Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds that people are a lot more negative and less p
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds that people are a lot more negative and less positive about UKIP now compared with last Euro elections in 2009
The pollster that came top in the EP14 polling accuracy table, YouGov, has issued comparative data about whether people feel positive or negative about UKIP compared with five years ago when they beat LAB for 2nd place in the Euro elections.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
No one likes them but they don't care
Another thread suggesting UKIP arent doing so well, this time using You Gov to back it up...
Have UKIP ever had a better YouGov Westminster VI than last nights 17%?
*TUT*
Here is why
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/10871063/Queen-goes-riding-on-anniversary-of-coronation-as-Spains-King-Juan-Carlos-abdicates.html
Of course, Clegg plucking a misleading figure out of the air is proof of LibLabCon lying.
UKIP plucking a misleading (or downright untrue, in the case of the '26 million people in the EU wanting your job' poster) figure out of the air is proof of UKIP's honesty and plain-speaking, that they are not like other politicians.
It's hard to see this disconnect lasting for long. As with the Cleggasm: easy inflate, easy deflate.
Now that UKIP take quite equally from all parties, scared loyalists have a more negative view
29% positive in 2009 but VI 1-2%
22% positive in 2014 but VI 15-20%
Disaster
What a marvel.
UKIP = Polarising.
Yougov's 17 involved a bit less of that than normal.
Ashcroft's 19% is closish to the mark I reckon:
See here for some rough & ready & probably slightly wrong statistical analysis.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1roY-VuzAUre3K5Tp74sf-sknXmfRPXaIoqtoPc7HMaA/edit#gid=0
I'm thinking it is down to Nick Clegg's heroic defence of the EU.
Far better to be both admired and hated (as Margaret Thatcher was) than to have people viewing you with indifference.
Firstly, 22/05/14 was a disaster for UKIP. There can be no denying this. They may have come top of the Euorpean elections, but they only attracted 9% of the electorate (the fact that the "major" parties attracted even less, need not concern us).
Secondly, when we look at the share of the vote that UKIP attracted in the Locals on 22/05/14 the scale of their disaster becomes even clearer. They may have won lots of seats, they may have topped 30% in areas that they had never contested before, they may have attracted more votes than the Lib Dems by a considerable margin. None of that matters, what you need to understand is that on a projection their national share of the vote plummeted like a paralysed falcon, possibly down to as low as 17%. The Lib Dems meanwhile remain a major party regularly attracting the high single figures in national polls.
Thirdly, UKIP have no MPs and cannot therefore be in anyway considered a serious party. That might have been said about the Labour party at one stage (before they stuffed the Liberals off the mainstream of UK government), but that is not the point.
Finally, UKIP can never achieve anything because, as we were told on this very site just this morning, UKIP voters are all people of low education and low self-esteem. Oh, and one of their candidates has a moustache.
So stop all this nonsense and get back to voting for one of the "Major" parties. If plebs like you are allowed to go around voting for just anyone, well, who knows where it might lead. Just remember Clegg and Cable were in a boozer before midday, that goes to show what normal chaps they are and how much they understand how little people feel.
I remember years ago (as an old git, I can say that), when Ken Livingstone was an up and coming politician. The Tory press made him out to be a rabid, slavering beast, a soul mate of Vlad the impaler and Dracula (now where did they come from?).
But what the public saw when he first appeared on TV was a charming, if committed, man with a few radical ideas. So despite the wall of derision, he prospered. OK, the mask has maybe slipped a bit since, but the point remains.
If Ukip push forward a few bright, preferably young and preferably female (I was going to add 'attractive' but the BBC would blow a fuse), possibly ethnic and with the odd gay spokespersons (the BBC would love the last two categories), the insults will wither away.
The best time is in September at their conference, when the policies might get a decent hearing - if the spokespersons are appropriately BBC-friendly. And let's be honest, the BBC remains the most important outlet.
Its more certain that people who like them vote for them but more certain that people who hate them vote against them.
The irony is that there might be lefties voting Conservative to keep UKIP out.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1454679_10200306524900845_1544516055_n.jpg
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/xj26ho1jhx/EP-trends-2009-14.pdf
The numbers thinking that trade, and climate change policy should be set at a national rather than EU level have increased.
And the question on leaving the EU "The UK should withdraw completely from the European Union" suggests a third option. I believe the general preference is for a free trade deal.
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/xj26ho1jhx/EP-trends-2009-14.pdf
Would it be enough to flip it back to an absolute coinflip if they were to split ?
http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/images/localworld/ugc-images/276334/Article/images/20989835/6031971-large.jpg
Please make them go away!!!!!!!!!!
I think she's done her best and has been a tremendous source of continuity. It's not her fault she's been let down by one useless government after another.
main parties – Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats".
2009: +46/-35
2014: +44/-33
The worst he can do to the country is to spill beer on their suits or flick fag ash into their soup.
UKIP adds farce to the political mix, not tragedy.
Yes Ill vote Conservative or Labour I think, as I disagree with them on almost everything!
It says the government "will allow" not "will come"
Personally I think Charles' Regnal should reflect modern Britain.
So I propose he becomes King Mohammed I.
Will do wonders for relations with the Muslim world.
Its why Middle class luvvies like mass immigration, it doesnt affect them negatively at all
Its why working class people arent so keen, it has the potential to ruin their lives
As an Arsenal fan, I generally dont think much about or have a negative view of Spurs. But when Bale was banging in worldies every game and they were above us in the league, I absolutely hated them.
Dunno.
Or perhaps Saxon, like Wiglaf.
I wonder if it's a general thing, plus contradictory statements of Britain benefiting from different cultures which is up and Islam is a danger for civilization which is also up.
Kellner is being disingenuous in comparing 2009 with 2014.
Next year,
the EU will allow
29 million Bulgarians and Romanians to come to the UK
Did 29 million Bulgarians and Romanians come to the UK?
Well, the population is only 27-and-a-half million of the two of them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/11/08/anna-soubry-slams-nigel-farage_n_4238815.html
Do they all come home with me?
My chat up lines are as awesome as my taste in music and shoes.
Unless the Prince of Wales predeceases his mother he will have on his mothers death until the Accession Council meets to determine whether to accede as King George VII as some speculation has considered or King Charles III or indeed some other regnal name of his choosing.
That is how they attempt to justify a vote for UKIP.
Their reason is to rage against the dying of the light.
That's fine, it's a democracy. If you can face the damage the two Eds will do to the country, and don't want a referendum, that's your democratic prerogative. But I don't think it will survive much contact with the reality post 2015, if, God forbid, we do slide backwards into Milibandism.
But you can solve factors number 1 and 3 by merging UKIP and the Conservatives in a new party under a new name, it worked before it can work again.
If the Conservative led Govt was popular, 2010 Cons wouldn't vote UKIP
Its not UKIP's fault the Conservatives are losing votes and members, thats like Sainsburys blaming Tesco for shoppers preferring Tesco
As such the UKIP claim was absolutely accurate. The fact that 29 million people did not immediately jump on a place or train and take up the right does not change the fact that that right was there. More importantly nor does it change the fact that we have now opened up our jobs market to a further 29 million people.
Eagles was lying on the last thread, he knew it and he still chose to make a statement that was factually untrue.
Mind you as we have seen from other Tories on here, 'facts' and the truth are not their greatest priority unfortunately.
Alexandrina Victoria reigned as Queen Victoria.
Albert Edward reigned as King Edward VII.
Albert Frederick Arthur George reigned as King George VI.
The Prince of Wales is Charles Philip Arthur George and is generally expected to reign as King George VII, though I doubt the tabloids will let that happen. He'll surely be King Charlie-boy to them.
I would think that if Charles does reign as King George VII then he will be the last British monarch in many generations to change his name upon taking the throne. Prince George was surely so named so that he could take that name to the throne without any such faffing about, and there's not the same negative connotations to a King William V as there would be with a King Charles III.
Your opinion., this is the point you are missing. Others disagree
Besides, the Kippers who deserted Labour wouldn't be happy with a merger. They'll scuttle away.
Can you explain.
Did UKIP say there was "a risk" of 29m coming?
They don't like it pointed out.
http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/images/localworld/ugc-images/276334/Article/images/20989835/6031971-large.jpg
Jeez, these things are less funny when you have to explain them in excruciating detail.
Thanks.
Yes, that's very funny Mr Anorak.
At least you don't fall into the "will be allowed" inexactitude - they had "been allowed" since 2008....
I made that mistake in an argument with Observer