The only way John Leech holds Manchester Withington is if he defects to Labour.
Is this likely, both in the specific case and more widely? I don't know John Leech's personal politics, but are there one or two LD MPs who might be peel-offable by EdM?
Nope , John Leech is totally unlikely to want to defect to Labour and Labour even more unlikely to want him if he did .
Not to mention that Occam's razor suggests Labour wouldn't have expanded postal voting quite so aggressively if they didn't think it would help them.
Right, so Labour almost certainly thought that expanding postal voting would help them, but given their record of stunning achievement in terms of effects following from intentions, how likely is it really that it does favour them?
Wouldn't it be less surprising if it turned out to be another thing they got wrong?
From what people like Nick Palmer etc tell us on here , its the labour activists who are more active wheras the tory ones are dying out. An efficient postal vote operation requires party activists and I suspect that's one of the reasons Labour like it. Again personally I think if you are farming votes in this way its not democratic even if there is no technical fraud
Re the Ashcroft Poll: don't think Lab will get as much as 61% due to differential turnout in the 2 parts of the constituency but should win comfortably.
re postal voting , I have never bought the argument that everything should be done to make voting easier so that turnout will be higher and this will somehow then be more democratic. Voting should not be made hard of course but a walk of no more than 300 yards to a polling station should not be beyond any able bodied person (the disabled and frail can of course postal vote). If you make voting too easy people will vote without care or little thought . That's not being democratic that's just encouraging triviality
My polling station is over half a mile walk.
So a 20 minute round trip? 30 tops if the place is busy?
JohnLoony was right to point out a few days ago that UKIP are always much weaker in the western side of England (excl. the south-west). So Greater Manchester is not as good territory for them as Yorkshire would be, for instance.
Wendi Deng has apparently been offering high praise of Tony Blair. Don't worry it's nothing to do with his policies like Iraq or his kow-towing to ex-husband Rupert, no it's that much under-estimated weapon in the Blairite arsenal, his body.
JohnLoony was right to point out a few days ago that UKIP are always much weaker in the western side of England (excl. the south-west). So Greater Manchester is not as good territory for them as Yorkshire would be, for instance.
Are there any stats backing that up?
Local election results in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent indicate UKIP have somewhat of an eastern tilt to their vote.
Can't remember how they did in Suffolk and Norfolk though..
re postal voting , I have never bought the argument that everything should be done to make voting easier so that turnout will be higher and this will somehow then be more democratic. Voting should not be made hard of course but a walk of no more than 300 yards to a polling station should not be beyond any able bodied person (the disabled and frail can of course postal vote). If you make voting too easy people will vote without care or little thought . That's not being democratic that's just encouraging triviality
My polling station is over half a mile walk.
So a 20 minute round trip? 30 tops if the place is busy?
30 mins , nice walk if pleasant and sunny , stay at home if pouring down .
JohnLoony was right to point out a few days ago that UKIP are always much weaker in the western side of England (excl. the south-west). So Greater Manchester is not as good territory for them as Yorkshire would be, for instance.
Are there any stats backing that up?
Local election results in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent indicate UKIP have somewhat of an eastern tilt to their vote.
Can't remember how they did in Suffolk and Norfolk though..
UKIP did very well in those counties and Cambridgeshire.
JohnLoony was right to point out a few days ago that UKIP are always much weaker in the western side of England (excl. the south-west). So Greater Manchester is not as good territory for them as Yorkshire would be, for instance.
Are there any stats backing that up?
Local election results in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent indicate UKIP have somewhat of an eastern tilt to their vote.
Can't remember how they did in Suffolk and Norfolk though..
While obviously there's been an almighty amount of mixing there's some evidence that there is a genetic difference, probably due to whence the aboriginal inhabitants came, between people in East and S England (and Scotland) and those in the West and North …… including the English North-West.
If a half mile walk is enough to put off a (with no offence intended Mark) political anorak like Mark Senior, it's no wonder turnouts among the great indifferent are so low.
I personally quite enjoy an excuse for a half mile walk. Though since I've had children, any incidence of leaving the house in the evening has to be carefully managed, and it wouldn't be feasible to have a pleasant 20 minute walk in the company of my wife, as one of us will have to stay at home and babysit. So my participation next Thursday is by no means assured.
JohnLoony was right to point out a few days ago that UKIP are always much weaker in the western side of England (excl. the south-west). So Greater Manchester is not as good territory for them as Yorkshire would be, for instance.
Are there any stats backing that up?
Local election results in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent indicate UKIP have somewhat of an eastern tilt to their vote.
Can't remember how they did in Suffolk and Norfolk though..
UKIP did very well in those counties and Cambridgeshire.
In Euro 2009, UKIP won
Two seats in the SW Two seats in the West Midlands One seat in the NW
then
Two seats in the SE One in London Two seats in the East One in the East Midlands One in Yorks/Humber
For those conditions you just have to suck it up and get wet!
Considering the tories are shovelling money at foreign dictators whilst their own citizens are battered by biblical weather conditions with no promise of a let up, I think polling in the low 30s isn't too bad.
For those conditions you just have to suck it up and get wet!
Considering the tories are shovelling money at foreign dictators whilst their own citizens are battered by biblical weather conditions with no promise of a let up, I think polling in the low 30s isn't too bad.
Which dictators are the Coalition giving money to?
If a half mile walk is enough to put off a (with no offence intended Mark) political anorak like Mark Senior, it's no wonder turnouts among the great indifferent are so low.
I personally quite enjoy an excuse for a half mile walk. Though since I've had children, any incidence of leaving the house in the evening has to be carefully managed, and it wouldn't be feasible to have a pleasant 20 minute walk in the company of my wife, as one of us will have to stay at home and babysit. So my participation next Thursday is by no means assured.
No offence taken , a half mile walk on a nice day would no put me off but the same in the pouring rain would do . A difference in the Conservative majority between 8,000 and 8,001 is not worth getting wet for . In 2005 I had moved from Brighton to Worthing shortly before the GE . With no postal vote I did not make the 24 mile round trip to vote .
For those conditions you just have to suck it up and get wet!
Considering the tories are shovelling money at foreign dictators whilst their own citizens are battered by biblical weather conditions with no promise of a let up, I think polling in the low 30s isn't too bad.
Which dictators are the Coalition giving money to?
Not to mention that Occam's razor suggests Labour wouldn't have expanded postal voting quite so aggressively if they didn't think it would help them.
Right, so Labour almost certainly thought that expanding postal voting would help them, but given their record of stunning achievement in terms of effects following from intentions, how likely is it really that it does favour them?
Wouldn't it be less surprising if it turned out to be another thing they got wrong?
On this occasion, their analysis was right. Unlike some of their other consitutional innovations, the postal vote reforms were minor and could be easily reversed without any loss of political prestige (on the contrary, their role in fraud has damaged how elections are seen). That they chose not to says something.
I would have no problem going back to the old rules, where in addition to the elderly and infirm, those who know they will be away on the day can also apply. The one and only time I applied for a postal vote was under the old rules, when I was at university and wanted to vote in my home local elections rather than than at my term-time address (I think I could have legally voted in both though I didn't know that at the time).
When do you think the Tory Party will reach the tipping point? The point where predominantly the backbenchers realise that not only will they not win, but there will quite possibly be a Labour government. Or more importantly to them, those in the marginals think they will lose their seat.
re postal voting , I have never bought the argument that everything should be done to make voting easier so that turnout will be higher and this will somehow then be more democratic. Voting should not be made hard of course but a walk of no more than 300 yards to a polling station should not be beyond any able bodied person (the disabled and frail can of course postal vote). If you make voting too easy people will vote without care or little thought . That's not being democratic that's just encouraging triviality
Voting is the least important feature of a democracy.
The restrictions on freedom of assembly that have been imposed over the last couple of decades have done much more to undermine democracy in this country than pettyfogging disputes over postal voting or gerrymandering.
On the other hand, voting creates events that are easy to frame bets on, so it does bring some advantages.
The restrictions on freedom of speech are worse still.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
Had two but the wind destroyed them in the recent storms .
Well an umbrella isn't any good in high wind, anyone could tell you that! For those conditions you just have to suck it up and get wet!
Or stay at home and use your postal vote .
Postal votes should only be available to the elderly or infirm.
So a business man working abroad on polling today should be disenfranchised ?
Worthing isn't "abroad", Mark
Yes, those who find themselves abroad should also qualify.
So not just the elderly or infirm , how about someone working away from home on polling day but in this country say 250 miles from the polling booth .
But you said you lived just over half a mile from your polling station!
and I am saying that I would not walk half a mile in the pouring rain to cast a vote . When I lived in Beighton it was less than 100 yards . If you want to disenfranchise those who would not do so then do not whinge when GE turnouts fall below 50% .
When do you think the Tory Party will reach the tipping point? The point where predominantly the backbenchers realise that not only will they not win, but there will quite possibly be a Labour government. Or more importantly to them, those in the marginals think they will lose their seat.
''Or more importantly to them, those in the marginals think they will lose their seat''.
Don;t hold your breath. Not until a month after Osborne's last budget.
The tories still have a number of cards to play. This year's budget, Cam's reneg, 2014 autumn statement, next year's budget, Lloyds stake sale - to name but five.
Now, you may think those are weak cards, but I think it would be foolish to discount their influence completely.
And then there are events, dear boy.
It was your man Wilson who said a week's a long time in politics.
Alex Salmond has urged Scots to ignore the views of the “elite” about independence after three times failing to name a major business leader who supports leaving the UK.
The interventions of the BP chief executive and the head of one of the North Sea’s leading investment banks were particularly damaging for the nationalists as oil is pivotal to their economic case for separation.
Speaking afterwards, Ms Lamont said: “The First Minister’s message to Scotland is don’t listen to the experts, or anyone who disagrees with him.
@OliverCooper: 54% of the public think the top rate of tax should be 45p or below - compared to only 40% that back raising it again. http://t.co/lSpuRpXYyG
''Or more importantly to them, those in the marginals think they will lose their seat''.
Don;t hold your breath. Not until a month after Osborne's last budget.
The tories still have a number of cards to play. This year's budget, Cam's reneg, 2014 autumn statement, next year's budget, Lloyds stake sale - to name but five.
Now, you may think those are weak cards, but I think it would be foolish to discount their influence completely.
And then there are events, dear boy.
It was your man Wilson who said a week's a long time in politics.
I appreciate the "events" adage, however, taking into the Tory backbenchers headless chicken syndrome surely not far beyond the Euro's if it is a bad result and the switch will be flicked?
''Or more importantly to them, those in the marginals think they will lose their seat''.
Don;t hold your breath. Not until a month after Osborne's last budget.
The tories still have a number of cards to play. This year's budget, Cam's reneg, 2014 autumn statement, next year's budget, Lloyds stake sale - to name but five.
Now, you may think those are weak cards, but I think it would be foolish to discount their influence completely.
And then there are events, dear boy.
It was your man Wilson who said a week's a long time in politics.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
I appreciate the "events" adage, however, taking into the Tory backbenchers headless chicken syndrome surely not far beyond the Euro's if it is a bad result and the switch will be flicked?
I reckon the tories could survive a bad result at the euros, especially if the economy keeps doing well. Not sure ed miliband could though.
I concede Labour are doing well in euro polls, but I still think ed will have great difficulties getting his vote out in that election. What is there to vote for? he's advocating the status quo and people tend to vote for change.
I appreciate the "events" adage, however, taking into the Tory backbenchers headless chicken syndrome surely not far beyond the Euro's if it is a bad result and the switch will be flicked?
I reckon the tories could survive a bad result at the euros, especially if the economy keeps doing well. Not sure ed miliband could though.
I concede Labour are doing well in euro polls, but I still think ed will have great difficulties getting his vote out in that election. What is there to vote for? he's advocating the status quo and people tend to vote for change.
Thats why we need a big fat cynical baws oot no messing income tax cut in the budget.
20 > 18 p rate with no clawback by freezing the 40p rate.
3 Labour MP's are having a whinge about property prices in London. Hmm. Shame they didn't think about this during their 13 years in power, when they could have built more social housing or tried to get a handle on immigration. I suspect Abbott was too busy making money from TV appearances, and choosing private schools for her son.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
So you're saying UKIP are the Viking Party?
Not really: East Anglia, Essex and Kent weren't really Viking strongholds as far as I know.
@OliverCooper: 54% of the public think the top rate of tax should be 45p or below - compared to only 40% that back raising it again. http://t.co/lSpuRpXYyG
Probably best explained by hopeful lottery players.
3 Labour MP's are having a whinge about property prices in London. Hmm. Shame they didn't think about this during their 13 years in power, when they could have built more social housing or tried to get a handle on immigration. I suspect Abbott was too busy making money from TV appearances, and choosing private schools for her son.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
So you're saying UKIP are the Viking Party?
Not really: East Anglia, Essex and Kent weren't really Viking strongholds as far as I know.
East Anglia was an integral part of the Danelaw. It's full of Viking place names.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
“Isn’t it the case that rule number one in Alex Salmond’s book of communication is to assert something that’s untrue and keep on repeating it often enough in the hope that people believe it to be true.”
Am I the only one to find this bit of Ashcroft's poll surprising?
"Not surprisingly, those who have switched to UKIP – largely but by no means exclusively from the Tories – are more likely than most to say they are voting tactically to try to stop another party from winning."
I've never met a UKIP voter who was supporting them as a tactical move, but I suppose that's because I've not recently canvassed a safe Labour seat. This appears to mean that many Tories in safe Labour seats do think that UKIP has the better chance, since even the least well-informed voter can't think that voting UKIP is the best way to prevent a Tory gain of that seat.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
So you're saying UKIP are the Viking Party?
Not really: East Anglia, Essex and Kent weren't really Viking strongholds as far as I know.
East Anglia and Essex were conquered and ruled by the Danes. Kent never was though.
Anyway, never mind the Vikings only the other day on this very site we were assured that UKIP was a party of Boers.
It's worth noting from the chart above that Nigel Farage's approval ratings are now falling. When polling started on his approval ratings in March last year, he was +9. This month only 31% approve and 41% disapprove (his joint worst figure ever). The gilt seems to be coming off the gingerbread.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
And Cameron is also barely above where Brown was. Yet his supposed popularity is supposed to save the Tories next year.
Am I the only one to find this bit of Ashcroft's poll surprising?
"Not surprisingly, those who have switched to UKIP – largely but by no means exclusively from the Tories – are more likely than most to say they are voting tactically to try to stop another party from winning."
I've never met a UKIP voter who was supporting them as a tactical move, but I suppose that's because I've not recently canvassed a safe Labour seat. This appears to mean that many Tories in safe Labour seats do think that UKIP has the better chance, since even the least well-informed voter can't think that voting UKIP is the best way to prevent a Tory gain of that seat.
Given that a large proportion of Lib Dem voters said that they were voting tactically to stop another party winning, I'm not sure that that information should be taken with anything other than a large dose of salt.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
I think you mean Labour which is not necessarily the same as Ed.....
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
I think you mean Labour which is not necessarily the same as Ed.....
Ok then, Labour, which is lead by Crap Ed, has not been behind in a single opinion poll since a poll taken between 16th-18th March 2012......strange eh.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
Does rather suggest that Labour could win an election outright with a different leader.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
I never understand why Tories gleefully point to EdM's mediocre personal ratings. Surely the fact that Labour still have a lead even in spite of there being no great enthusiasm for the leader just shows how utterly despised the Conservatives are?
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
Does rather suggest that Labour could win an election outright with a different leader.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
I assume they will look at the Euro result and the polls and think they have a good chance of their leader leading them to a GE victory in 2015.....Labour MP's, obviously, not the Tory MP's.
"A study by Capital Economics … has concluded that the average Dutch household could be £8000 per year better off, and that the national income would grow if Netherlands left the EU."
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
Does rather suggest that Labour could win an election outright with a different leader.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
Imo, the only person in the shadow cabinet who would do significantly better than Ed is Andy Burnham. Yvette would do about the same as Ed, the likes of Balls and Harman would do considerably worse (and, controversially, I also think DavidM would be doing worse as leader than Ed, even if he hadn't decided British politics was beneath him), and I still think Chuka Umunna and Rachel Reeves are vastly overrated.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
Does rather suggest that Labour could win an election outright with a different leader.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
I assume they will look at the Euro result and the polls and think they have a good chance of their leader leading them to a GE victory in 2015.....Labour MP's, obviously, not the Tory MP's.
Things could get very interesting if the Tories go for a presidential style campaign. I wonder...
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
Does rather suggest that Labour could win an election outright with a different leader.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
I assume they will look at the Euro result and the polls and think they have a good chance of their leader leading them to a GE victory in 2015.....Labour MP's, obviously, not the Tory MP's.
Things could get very interesting if the Tories go for a presidential style campaign. I wonder...
It would help if Cameron was actually popular, but he isn't, he is just not as disliked as the others. He has gone from just under sixty percent of people saying they were satisfied with him doing his job at the last election to 37 percent now. If he couldn't even win a mandate with the just under sixty percent satisfied with him, how is a presidential campaign going to help now?
I never understand why Tories gleefully point to EdM's mediocre personal ratings. Surely the fact that Labour still have a lead even in spite of there being no great enthusiasm for the leader just shows how utterly despised the Conservatives are?
Poll ratings may change where the public has not fully factored things into their thinking.
The MORI approval ratings for party leaders are often thought to be a predictor of future poll movements when voters come to focus on the election (some voters may fret about who represents Britain in negotiations, for example, and decide to vote for the man who looks more Prime Ministerial). For myself, I think there's something in this, but that it is overstated.
For similar reasons, Labour should be nervous about the rises in economic optimism and about the Conservatives' consistent lead over Labour on the handling of the economy in general. It should be nervous that the David Cameron has now taken the lead on which party leader is best able to deal with unemployment. Some voters when it comes to the crunch may decide that they can't risk voting Labour, even if they feel that they ought to.
Set against that, Labour's lead on which party is most likely to make the respondent's family better off should give it considerable comfort. In my view, the Conservatives urgently need to make the argument that what's good for the country will ultimately be good for the regular individual voter if they are to recover in the polls.
Finally, for completeness, I should say that Ed Miliband's personal ratings may themselves change if he can persuade the public to take a fresh look at him. The general election debates are his best opportunity to do this, and I wonder whether the Conservatives might sabotage these not to avoid having to debate with Nigel Farage but to avoid giving Ed Miliband this chance.
Ed Miliband is better than the public currently realise, and that's dangerous for the Conservatives.
Finally, for completeness, I should say that Ed Miliband's personal ratings may themselves change if he can persuade the public to take a fresh look at him. The general election debates are his best opportunity to do this, and I wonder whether the Conservatives might sabotage these not to avoid having to debate with Nigel Farage but to avoid giving Ed Miliband this chance.
Ed Miliband is better than the public currently realise, and that's dangerous for the Conservatives.
Interesting analysis. There seems to be a thing with Ed that he's a bit of a slow burner with people. The town hall format suits him best but generally one would think TV debates might suit, particularly if Dave gets angry.
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
Strange how Crap Ed has not been behind in a single opinion poll since March 2012, eh.
Does rather suggest that Labour could win an election outright with a different leader.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
Imo, the only person in the shadow cabinet who would do significantly better than Ed is Andy Burnham. Yvette would do about the same as Ed, the likes of Balls and Harman would do considerably worse (and, controversially, I also think DavidM would be doing worse as leader than Ed, even if he hadn't decided British politics was beneath him), and I still think Chuka Umunna and Rachel Reeves are vastly overrated.
Ed was the right choice - he much better fits the voting profile of the fabled LD switchers than David ever would.
Finally, for completeness, I should say that Ed Miliband's personal ratings may themselves change if he can persuade the public to take a fresh look at him. The general election debates are his best opportunity to do this, and I wonder whether the Conservatives might sabotage these not to avoid having to debate with Nigel Farage but to avoid giving Ed Miliband this chance.
Ed Miliband is better than the public currently realise, and that's dangerous for the Conservatives.
Interesting analysis. There seems to be a thing with Ed that he's a bit of a slow burner with people. The town hall format suits him best but generally one would think TV debates might suit, particularly if Dave gets angry.
Ed Miliband made a bad start to his tenure as leader, from which he has yet fully to recover. He looked odd, he sounded odd and the public wrote him off as weird and wonkish. You don't get a second chance to make a first impression.
Since then, he has shown a capacity to learn from his mistakes. He has found a style which suits him much better, though he still looks desperately beta male. But the public isn't really listening.
The next time they'll really listen is during the general election debates, and how they're adjudged to have played out. He doesn't need Cleggmania, just to exceed the public's low expectations. He should do this - unless the debates don't happen.
Alex Salmond has urged Scots to ignore the views of the “elite” about independence after three times failing to name a major business leader who supports leaving the UK.
The interventions of the BP chief executive and the head of one of the North Sea’s leading investment banks were particularly damaging for the nationalists as oil is pivotal to their economic case for separation.
Speaking afterwards, Ms Lamont said: “The First Minister’s message to Scotland is don’t listen to the experts, or anyone who disagrees with him.
Finally, for completeness, I should say that Ed Miliband's personal ratings may themselves change if he can persuade the public to take a fresh look at him. The general election debates are his best opportunity to do this, and I wonder whether the Conservatives might sabotage these not to avoid having to debate with Nigel Farage but to avoid giving Ed Miliband this chance.
Ed Miliband is better than the public currently realise, and that's dangerous for the Conservatives.
Interesting analysis. There seems to be a thing with Ed that he's a bit of a slow burner with people. The town hall format suits him best but generally one would think TV debates might suit, particularly if Dave gets angry.
Ed Miliband made a bad start to his tenure as leader, from which he has yet fully to recover. He looked odd, he sounded odd and the public wrote him off as weird and wonkish. You don't get a second chance to make a first impression.
Since then, he has shown a capacity to learn from his mistakes. He has found a style which suits him much better, though he still looks desperately beta male. But the public isn't really listening.
The next time they'll really listen is during the general election debates, and how they're adjudged to have played out. He doesn't need Cleggmania, just to exceed the public's low expectations. He should do this - unless the debates don't happen.
Personally, the who I think the biggest loser of the debates would be Clegg. He did so well last time that even five years later, people still remember he did well, if not what he said. The fact that he went back on quite a lot of what he did say in the debates(and people wont remember what was specifically said,but will remember what policies were ditched) will crucify him in this one. He must be praying they do not happen.
- 52% of the sample would prefer Miliband as PM (excluding the don't knows/refused) - 54% of the sample would prefer Miliband and Balls to manage the economy (ditto)
@compouter2 I disagree with that. There are two possibilities, and under neither of them are the debates a bad thing for Nick Clegg.
1) Nick Clegg is already roadkill. If so, nothing he can say or do is going to improve his party's performance. Equally, however, his rivals aren't going to waste their breath attacking him - you don't kick dead dogs.
2) Nick Clegg is capable of public redemption. If so, the debates are his big opportunity to rekindle the embers.
If Nick Clegg can make the best comeback since Lazarus, that would raise a tricky problem for Ed Miliband as to how hard he should then attack the Lib Dems. I expect that Labour are planning on the basis of my first permutation. Certainly there's nothing in the polling to suggest otherwise just yet.
But the Lib Dems have to plan on the basis that my second permutation is a possibility.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
So you're saying UKIP are the Viking Party?
Eastern England has a record of insurgency. The Peasants' revolt was centred on Kent and East Anglia, and the heartland of Cromwell's support was East Anglia.
UKIP aren't as popular as one would expect in places like Worcestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire. They're relatively strong down the east coast all the way from the Humber to Kent (although Suffolk is maybe an exception).
So you're saying UKIP are the Viking Party?
Eastern England has a record of insurgency. The Peasants' revolt was centred on Kent and East Anglia, and the heartland of Cromwell's support was East Anglia.
''he right wing media attack on Miliband snr, and the public response to it, shows what could happen if they go over the top on Miliband jnr.''
I'm sure the right wing press would be quite happy to go after Ed's policies, but he doesn;t have any.
He's relying on a constant stream of 'isn't this cr*p?' bandwagons which have traction at the polls because things are tough and people, after five or six tough years, are serially curmudgeonly.
But that's just sentiment. Votes, when government is at really stake, is a different matter.
@compouter2 I disagree with that. There are two possibilities, and under neither of them are the debates a bad thing for Nick Clegg.
1) Nick Clegg is already roadkill. If so, nothing he can say or do is going to improve his party's performance. Equally, however, his rivals aren't going to waste their breath attacking him - you don't kick dead dogs.
2) Nick Clegg is capable of public redemption. If so, the debates are his big opportunity to rekindle the embers.
If Nick Clegg can make the best comeback since Lazarus, that would raise a tricky problem for Ed Miliband as to how hard he should then attack the Lib Dems. I expect that Labour are planning on the basis of my first permutation. Certainly there's nothing in the polling to suggest otherwise just yet.
But the Lib Dems have to plan on the basis that my second permutation is a possibility.
Ed angles for a Labour-Conservative debate; Dave angles for a 3 leader debate; Nigel for a 4; Nick doesn't mind if it is 3 or 4. But definitely not 2.
@compouter2 I disagree with that. There are two possibilities, and under neither of them are the debates a bad thing for Nick Clegg.
1) Nick Clegg is already roadkill. If so, nothing he can say or do is going to improve his party's performance. Equally, however, his rivals aren't going to waste their breath attacking him - you don't kick dead dogs.
2) Nick Clegg is capable of public redemption. If so, the debates are his big opportunity to rekindle the embers.
If Nick Clegg can make the best comeback since Lazarus, that would raise a tricky problem for Ed Miliband as to how hard he should then attack the Lib Dems. I expect that Labour are planning on the basis of my first permutation. Certainly there's nothing in the polling to suggest otherwise just yet.
But the Lib Dems have to plan on the basis that my second permutation is a possibility.
Ed angles for a Labour-Conservative debate; Dave angles for a 3 leader debate; Nigel for a 4; Nick doesn't mind if it is 3 or 4. But definitely not 2.
My guess ?
Zero.
If that's how it pans out, that suits David Cameron best, because his personal advantage over his closest rival is then entrenched further.
Comments
Again personally I think if you are farming votes in this way its not democratic even if there is no technical fraud
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/letter-reportedly-written-by-wendi-deng-praises-tony-blairs-good-body-nice-legs-and-butt-9109525.html
Can't remember how they did in Suffolk and Norfolk though..
'John Leech is a class act, '
Why?
Interesting contrast between 'cost-of-living crisis' UK and the eurozone, where, apparently, deflation is a concern:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26063083
"I can't even imagine the British media meltdown if those waves [the 75 foot waves in Cornwall] were hitting London..."
That would be one heck of a tidal surge up the Thames.
I personally quite enjoy an excuse for a half mile walk. Though since I've had children, any incidence of leaving the house in the evening has to be carefully managed, and it wouldn't be feasible to have a pleasant 20 minute walk in the company of my wife, as one of us will have to stay at home and babysit. So my participation next Thursday is by no means assured.
Two seats in the SW
Two seats in the West Midlands
One seat in the NW
then
Two seats in the SE
One in London
Two seats in the East
One in the East Midlands
One in Yorks/Humber
None in the NE
Considering the tories are shovelling money at foreign dictators whilst their own citizens are battered by biblical weather conditions with no promise of a let up, I think polling in the low 30s isn't too bad.
Yes, those who find themselves abroad should also qualify.
In 2005 I had moved from Brighton to Worthing shortly before the GE . With no postal vote I did not make the 24 mile round trip to vote .
I would have no problem going back to the old rules, where in addition to the elderly and infirm, those who know they will be away on the day can also apply. The one and only time I applied for a postal vote was under the old rules, when I was at university and wanted to vote in my home local elections rather than than at my term-time address (I think I could have legally voted in both though I didn't know that at the time).
Don;t hold your breath. Not until a month after Osborne's last budget.
The tories still have a number of cards to play. This year's budget, Cam's reneg, 2014 autumn statement, next year's budget, Lloyds stake sale - to name but five.
Now, you may think those are weak cards, but I think it would be foolish to discount their influence completely.
And then there are events, dear boy.
It was your man Wilson who said a week's a long time in politics.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Harold_Macmillan
@PickardJE: October2013: GordonBrown lists £48k for MonteCarlo speech for Alphametrix http://t.co/HaYosg2Onj Alphametrix latest http://t.co/qmrDeWPNi9
I reckon the tories could survive a bad result at the euros, especially if the economy keeps doing well. Not sure ed miliband could though.
I concede Labour are doing well in euro polls, but I still think ed will have great difficulties getting his vote out in that election. What is there to vote for? he's advocating the status quo and people tend to vote for change.
20 > 18 p rate with no clawback by freezing the 40p rate.
A good honest BRIBE.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/we-cant-afford-a-london-home-on-our-pay-say-66kayear-mps-9111445.html
When did the crossover occur?
http://www.thecnj.com/islington/2007/083107/news083107_02.html
http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report-david-camerons-curse-of-death-behind-laura-robsons-shock-wimbledon-exit-1856107
"It’s a well-known fact that David Cameron consistently polls higher than his opposite number Ed Miliband when it comes to the ratings, but the graph below shows that the Labour leader’s stock is currently lower than Gordon Brown’s was just before the general election in 2010."
“Isn’t it the case that rule number one in Alex Salmond’s book of communication is to assert something that’s untrue and keep on repeating it often enough in the hope that people believe it to be true.”
Yup.......
"Not surprisingly, those who have switched to UKIP – largely but by no means exclusively from the Tories – are more likely than most to say they are voting tactically to try to stop another party from winning."
I've never met a UKIP voter who was supporting them as a tactical move, but I suppose that's because I've not recently canvassed a safe Labour seat. This appears to mean that many Tories in safe Labour seats do think that UKIP has the better chance, since even the least well-informed voter can't think that voting UKIP is the best way to prevent a Tory gain of that seat.
Anyway, never mind the Vikings only the other day on this very site we were assured that UKIP was a party of Boers.
When do you think his backbenchers will wake up to that fact? After the Euros maybe?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/janetdaley/100258448/newsflash-dutch-would-be-better-off-if-they-had-freedom-to-set-their-own-economic-policy/
That should gin up the Euro elections campaign in the Netherlands. :-)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26073155
The MORI approval ratings for party leaders are often thought to be a predictor of future poll movements when voters come to focus on the election (some voters may fret about who represents Britain in negotiations, for example, and decide to vote for the man who looks more Prime Ministerial). For myself, I think there's something in this, but that it is overstated.
For similar reasons, Labour should be nervous about the rises in economic optimism and about the Conservatives' consistent lead over Labour on the handling of the economy in general. It should be nervous that the David Cameron has now taken the lead on which party leader is best able to deal with unemployment. Some voters when it comes to the crunch may decide that they can't risk voting Labour, even if they feel that they ought to.
Set against that, Labour's lead on which party is most likely to make the respondent's family better off should give it considerable comfort. In my view, the Conservatives urgently need to make the argument that what's good for the country will ultimately be good for the regular individual voter if they are to recover in the polls.
Ed Miliband is better than the public currently realise, and that's dangerous for the Conservatives.
Since then, he has shown a capacity to learn from his mistakes. He has found a style which suits him much better, though he still looks desperately beta male. But the public isn't really listening.
The next time they'll really listen is during the general election debates, and how they're adjudged to have played out. He doesn't need Cleggmania, just to exceed the public's low expectations. He should do this - unless the debates don't happen.
Salmond is a member of the "elite". Should Scots ignore his call for them to ignore him?
- 52% of the sample would prefer Miliband as PM (excluding the don't knows/refused)
- 54% of the sample would prefer Miliband and Balls to manage the economy (ditto)
Depends on turnout
1) Nick Clegg is already roadkill. If so, nothing he can say or do is going to improve his party's performance. Equally, however, his rivals aren't going to waste their breath attacking him - you don't kick dead dogs.
2) Nick Clegg is capable of public redemption. If so, the debates are his big opportunity to rekindle the embers.
If Nick Clegg can make the best comeback since Lazarus, that would raise a tricky problem for Ed Miliband as to how hard he should then attack the Lib Dems. I expect that Labour are planning on the basis of my first permutation. Certainly there's nothing in the polling to suggest otherwise just yet.
But the Lib Dems have to plan on the basis that my second permutation is a possibility.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Britain_peoples_circa_600.svg
I'm sure the right wing press would be quite happy to go after Ed's policies, but he doesn;t have any.
He's relying on a constant stream of 'isn't this cr*p?' bandwagons which have traction at the polls because things are tough and people, after five or six tough years, are serially curmudgeonly.
But that's just sentiment. Votes, when government is at really stake, is a different matter.
My guess ?
Zero.