This will keep Hugh awake all night, from the Telegraph comments:
The white working classes have suffered more than any other group as a result of the neo liberal globalist controlled governments of recent years. Their communities have been DELIBERATELY destroyed by immigration. Their jobs have been DELIBERATELY moved abroad or had the salaries pulled down. Their values of patriotism, basic decency, small c conservatism, family and hard work have been trashed ridiculed and DELIBERATELY weakened through a grotesque, vulgar, propagandising education system and media. The country they love has been DELIBERATELY trashed and its sovereignty passed to a United States of Europe in the making. They are the ones who have been in the front line fighting the grotesque wars of choice and have come back with missing limbs and broken minds.
UKIP is now their natural home.
And UKIP in turn salutes and honours the working classes. They are backbone of the nation and its true beating heart.
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
There's something in that, I think. The implications for UKIP are interesting, though. Blue Labour - Callaghan Labour essentially - would envisage a very strong support for trade unionism, high taxes for the better off, high state spending on pensions, social housing, subsidised transport and so on; with a tough line on immigration and EU withdrawal. But is that the party UKIP's activists and leadership want? Farage has described himself as an arch-Thatcherite, for example. How does that sit with Blue Labour?
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
I remember there was a report from somebody saying that when UKIP's support went over 15%, it started taking votes off Labour. I further remember that that report was cited on this site. Problem is I can't remember what the name of that report was, nor when it was cited here (early last year? Dunno). Cn anybody remember it and where I can find it?
I think that was Survation. (scroll down link below)
FWIW. I believe people vote aspirationally, not what's good for them at any particular moment. If I am right Labour are fecked. Polls in 3 months time (If the economy continues to provides good news) should tell us more
The Tories MUST go for a 40p tax rate.
Eh? I assume you mean a reduction in the 45 p rate to 40? If so that's utterly bonkers. I know that people vote aspirationally
You weren't around when comedy posters like Seth O Logue and stuarttruth were pushing the PB Romney line on 'aspiration' beating everything? (except Obama as it turned out) A pity. It was truly hilarious.
Dreadful polls for Labour - but shift to Ukip seems inexplicable. YouGov is roughly in the natural order of things, as a share of 37% is quite common with that pollster.
You have to have been living on Mars to think the shift to UKIP is inexplicable.
snip
snip
Evidence?
Me.
You've switched from Labour since last month?
I know I don't trust ed balls even more since last month.
But you have been profoundly anti-Labour for a while, haven't you?
I suspect that come 2015 Labour will get more WWC votes than any other party.
Labour are at least four times as popular as UKIP amongst the working class. Even the Tories are twice as popular, at least.
As for "White working class". I find it odd that people refer to race.
Well tell your own supporters then,they Quick off the mark to mention the British immigrant community not voting conservative.
I asked about the "white" bit of "WWC", I didn't ask about immigration.
Do you think it is an even spread of working class people of all races that say they are voting ukip then?
snip
Haha great stuff
What's great? That Labour and the Tories are utterly trouncing UKIP amongst working class voters?
Still no evidence supporting the "WWC" Vs "Non-WhiteWC" thing I see.
Keep going, you're doing great!
Tell us Sam, white working class voters are different from non-white working class voters, how exactly?
I didn't make the claim
But if you're right, and ukip are drawing on support from the black and Asian community as well, the all the better
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
There's something in that, I think. The implications for UKIP are interesting, though. Blue Labour - Callaghan Labour essentially - would envisage a very strong support for trade unionism, high taxes for the better off, high state spending on pensions, social housing, subsidised transport and so on; with a tough line on immigration and EU withdrawal. But is that the party UKIP's activists and leadership want? Farage has described himself as an arch-Thatcherite, for example. How does that sit with Blue Labour?
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote UKIP in a million years because they are, to put it mildly, a bunch of wierdo Far Right nutters who would pretty much wreck everything. What's your point?
Dreadful polls for Labour - but shift to Ukip seems inexplicable. YouGov is roughly in the natural order of things, as a share of 37% is quite common with that pollster.
You have to have been living on Mars to think the shift to UKIP is inexplicable.
Hi Nigel - what I meant was, was what has caused such an -instant- shift. There seems to be a hefty weighting issue with the Lab/Tory score but less so with the Ukip one.
the WWC who have voted Labour all their lives because their Dad and Grandad did now realise that Labour does not support, represent or care about them any longer.
Evidence?
Me.
You've switched from Labour since last month?
I know I don't trust ed balls even more since last month.
But you have been profoundly anti-Labour for a while, haven't you?
I suspect that come 2015 Labour will get more WWC votes than any other party.
Labour are at least four times as popular as UKIP amongst the working class. Even the Tories are twice as popular, at least.
As for "White working class". I find it odd that people refer to race.
Well tell your own supporters then,they Quick off the mark to mention the British immigrant community not voting conservative.
I asked about the "white" bit of "WWC", I didn't ask about immigration.
Do you think it is an even spread of working class people of all races that say they are voting ukip then?
I think UKIP's lack of popularity, relative to Labour and the Tories, runs across race, age and class divides, yes.
I'm interested why UKIP supporters like to refer to the "White" working class so much though.
Perhaps Phillip below is right, and it's just shorthand. After all, even the Mighty Smithson used it. But I'd like to know what it's shorthand for.
Haha great stuff
What's great? That Labour and the Tories are utterly trouncing UKIP amongst working class voters?
Still no evidence supporting the "WWC" Vs "Non-WhiteWC" thing I see.
Actually I asked you for some evidence to back up your claims, where is it?
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
There's something in that, I think. The implications for UKIP are interesting, though. Blue Labour - Callaghan Labour essentially - would envisage a very strong support for trade unionism, high taxes for the better off, high state spending on pensions, social housing, subsidised transport and so on; with a tough line on immigration and EU withdrawal. But is that the party UKIP's activists and leadership want? Farage has described himself as an arch-Thatcherite, for example. How does that sit with Blue Labour?
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote UKIP in a million years because they are, to put it mildly, a bunch of wierdo Far Right nutters who would pretty much wreck everything. What's your point?
Cor Blimey calm down, it's only one poll
My point was that not all working class people are desperate to punish the wealthy, and would rather the rich got richer if it meant they were also better off
I remember there was a report from somebody saying that when UKIP's support went over 15%, it started taking votes off Labour. I further remember that that report was cited on this site. Problem is I can't remember what the name of that report was, nor when it was cited here (early last year? Dunno). Cn anybody remember it and where I can find it?
I think that was Survation. (scroll down link below)
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
There's something in that, I think. The implications for UKIP are interesting, though. Blue Labour - Callaghan Labour essentially - would envisage a very strong support for trade unionism, high taxes for the better off, high state spending on pensions, social housing, subsidised transport and so on; with a tough line on immigration and EU withdrawal. But is that the party UKIP's activists and leadership want? Farage has described himself as an arch-Thatcherite, for example. How does that sit with Blue Labour?
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
Absolutely. But then they could not really be described as the Old Labour types Nigel was referring to down below. If UKIP wants to attract and retain them, as opposed to that part of the working class that has never supported Labour its activists and leadership may need to rethink a few things.
Dreadful polls for Labour - but shift to Ukip seems inexplicable. YouGov is roughly in the natural order of things, as a share of 37% is quite common with that pollster.
You have to have been living on Mars to think the shift to UKIP is inexplicable.
snip
snip
Evidence?
Me.
You've switched from Labour since last month?
I know I don't trust ed balls even more since last month.
.
Well tell your own supporters then,they Quick off the mark to mention the British immigrant community not voting conservative.
I asked about the "white" bit of "WWC", I didn't ask about immigration.
Do you think it is an even spread of working class people of all races that say they are voting ukip then?
snip
Haha great stuff
Keep going, you're doing great!
Tell us Sam, white working class voters are different from non-white working class voters, how exactly?
I didn't make the claim
But if you're right, and ukip are drawing on support from the black and Asian community as well, the all the better
How do you know my name is Sam?
I've seen you refer to the "WWC" before. Even the Mighty Smithson did above, and I asked him the same question: what's the difference between the white and non-white working class? You haven't answered, the lamentable Nigel4England obviously hasn't.
The S, A, and M gave me some clues as to your name.
Ok Ugh
Yes the WWC... The white working class, they differ from the rest of the working class by having white skin, although so do many Eastern Europeans.... I guess white British working class would be a better description.
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote UKIP in a million years because they are, to put it mildly, a bunch of wierdo Far Right nutters who would pretty much wreck everything. What's your point?
Cor Blimey calm down, it's only one poll
My point was that not all working class people are desperate to punish the wealthy, and would rather the rich got richer if it meant they were also better off
Hehe. "We want the rich to get richer", so speak UKIP, finger on the pulse of the working class.
As long as they are also getting richer yes... You have the old fashioned notion of the working class being anti the wealthy... Far from it, they aspire to be wealthy... Your view can only be afforded by champagne socialists
Dreadful polls for Labour - but shift to Ukip seems inexplicable. YouGov is roughly in the natural order of things, as a share of 37% is quite common with that pollster.
You have to have been living on Mars to think the shift to UKIP is inexplicable.
snip
snip
Evidence?
Me.
You've switched from Labour since last month?
I know I don't trust ed balls even more since last month.
.
Well tell your own supporters then,they Quick off the mark to mention the British immigrant community not voting conservative.
I asked about the "white" bit of "WWC", I didn't ask about immigration.
Do you think it is an even spread of working class people of all races that say they are voting ukip then?
snip
Haha great stuff
Keep going, you're doing great!
Tell us Sam, white working class voters are different from non-white working class voters, how exactly?
I didn't make the claim
But if you're right, and ukip are drawing on support from the black and Asian community as well, the all the better
How do you know my name is Sam?
I've seen you refer to the "WWC" before. Even the Mighty Smithson did above, and I asked him the same question: what's the difference between the white and non-white working class? You haven't answered, the lamentable Nigel4England obviously hasn't.
The S, A, and M gave me some clues as to your name.
Ok Ugh
Yes the WWC... The white working class, they differ from the rest of the working class by having white skin, although so do many Eastern Europeans.... I guess white British working class would be a better description.
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
There's something in that, I think. The implications for UKIP are interesting, though. Blue Labour - Callaghan Labour essentially - would envisage a very strong support for trade unionism, high taxes for the better off, high state spending on pensions, social housing, subsidised transport and so on; with a tough line on immigration and EU withdrawal. But is that the party UKIP's activists and leadership want? Farage has described himself as an arch-Thatcherite, for example. How does that sit with Blue Labour?
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
Absolutely. But then they could not really be described as the Old Labour types Nigel was referring to down below. If UKIP wants to attract and retain them, as opposed to that part of the working class that has never supported Labour its activists and leadership may need to rethink a few things.
Probably why Farage is moving away from thè flat tax rate, and is talking about removing tax from the minimum wage
Dreadful polls for Labour - but shift to Ukip seems inexplicable. YouGov is roughly in the natural order of things, as a share of 37% is quite common with that pollster.
You have to have been living on Mars to think the shift to UKIP is inexplicable.
snip
snip
Evidence?
Me.
You've switched from Labour since last month?
I know I don't trust ed balls even more since last month.
.
Well tell your own supporters then,they Quick off the mark to mention the British immigrant community not voting conservative.
I asked about the "white" bit of "WWC", I didn't ask about immigration.
Do you think it is an even spread of working class people of all races that say they are voting ukip then?
snip
Haha great stuff
Keep going, you're doing great!
Tell us Sam, white working class voters are different from non-white working class voters, how exactly?
I didn't make the claim
But if you're right, and ukip are drawing on support from the black and Asian community as well, the all the better
How do you know my name is Sam?
I've seen you refer to the "WWC" before. Even the Mighty Smithson did above, and I asked him the same question: what's the difference between the white and non-white working class? You haven't answered, the lamentable Nigel4England obviously hasn't.
The S, A, and M gave me some clues as to your name.
Ok Ugh
Yes the WWC... The white working class, they differ from the rest of the working class by having white skin, although so do many Eastern Europeans.... I guess white British working class would be a better description.
“As good as the numbers have been in the last three quarters in the United Kingdom, we’re talking about three quarters of household-led growth, an economy that’s running 20 percent below pre-crisis trends, that has substantial spare capacity, that has not yet rebalanced. In that environment, exceptional stimulus remains very relevant.”
Food for thought.
I think he might have been chatting to another richard.
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote UKIP in a million years because they are, to put it mildly, a bunch of wierdo Far Right nutters who would pretty much wreck everything. What's your point?
Cor Blimey calm down, it's only one poll
My point was that not all working class people are desperate to punish the wealthy, and would rather the rich got richer if it meant they were also better off
Hehe. "We want the rich to get richer", so speak UKIP, finger on the pulse of the working class.
As long as they are also getting richer yes... You have the old fashioned notion of the working class being anti the wealthy... Far from it, they aspire to be wealthy... Your view can only be afforded by champagne socialists
Labour used to get millions more working class votes in the era of Clause 4, union dominance and 98 pence tax rates.
All you are doing by continuing to pursue this is showing that you do not understand why Labour losing votes to UKIP.
I'm asking you what difference you think there is between the white working class and the non-white working class.
Or to put it another way, why do you think UKIP are (supposedly) picking up white working class votes, and not, say, black working class votes?
From isam's posted link that I am sure you did not bother with:
Ukip's supporters look more like Old Labour than True Blue Tories. Ukip's supporters tend to be blue-collar, older, struggling economically, and often live in poorer, urban areas, with big pools of support in the Labour heartlands of the North. Middle-class suburbanites do not dominate Ukip. They shy away from it.
All very true and my point (and Mike's) is they tend to be, but not always, white. My guess is they feel disenfranchised by the current Labour and their mass immigration policy, which has driven down their wages and means there is less work for builders etc.
Who would have though that Labour would no longer be the party of the working class but are now the party of big business, who they have helped enormously by providing an endless supply of cheap labour.
Those are your suggestions of what these people want (tràde unions, high taxes)
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote UKIP in a million years because they are, to put it mildly, a bunch of wierdo Far Right nutters who would pretty much wreck everything. What's your point?
Cor Blimey calm down, it's only one poll
My point was that not all working class people are desperate to punish the wealthy, and would rather the rich got richer if it meant they were also better off
Hehe. "We want the rich to get richer", so speak UKIP, finger on the pulse of the working class.
As long as they are also getting richer yes... You have the old fashioned notion of the working class being anti the wealthy... Far from it, they aspire to be wealthy... Your view can only be afforded by champagne socialists
Labour used to get millions more working class votes in the era of Clause 4, union dominance and 98 pence tax rates.
Maybe they should try bringing all that back then because they are losing those kind of votes now
Mike Smithson doesn't want any more letters from M'Learned friends.
Fair enough. I was going to make the point to @TSE that anything Rennard comes out with, unless it's truly explosive, is just not likely to be that interesting. I was going to reference some of the details that have come out of THE STORY THAT I CAN'T TALK ABOUT that in the past would have been tabloid frontpages. But now it's just, Meh.
But I won't go there. Can I ask another question which may or may not be legally dodgy?
(I genuinely don't know)
I seem to remember a few months ago the Mail on Sunday (I think) saying they were going to expose some shocking affair at the heart of the tory party - did that ever come out? Or should I surmise that there's an SI?
Mike Smithson doesn't want any more letters from M'Learned friends.
Fair enough. I was going to make the point to @TSE that anything Rennard comes out with, unless it's truly explosive, is just not likely to be that interesting. I was going to reference some of the details that have come out of THE STORY THAT I CAN'T TALK ABOUT that in the past would have been tabloid frontpages. But now it's just, Meh.
But I won't go there. Can I ask another question which may or may not be legally dodgy?
(I genuinely don't know)
I seem to remember a few months ago the Mail on Sunday (I think) saying they were going to expose some shocking affair at the heart of the tory party - did that ever come out? Or should I surmise that there's an SI?
That Mail on Sunday story from a few months ago was phone hacking related, and made the moderating team age visibly.
This is the story, but it is not to be discussed on PB
As a reminder, Mike Smithson has made it clear, anyone who violates the phone hacking embargo is likely to have their posting privileges suspended until after the conclusion of the phone hacking trials.
Now the moderating team will be away from the site, until the morning, so if anyone violates the rules in our absence, they will find themselves exiled to
www.electoralvotingsystemsdiscussions.com for the next six months.
@isam - The polling suggests Labour has more working class support than it did at the time of the last election.
I think there has inarguably been some leakage of traditional Labour voters to UKIP, driven in large part by understandable disquiet about immigration. But if UKIP really is serious about competing with Labour for the working class vote it needs to go beyond that and into other areas that may be less comfortable for the party's leaders and activists. The Old Labour vote Nigel talks about is certainly small c conservative, but it is also redistributive and pro-union. My late grandfather and father-in-law both spring straight to my mind. I am suspicious of misty eyed tributes to the values of the WWC from people who despise the likes of Bob Crow, and think Maggie was right to smash the miners, the steelworkers, the printers and so on. Those were all mass white working class occupations whose disappearance hastened the decline of the WWC just as much as immigration ever did.
@isam - The polling suggests Labour has more working class support than it did at the time of the last election.
I think there has inarguably been some leakage of traditional Labour voters to UKIP, driven in large part by understandable disquiet about immigration. But if UKIP really is serious about competing with Labour for the working class vote it needs to go beyond that and into other areas that may be less comfortable for the party's leaders and activists. The Old Labour vote Nigel talks about is certainly small c conservative, but it is also redistributive and pro-union. My late grandfather and father-in-law both spring straight to my mind. I am suspicious of misty eyed tributes to the values of the WWC from people who despise the likes of Bob Crow, and think Maggie was right to smash the miners, the steelworkers, the printers and so on. Those were all mass white working class occupations whose disappearance hastened the decline of the WWC just as much as immigration ever did.
I see what you are saying. My parents are both Labour voters, born in council houses, educated at grammar schools, worked in public sector, members of trade unions... But a least one of them is voting ukip next time and the other cant have EdM on her mind...
I Wouldntlike ukip to go too mad chasing votes at all costs though. Better to say what you believe in and see where it gets you... If they start becoming phoney and compromise too much then they will get the 'just like all the rest' backlash, and voters will turn off
Independent Front Page shows to me that the Lib Dems are going to concentrate on focussing on getting Labour tactical votes in the next GE.
It's their only realistic option. But it will piss off the Tory right and make it even less inclined to support a new coalition should the electoral maths make one possible.
Mike Smithson doesn't want any more letters from M'Learned friends.
Fair enough. I was going to make the point to @TSE that anything Rennard comes out with, unless it's truly explosive, is just not likely to be that interesting. I was going to reference some of the details that have come out of THE STORY THAT I CAN'T TALK ABOUT that in the past would have been tabloid frontpages. But now it's just, Meh.
But I won't go there. Can I ask another question which may or may not be legally dodgy?
(I genuinely don't know)
I seem to remember a few months ago the Mail on Sunday (I think) saying they were going to expose some shocking affair at the heart of the tory party - did that ever come out? Or should I surmise that there's an SI?
That Mail on Sunday story from a few months ago was phone hacking related, and made the moderating team age visibly.
This is the story, but it is not to be discussed on PB
As a reminder, Mike Smithson has made it clear, anyone who violates the phone hacking embargo is likely to have their posting privileges suspended until after the conclusion of the phone hacking trials.
Now the moderating team will be away from the site, until the morning, so if anyone violates the rules in our absence, they will find themselves exiled to
www.electoralvotingsystemsdiscussions.com for the next six months.
Sure, I respect that.
Especially when backed up with such an ominous threat.
Anyway - i've been away from PB for a while & logged in again today (after hearing Mike on the bbc). The thread yesterday about internet betting was very interesting, especially EiT's post. If someone can figure out a decent, trusted p2p/escrow betting platform that allows bespoke bets, it could really make bookmakers (and much of the existing licensing legislation) irrelevant. Imagine PB with a "design-your-own-bet" plugin on the sidebar. It would be awesome.
MP But the UKIP vote could make it almost for the Tories to get a majority and also prevent Labour from getting enough of a swing to win a majority too, if the parties are close together as this poll suggests a hung parliament is quite likely
Independent Front Page shows to me that the Lib Dems are going to concentrate on focussing on getting Labour tactical votes in the next GE.
It's their only realistic option. But it will piss off the Tory right and make it even less inclined to support a new coalition should the electoral maths make one possible.
It's also what Ashcroft was hoping they'd do.
"The Lib Dem dilemma, then, is to decide how far to go in trying to win back people who have largely made up their minds to support Ed Miliband, and indeed only voted Lib Dem in the first place as a left-wing alternative to Labour. The more they do so, the less success they will have with the smaller but much more biddable moderate voters, who are also open to the Conservatives, want the party to play a constructive part in government and would be unimpressed with the antics that the angry left require."
The ComRes favourability poll the other day found 17% of Scottish, and 25% Welsh voters have a "favourable view" of UKIP. So the celts are not a lost cause for them.
Independent Front Page shows to me that the Lib Dems are going to concentrate on focussing on getting Labour tactical votes in the next GE.
It's their only realistic option. But it will piss off the Tory right and make it even less inclined to support a new coalition should the electoral maths make one possible.
I'm really not sure about that, SO. I expect there will be a lot of this sort of talk in the run up to 2015, but any bad blood from the campaign will be quickly forgotton if/when the numbers add up.
Why is it inexplicable? Where else would dissatisfied Labour switchers head with the Libdems in Coalition with the Tories, especially as dissatisfied Libdems have already hopped across from the Libdems to Labour since 2010?
Dreadful polls for Labour - but shift to Ukip seems inexplicable. YouGov is roughly in the natural order of things, as a share of 37% is quite common with that pollster.
Its a classic Labour tax bombshell. But as Cyclefree pointed out in the previous thread, what about the totally valid questions that now raises about the kick in point for the 40% tax rate for middle income earners, or how the 10p tax rate will now effect the poorest earners? Both of which are a far more sizeable group than those effected by a 50p tax hike, and far more importantly, they are less likely to be able to afford an accountant or just up stakes and leave to pastures new.
Ask a straight forward supplementary question in a poll about Labour raising the top rate of tax to 50p when so few would be impacted, hardly a surprise if the majority then favour it. Now if this poll had asked about increasing the tax burden for those on lower tax rates too, or if this indicated a direction of travel for the Labour party on overall taxation as the answer to filling in the economic black holes in their spending plans....
But, after such a huge and lengthy emphasis on the Coalition making 'cuts' to reduce deficit from all political sides, Ed Balls and the Labour party over one weekend have declared that they would prefer to raise taxes to increase Treasury revenue rather than carrying on pursuing these cuts to reduce the deficit if they are elected. Those internal Labour Blairite critics who have raised concerns about this damaging move may well be feeling vindicated this evening.
The last Labour Government generously gave middle income earners a 2p income tax cut at the expense of the lowest paid earners in their very sleekit removal of the 10p tax rate. They only went after the top earners 57 days before they left power. But while Osborne reducing the top rate of income tax from 50p to 45p may have been unpopular in polls, no one feels in the slightest bit threatened that the he would ever countenance pushing up the tax burden on the lowest paid to compensate for this. Indeed, he removed the very lowest earners from paying tax at all, something that Labour never did in all their time in Office last time.
I warned this afternoon - 50p tax could be popular in isolation but still disastrous for Lab.
Tough immigration and benefits policies are popular in isolation but make Con look nasty - Result = Con lose votes.
50p tax is popular in isolation but make people think Lab means high tax FOR EVERYONE - Result = Lab lose votes.
Lots of people will be thinking: If Lab will do 50p tax, what other taxes will they change? Will they abolish ISAs? Will they tax existing ISAs? Will they put up Income Tax or NI? Will they increase Inheritance Tax? etc etc etc.
Ukip don't want to take too much notice of the class stuff - it's mainly attempts at divide and rule imo. Just aim for what an old-fashioned, non-PC, non-Europhile small-c conservative party would be like.
IoS/Sunday Mirror are online polls, that UKIP appears to consistently perform more strongly in online polling is definitely worthy of a thread at some point.
Why do the IoS/Sunday Mirror polls always show UKIP at least 50% higher than the Independent polls. Both are conducted by ComRes and presumably both use the same methodology
Things are really starting to move in the right direction for the Tories - you can just sense that being the case. Possibly now is the time to start targeting their prospects in certain seats where hitherto they have been given little chance of winning. One of my favourites currently is Torbay which Electoral Calculus shows the Blues winning narrowly but which those nice people at Paddy Power are offering at 6/4, pricing the incumbent LibDems at 1/2. I know which I'd rather be on given the direction in which the polls appear to be heading. OGH would doubtless disagree ..... maybe he'll offer me even better odds!
Speaking of polls, those odds of 7/2 for H1 2014 and 9/2 for H2 2014 offered by the aforementioned Paddy Power last September on when YouGov next show a Tory Lead Voting Intention are now looking decidedly tasty. Sadly these odds are now long gone.
I remember there was a report from somebody saying that when UKIP's support went over 15%, it started taking votes off Labour. I further remember that that report was cited on this site. Problem is I can't remember what the name of that report was, nor when it was cited here (early last year? Dunno). Cn anybody remember it and where I can find it?
I think that was Survation. (scroll down link below)
Blimey the 1% and 2% leads have come sooner than I thought. Maybe they are outliers, or perhaps people are starting to feel better and get pay rises in their January pay?
Blimey the 1% and 2% leads have come sooner than I thought. Maybe they are outliers, or perhaps people are starting to feel better and get pay rises in their January pay?
Or maybe voters' minds are becoming more concentrated as we approach the next GE and the prospect of Labour's Tax and Waste policies start to raise their ugly head once again.
What I found funny reading the whole thread was the mixture of anger and denial from some posters over 2 polls which hint at a Labour decline. They know the lead is as flaky as their policies and panic is clear. They really need to get a grip.
Comments
The white working classes have suffered more than any other group as a result of the neo liberal globalist controlled governments of recent years.
Their communities have been DELIBERATELY destroyed by immigration. Their jobs have been DELIBERATELY moved abroad or had the salaries pulled down.
Their values of patriotism, basic decency, small c conservatism, family and hard work have been trashed ridiculed and DELIBERATELY weakened through a grotesque, vulgar, propagandising education system and media.
The country they love has been DELIBERATELY trashed and its sovereignty passed to a United States of Europe in the making.
They are the ones who have been in the front line fighting the grotesque wars of choice and have come back with missing limbs and broken minds.
UKIP is now their natural home.
And UKIP in turn salutes and honours the working classes. They are backbone of the nation and its true beating heart.
Phone hacking no.
Mike Smithson doesn't want any more letters from M'Learned friends.
I know plenty of working class people that would not vote labour and would welcome lower taxes and a cut in the welfare state
http://survation.com/2013/05/local-elections-2013-seat-projections-too-conservative/
But today's Telegraph piece points out that in the 2005 parliament, they were drawing from Labour more than Conservatives.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukipwatch/100256765/meet-ukip-britains-most-working-class-party/
It might be better to think of UKIP's support as swing voters.
It was truly hilarious.
But if you're right, and ukip are drawing on support from the black and Asian community as well, the all the better
How do you know my name is Sam?
My point was that not all working class people are desperate to punish the wealthy, and would rather the rich got richer if it meant they were also better off
LD -> LAB LAB -> UKIP CON -> UKIP.
Wonder if there are any LD -> UKIP waiverers ?
Yes the WWC... The white working class, they differ from the rest of the working class by having white skin, although so do many Eastern Europeans.... I guess white British working class would be a better description.
61 per cent in favour of a 50p tax rate and 26 per cent against,
Labour voters are overwhelmingly supportive, while 52 per cent of Tory supporters are opposed.
45 per cent think it would help the economy, 19 per cent consider it would cause damage.
Half those questioned think the 50p rate would bring in more money, and 40 per cent would want it on moral grounds even if it raised no more money.
“As good as the numbers have been in the last three quarters in the United Kingdom, we’re talking about three quarters of household-led growth, an economy that’s running 20 percent below pre-crisis trends, that has substantial spare capacity, that has not yet rebalanced. In that environment, exceptional stimulus remains very relevant.”
Food for thought.
I think he might have been chatting to another richard.
But I won't go there. Can I ask another question which may or may not be legally dodgy?
(I genuinely don't know)
I seem to remember a few months ago the Mail on Sunday (I think) saying they were going to expose some shocking affair at the heart of the tory party - did that ever come out? Or should I surmise that there's an SI?
This is the story, but it is not to be discussed on PB
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24762474
As a reminder, Mike Smithson has made it clear, anyone who violates the phone hacking embargo is likely to have their posting privileges suspended until after the conclusion of the phone hacking trials.
Now the moderating team will be away from the site, until the morning, so if anyone violates the rules in our absence, they will find themselves exiled to
www.electoralvotingsystemsdiscussions.com for the next six months.
I think there has inarguably been some leakage of traditional Labour voters to UKIP, driven in large part by understandable disquiet about immigration. But if UKIP really is serious about competing with Labour for the working class vote it needs to go beyond that and into other areas that may be less comfortable for the party's leaders and activists. The Old Labour vote Nigel talks about is certainly small c conservative, but it is also redistributive and pro-union. My late grandfather and father-in-law both spring straight to my mind. I am suspicious of misty eyed tributes to the values of the WWC from people who despise the likes of Bob Crow, and think Maggie was right to smash the miners, the steelworkers, the printers and so on. Those were all mass white working class occupations whose disappearance hastened the decline of the WWC just as much as immigration ever did.
I Wouldntlike ukip to go too mad chasing votes at all costs though. Better to say what you believe in and see where it gets you... If they start becoming phoney and compromise too much then they will get the 'just like all the rest' backlash, and voters will turn off
Especially when backed up with such an ominous threat.
Anyway - i've been away from PB for a while & logged in again today (after hearing Mike on the bbc). The thread yesterday about internet betting was very interesting, especially EiT's post. If someone can figure out a decent, trusted p2p/escrow betting platform that allows bespoke bets, it could really make bookmakers (and much of the existing licensing legislation) irrelevant. Imagine PB with a "design-your-own-bet" plugin on the sidebar. It would be awesome.
MP But the UKIP vote could make it almost for the Tories to get a majority and also prevent Labour from getting enough of a swing to win a majority too, if the parties are close together as this poll suggests a hung parliament is quite likely
"The Lib Dem dilemma, then, is to decide how far to go in trying to win back people who have largely made up their minds to support Ed Miliband, and indeed only voted Lib Dem in the first place as a left-wing alternative to Labour. The more they do so, the less success they will have with the smaller but much more biddable moderate voters, who are also open to the Conservatives, want the party to play a constructive part in government and would be unimpressed with the antics that the angry left require."
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/03/what-are-the-liberal-democrats-for/ The ComRes favourability poll the other day found 17% of Scottish, and 25% Welsh voters have a "favourable view" of UKIP. So the celts are not a lost cause for them.
Ask a straight forward supplementary question in a poll about Labour raising the top rate of tax to 50p when so few would be impacted, hardly a surprise if the majority then favour it. Now if this poll had asked about increasing the tax burden for those on lower tax rates too, or if this indicated a direction of travel for the Labour party on overall taxation as the answer to filling in the economic black holes in their spending plans....
But, after such a huge and lengthy emphasis on the Coalition making 'cuts' to reduce deficit from all political sides, Ed Balls and the Labour party over one weekend have declared that they would prefer to raise taxes to increase Treasury revenue rather than carrying on pursuing these cuts to reduce the deficit if they are elected. Those internal Labour Blairite critics who have raised concerns about this damaging move may well be feeling vindicated this evening.
The last Labour Government generously gave middle income earners a 2p income tax cut at the expense of the lowest paid earners in their very sleekit removal of the 10p tax rate. They only went after the top earners 57 days before they left power. But while Osborne reducing the top rate of income tax from 50p to 45p may have been unpopular in polls, no one feels in the slightest bit threatened that the he would ever countenance pushing up the tax burden on the lowest paid to compensate for this. Indeed, he removed the very lowest earners from paying tax at all, something that Labour never did in all their time in Office last time.
Possibly now is the time to start targeting their prospects in certain seats where hitherto they have been given little chance of winning. One of my favourites currently is Torbay which Electoral Calculus shows the Blues winning narrowly but which those nice people at Paddy Power are offering at 6/4, pricing the incumbent LibDems at 1/2. I know which I'd rather be on given the direction in which the polls appear to be heading.
OGH would doubtless disagree ..... maybe he'll offer me even better odds!
Speaking of polls, those odds of 7/2 for H1 2014 and 9/2 for H2 2014 offered by the aforementioned Paddy Power last September on when YouGov next show a Tory Lead Voting Intention are now looking decidedly tasty. Sadly these odds are now long gone.