politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What I cannot understand given their age profile is the lack of concern by UKIP voters about pensions and health
Given thatb the age profile of kippers is tilted to the higher end of the range their views on the lack of importance of, say, education is understandable. But what about health and pensions?
Mike I would not confuse not being so concerned about the provision of state pensions with not being interested in having freedoms to decide one's own private pension. Ozzy's policies may well be exactly what relatively well off older kippers want.
Its certainly what this voter wants. I have been stuck because of lower gulit yields(so they tell me) April 1 2015 is going to be one happy day for me.
George will get my vote (I was 70% going to vote Tory 30% abstain. now I'm in the fold again.
Its certainly what this voter wants. I have been stuck because of lower gulit yields(so they tell me) April 1 2015 is going to be one happy day for me.
George will get my vote (I was 70% going to vote Tory 30% abstain. now I'm in the fold again.
Maybe Mike is right, and these UKIP voters do hold pensions and health as issues of higher concern, but this kind of polling isn't very good at getting honest and accurate answers from people at this stage in an electoral cycle.
For older citizens health is interesting. Many will have traveled and seen that the NHS is neither the only system nor the best.
Mike I would not confuse not being so concerned about the provision of state pensions with not being interested in having freedoms to decide one's own private pension. Ozzy's policies may well be exactly what relatively well off older kippers want.
The polling in not state pension specific but about the general issue. See above.
Today's YouGov shows that UKIP support (14% VI) comes from 18% of 60+ and not all of those will be pensionable or may be working after 65, 14% of 40-59, 12% of 25-39, and 7% of 18-24. Men are 16% and women 11%.
Of the 2010 VI, Cons to UKIP are 16%, LAB to UKIP 9% and from LD 15%. For Social Grade ABC1 are 11% whilst C2DE are 18%.
Highest supporting region is Midlands/Wales at 18% followed by Rest of South at 16% and North at 14%. London is 7%.
Its certainly what this voter wants. I have been stuck because of lower gulit yields(so they tell me) April 1 2015 is going to be one happy day for me.
George will get my vote (I was 70% going to vote Tory 30% abstain. now I'm in the fold again.
Come on. You were always going to go blue though knowing your particular MP I can understand your concerns. In any case you don't live in a marginal so what you think or what you do will be irrelevant.
Its certainly what this voter wants. I have been stuck because of lower gulit yields(so they tell me) April 1 2015 is going to be one happy day for me.
George will get my vote (I was 70% going to vote Tory 30% abstain. now I'm in the fold again.
April fool!!!
Most amusing. This "April Fool" will be jetting off with my partner for three months( Club class mind , not steerage) to New Zealand. Something I have ALWAYS wanted to do. Don't underestimate how pissed off people have been with the ridiculous rules there have been to stop people spending their own money.
Its certainly what this voter wants. I have been stuck because of lower gulit yields(so they tell me) April 1 2015 is going to be one happy day for me.
George will get my vote (I was 70% going to vote Tory 30% abstain. now I'm in the fold again.
Come on. You were always going to go blue though knowing your particular MP I can understand your concerns. In any case you don't live in a marginal so what you think or what you do will be irrelevant.
Not quite true, No vote is a given, I might end up being one of many who give Dave most votes but not seats.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
Mike I would not confuse not being so concerned about the provision of state pensions with not being interested in having freedoms to decide one's own private pension. Ozzy's policies may well be exactly what relatively well off older kippers want.
The polling in not state pension specific but about the general issue. See above.
Kippers ain't interested.
I still think you're deliberately misinterpreting. Not worried and not interested are different things. Oldies are always interested in pensions.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
Of course, we first have to discover whether those on here puffing the Government's plan are or are not pensions advisers plotting to help themselves to a sizeable tranche of the pot.
A lot of UKIP support comes from the feeling of being ignored by the all the other main parties. 'LibLabCon' all share an amazingly similiar sense of superiority, based on an Oxbridge metropolitan elite which 'knows best'. Hence the understandable shorthand, which is sneered at especially by those few souls who know and care about the detailed policies of the individual parties making up 'LibLabCon'.
FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions. Countering "Should Britain be a more sovereign nation" or "Shouldn't we be saving the planet?" with "Aren't you worried about how long it takes to get seen in A&E?" seems insultingly trivial.
It's also a cap on their appeal. People who ARE worried about how long it takes to get seen in A&E often get impatient if you start talking about Europe or the planet.
Of course, there is another explanation ... altruism; they could be more concerned for their country than for their personal wants.
I suspect it's not, but it's interesting that no one gives them the benefit of the doubt. Surely that says for more about you than about them. Says me, feeling very noble.
Then again, I'm not sure what the new pension reforms mean to those who have already have taken an annuity and those who won't be affected by the proposed changes to SERPS etc.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
Of course, we first have to discover whether those on here puffing the Government's plan are or are not pensions advisers plotting to help themselves to a sizeable tranche of the pot.
1) am not an advisor in any capacity pensions or otherwise 2) the Govt is organising FREE advice for those approaching retirement and those who have not taken an annuity. 3) You have to be negative, don't you, you cant help yourself
UKIP concerns above average - country: Immigration [+28] Welfare benefits [+4] Europe [+21] Crime [+6] Tax [+1]
UKIP concerns above average - you and your family: Immigration [+26] Tax [+3] Welfare benefits [+2] Europe [+15] Crime [+2] None [+2]
I think the positive scores are not all that surprising. Immigration and Europe well above average, Crime, Tax and Welfare Benefits marginally above average - all fit into the UKIP stereotype of worrying about the country "going to the dogs" in a general way.
With those five areas above average it is really hard to avoid areas that are important for other voters - such as the NHS and Pensions - from being below average.
I think Mike is right to infer that there is an extent to which these are "imagined" worries, based on reading the media, etc, rather than personal knowledge. It follows that the media coverage will be particularly important, but I don't see papers like the Express abandoning their current worldview.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
Of course, we first have to discover whether those on here puffing the Government's plan are or are not pensions advisers plotting to help themselves to a sizeable tranche of the pot.
1) am not an advisor in any capacity pensions or otherwise 2) the Govt is organising FREE advice for those approaching retirement and those who have not taken an annuity. 3) You have to be negative, don't you, you cant help yourself
I think Mike is right to infer that there is an extent to which these are "imagined" worries, based on reading the media, etc, rather than personal knowledge. It follows that the media coverage will be particularly important, but I don't see papers like the Express abandoning their current worldview.
By "imagined" I mean that the UKIP voters are not personally suffering as a result of this worry. Perhaps a word like "intellectual" would be more accurate, as the worry is theorised rather than experienced.
A lot of UKIP support comes from the feeling of being ignored by the all the other main parties. 'LibLabCon' all share an amazingly similiar sense of superiority, based on an Oxbridge metropolitan elite which 'knows best'. Hence the understandable shorthand, which is sneered at especially by those few souls who know and care about the detailed policies of the individual parties making up 'LibLabCon'.
Maybe it's me, but I can't help feeling there is a lot of sneering and superiority in the UKIP attitude to everyone else. I see it in this post and the one from radsatser.
Amusing blind item about a newly promoted Cabinet Minister in Bryony Gordon's column in yesterday's Telegraph
Here’s your starter for 10: which member of David Cameron’s new “female-friendly” Cabinet came up to me at a party four years ago and called me a word I hope he never uses in Parliament?
I was at a leaving do for a colleague who was moving to America, in the basement of a grotty bar near Westminster. It was the hottest day of the year and people were speed-drinking to keep cool. Perhaps that goes some way to explaining what transpired a couple of hours into the party.
As I stood in a group near the bar, a Tory MP came over to introduce himself. “What are you doing here?” he asked abruptly, in what I can only assume was an attempt at small talk. “I work with the party’s host,” I explained. “What are you doing here?” He wittered on about the select committees he worked on that my colleague had covered. And then he said: “If you work at the Telegraph, do you know that slut who writes that Single Girl About Town column at the back of the magazine? What’s her name? Bryony Gordon?”
The room seemed to fall silent.
“Yes,” I managed to respond. “I know her very well, because that slut is me.” The new minister for can-you-guess-what blushed crimson and spent the rest of the evening apologising profusely. Let’s hope his new career in the Cabinet comes with training to make him less gaffe-prone, or he’ll be out by the time MPs return from their summer recess. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10981625/Hey-Minister-remember-me-Im-the-one-you-called-a-slut.html
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
UKIP supporters are in it for themselves just as much as anyone else. They do not like the country as it is, it makes them deeply depressed, they want to change it because it would make them feel a lot better. They bristle at the names thrown at them, but sneer at their opponents, accuse them of not standing up for Britain (England) and call them the metropolitan elite, the commentarial, the liberal elite and so on. It's pretty much politics as normal.
FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions. [snip]
Exactly - and unsurprisingly in the case of UKip, the party's raison d'être trumps all.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
UKIP supporters are in it for themselves just as much as anyone else. They do not like the country as it is, it makes them deeply depressed, they want to change it because it would make them feel a lot better. They bristle at the names thrown at them, but sneer at their opponents, accuse them of not standing up for Britain (England) and call them the metropolitan elite, the commentarial, the liberal elite and so on. It's pretty much politics as normal.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
Of course, we first have to discover whether those on here puffing the Government's plan are or are not pensions advisers plotting to help themselves to a sizeable tranche of the pot.
1) am not an advisor in any capacity pensions or otherwise 2) the Govt is organising FREE advice for those approaching retirement and those who have not taken an annuity. 3) You have to be negative, don't you, you cant help yourself
What is an annuity? A kind of fraud, I believe...
Do you pay your dues to the Govt. Do you pay tax here or are you a tax exile or not ordinarily resident?
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
UKIP supporters are in it for themselves just as much as anyone else. They do not like the country as it is, it makes them deeply depressed, they want to change it because it would make them feel a lot better. They bristle at the names thrown at them, but sneer at their opponents, accuse them of not standing up for Britain (England) and call them the metropolitan elite, the commentarial, the liberal elite and so on. It's pretty much politics as normal.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
UKIP supporters are in it for themselves just as much as anyone else. They do not like the country as it is, it makes them deeply depressed, they want to change it because it would make them feel a lot better. They bristle at the names thrown at them, but sneer at their opponents, accuse them of not standing up for Britain (England) and call them the metropolitan elite, the commentarial, the liberal elite and so on. It's pretty much politics as normal.
Well SO, if the cap fits..........
Absolutely - we are all the same. No-one has the moral high ground in politics. Dismissing people who disagree with you as the sneering metropolitan elite is just as lazy as calling them xenophobes.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
My post wasn't intended to be critical of Kippers and Greens on this (and I don't think it reads that way - aren't you projecting something into it?), just an observation. Personally I also think that questions of sovereignty and the future of the planet are more important than many of the daily issues we deal with, though I draw un-Kipper conclusions.
My absolute favourite constituent is the one who ticked me off for a leaflet saying Labour would make her better off - "I'm not interested in being better off, I want you to be doing more about world poverty." I understand people whose personal difficulties are so pressing that they trump wider issues, but it's nice when that doesn't happen.
Has anyone done any polling on how many Kippers are worried about immigration and asylum in areas where there are few immigrants and/or asylum seekers. On a recent trip to Cornwall, where I understand UKIP does quite well, I noted that the BT roadside boxes were adorned with notices to the effect that super fast Broadband was there, courtesy of an EU grant. I live around 50 miles from London and we won’t get it for ages. I do realise that fishing policies may affect Kippery!
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
Look at Ukip supporters as caring parents who see the children squabbling over instant gratification. Poking their fingers into electrical sockets, picking stuff from the floor and eating it. They need gentle guidance from time to tome, the little tinkers.
Ah, bless.
And Mr Smithson, you're old enough to know better.
Look at Ukip supporters as caring parents who see the children squabbling over instant gratification. Poking their fingers into electrical sockets, picking stuff from the floor and eating it. They need gentle guidance from time to tome, the little tinkers.
Ah, bless.
And Mr Smithson, you're old enough to know better.
I look at UKIP supporters as people who are made profoundly miserable by the country in which they live and would prefer it to be very different.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Will AIFE be standing in any high profile UKIP target Westminster Seats like Thurrock, Thanet South or Boston & Skegness ?
Perhaps they are near to gods waiting room anyway, so they are not that bothered. They may think that their local NHS is ok for their needs or have private health cover. As for pensions, again they feel that they are getting a good deal. Some many be fortunate enough to have retired with good company pensions.
From my personal experience, most of the retired people I meet seem very happy about their financial situation and realise that they have done better than younger generations are likely to experience. They are more concerned about immigration causing pressures on the countries services and how the economy is going to provide opportunies to their children/grandchildren.
Mr. Observer, the wonderful world of multi-culturalism and embracing diversity also meant a weakness and failure by the political (and media, now with the self-censorship which occurs over Danish cartoons as well as Jesus and Mo) class to stand up for decent British values. So, we had a decade and more of doing sod all about FGM, and now we find schools trying to radicalise pupils.
Saw a clip of one parent on ITV last night asking whether people expected to see a child with a bomb strapped to him.
Would it actually be a surprise at this point? After Lee Rigby, the marches proclaiming Death to the West because a cartoon wasn't to the liking of some Muslims, 7/7, numerous foiled terror plots and the attempt to get a Lib Dem deselected because he tweeted a picture of Mohammed?
To ramble some more, this happens at the same time as Russia is trying to re-run the Cold War, a little hotter this time. Obama's never going to go for military action and the vaunted EU (truly, it is deserving of its Peace Prize) can't decide whether to wibble impotently or impotently wibble.
We need some more backbone, whether that's dealing with ex-KGB thugs abroad or zealous lunatics at home. Of course, the former requires the French and Germans to get on board. I'm sure the European spirit will see that happen.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Will AIFE be standing in any high profile UKIP target Westminster Seats like Thurrock, Thanet South or Boston & Skegness ?
Maybe ICM and YOUGov are so superior, they factored the AIFE score in to their predictions?
Ridiculous to use the final euro poll results as a comparison with GE polling 10 months out... ICMs early euro polls had UKIP in 3rd place on 20% and Labour clear on 35%, absolutely useless
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Pay's your money and takes your chance. Didn't ICM have the BNP on 4% around about the 2013 locals, what happened to that. They had UKIP on 9% immediately before the locals, and then a unbelievably massive 100% month on month increase to 18% for the immediate pre-election poll, ( nearly matching the 19% that UKIP actually got), and then the following month they reverted to type had UKIP back down to 12% down amongst the dead men.
On that example it would suggest the only polls ICM get right are the ones around the time of any given election, after which they seem to revert to a state of understating UKIP for any inter election period.
I'm no expert, but how can they be so inconsistent, and remain credible. From the position of a layman, it would seem to me that as the election approaches, they have a look at what all the others are indicating and shuffle their figures to get within the same ballpark.
You are right... They did exactly the same at the a Euros, and were still the firm that understated ukip the most in their final poll
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Pay's your money and takes your chance. Didn't ICM have the BNP on 4% around about the 2013 locals, what happened to that. They had UKIP on 9% immediately before the locals, and then a unbelievably massive 100% month on month increase to 18% for the immediate pre-election poll, ( nearly matching the 19% that UKIP actually got), and then the following month they reverted to type had UKIP back down to 12% down amongst the dead men.
On that example it would suggest the only polls ICM get right are the ones around the time of any given election, after which they seem to revert to a state of understating UKIP for any inter election period.
I'm no expert, but how can they be so inconsistent, and remain credible. From the position of a layman, it would seem to me that as the election approaches, they have a look at what all the others are indicating and shuffle their figures to get within the same ballpark.
Thats an interesting take on ICM @radsatser. In other words you think that some pollsters cook the books in UKIP's case, and that ICM is a major miscreant.
Mr. Observer, the wonderful world of multi-culturalism and embracing diversity also meant a weakness and failure by the political (and media, now with the self-censorship which occurs over Danish cartoons as well as Jesus and Mo) class to stand up for decent British values. So, we had a decade and more of doing sod all about FGM, and now we find schools trying to radicalise pupils.
Saw a clip of one parent on ITV last night asking whether people expected to see a child with a bomb strapped to him.
Would it actually be a surprise at this point? After Lee Rigby, the marches proclaiming Death to the West because a cartoon wasn't to the liking of some Muslims, 7/7, numerous foiled terror plots and the attempt to get a Lib Dem deselected because he tweeted a picture of Mohammed?
To ramble some more, this happens at the same time as Russia is trying to re-run the Cold War, a little hotter this time. Obama's never going to go for military action and the vaunted EU (truly, it is deserving of its Peace Prize) can't decide whether to wibble impotently or impotently wibble.
We need some more backbone, whether that's dealing with ex-KGB thugs abroad or zealous lunatics at home. Of course, the former requires the French and Germans to get on board. I'm sure the European spirit will see that happen.
We have been earning money from the Russians for a long time and have turned a blind eye to the Putin regime just as much as anyone else.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Will AIFE be standing in any high profile UKIP target Westminster Seats like Thurrock, Thanet South or Boston & Skegness ?
Maybe ICM and YOUGov are so superior, they factored the AIFE score in to their predictions?
Ridiculous to use the final euro poll results as a comparison with GE polling 10 months out... ICMs early euro polls had UKIP in 3rd place on 20% and Labour clear on 35%, absolutely useless
I think ICM useful as a lower bound on UKIP - that is what I'll judge it as at any rate.
If you list out the current Westminster VI scores with all the pollsters in the same order as the Euros there is a broadly similiar spread to the Euros. And you can aduce that UKIP are ~ 14% right now from this lot nationally, but the swing is not uniform as Lord Ashcroft's polling shows.
"most of the retired people I meet seem very happy about their financial situation."
That's because many can look back to a childhood and remember real poverty. And I don't mean not having the latest smart phone. I still remember my mother being pleased for weeks when we moved into a new council house with an inside toilet.
Anyway, enough of the "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch.
Life always becomes easier as the time goes on. My grandparents moaned about "today's kids" not knowing they were born. The complications added by technology are voluntary. You will live a lot longer (if you don't scoff so much) - that's why you need to work longer (albeit with a much shorter week). So that's hardly something to complain about. And you may get dementia and die at eighty, rather than die at fifteen of consumption.
And I don't mean you personally, obviously, and I understand it's human nature to moan a bit. Let's face it, we Oldies do that well enough.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
UKIP supporters are in it for themselves just as much as anyone else. They do not like the country as it is, it makes them deeply depressed, they want to change it because it would make them feel a lot better. They bristle at the names thrown at them, but sneer at their opponents, accuse them of not standing up for Britain (England) and call them the metropolitan elite, the commentarial, the liberal elite and so on. It's pretty much politics as normal.
Aside from the obvious reasons for wanting to withdraw from the EU, namely that I am pro democracy, another overriding factor in my being a supporter is that they are the only party campaigning to bring back grammar schools.
I firmly believe that grammar schools give bright working class kids, of all colour and creed, a better chance in life. As I am 59 on Friday it obviously doesn't affect me, and I moved my family out to Buckinghamshire twenty years ago precisely because they still operate the grammar school system, so my grand kids will have the opportunity. Thus my support for grammar schools will not benefit me in anyway, if that makes me in it for myself then so be it.
Oh and the idea of Nick Palmer debating pensions with anyone is simply laughable.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
UKIP supporters are in it for themselves just as much as anyone else. They do not like the country as it is, it makes them deeply depressed, they want to change it because it would make them feel a lot better. They bristle at the names thrown at them, but sneer at their opponents, accuse them of not standing up for Britain (England) and call them the metropolitan elite, the commentarial, the liberal elite and so on. It's pretty much politics as normal.
How very knowledgeable, are you a UKIP supporter, (seems unlikely since you apparently know nothing about them) judging them by your own narrow and quite disturbing prejudice. Perhaps you are an ex soothsayer, chicken bone chucker or tea leaf reader out of time and place, reduced to resorting to evidence based rational analysis gathered from the Sun.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
@Nigel4England - I agree with you about grammar schools - although I would be happy with strict streaming inside the comprehensive system, which is probably more realistic an option - and it does not affect me directly because all my kids have now left school. I did go to one, though, and know that it played a big part in helping me get to where I am today from what was a working class background.
I am a top rate taxpayer who believes in redistribution from rich to poor. That affects me adversely, but I don't believe in it because I am an altruist, I believe in it because on the whole I believe it will help to create a society which is more at ease with itself, happier and therefore one that it is better and safer to live in - something that does suit me and my family down the ground. Your support for grammar schools (and mine) is along the same lines, I would argue.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
Look at Ukip supporters as caring parents who see the children squabbling over instant gratification. Poking their fingers into electrical sockets, picking stuff from the floor and eating it. They need gentle guidance from time to tome, the little tinkers.
Ah, bless.
And Mr Smithson, you're old enough to know better.
Loving the simile, but caring parents wouldn't be so jaw-droppingly uninterested in education as UKIP seem to be.
These data would all be more interesting if the question were "tick as many as you like"; as it's limited to 3, fanatic-heavy parties are bound to score low in areas outside their core interests.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
For the record I am an ex-Labourite too, in fact I have never voted Tory.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
I think older UKIP supporters acknowledge they've had pretty good lives, but fear that their children and grandchildren won't do. They were able to buy their own houses; they fear their offspring won't be able to. They worry about multiculturalism becoming ever more entrenched, and governments of all stripes prioritising the interests of growing minority populations over their own descendants.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
But they are not treated as other political parties. They are (often) treated as loons, etc.
There is plenty of evidence that UKIP support is sinking rapidly apart from ICM polls . So far in July 35,000 votes have been cast in council by elections , UKIP have gained no seats and lost 2 seats , their total number of votes in 4,975 14% the same % as Lib Dems who won 5 seats and Others who won 3 seats . Greens had 4% of the vote and won 1 seat ( actually 1 gain and 1 loss ) .
@Nigel4England - I agree with you about grammar schools - although I would be happy with strict streaming inside the comprehensive system, which is probably more realistic an option - and it does not affect me directly because all my kids have now left school. I did go to one, though, and know that it played a big part in helping me get to where I am today from what was a working class background.
I am a top rate taxpayer who believes in redistribution from rich to poor. That affects me adversely, but I don't believe in it because I am an altruist, I believe in it because on the whole I believe it will help to create a society which is more at ease with itself, happier and therefore one that it is better and safer to live in - something that does suit me and my family down the ground. Your support for grammar schools (and mine) is along the same lines, I would argue.
As someone who was in the top stream in a comprehensive, and whose mates were all mucking about in the bottom stream, I can tell you it is very hard to resist the lure of being with your mates over studying with the swats. It doesn't really work, although obviously that's just my experience, and my fault for preferring to be in with the in crowd over my education.
I would suggest that Mike is mistaken in his interpretation of the data.
I do not believe that it necessarily means that UKIP supporters are less concerned than others about health and pensions. I would suggest it is more the case that they see no real difference between the two parties - or indeed any of the parties on the issues.
They are not driven by the false ideological divide that Tory and Labour like to pretend exists over these issues - with each looking to gain political ground by accusing the other of undermining, mismanaging or destroying the NHS - and so do not see these as major political battle grounds.
In the same way as when the economy is doing well, it drops share as an issue with many people as they do not see it as something that threatens them directly at that time. But that does not mean they do not care about it at all. In the same way I would assume that most UKIP supporters do not see that a change of government would make much real difference in how their pensions or health care are run and delivered.
Tory and Labour on the other hand still see these as major battlegrounds for ideological reasons and so they rank higher in their concerns.
There is plenty of evidence that UKIP support is sinking rapidly apart from ICM polls . So far in July 35,000 votes have been cast in council by elections , UKIP have gained no seats and lost 2 seats , their total number of votes in 4,975 14% the same % as Lib Dems who won 5 seats and Others who won 3 seats . Greens had 4% of the vote and won 1 seat ( actually 1 gain and 1 loss ) .
Plus of course the 2009 > 2010 GE slump.
It's a GE next May - not a poll or a worthless Euro election.
Kipper leadership is not showing any answer to their GE irrelevance questio.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
I think older UKIP supporters acknowledge they've had pretty good lives, but fear that their children and grandchildren won't do. They were able to buy their own houses; they fear their offspring won't be able to. They worry about multiculturalism becoming ever more entrenched, and governments of all stripes prioritising the interests of growing minority populations over their own descendants.
Absolutely. I have many similar worries. But I may have different solutions. I would argue also that you can be part of a growing minority population and a UKIP supporter as well and that UKIP should not be about ethnicity.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
But they are not treated as other political parties. They are (often) treated as loons, etc.
I agree. But UKIPers also tend to dismiss their opponents as the sneering metropolitan elite. It's the same kind of thing in my view.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
I think older UKIP supporters acknowledge they've had pretty good lives, but fear that their children and grandchildren won't do. They were able to buy their own houses; they fear their offspring won't be able to. They worry about multiculturalism becoming ever more entrenched, and governments of all stripes prioritising the interests of growing minority populations over their own descendants.
Anxiety for the future seems to be the driver.."if I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country"
I think a lot of ukip supporters feel trapped. They don't have the money to leave where they live, and the changes the state has made to their hometown makes them want to leave even more
It's like being trapped in a lift on a not day, and the people who you trust to fix it turning the heat up, then calling you names when you complain, while they're sipping a cool drink by a pool
Absolutely. I have many similar worries. But I may have different solutions. I would argue also that you can be part of a growing minority population and a UKIP supporter as well and that UKIP should not be about ethnicity.
I honestly do not believe that UKIP is about ethnicity. However much their opponents might try to paint them as such, as a party they have consistently maintained a position that Britishness is nothing to do with colour or ethnic background but about acceptance of shared values.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
Nothing is more important to the average Kipper, then regaining our ability to govern ourselves and then electing politicians that actually believe that the interests of the British take priority over everything else. When the main three parties understand that, rather than thinking that everything is solvable by triangulation, and occasionally throwing a sweetie at the plebs, they may be on the first step to understanding how to deal with the UKIP movement.
UKIP will not vanish simply because ICM the 'gold standard' of polls comes up with a rogue poll suggesting their imminent demise, followed by the chattering classes going into a UKIP Domesday scenario, neither will this type of micro analysing of polls do anything other than take you off into the buffers of the railway siding, to join all the other rusting hulks of political theories about UKIP.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Pay's your money and takes your chance. Didn't ICM have the BNP on 4% around about the 2013 locals, what happened to that. They had UKIP on 9% immediately before the locals, and then a unbelievably massive 100% month on month increase to 18% for the immediate pre-election poll, ( nearly matching the 19% that UKIP actually got), and then the following month they reverted to type had UKIP back down to 12% down amongst the dead men.
On that example it would suggest the only polls ICM get right are the ones around the time of any given election, after which they seem to revert to a state of understating UKIP for any inter election period.
I'm no expert, but how can they be so inconsistent, and remain credible. From the position of a layman, it would seem to me that as the election approaches, they have a look at what all the others are indicating and shuffle their figures to get within the same ballpark.
Inaccurate.
The poll that had the BNP on 4% and UKIP doubling from 9 to 18% was after the locals. Not before.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
But they are not treated as other political parties. They are (often) treated as loons, etc.
I agree. But UKIPers also tend to dismiss their opponents as the sneering metropolitan elite. It's the same kind of thing in my view.
What you're saying comes across as saying it's just as valid for the bourgeoise to call the peasants peasants, as vice versa.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Pay's your money and takes your chance. Didn't ICM have the BNP on 4% around about the 2013 locals, what happened to that. They had UKIP on 9% immediately before the locals, and then a unbelievably massive 100% month on month increase to 18% for the immediate pre-election poll, ( nearly matching the 19% that UKIP actually got), and then the following month they reverted to type had UKIP back down to 12% down amongst the dead men.
On that example it would suggest the only polls ICM get right are the ones around the time of any given election, after which they seem to revert to a state of understating UKIP for any inter election period.
I'm no expert, but how can they be so inconsistent, and remain credible. From the position of a layman, it would seem to me that as the election approaches, they have a look at what all the others are indicating and shuffle their figures to get within the same ballpark.
A POLL IS NOT A PREDICTION (sorry). A poll six months out is not "right" if it is close to an election result six months later and "wrong" if it is not. A poll is an attempt to answer the counterfactual "what would happen if there were an election tomorrow", which is why the final polls before the election are the acid test and indeed the only test.
Polling methodology is too transparent for ICM to "shuffle their figures" even if they wanted to.
There is plenty of evidence that UKIP support is sinking rapidly apart from ICM polls . So far in July 35,000 votes have been cast in council by elections , UKIP have gained no seats and lost 2 seats , their total number of votes in 4,975 14% the same % as Lib Dems who won 5 seats and Others who won 3 seats . Greens had 4% of the vote and won 1 seat ( actually 1 gain and 1 loss ) .
Plus of course the 2009 > 2010 GE slump.
It's a GE next May - not a poll or a worthless Euro election.
Kipper leadership is not showing any answer to their GE irrelevance questio.
One of tomorrow's by elections is a Labour held seat in a ward in Doncaster . UKIP gained this ward in May . News from the ground is that UKIP are barely putting any effort into the by election and a comfortable Labour hold is expected .
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.
I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
But they are not treated as other political parties. They are (often) treated as loons, etc.
I agree. But UKIPers also tend to dismiss their opponents as the sneering metropolitan elite. It's the same kind of thing in my view.
What you're saying comes across as saying it's just as valid for the bourgeoise to call the peasants peasants, as vice versa.
Only if you believe that UKIP supporters are all peasants and those of other parties are all bourgeois. I don't.
Absolutely. I have many similar worries. But I may have different solutions. I would argue also that you can be part of a growing minority population and a UKIP supporter as well and that UKIP should not be about ethnicity.
I honestly do not believe that UKIP is about ethnicity. However much their opponents might try to paint them as such, as a party they have consistently maintained a position that Britishness is nothing to do with colour or ethnic background but about acceptance of shared values.
I was just responding to the second half of SeanF's final sentence:
They worry about multiculturalism becoming ever more entrenched, and governments of all stripes prioritising the interests of growing minority populations over their own descendants.
Silly question maybe, but how does one access the daily YouGov/Sun VI poll, usually released around 10pm, or is this only available from behind the paywall?
Silly question maybe, but how does one access the daily YouGov/Sun VI poll, usually released around 10pm, or is this only available from behind the paywall?
Via the sun politics Twitter Feed at 10pm and 6am the following morning on the YouGov website.
It is glaringly apparent that Kippers and most minor party supporters for that matter, are not in politics for what they can get out of it for themselves, and that equally applies whether it is the economy, pensions, health, immigration, overseas aid or green crap. What is actually wrong with simply regaining the concept of governing for the British, protecting the British, spending our money on the British, or if we borrow money, spending that on the British.
What drives the Kippers is patently transparent, the problem is the commentariat refuse to believe the evidence before their own eyes, simply because they don't want to, they are still hoping it might all be a horrible dream, that will eventually go away.
ICM got the second most accurate figure for UKIP for the EUROs.
Pay's your money and takes your chance. Didn't ICM have the BNP on 4% around about the 2013 locals, what happened to that. They had UKIP on 9% immediately before the locals, and then a unbelievably massive 100% month on month increase to 18% for the immediate pre-election poll, ( nearly matching the 19% that UKIP actually got), and then the following month they reverted to type had UKIP back down to 12% down amongst the dead men.
On that example it would suggest the only polls ICM get right are the ones around the time of any given election, after which they seem to revert to a state of understating UKIP for any inter election period.
I'm no expert, but how can they be so inconsistent, and remain credible. From the position of a layman, it would seem to me that as the election approaches, they have a look at what all the others are indicating and shuffle their figures to get within the same ballpark.
A POLL IS NOT A PREDICTION (sorry). A poll six months out is not "right" if it is close to an election result six months later and "wrong" if it is not. A poll is an attempt to answer the counterfactual "what would happen if there were an election tomorrow", which is why the final polls before the election are the acid test and indeed the only test.
Polling methodology is too transparent for ICM to "shuffle their figures" even if they wanted to.
"Polling methodology is too transparent"
That's the point though. Class/Age/Gender aren't enough anymore. Ethnicity and the public/private split will make polling erratic until they're included.
Silly question maybe, but how does one access the daily YouGov/Sun VI poll, usually released around 10pm, or is this only available from behind the paywall?
Via the sun politics Twitter Feed at 10pm and 6am the following morning on the YouGov website.
Thanks TSE, I'm not into twitter which probably explains my problem! I'm aware that this poll appears on YG's website at 6.00am (sharp!) the following morning.
ICM is "liked" because it's been around the longest - I've often commented that it throws out outlier numbers for individual parties (this month's UKIP may be one such, we'll see) but as a way of looking at the bigger picture over time it's very good.
On topic, it's also interesting to note the figures on crime and welfare benefits listed above so while the top two "concerns" are clearly immigration and Europe, the profile of other concerns is also quite specific with the environment and education also out of kilter.
Comments
George will get my vote (I was 70% going to vote Tory 30% abstain. now I'm in the fold again.
For older citizens health is interesting. Many will have traveled and seen that the NHS is neither the only system nor the best.
Kippers ain't interested.
Men are 16% and women 11%.
Of the 2010 VI, Cons to UKIP are 16%, LAB to UKIP 9% and from LD 15%.
For Social Grade ABC1 are 11% whilst C2DE are 18%.
Highest supporting region is Midlands/Wales at 18% followed by Rest of South at 16% and North at 14%. London is 7%.
Thanks George
Not quite true, No vote is a given, I might end up being one of many who give Dave most votes but not seats.
It's also a cap on their appeal. People who ARE worried about how long it takes to get seen in A&E often get impatient if you start talking about Europe or the planet.
I suspect it's not, but it's interesting that no one gives them the benefit of the doubt. Surely that says for more about you than about them. Says me, feeling very noble.
Then again, I'm not sure what the new pension reforms mean to those who have already have taken an annuity and those who won't be affected by the proposed changes to SERPS etc.
2) the Govt is organising FREE advice for those approaching retirement and those who have not taken an annuity.
3) You have to be negative, don't you, you cant help yourself
Immigration [+28]
Welfare benefits [+4]
Europe [+21]
Crime [+6]
Tax [+1]
UKIP concerns above average - you and your family:
Immigration [+26]
Tax [+3]
Welfare benefits [+2]
Europe [+15]
Crime [+2]
None [+2]
I think the positive scores are not all that surprising. Immigration and Europe well above average, Crime, Tax and Welfare Benefits marginally above average - all fit into the UKIP stereotype of worrying about the country "going to the dogs" in a general way.
With those five areas above average it is really hard to avoid areas that are important for other voters - such as the NHS and Pensions - from being below average.
I think Mike is right to infer that there is an extent to which these are "imagined" worries, based on reading the media, etc, rather than personal knowledge. It follows that the media coverage will be particularly important, but I don't see papers like the Express abandoning their current worldview.
Here’s your starter for 10: which member of David Cameron’s new “female-friendly” Cabinet came up to me at a party four years ago and called me a word I hope he never uses in Parliament?
I was at a leaving do for a colleague who was moving to America, in the basement of a grotty bar near Westminster. It was the hottest day of the year and people were speed-drinking to keep cool. Perhaps that goes some way to explaining what transpired a couple of hours into the party.
As I stood in a group near the bar, a Tory MP came over to introduce himself. “What are you doing here?” he asked abruptly, in what I can only assume was an attempt at small talk. “I work with the party’s host,” I explained. “What are you doing here?” He wittered on about the select committees he worked on that my colleague had covered. And then he said: “If you work at the Telegraph, do you know that slut who writes that Single Girl About Town column at the back of the magazine? What’s her name? Bryony Gordon?”
The room seemed to fall silent.
“Yes,” I managed to respond. “I know her very well, because that slut is me.”
The new minister for can-you-guess-what blushed crimson and spent the rest of the evening apologising profusely. Let’s hope his new career in the Cabinet comes with training to make him less gaffe-prone, or he’ll be out by the time MPs return from their summer recess.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10981625/Hey-Minister-remember-me-Im-the-one-you-called-a-slut.html
Mr. Abroad, really? Annuities do offer guaranteed income, which is a significant plus.
"FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly voting to show a strong general view of how things are going or should go, and that absolutely trumps discussing health and pensions."
You mean that most people you see are somewhat selfish, the me-me-me people. I accept that many will have problems but you're right that most people will vote for a politician who promises them personal jam today.
So shouldn't we celebrate those who care more for the general good than for selfish aims. I'd give the greens that compliment even though I think they shouldn't be out on their own.
My absolute favourite constituent is the one who ticked me off for a leaflet saying Labour would make her better off - "I'm not interested in being better off, I want you to be doing more about world poverty." I understand people whose personal difficulties are so pressing that they trump wider issues, but it's nice when that doesn't happen.
I do realise that fishing policies may affect Kippery!
An unusually cynical view from you.
Look at Ukip supporters as caring parents who see the children squabbling over instant gratification. Poking their fingers into electrical sockets, picking stuff from the floor and eating it. They need gentle guidance from time to tome, the little tinkers.
Ah, bless.
And Mr Smithson, you're old enough to know better.
From my personal experience, most of the retired people I meet seem very happy about their financial situation and realise that they have done better than younger generations are likely to experience. They are more concerned about immigration causing pressures on the countries services and how the economy is going to provide opportunies to their children/grandchildren.
Saw a clip of one parent on ITV last night asking whether people expected to see a child with a bomb strapped to him.
Would it actually be a surprise at this point? After Lee Rigby, the marches proclaiming Death to the West because a cartoon wasn't to the liking of some Muslims, 7/7, numerous foiled terror plots and the attempt to get a Lib Dem deselected because he tweeted a picture of Mohammed?
To ramble some more, this happens at the same time as Russia is trying to re-run the Cold War, a little hotter this time. Obama's never going to go for military action and the vaunted EU (truly, it is deserving of its Peace Prize) can't decide whether to wibble impotently or impotently wibble.
We need some more backbone, whether that's dealing with ex-KGB thugs abroad or zealous lunatics at home. Of course, the former requires the French and Germans to get on board. I'm sure the European spirit will see that happen.
Ridiculous to use the final euro poll results as a comparison with GE polling 10 months out... ICMs early euro polls had UKIP in 3rd place on 20% and Labour clear on 35%, absolutely useless
I've had thoughts like that myself.
If you list out the current Westminster VI scores with all the pollsters in the same order as the Euros there is a broadly similiar spread to the Euros. And you can aduce that UKIP are ~ 14% right now from this lot nationally, but the swing is not uniform as Lord Ashcroft's polling shows.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
Where was your commentary last night?????
Keith @KGBut 3m
To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"
"most of the retired people I meet seem very happy about their financial situation."
That's because many can look back to a childhood and remember real poverty. And I don't mean not having the latest smart phone. I still remember my mother being pleased for weeks when we moved into a new council house with an inside toilet.
Anyway, enough of the "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch.
Life always becomes easier as the time goes on. My grandparents moaned about "today's kids" not knowing they were born. The complications added by technology are voluntary. You will live a lot longer (if you don't scoff so much) - that's why you need to work longer (albeit with a much shorter week). So that's hardly something to complain about. And you may get dementia and die at eighty, rather than die at fifteen of consumption.
And I don't mean you personally, obviously, and I understand it's human nature to moan a bit. Let's face it, we Oldies do that well enough.
I firmly believe that grammar schools give bright working class kids, of all colour and creed, a better chance in life. As I am 59 on Friday it obviously doesn't affect me, and I moved my family out to Buckinghamshire twenty years ago precisely because they still operate the grammar school system, so my grand kids will have the opportunity. Thus my support for grammar schools will not benefit me in anyway, if that makes me in it for myself then so be it.
Oh and the idea of Nick Palmer debating pensions with anyone is simply laughable.
But.
Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.
Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.
The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.
Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.
What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.
The 2013 UKIP ICM surge:
Unweighted -> Weighted
Mar 2013 39 -> 42 (1002) 7%
April 2013 55 -> 57 (1005) 9%
May 2013 106 -> 109 (1001) 18%
LE result:23% of vote where candidates stood
June 2013 70 -> 72 (1002) 12%
I am a top rate taxpayer who believes in redistribution from rich to poor. That affects me adversely, but I don't believe in it because I am an altruist, I believe in it because on the whole I believe it will help to create a society which is more at ease with itself, happier and therefore one that it is better and safer to live in - something that does suit me and my family down the ground. Your support for grammar schools (and mine) is along the same lines, I would argue.
These data would all be more interesting if the question were "tick as many as you like"; as it's limited to 3, fanatic-heavy parties are bound to score low in areas outside their core interests.
April 2014 64 -> 67 (1000) 11%
May 2014 89 -> 89 (1000) 15%
June 2014 96 -> 100 (1001) 16%
July 2014 66 -> 57 (1000) 9%
I do not believe that it necessarily means that UKIP supporters are less concerned than others about health and pensions. I would suggest it is more the case that they see no real difference between the two parties - or indeed any of the parties on the issues.
They are not driven by the false ideological divide that Tory and Labour like to pretend exists over these issues - with each looking to gain political ground by accusing the other of undermining, mismanaging or destroying the NHS - and so do not see these as major political battle grounds.
In the same way as when the economy is doing well, it drops share as an issue with many people as they do not see it as something that threatens them directly at that time. But that does not mean they do not care about it at all. In the same way I would assume that most UKIP supporters do not see that a change of government would make much real difference in how their pensions or health care are run and delivered.
Tory and Labour on the other hand still see these as major battlegrounds for ideological reasons and so they rank higher in their concerns.
It's a GE next May - not a poll or a worthless Euro election.
Kipper leadership is not showing any answer to their GE irrelevance questio.
I think a lot of ukip supporters feel trapped. They don't have the money to leave where they live, and the changes the state has made to their hometown makes them want to leave even more
It's like being trapped in a lift on a not day, and the people who you trust to fix it turning the heat up, then calling you names when you complain, while they're sipping a cool drink by a pool
The poll that had the BNP on 4% and UKIP doubling from 9 to 18% was after the locals. Not before.
http://www.icmresearch.com/media-centre/guardian-voting/guardian-poll-may-2013
Polling methodology is too transparent for ICM to "shuffle their figures" even if they wanted to.
(Actual 19.9%, Rallings & Thrasher PNVS 22%, BBC PNVS 23%)
It's not wise to compare Westminster VI polls with actual locals votes or NNESV
ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)
Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%
ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%
Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %
Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?
ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;
But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.
They worry about multiculturalism becoming ever more entrenched, and governments of all stripes prioritising the interests of growing minority populations over their own descendants.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/05/27/guest-slot-rod-crosby-the-bell-tolls-for-labour-and-miliband/
Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on
That's the point though. Class/Age/Gender aren't enough anymore. Ethnicity and the public/private split will make polling erratic until they're included.
ICM is "liked" because it's been around the longest - I've often commented that it throws out outlier numbers for individual parties (this month's UKIP may be one such, we'll see) but as a way of looking at the bigger picture over time it's very good.
On topic, it's also interesting to note the figures on crime and welfare benefits listed above so while the top two "concerns" are clearly immigration and Europe, the profile of other concerns is also quite specific with the environment and education also out of kilter.