Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Conservative nightmare: We could be seeing a voteless r
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Conservative nightmare: We could be seeing a voteless recovery
The one hope that has been consistent amongst both coalition partners during the past three and a half difficult years has been the political bnefits that would come once the recovery was established and the electorate could see that it had all been worthwhile.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Edited extra bit: the Freudian Left reveals itself again. Whats the point of anything if it doesn't gain you a few votes eh Mike? Nightmare.
Labour are strolling to a majority. They don't deserve it, but everything just lines up so nicely for them come 2015.
That said, Mike's basic thesis is right. The recovery isn't doing the Tories any good - they have built up too much sheer dislike in the 38-39% who are planning to vote Labour, plus many of the UKIP voters too.
There is a question in the same survey about whether people feel the coalition has proved better than a pure Tory or Labour government. About 2-1 say no, obviously mostly Labour and Tory voters but the LibDems themselves are evenly divided. That may make a minority government after the election more likely than a coalition, if those are the only options.
Another freudian slip from our resident Communist.
The Tories despised not getting their own way, even though their internal divisions would mean it is not as though things would have been harmonious with a majority, and the backbenchers have proven themselves very stubborn and independent minded, for good and ill. Throw in a loss despite an acceptable record in government, and they would be ungovernable if someone suggested coalition. Even if it shot them in the foot, they'd reject it.
Labour will really not want to be seen working with the LDs after years of hammering the false notion that 'Coalition means the LDs are now the same as Tories' line home, though they would be most amenable I'd guess, if it came down to it, as anything better than a Tory controlled government, and it would welcome the base of the LDs back to the place many of them clearly wished they had been all along, in Labour's pocket.
The LDs will take a battering of some sort, from hurtful to outright disastrous, and I suspect will want a long period to redefine the party after the aforementioned 'LDs=Tories' attacks and hope to rebuild in the places they will be woped out in 2015, as well as not wishing to appear too mercenary by jumping from the Tories to Labour in an instant. More likely than the Tories to accept a coalition though, for one because it will be with Labour, so more palatable to the base if not the current leadership and keeps them prominent at least. I imagine the best result for them while being in coalition would be a situation where the maths means they could create a Labour government with a majority, but not a Tory one, so they would not have to pick sides, sides would be picked for them, like in 2010. Didn't stop the accusations of betrayal then and wouldn't again, but it's an easier thing for them to spin.
ETA: Yes, this is sheer wild speculation based on gut feeling. Take it for what you will.
Lab 38
C 30
UKIP 11
LD 10
That being said, it is true, as Nick points out, that the Conservatives have stockpiled dislike from all angles in the last 3 years, and being more economically competent than Labour (not a significant achievement), while massively important, is not likely to outweigh pure sentiment with most voters.
If the economy continues to grow
If wages outstrip inflation
If Ukip returns to the Tories
If Lib Dems return home
If Ukip only take off the Tories in safe Tory areas
If Labour voters don't vote tactically in Lib Dem seats
If Toby gets his way and Ukip and Tory voters vote tactically
If Ukip goes to 5%
If the Lib Dems head back towards 20%
If Ed remains crap
If house prices soar
If Scotland votes for independence
If Labours campaign is crap
If Lynton gets his finger out
If unemployment keeps falling
If Cameron goes *ahem* cast iron on the in/out referendum
If the Tory MP's of the right stop their suicide mission
If the unions pull the plug on Labours money so they cannot fund a campaign
If there is a breakout of war
If the falling Tory membership still manages to campaign hard
If only they had got the boundary changes through
If there is swingback
If Ashcrofts marginal polling is wrong
If the Tory vote was spread out more like Labours and not building up in seats that are safe
If Ed is found eating kittens or some other scandal
If the Lib Dems get rid of Nick Clegg and replace him with someone more left wing
If Ukip don't stand against Euro-sceptic Tory MP's
If the focus goes back onto the two Ed's
If Labours manifesto is torn apart by the press
If the country sees sense
If the right wing voters hold their nose about Cameron and vote Tory
If the voters realise what a fantastic job the coalition has been doing
If the raising of the minimum wage will sway floating voters toffs do have hearts
If Labour polling figures are being exaggerated
If the electoral bias in FPTP is not as big as it has been historically
If the press decide to attack the two Eds with even more venom in the run up to the election
If the Ukip supporters realise that voting Labour means the will be less chance of a Euro referendum
I hope the PB Hodges haven't been telling porkies, the little tinkers.
The public in 2015 is more likely, I suspect, to either think that the coast is clear now the economy is ok, we may as well vote in a new lot after this lot spent give years cutting (I think it totally necessary cutting myself, but many disagree), or that it was inevitable, or that Labour will do pretty much the same anyway.
The Labour base is pretty large. Add in a few more points at a minimum as a recovery from the low point of Brown being defeated, a few LD and lefty ideologues who hate the government cuts regardless of if it was necessary or not, and Labour already emerge as the largest party. Then factor in UKIP and disaffected Tories unhappy with social aspects of the Cameron government, many of whom come across as more hostile than the Opposition, and not enough people are voting on grounds of who will lead the economy best to make a difference I think.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26442420
"She said she believed "research will find sugar is addictive", and that "we may need to introduce a sugar tax"."
Food's addictive. I haven't met a man yet who could live without it.
It's ridiculous to slap 'addictive' onto something just because it's tempting. It also removes personal responsibility from the rotund rascals who have a fondness for cake and cookies. Taxing everybody because some overdo it is silly.
People need to know the consequences of things, but too often we abdicate responsibility for our own actions by crediting too much influence of things over us as if we are helpless, as well as spending too much time protecting stupid people from the consquences of their own stupidity.
x = number of immigrants * per capita GDP
"recovery" = GDP growth - x
importing more people isn't growth
The importance of self restraint and patience should be taught in schools rather than taxing adults in my opinion. It would make the country a better place in many aspects.I think @rcs1000 said tests have shown it also has a big part to play in intelligence
To many men
To many posh people
Not enough ethnic minorities
Meanwhile Cameron should continue doing what he is doing - governing well, for the whole country. It's the USP.
It is Cameron's fault for being such a poor party leader. He has gutted your party. The reason why you will lose is that you don't have the activists.
Cameron's done ok. I'm not very happy with things, but they're looking up. Unfortunately for him, some of the more notable things he has achieved are the more controversial which won't actually see him rewarded, and either he has zero control over his party, or it merely looks like he has zero control of his party, which amounts to the same thing, so he cannot martial his forces behind him effectively to put up a proper defence and campaign.
For example: the fact that Rooney is being paid £300 000 per week to warm the bench with his fat arse does not improve my economic world view, yet it accounts for some GDP growth!
As I've said before, if turnout atleast holds up to the level it's been at for the last few elections, the Tories have no chance of a majority because there's simply too many people who think the Tories are actively making their lives worse and won't be swayed by any alleged "competence". The Tories need to shrink the turnout to below 50% (negative campaigning is probably their best strategy to achieve that), because they only have a chance of cobbling together enough votes if the pool is shrunken down enough.
When half the electorate are women and you have an all male top team you are going to constantly overlook political issues that effect women. Therefore you look as if you aren't governing for at least half the electorate.
If the Tories are serious about ever winning a majority they will adopt all women's shortlists.
To most informed people, and I dare say even many reasonable Labour supporters, this government has done a better job than many expected. Circumstances have been extremely difficult, particularly once the Eurozone crisis took hold, but surprisingly we've had no further financial crisis, no surge in unemployment, and by and large the government is slowly steering the country in the right direction.
Sadly a lot of people will not see that, they'll merely compare the "boom" before 2005 to 2015 with no thought as to what those boom years lead to and kick out a reasonably competent government for one that has been in total denial for the last four years and appears to be setting out to out-Brown Brown.
God help us all.
When is that going to happen?
Just because you are not of a particular demographic does not mean you cannot put yourself in their shoes, nor does it dilute the value of your opinion in matters regarding them.
A demographically representative chamber (ie having the percentages of various races as well as the genders be reflected in the 650 MPs) sounds delightful, but, leaving aside the vile quotas necessary to effect it, would be quite stupid. Three hundred and twenty-five MPs would need to have below average intelligence, 1-2 would have to be psychopaths and the number with Alzheimer's would have to rise every year.
Identity politics is a horrendous approach. I'm baffled as to why we should wish tocategorise people so, according to race and gender and other demographic categories.
I think women and men do not (or at least should not) judge others by their possession of ovaries or cullions, or the shadow of their skin.
Well disagree fundamentally. But if you want a party other than Labour to keep knocking in the majorities then you better realise that women want to see women and women friendly polices from a government.
To many posh white lads. Once the right wing gets rid of them they may - just may - have the chance for a majority.
The Tories have delivered a stupendous recovery. From where we were in 2010 to where we are now belies belief (EdM and EdB certainly didn't believe it).
Has it percolated down far enough? Perhaps not. Is the Tory party still chock full of poshos? Yep. Should there be more Tory women MPs? Probably (if they want to be Tory MPs).
But the coalition has unambiguously delivered growth, recovery, prospects.
If the general public (at the very minimum 38% of them) want to go ahead and vote back in those responsible for the mess in the first place well you can only do so much to persuade them otherwise.
It would be a crying shame for the country to regress to greater difficulties through a profligate fiscal policy and a collapse in confidence by the markets, which Labour can provide, but if that's what thems want, that's what thems will get.
And the funny thing is, it won't be Osbo or Cam, who are very comfortable as we are all reminded by Polly every day, who will suffer. It is those at the bottom of the ladder.
And then the kids are left all alone (being videoed, obviously :-)).
All kids eat the sweet in the end. Some try and ignore it, some sit on their hands, some talk to themselves to try and persuade themselves to wait... but all succumb.
But what was most fascinating was the fact that - revisiting these kids 40 years later - there was an incredibly degree of correlation between showing restraint (i.e., a long time before they ate the sweet) and life success. People who were able to defer gratification simply did better in life.
I find that a stunningly interesting finding. And I will dig out the paper and post in on pb tomorrow...
If the Tories are serious about ever winning a majority they will adopt all women's shortlists.
I cannot agree with that.An AWS is very patronising to women and also amounts to gender apartheid. I am left of centre and live in a Tory-Lab marginal. On principle I will not be voting Labour in 2015 because the candidate was selected from an all women shortlist.
Hope you stick around for the real result...
as well as being interesting it's pretty funny watching the kids
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=marshmallow+test+video&safe=off&tbm=vid
Bit sleepy, so I might've phrased that poorly, but hopefully you can wrest some semblance of meaning from it.
Compouter bang on
Politics is a numbers game. We win far more than we lose. We win more elections on this equation.
A few more loses and the right wing may come to terms with this.
Was it Jack Dromey?
This is a difference between Cameron, Osborne, and IDS. Cameron comes from a privileged background but he's aware of it and makes a bit of an effort. Osborne doesn't appear to bother at all. IDS is seriously interested in other people, and gets cut more slack as a result (except, unsurprisingly, by Osborne).
Incidentally, I think Miliband is benefiting from lack of dislikeability. He's a pleasant middle-class intellectual and doesn't pretend to be anything else, but he's not ostentatious and takes an interest in ordinary people's problems. It's not that most people think he'd be great, but that very few people really hate him to the point of voting Tory against their instinct to keep him out. In my view they'll actually be pleasantly surprised by how good he is if he gets in.
That is seriously awesome.
Thank you for posting that.
You think there are more people who will vote like you do on the basis of how the candidate was selected rather than on how representative the party feels to them?
Compouter2! Come forth! Comment! Give an opinion!
We won't bite.
(unlike Basil, etc..)
More research needed, I suspect. But an intriguing hypothesis.
Genuinely don't think anything is really happening!
1 lefty women activist > no women
Why don't the Tories try putting up a 50/50 male/female cabinet with all right wing women? The tories would have a hell of a lot less of a problem them.
Fortunately Dave keeps on giving his rich white mates jobs.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/03/from-lordashcroft-do-the-tories-have-a-women-problem.html
Tories really do need to stop dancing to Labour's fatuous propaganda
If he had any...
Priti Patel on the other hand...
Real diversity is more than skin deep. Adam Afriye will not convince in Tottenham as much as that WASP Ken Livingstone...
Look. Let's just wait another 10 years until the Tories have failed to win a majority for almost two entire generations. Then you may decide to just accept the 21st century.
If not can the Tory party die so that we can have a proper right wing opposition to face.
Labour politicians shout about Dave having a problem with women. 3 Tory MPs who happen to be female are not seeking re-election. 9 Labour MPs who happen to be female are not seeking re-election. Do the maths!
Labour politicians shout about Tory toffs. David Cameron went to Eton, Tony Blair to Fettes, the Eton of Scotland. George Osborne went to St Pauls like Harriet Harman and Alistair Darling went to Loretto, the Harrow of Scotland.
Tory front benchers are rich. Labour front benchers are rich. Mr and Mrs Balls between them take well over £1/4 million a year from the taxpayer in salary, expenses etc.
The Tory education secretary was adopted and attended a well known Scottish private school so he is out of touch. His Labour shadow is an Honourable, attended an Eton-group public school but he is not out of touch.
No wonder ordinary people have little time for most politicians.