Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Based on YouGov’s first three polls this week the gap is ge
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Based on YouGov’s first three polls this week the gap is getting narrower
The latest YouGov/Sun daily poll, published last night, has LAB 38/CON 35/LD 10/UKIP – so a continuation of what we’ve been seeing all week.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The optimistic take on this is that the voters are dimly aware that they don't know what they're talking about, and punish parties that are foolish and irresponsible enough to listen to them.
We know that the Balls move is most popular among Labour voters. So if it has strengthened their support, that's good news because Labour is already in a winning position.
China PMI, mate.
Heavens to Betsy, the Middle Kingdom is fecked. They'll be eating sparrows and grass, by March, expect reimposition of Tang Era values by summer.
No one questions that China is slowing down - a few years ago it was posting double digit growth per annum. Now it's more like 6-8%. It will surely never go back to 10%+
The question is whether the government will allow growth to slow to sub-5% (our bet, remember) which would feel dangerously like a nasty recession - when they have such enormous firepower left in terms of forex reserves, to stimulate things if needs be.
Given that the Chinese are terrified of a restive populace, and think minimum 6-7% GDP growth is essential, still, to keep the citizens happy, I very much doubt they will let growth go sub-5% for the meantime (it might of course happen, anyway, thanks to some outright calamity)
Moreover, as aforemenshed, the West is now growing quite strongly, esp the US and, to a lesser extent, the UK (and parts of the EU), the BRICS aren't doing too badly either. This will act as a locomotive on Chinese production and I expect it to pull out of this slump-ette.
I remain 95% confident I will win this bet. We can double it to £100 if you like.
Masjid Nawaz did not tweet the cartoon to wind up Muslims. He sets out his reasons very well on Comment is Free. His intention was to promote equal treatment for Muslim and atheist students.
That said, I take SO's point that the evidence for a drop in the Labour share is a bit thin.
One nation in the bin, 35% will do.
A chart for you. Note how Chinese manufacturing foreshadows or echoes EU/US manufacturing orders. If the West grows, China booms.
Twitter.com/MktAnthropology/status/428719176396460032/photo/1
I suspect many Lib Dems will end up going back home, but even if things go well I worry about Kippers returning to the Tories. Kippers are feeling the wind at their backs and I think many are willing to suffer a Labour government in view of the long term. It'd be a disaster in my view but there we are.
On the 50p rate, and aside from the fact I'm nowhere near that tax bracket, I tend to think that if a 50p top-rate of tax earned lots of money all governments would do it. The fact that few sensible governments have a 50p rate makes me think it's a political rather than an economic tool. And above all else, taxing someone over half what they earn doesn't feel very moral to me.
Last of all, interesting that Matthew D'Ancona's Standard piece touts Dominic Raab as a future Tory leader. I think so too - watch out for him after Cameron goes.
Question is: would a 3% Tory lead be enough for most seats and a 2nd coalition?
I still think UKIP hold the keys to number 10
I am not so sure about the two separate conversations bit though although there is clearly a bit of that. I think there are also traditional floating voters in the middle that are in play. Labour has been scooping the pool with them until recently and they have liked populist nonsense such as the freeze on energy prices but the tories are maybe getting more of a look in now on the back of better economic performances.
The key going forward remains that Labour share. Can Ed keep the Coalition of Labour core vote, 2010 Lib Dems and floaters together? If he does, he wins.
* A small number of Tory defectors to Ukip returning (2% of the C2010 group)
* A bigger loss of Labour voters, mostly to "Don't Know" (4% of the L2010 group)
* A smaller movement of LD2010 voters back from Labour and Ukip to LD and Tories (total of 3-4% of the LD2010 group)
These changes have all added up to a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in the published YouGov numbers.
We will see if it continues, but the good economic news isn't going to stop and Labour are sending mixed signals about what they would do.
Like i've said before - too early for Labour to return to government, especially with enough people willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt.
This appears to be the wide acceptance of the Labour bias in FPTP at this support level but I'm minded to believe that differential turnout in the marginals will enhance Tory numbers.
I was also of the belief that consistent crossover might not occur until Dec14/Jan15 but recent polling trends would seem to indicate bringing those dates forward by several months. It's all turning to dust for Labour - Ed a few points ahead 16 months out from the general election is just the sort of numbers that should have the Coalition parties smiling into the economic briefing papers .... and then smiling all over again.
What's changed?
Well your party has been in power is what's changed. It has had influence over national issues, to a greater or lesser degree but the influence has been there: you have been at the top table.
What would change if you switched back to Lab (assuming you think that somehow they are now competent, which the polls say you don't)?
You lose power.
The critical issue is whether you are Lab through and through and you have now given them a wake-up call (in which case it didn't work, they are still asleep), or you are a mediumly floating voter and like what you see in terms of some kind of compassionate restraint on a perhaps heartless but undoubtedly economically competent party.
It seems to me that the decline in the vote share split between the 2 main parties and the rise of the others in recent decades and notably since Blair is due (at least in part) to the greyness of politics, and a feeling of "they're all the same".
I would expect a move back to a higher vote share for Labour and the Tories (but probably not until after the Euros).
Since almost everyone thinks the kippers are going to have a good May EU elections (even CCHQ have said as much to try and do damage limitation) then it's all about how that expected upward change in kipper VI hits labour and the tories.
MORI had immigration jumping 30 points from last year and hitting joint number one in voter concerns for January. So is it more likely that is now having an effect now or a 50p pledge who's effects have already played out in the omnishambles?
In the week of 20 December 2013 when the BBC headlined "UK unemployment rate at lowest since 2009", apparently no one noticed the story according to Populus: http://www.populus.co.uk/News/Something-for-the-Weekend-7/
And last week the BBC headline was "UK unemployment rate drops to 7.1%". 3.8% of the Populus poll noticed "Unemployment Falling" (also 2.2% noticed "The Economy"): http://www.populus.co.uk/item/Something-for-the-Weekend-9/
People are starting to pay attention to what is going on.
I tend to trust the polls and believe Labour is well in the lead but - probably like many others - I find it difficult to see Ed Miliband in Number 10.
My head tells me Labour will almost certainly win most seats and maybe even a majority, but my heart isn't in it.
F1: Ecclestone is off his rocker (or successfully distracting from his legal issues in Germany). He now wants double points at the last three races:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/25955560
Newsnight: watched this. I was pretty displeased, to be honest. Not sure whether to blog about it (my blog is typically about fantasy, history and occasionally sci-fi/science).
Maajid Nawaz and the Jesus & Mo cartoonist were largely portrayed as in the wrong. Excepting less than a minute when a Ramadhan Foundation spokesman was repeatedly asked the same question about freedom of expression the focus was entirely on whether the cartoonist (and Nawaz) was wrong. There was an implicit assumption by Paxman that 'offence' is just cause for stopping doing something (or not doing it in the first place). There was far too little consideration of freedom of speech, or even the bloody obvious point that non-Muslims cannot reasonably be subjected to the religious rules and beliefs of Islam.
They have no choice. Neither party has a hope in hell of outkipping the kippers on immigration and the EU so it's going to be spinning economic stats for the tories while labour will concentrate on cost of living policies/posturing. Which isn't to say we won't be seeing some amusing posturing from both sides on immigration and the EU, because we certainly will, but labour will be even less persuasive at pretending to be Farage than Cammie.
The fact is we know the basic shape of politics from now until May.
Fearful tory backbenchers have self-evidently noticed it by now. Which is why, despite this better polling for them, the Cameroon spin machine is focused like a laser on trying to get the rebels to shut up. Yet again.
'Ladbrokes: Scotland 1/100 to enter currency union - 50/1 not to'
http://tinyurl.com/oy2359x
So I would say the issue is to what extent the LDs enjoy being in govt and want to continue, with all the imperfections which that requires.
LOL
Need to study the rules on that 50/1 - relies on a yes win though.
Indy has an apt cartoon
Mind you, I was very surprised by the polling info Mr. Carnyx posted yesterday regarding the apparent positive view the English held towards the concept. Whilst I haven't run around asking every Angle, Saxon and Jute I could find their thoughts, I entirely expected the view to be against it (and suspect it may well swing that way).
China PMI continues to show signs of slowing Chinese economy. Gildas says this doesn't matter. Gildas is wrong.
Spain came out with preliminary 4Q GDP numbers this morning, showing 0.3% q-o-q growth, in line with expectations, and up from 0.1% in 3Q. On the other hand, December retail numbers (out earlier this week) were somewhat weaker than expected. You can take this as either a positive that the economy continues to rebalance, or a negative in that they should really be improving at this point.
Portugal will release December industrial production and retail sales in about 45 minutes. Consumer confidence was a staggering -40 in November. While it's hard not to see that improving, Portugal remains at least six months behind Spain (which, in turn, is six to twelve months behind Ireland).
The US will announce annualised GDP data later today. I like the way that the US annualises the numbers to make them look bigger. My guess is that it will come in ahead of the 3.2% forecast, but not by much.
I think what @Gildas was saying (and Gildas can speak for himself) is that to look upon China as analagous to another developed (or even developing) country is not appropriate.
They are in the bottom decile of per capita GDP and have plenty of room both administratively and via (socialism with) market-based measures to achieve huge gross GDP jumps without "overheating" or any other phenomenon you might ascribe to, say Ireland or Portugal.
There is plenty of room to grow in China. And Gildas is right; the idea of sub-5% GDP growth is a million miles from happening.
I know you believe the deal will effectively involve the UK saying "This is the deal, with fiscal limitations and so forth" and the Scots saying "Yes" because the alternatives (the groat or the euro) are much worse.
I have less faith in our politicians (UK, that is) to be tough enough in negotiations, and in any proposed rules governing debt and fiscal policy to be kept (they weren't in the eurozone).
There's also the moral part of the question: if the Scots want independence, that's their right. But if you want it, have it. Don't decide the UK is so awful you can't bear to be in it, but that the British currency is so delightful you just can't stand to be without it. Go for the Scottish pound/groat or join the euro, but if you're separating, separate.
Or not.
*chortle*
That's not in the bottom decile - that's only a little below world GDP per capita.
My point is simply that "the Chinese government won't let GDP fall below 4%" or somesuch is an absurd statement. Governments (even the Chinese one) don't have that level of control. And such things they do to maintain growth rates, by boosting government spending, or encouraging easy credit, just defer pain, and make it worse when the eventual rebalancing happens.
Let me give you some numbers. According to JP Morgan, the Chinese shadow banking system is now 87% of GDP. Add this to the official 130% private sector debt-to-GDP number, and you get a total of around 220% of GDP.
That's greater private sector indebtedness than Spain or the UK managed in 2007 (and only a smidgen lower than Ireland).
Now, sure, the government can avoid a rebalancing now. But remember, the way governments respond to crises is usually by making credit more available and cheaper. That just makes the eventual problem worse.
Well, I don't have to "put myself in the head of a 2010 LD" whatever that means. We could play the same game with those who voted Conservative or Labour in 2010 but perhaps more importantly with those who didn't vote in 2010.
As with OGH, I need far more than the daily YouGov before I'm convinced of anything. Populus on Monday didn't exactly scream a narrowing gap and ComRes (33/32- really) needs more support. ICM, as always, will be informative.
It will be significant if the Conservatives can hold and start moving above 35% but we can't say that yet with any confidence. Labour seem firm (ComRes apart) in the 37-40% range but again we'll see.
Nice to see CR following my "40% of UKIP share to the Tories" rule - that's another one which will be tested in the months ahead. We are once again cursed to live in interesting times as someone much wiser than me once opined.
On 50% tax rate - more symbolic than significant. It doesn't apply to me so personally I'm not too bothered. As with many other political messages, more designed to talk to the heartlands than the badlands as is this morning's latest wheeze on extending the school day. The demise of the "school run" ? We'll see. As with much else, superficially attractive but any kind of thought soon uncovers the problems. I'm back with the thought (as with so much else) that if it really worked, we'd be doing it already.
If they were offering a bet on those rates as to whether Scotland would still be using the rUK £ 5 years after independence I would be seriously tempted although that is a long time to wait for your money.
The Governor's speech has got a lot of front page headlines in Scotland this morning. The SNP will not be pleased.
@MikeSmithson's fear that they were sliding backs looks to be 24 hour wonder.
*@TSE netted off, as with all other polling figures
What does appear to be happening is some of the less grumpy kippers going back to the Tories. That's great news for the Blues - let's see if it is sustained.
And again with China you are comparing apples and chalk. It is an administrative economy. If you really believe that the Chinese govt "don't have that level of control" you haven't been paying attention to the development of the country since the 3rd Plenum in 1978. The Chinese govt has absolute control (save for a very few, carefully selected and high profile SOEs via B- and H-shares).
As for the shadow banking system (utter speculative numbers from JPM) and private sector debt, these again are phenomena that have different meanings in the PRC.
At the level of foreign exchange reserves and administrative intent, they can defer any "crisis" or "unwinding" until well after you and I are safely in the ground.
We just have to hope that China is catching a little cold rather than a full-blown fever. I am with you. It's economy is very lop-sided and very vulnerable. There is only so much the government can do - especially when corruption is such a problem.
I agree with you in the long term, China will either crash or face a severe slowdown. It is inevitable. It's just not likely this year, which is why I made that bet with you, and then offered to double it today (which offer you refused, I note)
What do I see?
1. I see that Labour and the Tories both lost voters to the UKIP bandwagon in early 2013.
2. I see that after UKIP peaked at the May locals the Tories recovered some ground - but Labour did not.
3. I see a tiny energy price freeze bump in the Labour score, mirrored in the Tory score, following the conference season. This has not quite entirely unwound.
4. I see UKIP possibly beginning to rise again in the run-up to the Euro elections, and it is notable that their minimum after the local election surge was higher than before it.
The most interesting thing that has happened over the last year is that both Labour and the Tories lost votes to the UKIP surge, but only the Tories managed to pull any significant numbers back.
That's a really interesting difference and I'd be delighted if someone was able to explain it, and predict whether the pattern was likely to repeat or change with the expected UKIP surge for the Euro elections.
Edit; Another interesting thing. The last opinion poll to record a UKIP share of 6% or less - that is twice their share of the vote at GE2010 - was about one year ago.
The point is that the $9,000 per capita GDP is a meaningless stat.
1. The Tier One Cities are incredibly wealthy on a per capita basis. Much more than $9,000 - probably not up with Hong Kong, but almost certainly top quartile globally
2. Tier Two/Tier Three Cities - $9,000 feels about right. Solid industrial towns, decent standard of living. Increased car ownership, etc, but still not wealthy.
3. Rural - A huge number of people living at or below the subsistence level. The Chinese government isn't really worried about them, provided they get fed just enough not to rebel (and not so much that if they rebel they are strong enough to take on the army). They have much much less than $9,000 per capita GDP.
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/censoring-jesus-and-mo-establishes-uk.html
Chinese people lend their money to banks. The banks lend money to property development companies to build houses. The property developers hire people, and these people save a large portion of their earnings, and the cycle continues.
The problems with this virtuous circle are two-fold: Firstly, house prices in China are astronomical - according to Citibank, in first tier cities, house prices are 20x salaries, and even in third tier cities, they are 7x. Secondly, a crazy proportion of SpanishChinese economic activity is contruction. Something like 20-25%.
I defy you to find any country on earth - all powerful state or not - that has gone through a construction boom like that and not had a single quarter of negative of growth during the hangover phase.
Given you are "95%" confident that the Chinese government will not "let" growth dip below 5%, why don't we make the additional £50 on Q414 vs Q413?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a14e208-88ff-11e3-9f48-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2rsMquQzT
"In a blow to the UK prime minister’s negotiating tactics, Paris signalled that Mr Hollande would make clear at their Anglo-French summit that he was not prepared to accelerate a reopening of the treaty to suit Mr Cameron’s timetable of a poll in 2017."
"Mr Hollande’s socialist government acknowledges that an eventual change to the treaty, sought by Germany to cement further integration in the eurozone, may be needed. But with French hostility to Brussels on the rise, he is reluctant to trigger any call for a referendum that would inevitably follow in France before his own re-election date in 2017."
"The prime minister has tried to claim that Mr Hollande’s socialist economic policies are a glimpse of what a Labour government under Ed Miliband would look like. Grant Shapps, Tory chairman, has said Mr Hollande is taking his countrymen “back into the dust”.
The comments have irked Mr Hollande’s government. “It would be better if there were not these statements in the UK but they won’t impede [the summit],” the senior official said. They reflected internal UK politics and were “a way of masking certain realities in the UK economy”, he said."
In fact in a comment the other day I mentioned 30 micro-economies there but the point is made.
I would take issue with you on pt.3, howver - the Chinese govt, via each administrative regional govt, is extremely keen to improve its lot (whether that be by offering tax or other incentives) via SEZs, free-trade and development zones. Every region has its own set of "business-friendly" initiatives.
It's not unreasonable to expect that an improving economic picture will benefit the governing parties but, in the context of the Parliament as a whole, four opinion polls is neither here nor there in terms of judging whether it is happening or not.
Of course it's not great to build "ghost towns" of unlived-in houses but really, it's small change in the grand scheme of things.
Here's a handy list (from the BBC livefeed) of laps completed:
Engine Day One Day Two Total
Mercedes 36 212 248
Ferrari 38 100 138
Renault 19 19 38
And he has a lot of gas he can use to fire up the Quattro.
China will, shall and must slowdown or even crash, eventually. But this year? Pretty unlikely.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/30/britain-first-world-war-biggest-error-niall-ferguson
Not this year, next year or the the one after is my RMB0.02.
No elected politician would allow such a thing. Exports will not be a major source of growth for China from here on. This does not mean that their export production will not increase, simply that increases on the scale we have seen in the last 20 years are no longer possible and it can no longer be a major engine of growth.
This means that it is much more dependent on getting and keeping domestic demand going. So far this has been by investment, specifically on construction. This cannot go on either. There are already huge numbers of empty towns waiting for customers. So we are looking at consumption. Hence real wage increases, hence the loss of economic competitiveness on exports and the return of some manufacturing to the west, specifically the US.
This is a well known and well recognised conumdrum for developing economies. We have just never seen it on this scale before. What the Chinese government is seeking to do is (Brown like) boost internal demand by very loose money supply and debt. Such a policy may well work in the long run but will inevitably cause volitility in the short run and the odd panic.
The tapering down of Fed support is causing real problems in smaller developing markets at the moment. I think there is a strong chance that it will trip convulsions in China as well over the coming months.
The best counterargument was that made by the exceptionally numerate @OblitusSumMe yesterday. Given that the 2013 growth figures were strong there is a lot of annualised growth already in the tank.
The government's last-minute amendment to the immigration bill will mean there will be three different types of people in the UK:
1) Non-citizens
2) Citizens
3) Citizens-but-if-we-don't-like-you-we'll-make-you-stateless. A really bad move IMHO. Expect the definition of "seriously prejudicial" to be really stretched over time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25953053
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25953053
Oh yuck. If you're a British citizen, you're a British citizen. That should be the end of it.
It's also possible that China is Sui generis. We have never before seen a country of this enormous size and physical/intellectual potential - with such a long history of unified rule - industrialise and "capitalise" its economy so rapidly and dynamically, from an inert, communist standing start.
The lessons we have learned from other developing nations, even Asian states similar to China, like Japan or South Korea, may NOT be scalable. They may not apply. China might be rewriting the rules, for good or bad.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25940583
That should be the end of it unless you have a backbench rebellion to head off. I loved the reported Lib Dem leadership position - they'll support it because it will only affect a few people. Your rights are in safe hands people!
The kipper tory waverers Osbrowne scared off with the omnishambles could start to go back if they feel better off but counterbalancing that are the polls which say immigration is still a number one issue for most kippers.
If labour lose yet more of their vote to the kippers than last May then it's probable they too would eventually hit a point where some of those are the very softest of protest votes that soon come back.
If the kipper vote drops again after the May EU elections like it did last May that would likely be when any possible crossover could be strongest and could even remain for a time.
What's Labour's position on it? Are they going to vote for this amendment?