Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the pollsters are understating UKIP like at previous by-
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the pollsters are understating UKIP like at previous by-elections then Newark is absolutely neck and neck
Tomorrow afternoon Lord Ashcroft is publishing his poll for Thursday’s Newark by-election which will be the only the second survey that’s been carried in what’s turning out to be a humdinger of a fight between UKIP and the Tories. Both have got historical baggage that a win could help them shed.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Then prospective Labour voters can play an historic part. Let's see how different Ashcroft poll is from the other one ?
The 2010 LD split: Cons:13; LAB:33; LD:30; UKIP:10; Green:10
Well/Badly: DC:-10(-1); EdM:-46(-5); NC:-65(-9)
When would you most like to see a referendum on
Britain's membership of the European Union?
Before the GE: 34
Same day as GE:13
2016:13
2017: 8
Should not be a referendum: 16 (only LDs in favour)
DK:15
David Cameron has said he will seek to renegotiate
Britain's membership of the European Union and then
hold a referendum on whether Britain should remain a
member.
When renegotiating Britain's relationship with the EU, in
which if any of the following areas do you think David
Cameron should seek to change our relationship with the
EU? Please tick up to three
Greater control of our borders and immigration from the EU:58
Limits on EU citizens rights to claim UK benefits or use the NHS: 54
Relax Human Rights Laws: 22
Freedom to set up our own trade relations with countries outside the EU:22
Thinking about the current right of people from the
European Union to claim benefits if they go to live in
other European countries, what would you most like to
see David Cameron seek in any renegotiation?
A total ban on EU citizens claiming benefits in the UK: 37
Restrictions on amount of UK benefits EU citizens can claim:34
None of these 15:
If the Labour party and Ed Miliband win the next election
and form a government, how well or badly do you think
they would handle the issue of immigration from the
European Union?
Well:25
Badly:57
Thinking back to the last Labour governments under
Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, how well or badly do you
think they handled the issue of immigration from the
European Union?
Well: 17
Badly:69
Labour's current policy is only to hold a referendum on
Britain's membership of the European Union if there is a
proposal to transfer more powers to the EU
Do you think Ed Miliband should or should not promise
to hold a referendum on Britain's membership of the EU
during the next Parliament anyway?
Should promise to hold a referendum anyway, regardless of
whether there are proposals to transfer more powers:52
Only if transfer of more powers:16
No referendum:10
Labour got 29.6. Therefore, 29.6 + 7.6 = 37.2.
As such , Labour's net loss [ UKIP and others ] = -1.2
UKIP = 10, means 7 more than GE2010. On a 2:1 ratio that means about 2.3 has come from Labour.
So, 1,1% has come from the Tories.
Summary:
Lab 2010: 29.6 + Lib Dem 2010: 7.6 - UKIP: 2.3 + Tory/Others 2010: 1.1 = Lab Yougov: 36.
Stands to reason.
I wonder if commercial reality is perhaps starting to trump political loyalty.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645084/Newark-election-Tory-candidate-Robert-Jenrick-says-just-three-homes-doesnt-mean-I-dont-know-life-breadline.html
The LDs appear to have had a brief dip in their numbers after the local/EU result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014
At the time of the previous by-elections, UKIP was still being referred to by many, if not most as the fruitcake party. It is now seen as a serious player. People are no longer ashamed to admit that they support UKIP which was certainly the case 1-2 years ago.
The Daily Mail is an evil newspaper, it has no scruples or morals at all, it panders to peoples worst instincts. Apart frim that the website is tits and bums , and not al lot else,
It has its uses as emergency bog paper.
What is in my opinion highly significant is not that they have done it, but they have done it to the Tory candidate not the UKIP one.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/6692856/UKIP-leader-Lord-Pearson-claimed-100000-allowances-for-3.7m-London-home.html
I look forward to the common man Roger Helmer speaking for the people of Newark: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100054433/catholic-church-is-systemically-paedophile-says-tory-mep/
_
Roger Helmer MP as the public face of UKIP for the next year is going to be entertaining. Be careful what you wish for!
Jenrick had apparently also agreed to be interviewed, but was not answering his phone.
It is, of course, a hatchet job, and the question is whether there's any hypocrisy in the leaflets. IMO the candidate would have been best advised to say "I was lucky enough to be sent to an exceptionally good school and have had a very successful career - now I'd like to give something back by being a good MP". Very few voters would object to that. The only real angle of attack is if his leaflets portray him as quasi-local and a humble small businessman. If they do, his advisers are idiots.
It is Nottinghamshire's Chipping Norton.
Random fact: I seem to remember that the rebuild insurance value of the parish church is around £12m.
How to unite the Tories, LDs, Labour and UKIP.
"In this case it's not "been left out", it's "opted out". If Cameron's conservatives has stayed in the group with the rest of the EU's conservatives, they, as a fairly big country with a conservative government, would have had a lot of influence over the choice of the EPP candidate. Instead they left the group, and left the decision to Rajoy and Merkel."
Because we had oh so much influence when Blair was leader? Even after giving billions extra into the EU budget, what did he achieve?
Kay Burley made an arse of herself by persistently asking Helmer about rape and trying to put words into his mouth. Helmer replied with unspinnable common sense answers - he's a good speaker.
Honestly, what are the tories on....
Perhaps it's all got a bit like the Cleggasm where people that have no intention of voting are getting on the band wagon?
With just one poll and no knowledge of Newark I'm still saying Conservatives win with a much reduced but fairly comfortable majority (2,000-3,000 perhaps?)
Redundancy payments will be recouped from anyone earning more than £100,000 a year if they go back into a similar role within 12 months of leaving their job.
The announcement will be made in the Queen's speech this week. In the NHS between 2010 and 2013, out of 19,000 redundancies of NHS staff, 17% had been rehired by the NHS and 13% of these within a year.
An Audit Commission report into local government in 2010 found that, of 37 chief executives who left by mutual agreement between January 2007 and September 2009, 16% had been employed by another council within 12 months.
The threshold for full repayment would be an annual salary of more than £100,000; below this, repayments would be tapered. The intention is that someone earning £90,000 would be expected to repay a higher proportion of their redundancy package than someone earning £80,000.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/31/rehired-civil-servants-lose-redundancy-payoff?guni=Keyword:news-grid main-1 Main trailblock:Editable trailblock - news:Position5
Jenrick would be one of many, but Roger Helmer MP would be UKIPs face at Westminster. As a LibDem I look forward to it.
He also just said that he is going to stand "in the South East of England because that's where I'm from"
Full manifesto to come in Doncaster at the autumn conference. Will take people out of minimum wage out of income tax and reduce the top rate to 40p. No comment on how he's going to reduce spending to fund it, but I only caught the end of the interview.
What I thought was highly significant is that it was was aimed at the Tory in a by election where UKIP are the only other contender with a real chance of winning, four days from the election.
In the run up to the Euros the aim was IMHO squarely at UKIP. Thats the difference and why I thought it worth posting.
I once canvassed a girl with a zealot colleague and she said she'd vote for me. I said, "thanks, that's great." My colleague said, "You are so right, because..." and launched into a two-minute harangue on our wonderful policies. The voter eyed, him bemused, and said er, she wasn't so sure now...
@RogerHelmerMEP
Headline: "PM threatens to quit EU". There must be a by-election coming up somewhere."
twitter.com/RogerHelmerMEP/status/473002905336037376
:-)
Unfashionably I don't actually think Mercer was a bad MP in the Commons (don't know about his local work), though he clearly screwed up over the paid lobby group - presumably due to arrogant carelessness like several other MPs, since I can't imagine he desperately needed the dosh. He was mildly maverick without the preening self-regard that spoils some mavericks, and genuinely interested and concerned with army matters, which the Commons needs. We always got on well and I was sorry to see his downfall. That said, I don't believe he really liked politics and he'd have been well-advised to stay in the Army.
I know Roger Helmer moderately well too. He's essentially an unflinchingly free-market Tory who has taken against the EU. He's tough and quite courageous in taking on hostile audiences, and polite to all-comers (his victory comments after the Euros were notably courteous to his rivals), but not as affable and engaging as Mercer.
Will both main parties, with their reliance on American and Australian campaign gurus, make the same mistake in 2015? Now that any local journalist or party activist has access to Google, Linkedin and Wikipedia, personal histories can surely not go unchecked.
twitter.com/GalileoMovement/status/472879023152832513
"There is no climate crisis, only a climate model crisis"
His manners matter little compared to his policies. Indeed the fact that such people no longer feel comfortable in the Tories shows that Camerons detox strategy has worked. Meanwhile UKIP adopt a re-tox strategy...
Unfashionably I don't actually think Mercer was a bad MP in the Commons (don't know about his local work), though he clearly screwed up over the paid lobby group - presumably due to arrogant carelessness like several other MPs, since I can't imagine he desperately needed the dosh. He was mildly maverick without the preening self-regard that spoils some mavericks, and genuinely interested and concerned with army matters, which the Commons needs. We always got on well and I was sorry to see his downfall. That said, I don't believe he really liked politics and he'd have been well-advised to stay in the Army.
I know Roger Helmer moderately well too. He's essentially an unflinchingly free-market Tory who has taken against the EU. He's tough and quite courageous in taking on hostile audiences, and polite to all-comers (his victory comments after the Euros were notably courteous to his rivals), but not as affable and engaging as Mercer.
The Tory Party dared not fight on its record, which is one of sustained Blairism, on immigration, political correctness, education and the economy (a dangerously inflated mass of debt which will explode like a punctured Zeppelin once George Osborne is out of the way after the next Election).
So it fought instead with smears. And now it seeks to deflect attention from the Blairite Tory Party’s disaster at the polls.
Some dingbat at Tory headquarters who doesn’t read the papers has been sending me the emails they dispatch to their loyal media toadies. I have no hesitation in sharing them with you."
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
http://newarkadvertiser.co.uk
What was behind the bad blood between Mercer and Cameron. I am reliably informed that the two men loathe each other.
But here I am a Bennite: politics should not be about personalities, it should be about policies and ideas.
I do not dislike either Helmer or Farage for their manners or personalities, it is for their policies, which are similtaneously negative and incoherent.
Mercer had a lot of very nasty things to say about Cameron from the start. A number of them I would not repeat as they are certainly actionable and I very much doubt their truth but loathing is certainly not too strong a word to describe what he thought of him.
This all predated any of the better known issues that lead to and followed Mercer losing his ministerial position. I think it was just that Cameron represented the sort of person an ex military man would instinctively distrust and with that as the initial basis of their relationship, combined with Mercer's support for Davis, it was all downhill from there.
I have no idea what Jones was like as a person - probably absolutely fine - but as an MP she had no redeeming factors.
Oh and a lot of what is laid at Mercer's door in the campaign against Jones actually started long before he ever came on the scene. I should know as a fair bit of it was down to myself and a set of like minded colleagues with no connection to the Tory party.
I have made a number of critiques of the NHS over the years. Certainly it would be run very differently if I were in charge. What I particularly dislike is the mendacity of parties such as New Labour being elected on a ticket of ending the internal market; then embedding it and a top down target culture.
“He told the BBC that those seeking to oust Mr Clegg were motivated by "deep malice" and had made "a bad situation worse" after poor election results.”
Is there any other kind of 'malice' I wonder..?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654959
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/06/gender.politics
Though neither LibDems or parliamentry colleagues seem to have been very helpful
She was in my opinion a tragic case of a lively, gutsy person who let herself be trapped in brooding about perceived past injustices. Sometimes you just have to move on from unfairness or you destroy yourself.