 BILLION into the economy via quantative easing. We are f8cked.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/alex_singleton/blog/2009/03/02/alistair_darlings_150000000000_tax_bombshell
87 Yes true blue tory
123 quantatitive
Did any one litsen to Gordon Brown on talk sport radio this morning,this man told lie after lie ,live on air.The main two lies that stuck in my mind were first about mistakes he has made and he said the 10p tax was a mistake and he (Gordon Brown)admitted it was a mistake straight away,when the truth was brown went months defending the 10p tax.The second lie that stuck with me was when a caller told Brown to get rid of all fat cats,brown responded with that he did’nt go into politcs for those sort of people(fat cats means bankers)when the truth was he was giving bloody knighthoods to those people.How doe’s he get away with such porkies.
119. Fair enough Nick!
That is within electoral up’s and down’s and explains the vigourous activity in your neck of the woods!
Just out of interest, when you attend a PLP and the leader speaks - you have been a parliamentarian for many years now: 12 or so! What is it really like! Do you go in wondering what it will be like and maybe swong over by the leader or do you listen to the leaders speeech and get swung over. I ask out of interest! Obviously i am asking over the full the full period!
111. I think that kind of narrative is a real danger for Brown this week. In a lot of way it deoends what happens to the FTSE while he’s in America. If it continues to tank I think Brown will face a lot of “Brown fiddles while Rome burns” type headlines.
Most leaders that are under the cosh at home do take to grandstanding on the global stage, because it polishes their damaged and fragile egos, but invariably voters back home take a dim view to their leader swanning around on the world stage while things go from bad to worse at home.
This weeks US visit has the danger of blowing up in Growns face….
On the basis of this poll there has been a 4% swing from LibDem to Labour over the past month. How credible is that?
125. quantitative
129. I never thought the 22% for the LD’s was realistic!
Labour will be defeated at the next election - Can anyone really see them getting better than 35%?
It is a matter of whether the Tories get a working majority or a landslide now - that is the parameters of logic.
126 - I have come to the conclusion that MSM presenters are on the whole as thick as and lazy to boot (distinction between that and proper journos who I reckon are just lazy). Time after time I hear them talk about things and they clearly have no idea what they are spouting and have done nothing more than a brief wiki/googling as research around the subject.
In terms of holding Gordo to his porkies the only one who I have heard say to his face, no you are wrong, is Randall. When they did a meet the PM a few months ago, Randall was clued up and not afraid to say it.
130 hard enough to say, never mind spell!
A bounce, from 25% to 28%, bet that was just the defibrillator paddles operated by The LibDems!
The regional breakdown is now up on the Comres site.
In Scotland it reads SNP 29 LAB 25 TORY 22 AND LIB 16.
ON ITS OWN THIS IS NOT SIGNIFICANT AS THE SAMPLE IS TINY.
However it is the second Scottish breakdown in three days to show the SNP in the lead - YOUGOV on Saturday had the Snips ahead 33-32.
This brings me back to my previous point. Individual sub samples tell us little but aggregated they tell us a good deal ie SNP ahead last Summer, Labour back in front in the Autumn and now SNP moving back to the lead.
The significance is this. On these numbers Labour would still cling on to most seats BUT a few points more and we are in landslide and earthquake territory.
DOES ANYONE THINK THAT LABOUR MAY NOT SLIP FURTHER OVER THE NEXT YEAR?
129 - On the basis of the previous poll there had been a 4.5% swing from Labour to the Lib Dems. The Lib Dem boosters on here were very keen to treat that as credible.
Two polls in mid February had the Lib Dems on 22%. This was out of line with anything before and both pollsters since have the Lib Dems settling back to their previous levels. If there was a boost rather, it appears to have disappeared. More likely, it represented some form of polling glitch.
133. QE is a ridiculous policy - it is completly unknown where to start and stop. If all countries do it!
I have debts and most of them are are on fixed rates but Barclays refused a Credit Card transfer for me last week and i still had 6K on the card! It was onlu 1k or so! Maybe they are in shit? or they realise QE will impovorish them and not me?
100
One paragraph looks a little ominous:
“The Government will also begin a data-matching scheme on a pilot basis to allow electoral registration officers to obtain relevant and restricted data from public authorities such as Revenue & Customs and the Department of Work and Pensions.”
Sounds like the taxman will be hunting through the electoral roll for any names he doesn’t have on file.
132. I’ve long believed journalists are particularly lazy people. It’s their laziness that both allows spinmeisters to get away with their deception, and also force good politicians to employ those spinmeisters, as basic facts that support your side won’t get covered unless journalists are handed them on a plate.
132,well the two interviewers were mike parry(lick,lick primeminister)and Andy Townsend (ex footballer),so your proberly right oracle.
131 The most recent Yougov and ICM polls does not confirm that - indeed , still puts Labour within reasonable reach of Hung Parliament territory.I do agree ,however, that the last Comres rating of 22% was highly improbable.
Hopefully, a poll from Populus next week will help clear the air a bit!
141 Apologies for grammatical errors - effect of a few pints am afraid!
123 I was told that Gordo had already done £140 billion of quantative easing ,this from an economist, also bank of England accounts are no longer being published every week so we know what that means OMG what a mess
Limbaugh turns on Steele:
“Yes, said Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, I’m incendiary, and yes, it’s ugly. Michael Steele, you are head of the RNC. You are not head of the Republican Party. Tens of millions of conservatives and Republicans have nothing to do with the RNC and right now they want nothing to do with it, and when you call them, asking them for money, they hang up on you. I hope that changes. I hope the RNC will get its act together…
It seems to me that it’s Michael Steele who is off to a shaky start….
Now, Mr. Steele, if it is your position as the chairman of the Republican National Committee that you want a left wing Democrat president and a left wing Democrat Congress to succeed in advancing their agenda, if it’s your position that you want President Obama and Speaker Pelosi and Senate leader Harry Reid to succeed with their massive spending and taxing and nationalization plans, I think you have some explaining to do.
Why are you running the Republican Party? Why do you claim you lead the Republican Party when you seem obsessed with seeing to it that President Obama succeeds? I frankly am stunned that the chairman of the Republican National Committee endorses such an agenda.”
Let the civil war begin… I know who my money would be on.
143 - John Redwood posted in his blog a while back a form of quantitative easing has been going on for over a year now.
re several. Having to prove you are who you say you are when you go to vote is a very good thing, and you don’t need an ID card to do it. This is probably why Labour is taking 6 years to fully implement it, and without any tightening up of postal voting it’s a meaningless gesture as the voting factories in Asian areas will still be in full swing.
Frankly I couldn’t care less if this cause a huge drop in turnout as those who can’t be bothered with a simple form don’t deserve the vote.
135 I would happily accept that split for Scotland. It would lead to 8 Tory gains, Argyll and Berwick from the LibDems, Edinburgh South, South West and North, Dumfries and Galloway, Stirling and East Renfrewshire all from Labour. 2 cabinet ministers would be a lovely present for the Scottish Tories to give David Cameron.
Night all
Martin at 127: Most PLP meetings are fairly straightforward - a Minister talks about his or her area, e.g. Alan Johnson discusses NHS trends. The party leader will speak at the beginning of any session and if there’s some major controversy. Usually we’re familiar with the pros and cons of each issue, so the interest is more how effectively the leader ties the arguments together in a convincing narrative - it’s not so much is he impressing us, as how will this play outside. The atmosphere is nearly always friendly - loyalists predominate among the speakers since there are simply more of us (though the journos will only report the dissidents or any loyalist who’s been rude about them, giving an impression of more division than there actually was).
Occasionally you get some real drama, e.g. when Tony was putting the case for Iraq and a lot of the PLP had been genuinely undecided. But I wouldn’t say most PLPs are exciting, and if the theme is a routine update on, say, fishing policy, only 50 or so will turn up.
138. it’s all so predictable. They haven’t even started distributing the cards and they are already planning data mining of confidential information.
Heres the report on the poll;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-most-trusted-with-economy-1635888.html
Lots of interesting data for Mike to get his teeth into, but one result struck me as significant. The Conservatives have won back 21% of voters who voted Lib-Dem in 2005, where-as Labout has won back just 7%. Looks quite significant to me?
Tories also have a lead amongst all age groups and all social groups baring one, DEs.
149. Will the BNP win either of this weeks Carlisle By Elections ?
146. When I first went into a polling station as a child with my parents in the 1950’s,the Polling Clerks knew my parents and almost all those voting by name as they lived within the community. It was very much more difficult to impersonate.
Yes times are different and there is much more movement of people, but in our area they now bring people in from outside as Polling Clerks rather than having locals who know and our known by the electors. Postal voting is anonymous, open to abuse and needs tighter controls.
123 - sigh - as if I didn’t have reason enough to hate Labour right now.
152. i hope not… They are putting a heavy fight in though..
131. The polls were indicating a hung parliament before Christmas. A roughly 2% swingback from the present position will take us there again, which is what I expect easily to happen.
Easteross: please stop talking about how well the Tories have done under STV. Remember, the next Westminster election will not be fought under STV, and only weak parties benefit from STV anyhow (btw, the Tories have not even done as well under STV as they ought to have done, owing to them being transfer-pariahs.)
Also, Holyrood is not Westminster. Remind us of in how many of the 4 Scottish Westminster by-elections have the Tories increased their vote. [0]
The Lab-Con swing in Scotland next time will be minimal, close to 0%, or conceivably negative. Only one Labour seat will likely fall to the Tories, and even that is not guaranteed.
I am not a Tory; I am not Labour; I am not a LibDem; I am not SNP - I am a statistician…
155. Further to that, what seems strange is the disappearance of the Labour party, they seem to have fled the stage, and arent chasing votes in either ward. Both wards have a sizable labour vote, which strategically is very important to keep labour in at the general election. They are standing back and letting bnp hoover up their vote.
I wouldnt be surprised if they come second ahead of labour in both.
157. Any comment on Copeland at the General ?
144- Socrates: “Let the civil war begin”
Call it the shortest civil war in history, as Steele has already apologized to Limbaugh: “In the interview with Politico, Steele called Limbaugh “a very valuable conservative voice for our party. He brings a very important message to the American people to wake up and pay attention to what the administration is doing,” Steele said. “Number two, there are those out there who want to look at what he’s saying as incendiary and divisive and ugly. That’s what I was trying to say. It didn’t come out that way. … He does what he does best, which is provoke: He provokes thought, he provokes the left. And they’re clearly the ones who are most excited about him.” Asked if he planned to apologize, Steele said: “I wasn’t trying to offend anybody. So, yeah, if he’s offended, I’d say: Look, I’m not in the business of hurting people’s feelings here. … My job is to try to bring us all together.””
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19517.html
One other interesting tidbit from the above-referenced article: “The dust-up comes at a time when top Democrats are trying to make Limbaugh the face of the Republican Party, in part by using ads funded by labor. Americans United for Change sent a fund-raising e-mail Monday that begins: “The Republican Party has turned into the Rush Limbaugh Party.””
So much for the party that claimed to have embraced the politics of hope over the politics of fear. The fact that the Dems now have to reach back to Limbaugh, a guy who’s been around for decades, shows how desperate they’ve become in their latest quest for a GOP ogre.
But it’s all a tempest in a teacup anyway, political theatre for the politically engaged. In a great article by Jay Cost of RCP today, he nicely framed my longstanding view that the fortunes of the major parties in America are largely a function of events intertwined with certain enduring truths of our political system:
“[F]rom the perspective of electoral politics, Rush Limbaugh is not much of a factor. That’s not to say he is unimportant in other ways. He influences lots of people and is certainly important from a cultural perspective. But we’re talking about elections - where more than a hundred million people participate. That has to change our evaluation of his influence. Additionally, he might be a hot topic for a few news cycles, but news cycles are drops in the bucket from an electoral perspective.
Second, there is value in the discussion among conservatives about the future of their movement. But that does not mean that the payoff is going to be electoral. This is a discussion by political elites for elites. Electoral politics - at least the difference between winning and losing - is inevitably non-ideological and non-elite.
Think of it this way. Suppose the Republican Party and the conservative movement fail to “reform” or “reimagine” themselves, but the country becomes highly dissatisfied with the governance of President Obama. What happens in 2010? I’ll bet the farm that the GOP makes big gains in the House, ideological anemia aside. Now, suppose that the party and the movement do reinvigorate themselves, translate their principles into compelling policy solutions and generally begin an intellectual renaissance on the right - but the country is pleased with Obama and the Democrats. What happens? Again, I’ll bet the farm that the Republicans make little or no gains.
When you get right down to it, elections are fought over the state of the union and the country’s opinion on how the majority party has managed the government. The parties get to tinker at the margins, and ideology can be a part of this tinkering, but it’s important not to make too much of it.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2009/03/how_much_does_rush_limbaugh_ma.html
156. RodCrosby: I am not a Tory; I am not Labour; I am not a LibDem; I am not SNP
You’re anti-Tory.
A roughly 2% swingback from the present position will take us there again, which is what I expect easily to happen.
Even if that’s a pseudo-swing from a 4% Con-LD swing, that’s still not hung parliament territory. Con 40+ wins unless LD is sub-18.
Excellent poll for us.
From the previous thread.
366.”360. I mostly agree with you, but I suspect Aberdeen South will go SNP rather than Conservative.”
I know this constituency extremely well, and I have regularly pointed out that it could throw up a surprise, and that includes the highly likely scenario of Ann Begg holding on because the Libdem vote evaporates as it splits between the SNP and the Conservatives.
Most likely - tight Labour hold, but with the seat becoming a four way marginal as Ann Begg’s vote slips and the Libdem vote fractures to both the SNP and the Conservatives.
Outside surprise - A Conservative gain on the back of a high turnout and large swing to the Conservatives from all three parties as the main opponent of the present government at Westminster. They have a very active PPC who has in the past managed a swing from Labour elsewhere.
No chance - a Libdem or SNP gain. Libdem council meltdown and SNP administration in Holyrood. Now that will only change if cynical old me sees the SNP find a large amount of spare cash to bail out Aberdeen council.
Parts of this constituency have a very wealthy/ aspiring middle class crowd who paid a lot of dosh to buy homes in desirable catchment area’s. House prices have been totally off the radar in the last few years….Private schooling provision has expanded at an incredible rate in recent years as they have become more concerned about the state provision. A 50 million pound deficit really screws this area further as most people have had to tighten their belts financially, and when they have taken out large mortgages to get little Joey into that sought after school. Area very reliant on the Oil/Gas industry - already showing signs of big cutbacks, its like a domino effect in this type of recession.
Hearing some real horror stories about slashed budgets right across the board. Its also got a very mobile non Scottish population which doesn’t necessary bode well for the SNP either.
156.”I am not a Tory; I am not Labour; I am not a LibDem; I am not SNP - I am a statistician…”
And one who doesn’t seem to comprehend the idea that any real political or economic tsunami’s would dare screw their pre designed forecasts.
Good luck with those predictions from this mornings thread, I hope you have not backed them up with hard cash.
136. We were keen to treat it as a boost certainly. 17% is iirc higher than we’ve been polling with ComRes for some months.
Comparing the first polls of the year with the latest.
Yougov 15 (0)
ComRes 17 (+2)
Populus 18 (+3)
Ipsos 17 (0)
ICM 18 (+2)
We’re showing mostly high teens across pollsters and are generally a couple of points higher than January. There has been a genuine Lib Dem boost, with the waters muddied by the 22% results.
Just getting my head around these QE figures tonight. On Darlings tenure as Chancellor, maybe a complete coincidence, but aren’t he and Norman Lamont both former pupils of Lorreto school?
Makes you wonder about Darling’s prospects, especially when you think back to what happened to Lamont and Portillo in 1997. Ken Clarke was Chancellor at the time of the GE, but it was the former pair who were the two key players in the Treasury on Black Wednesday.
Doesn’t bode well for Yvette Cooper at the next GE either.
(Two threads ago) Are PBers aware that Presbyterians is an anagram of Britney Spears? I think this is the best anagram ever!
Shurely not as good as the Virginia Bottomley one.
(One thread ago) If there are bets on what words will be used by a politician in a speech, it will only be a matter of time before a politician reads a thread like this and deliberately inserts lots of key words into a speech as a gift to the betting people.
Given the amount Brown gets abused on here, I’d imagine he’d avoid them all, possibly tauning the betters.
Mentioning Theodore Roosevelt, General Motors, the G8, West Bank, recapitalisation of banks and getting as close as he can without saying any.
A few people have mentioned or speculated on the possible political impact of Ivan Cameron’s death. I found it thoughtworthy to notice that David Cameron has said that when Ivan was born, he assumed that caring for Ivan would be beneficial to Ivan but burdensome for his parents; but in fact it turned out to be the opposite: Ivan was always in a lot of pain and discomfort, but caring for him was a joy and beneficial to David and his wife.
166. Brown wouldn’t but someone media-savvy like Obama might.
Talking of FDR, I wonder what would have happened to JFK if he hadn’t been assassinated? How long would he have lived, with all his health problems? I read an alternative history theory recently which suggested that in late 1963 he was on the verge of being impeached because he was a security risk because of the various women he was having affairs with (a bit like the Profumo affair). There is also a theory that the neck wound from the Single Bullet (sometimes erroneously called the Magic Bullet) would have been fatal, because JFK was extra vulnerable to infection, even without the head shot.
Surely impeachment and Senate trial would have been much more distabilising to the republic than anything he was doing ? Particularly as he would have had to have run again in November 64 when judicious leaking could have had the electorate do the job for them ?
New Thread.
168. I believe Red Dwarf conclusively addressed that issue.
“Michael Crick wedged somewhere near Brown’s colon on Newsnight.”
Indeed it was sickeningly laudatory.
The point I took away was that Crick said both Brown and Obama were ‘progressives’ and it was clear that he meant it as a compliment. It follows that ‘conservatives’ would be derogatory.
Cricks slip was certainly showing …
Mr Smithson is now neck and neck 119 votes each