Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Coalition versus CON majority or LAB majority – the latest
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Coalition versus CON majority or LAB majority – the latest Ashcroft mega poll
@MSmithsonPB @LordAshcroft Interesting that public opinion split into three almost equal chunks: Lab, Con, Coalition
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What we don't know is how many would prefer a Tory min, which sounds like a walking disaster to me that would last only a few months at most. It would seem unlikely, I'd venture, that this is a preference of the public.
I agree with Richard N's analysis - or did. Looked for all the world like a junk story.
But why Cameron has not rebutted it, I do not know.
... and some folk wonder why Scots are disillusioned with Westminster politics.
A. It works. For all the carping, the government's record in power and the WAY it has governed has been generally very good. A huge and refreshing improvement on the New Labour years from both the results and the 'smell' perspective. Key reforms have been made, the finances turned around to a significant extent. It's not a shabby record by any objective assesment.
B. The parties hate it. It seems unsustainable to have a single kingmaker party that keeps getting pulled left then right. If we are again to have good functioning coalitions we need more parties with decent numbers of MPs. UKIP, Green, Nats, Loonies - don't care. But the coalition = LibDems in power meme looks to have passed its sell-by date.
And from this one can deduce that the USP of the LibDems has been destroyed by their being in power. I always felt they'd survive right up until they actually had to side with one lot or the other in power and then they 'd collapse. FPTP and LibDems aren't compatible. Maybe FPTP and vote shares as we now see them are not compatible. We may be heading for a historically crappy and indefensible GE outcome in 2015.
of course Stuart, because the current status of scottish politics is such a model for us all:
unionists : you'll all die and Scotland will fall into the sea
nats : free pixie dust and unicorns for all
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-26334501
So that should show up in polling then. We will see.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26335330
No.
But as is your wont, feel free to make a grave error.
It'd be interesting to know how useful this sort of poll really is. By that I mean how much weight people give to:
Party leaders
Parties
The local electoral situation
And how the above vary according to political leanings (namely that lefties are willing and able to cast anti-Tory tactical votes).
Which is odd, with so much to apologise for.
We have achieved some wonderful things. Not everything we have done can be found in either the Conservative or LD manifesto but we have come together and helped to create a better Britain. We have steered the country out of economic danger and are on a far stronger footing than we were in 2010 and than we would have been if Labour had come to power.
But we the Conservatives still have a vision. We want to extend the recovery, to make it a broad based recovery touching every one of us. We believe that a strong government is essential in these still fragile times and that a Conservative government can deliver that as you can see from our manifesto [pauses to sing Floreat Etona].
We look forward to a cracking fight come the general election and, following a Conservative victory, five more years of economic competence, stability and recovery."
Cameron didn't say that either but it doesn't take a great stretch to fashion something plausible that he might say along those lines.
Here are what they are most proud of:
NHS: The worst medical service in Western Europe.
Education: Nearly the worst in the civilised world.
Multi-ethnicity: they've watered down the Anglo Saxon base quite nicely, thank you.
Is it possible that there be some kind of resonant communal subconscious that makes us play with politicians, pollsters and other social observers?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2566282/Harriet-Harman-wasnt-quiet-Jimmy-Savile-scandal-Deputy-Labour-leader-toured-TV-radio-stations.html
We've also seen dangerous backsliding on freedom of speech, whether it's the right to be offensive for comedic purposes (as rightly criticised by Rowan Atkinson) or to mock religion (Jesus and Mo).
Counts silver threepences fertively
Tom Watson must rue the day he started digging about. Or not.
This will run and run and run...
Wonderful!
Daily Mail v Harriet Harman. One of those contests where you hope both sides will lose.
May I send you a fiver, in recompense? A white one.
Any chance that we can have a break from it over here?
"Multi-ethnicity: they've watered down the Anglo Saxon base quite nicely, thank you."
I hadn't appreciated England had a Labour government when there were waves of immigration from the :
Romans .. Vikings .. Normans .. Jews .. Huguenots .. Scots .. Welsh .. Irish ..
And what of the original Brits having their "base watered down" by the Germans of Angle and Saxon origin ?
As Captain Mainwaring was wont to say :
"You stupid boy !!"
They've cheekily pointed out that Harriet is on the left, and Savile on the right. Just in case you weren't sure.
I'm sure Harman criticised the goverment's child protection policies on a recent question time actually. Opined that measures to stop scurrilous pupil accusations against teachers made kids a bit less safe.
This looks terrible for her.. possible checkmate when you consider how she dismisses the shifting moral zeitgeist for others
That way lies racial micon... thingymejig...
[As an aside, mongrels are very often healthier than pedigrees due to a lack of in-bred conditions].
This is such a silly story because everything turns on the numbers. If the tories edged up to, say, 320, then a minority administration would be possible if not desirable. If they go under 300 but remain the largest party a coalition is inevitable.
In the meantime criticising or undermining a very successful coalition for the sake of some bizarre differentiation policy makes very little sense to me. It borders on the presumptuous frankly and the idea that this is going to make labour supporting voters vote Lib Dem anywhere but in Con/Lib Dem marginals is just stupid.
Cameron needs to make clear that he will do what is in the national interest. It is his most important USP. If the great British public in their collective wisdom make another coalition inevitable he needs to work with that and do the best he can as in 2010. Anything else is self indulgent.
The two that most clearly come to mind are:
1. The failure to introduce a recall mechanism for MPs, so that individuals such as Mr Joyce could be more speedily removed from the Commons by their electors.
2. The failure to follow through on promises to protect civil liberties (though ID cards were scrapped we never did have the Great Repeal Bill). Does David Davis look at Theresa May at the Home Office and ever feel any regrets I wonder?
Oh, and I think they both promised to cut the deficit faster than under Darling's plan, but progress on that has been patchy...
They must have had that article on the Harman-authored legal paper ready to go for a while, hoping and praying that she'd break cover.
[note: despite my barely-contained glee at this episode, I'd like to point out that the DM is still a rather nasty publication]
Such has contributed to recent well-known travesties of justice, where victims went to the police but were ignored. On a less horrific scale, it's also led to a media cowed and fearful to publish material considered blasphemous by some, whilst politicians lack the backbone or the brain to stand up for freedom of speech.
Incidentally, wasn't there an awful fuss about Leveson and a Royal Charter a few months ago? Seems to have gone rather quiet.
And what have the Romans ever done for us ....
Cue Monty Python music ....
@JackW
Ha! This is the LastBoyScout's definition of spring madness
Good point on Leveson. A little strange that this episode hasn't stirred the authoritarian left to demand a hastening of matters.
It was reported on the news last night, from "a Labour source", that Harriet wasn't resorting to litigation against the Mail as she preferred things to be settled in the 'court of public opinion'. Given how ridiculous and contemptible that phrase was a few years ago I was surprised it was given another outing. Unless the source was being rather waggish.
Victims were ignored by the police and politicians because of the latters stupidity and deference to political correctness. We shouldn't conflate multiculturalism and political correctness.
Also I was talking about England not the British Isles. The Vikings will vote UKIP and the Romans all went home.
There was a clear and blatant cultural aspect to the crimes, and to the attempts (sadly, largely successful) to reduce freedom of speech if they hurt the feelings of the over-sensitive and commit the pretend crime of blasphemy.
Now, as I have said, arguing that introducing new genetic mixtures that evolved elsewhere is wrong is an incorrect and ugly view. But the pro-immigration camp don't help themselves when they misrepresent the facts.
The police initially lost control of the riots because the were numerically over-whelmed and only regained control when shift patterns and outside forces increased numbers on the ground.
Criminality isn't a causal cultural issue. A culture doesn't opt for crime. Crime is simply borne of deviance from accepted norms of society and that effects all cultures.
You note the Duggan case. Perhaps you might reflect that the Met weren't exactly slow to act there an in the end were prepared to use lethal force.
The riots then looting occurred because there was accumulated resentment at treatment by the police which took expression following the Duggan family visit to Tottenham police station. It continued because the rioters realised they could. Rioting then turned to looting. Study after study has shown that while unambiguously criminal, the riots and looting also represented a backlash against that police behaviour and was as much as anything about power.
To include a cultural dimension would be to examine which section of the population felt most aggrieved by the perceived heavy-handedness of the police. And why.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/10660286/RSPCA-chief-executive-leaves-post.html
If Nick Palmer's around, I'm still waiting patiently for his figures that show a majority are against badger culling.
........................................
And now if you'll forgive me I away to uplift Mrs JackW from her most recent trip otherwise she's likely to inflict a cultural form of criminality in the "W" household known as a bloody good ear bashing !!
Laters ....