Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the Miliband ratings it is the views of the 2010 LD to L
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On the Miliband ratings it is the views of the 2010 LD to LAB switchers that matter most
One of the big factors that makes analysing this election so different from the past is the amount of data in the public domain from which we can measure significant sub-groups – like those 2010 LD voters who have switched to LAB.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The consequences of casting a vote for Ed rather than mouthing a passing opinion on him will soon act as a cold slap about their chops. Expect them to either hide under a blanket or return to the yellow sheepfold come election day.
The idea that this group of preening apostates will have any material impact on the general election is utterly absurd. Attaching them to importance is the equivalent of giving credibility to the 2010 Con to Kipper converts who laud the rise of Farage as some kind of second messianic coming.
These are the truths that no polling numbers can reveal.
Just because the leadership has taken their party from them will not stop them from taking revenge. The fun will start after the GE when the LibDems labour voters retake their party back and rejoin. By then it will be too late for DC and NC with Miliband in No 10.
When I saw this in today's Daily Mail, the thought occurred to me that perhaps Suarez is set to become Liverpool's Torres Mk 2, should he lose a yard of pace as a result of his recent surgery. Then I realised that the Uraguayan manager was only referring to his anticipated level of performance in the current World Cup .... at least I think that's what he meant.
Reading between the lines, if I were a betting man, I'd not expect him to play against England tonight.
..... Of course I could be wrong!
Enough to make even the mildest leftie turn puce in indignation.
Full disgrace revealed here: http://bloom.bg/Uee36C
I was wondering who those headlines were aimed at. UKIP switchers? But I think you're right, they'd be better off ignoring the fruitcakes and loonies
I guess they are consistent...
1) satisfied with David Cameron as Prime Minister
2) dissatisfied with David Cameron but still preferring him to Ed Miliband as Prime Minister
3) dissatisfied with David Cameron and preferring Ed Miliband as Prime Minister
30% of all Labour voters agree with one of the first two propositions. 23% of 2010 Lib Dem voters who have switched to Labour agree with one of the first two propositions. 3% of Conservative voters agree with the third proposition.
If you take the results at face value, the Conservatives will have an easier job wooing the 30% of Labour voters who prefer David Cameron than Labour will of wooing the 3% of Conservative voters who prefer Ed Miliband.
You can take issue with the structure of the question on two grounds:
1) it gives respondents two ways out of three to be dissatisfied with David Cameron
2) it gives respondents two ways out of three to prefer David Cameron as Prime Minister
Both of these will lead some respondents towards the second proposition.
The problem for Ed is that he is now a big part of the central narrative. As I do my early morning emails I have Classic FM on in the background to ease me into the day. The news on this most inoffensive of radio stations has just run Ed's catastrophic personal ratings as one of its main headlines. It's not just places like PB where people are talking about this now.
I never used to think it was an issue and dismissed those on PB who said it was. But I think they were right and I was hopelessly wrong (not for the first time!). Ed appears on TV more during election campaigns and Labour's vote is never as high as the opinion polls indicate it should be. He is an active drag on the party. In addition to which, he is a catastrophically poor leader who has failed utterly to challenge labour's lazy 20th century way of seeing the world. It is hard to think of anyone in recent history more ill-equipped for a leadership role, and I include IDS and Hague in that. Even Michael Foot, who at least inspired a level of affection among Labour members. Ed has nothing - he's a nice bloke who should be running a ThinkTank or working as an adviser.
"The BBC's Jeremy Paxman presented his final edition of Newsnight, after 25 years fronting the programme during which he suggested that Labour leader Ed Miliband had about as much appeal "as a flatulent dog in a lift".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10910736/After-25-years-at-the-helm-Jeremy-Paxman-presents-his-final-Newsnight.html
In Today's YouGov, on best PM, DC is 37(+2) and EDM is 19 (-2).
EdM is supported by 56% of Labour VI and 45% of 2010 Labour VI.
It's not that bad to be from Planet Odd - plenty of folks on here come from the same place. What's strikes me as unfortunate is the misguided attempts to humanise the poor old thing. It simply draws attention to his innate oddity.
The problem for Labour is that this issue, which has been bubbling under for a while, has suddenly come into central view quite close to the election. Unless they are going to have another coronation I really don't see how they have time to do much about it now.
Even if they did we have to remember this is the same party that crowned Brown unopposed and foisted him on the country. Madness, incompetence and a complete inability to make a decision (until Mandy came back to run things for him) were not enough for that party to do the sensible thing (I won't bother mentioning the interests of the country because there is no evidence that was even on the radar). It is just not in their DNA.
It's a horrible time to be young. Two parties who are trying to outdo themselves in screwing them over.
EdM has shown he has the guts for the fight. Stopping unemployment benefit for 18-21yr olds will ignite the left.
Onwards!
I personally think Labour should go for Andy Burnham. He is not the sharpest tool in the box but he has decent instincts and seems to be able to relate to the species known as homo sapiens, something the leadership of all the main parties seem to find difficult. I was impressed with the role he played on Hillsborough. I think the Stafford story is too complicated and too long ago to resonate in any particular way.
There is no doubt that Labour need a serious infusion of new blood at the top levels removing the Brown/Blair remenants. But that is a job for after the election.
...and monkeys might fly out of my butt
The reality brought about by ISIS publishing a 410 page annual report which details its terrorist actions over the last year and makes reference to its financial supporters, shows a degree of wide-ranging support and a disciplined organisation that would be envied by many plcs.
The report (in Arabic) is downloadable from: http://azelin.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/al-binc481-magazine-1.pdf.
Its cold listing of atrocities by type (in all the press today), of its armaments and of its territorial gains and not least its aim of enforcing totalitarian Islamic belief and practices in all its territories can only lead to one conclusion: that it will have to be met by force. Whether that will be Shias from Iran or an international UN sanctioned force (doubtful and probably too late) remains to be seen.
Not only is it a threat to the personal freedoms of millions of people, but its activities in the Middle East could cause another energy price hike as well as an economic growth disruption.
At present it appears to be Sunni-led, which is also the main Islamic-sect in Nigeria and Somalia which are sources of Islamic aggression seen recently.
As well as theft, it is believed that many of its sources of financial support come from S.E Asia.
How DC will deal with any Islam fighters returning from Syria and Iraq will be interesting and how much will the ECHR interfere citing their rights to a family life etc?
The real issue is that we live in a rapidly globalising world. We need to compete. We need to balance our books. We need to educate our kids (actual knowledge and capabilities not devalued certifications). We need to rethink our whole worldview on running an unaffordable welfare state. The whole over-borrowed, deficit running developed world is circling the bowl.
And what is the point of Labour, what is it's view, what value does it bring to the table when 'there's no money left'? All they ever promote is more borrowing, more spending, more central control, more unions, more of the state. When the only tool you have is a hammer then every problem starts to look like a nail. Labour's policy toolbox has just the one hammer in it. And the UK does not need another thumping right now.
Wages to grow at double the rate of inflation.
Personally, I am not sure I believe it. I think that the huge pool of well qualified and seriously under-employed on our doorstep in the EU with unrestricted rights of access here has materially and substantially changed the labour market. The supply of labour is now almost limitless so increases in pay have to reflect the desire to have a particular person or achieve a particular output.
In a near-by group of offices there are three charities/councils - all funded by the public purse - enabling people who are unemployed/disabled/ex-cons etc to be employed. Major problem is that in this district there are no jobs available. Also I am told that most do not want to move as they are "happy where they are" on benefits. I was informed that they are not allowed to recommend that they move to where jobs are available under the terms of their contract.
All these offices pay a high rent and are stuffed with the latest in IT, special furniture and advisors who admit privately that not one person has become employed through their efforts. Surely it would be better to financially help people to move than waste all this money.
But that is very much the worst case (Con)/ best case (LD) scenario.
Food for thought.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2662023/SEBASTIAN-SHAKESPEARE-Hacked-Ian-Hislop-quits-campaign-group-patronage-protest-comedian-Steve-Coogan.html
I remember before the last GE a large number of PBers were putting the LibDems at 80-100 seats and those of us who said they would go backwards and have a net loss were told we didn't know what we were talking about. We know what happened on the day.
People lie to pollsters and pollsters rarely achieve a truly balanced sample no matter how much they weight up and down for spirals of silence. There is a widespread view among people that Miliband is just not up to the job and that is only going to get worse as he comes under increasingly tight scrutiny in the weeks ahead. Party Managers can silence embarrassing candidates but they cant silence an embarrassing leader!!
The LibDem to Labour switchers might be an important group but at the end of the day we know a great many were either Labour voters pre 2010 or will simply not vote. If David Cameron can muster 35+% in on election day, he remains PM. The recent Peter Kellner analysis was fascinating. It made me think back to pre 1983 when only a few seats needed to shift to change governments because the Liberals were totally irrelevant outside 20 seats. In 150 minutes we will know if that is where they are headed once more.
FPT: Mr. Briskin, you're quite correct, I got the headline wrong.
Mr. Kendrick, thanks, although I must point out of 4 recent(ish) tips only 2 came off (1 was null and void due to a player dropping out). A reasonable quartet, overall, but could be better.
Edited extra bit: no tips today, incidentally.
The trade deficit isn't going to go away, and it has to be financed?
The latest Ashcroft national poll has LD 8,Con 29,Lab 35,Ukip 15.Compared to the GE this is Con -8,Lab +6,Lib -15 ,UKIP =12. This gives a swing of 4% from LD to CON,so will be looking to see if marginals have greater or lesser swing than this.Ashcroft swings away from LD are to Labour 10% and to UKIP 13%
"OK, I've got it....yes...big gun...armour...tracks...I'm thinking tank...."
To be fair, only the most horrid people appear on the show, and only the worst dregs of humanity more than once. Like... Steve Coogan, for example. Ahem.
[For the record, I do like Top Gear, even if Richard Hammond needs to be tossed overboard].
Use both sides of the paper.
It may be enough.
They could make a virtue of it. You have posh spivs, but we've got Mr Potato Head. Although he looks weird and he sounds weird, he's the man for the job.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/sport/football/World_Cup/article1417169.ece
Reign of Spain hard to break.
Unskilled workers, semi-skilled workers and workers with skills that are found in other places in the EU will have a very different experience.
The moral of the story, children, is get valuable skills that few others have.
Us too, over the last 5 years business has changed from 70%UK/20%EU/10%ROW to 10%UK/30%EU/60%ROW.
However, especially with Asia and S America price is getting to be a problem - mainly because their skill sets and technical expertise is rapidly approaching the best of the UK's levels. Thus we are inhibited on employee total package as the best of Asia charge lower day rates that us.
Also most of the new energy sources are outside Europe. and that a good part of our business.
What I can see, is that many UK companies will move some of their offices overseas in order to be able to compete. Then restrictions on ex-pat employees may have a significant effect.
Reforming the welfare state and making it both affordable and sustainable is going to require a lot of what we laughingly call 'tough decisions'. Props to Labour for making a start.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9238331/since-when-has-steve-coogan-stood-against-censorship/
EDIT Bah, there is no colour option.
In the end, my dilemma was resolved by the defenestration of IDS and the appointment of Michael Howard as leader. Although Howard wouldn't have been my choice, he was at least a serious figure that one could feel could hold the office of PM.
Boris I have met, and he was very warm and friendly, and came across similar to his public persona.
There are politicians who would make worse Prime Ministers.
They are both aware of the dynamics involved in high office and are forever treading a fine line between appealing to their base, drifting to the middle, setting a "bombshell" narrative (eg. energy prices, etc).
They are, through no fault of their own, more perceptive than the GBP. Now, we may be also, as self-identified political geeks, but these people have gone that extra step and sought and achieved power.
This is not to say that they are two-faced or deliberately disingenuous, just that they are aware of what they can and can't get away with. They are savvy (or have advisers who are).
The whole "odd" thing is a (very amusing) red (!) herring and sideshow.
http://thewptformula.com/2014/06/18/bloodhound-ssc-cockpit-launch-day/
Well thought out by Ed.
DC is often lost in his thoughts and so may appear unfriendly in real life, but get him on a one-to-one basis he is both good fun as well as a good listener.
Is your close friend a Labour supporter?
I know someone who HAS met Cameron by accident rather than design , I shall not say how or where but that person said he was very pleasant .
Sums it all up really.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/yes-campaign-distances-itself-from-controversial-website-link.24528929
"The cross-party Yes organisation ordered a local group to stop distributing material endorsing the Wings Over Scotland website."