Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Four very different pictures from the four overnight online
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Four very different pictures from the four overnight online polls for the Sunday papers
@msmithsonpb getting some interesting spreads in polling now
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
ICM on the Wisdom index:
http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/11/The-power-of-Wisdom.pdf
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/lu4hu1in3u/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-170513.pdf
All 3 leaders take a battering:
Net Well
Cameron : -30 (-7)
Miliband: - 35 (-6)
Clegg: -61 (-6)
As does coalition cooperation : net working well together : -45 (-8)
UKIP VI still massive outliers (diff vs OA) on:
Immigration: +37
Europe: +21
Also on fans of police - "good job" (net)
Con:+63
Lab: +64
LibD: +68
UKIP: +29
Then again, they don't trust the crime figures
net trust:
OA: -7
UKIP: -53
Some other data on attitude to getting genetic testing for cancer etc - it's only just on the MOE - but suggests less enthusiasm for it (greater fatalism?)
Con VI support Cameron (52) over his rebels (19) - only UKIP support the rebels (13 & 44 respectively.)
George Takei (of Star Trek OS fame) responds to protesters against gay marriage (*)
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/george-takei-responds-to-traditional-marriage-fans
(*) Note marriage is spelt correctly. Thanks, George.
The bigger question is whether Ukip-lite Tories would rather see Labour back in office as long as they may foam about Europe with impunity ??
Meanwhile .... on the plus side for the Coalition - Labour only +3 with gold standard ICM !!
Titters ....
How do you think the financial situation of your household will change over the next 12 months?
Net "better"
Con: -2
Lab: -47
LibD: -11
UKIP: -66
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7435
Polling industry dealt major blow in British Columbia provincial state election
Last night was a very bad one for Adrian Dix and the New Democrats, who expected victory as much as the pollsters did. And with good reason: a stabilizing, maybe even growing, lead over the B.C. Liberals with hours to go before the polls opened. Instead, British Columbians collectively woke up and changed their minds and swung about 13 points towards Christy Clark. OR MORE LIKELY, SOMETHING DISASTROUSLY WRONG OCCURRED IN THE POLLING INDUSTRY.
There is an inquest going on over there with all polling organisations.
Also Liberals marred campaign with heavy negative adverts. Is that a foretaste of what we might expect from the parties in the next election here, the Cons could probably destroy UKIP with that?
PS Clarke lost her seat! Liberals soaring with the advent of Trudeau, may only be temporary.
The solution is probably to hit them with everything they've got until a few months before the election, then put them on ignore.
BTW, the fact that this may be tricky brings us back to one thing Blair did right and Cameron doesn't seem to have been able to pull off, which was keeping people like John Prescott on-side to connect him to the base. It may be that the right are just less amenable than the left, but I also think it comes back to the core problem with the way Cameron has handled the right, which is that he's giving them policy concessions and no respect, when he should be giving them respect and no policy concessions.
Which group would UKIP be mostly likely to lose: the ex tories or the protest voters? I suspect the latter.
Con 29, Lab 40, Lib 9, UKIP 14
Approval -39
7-Day weighted average (changes on a week) -
Con 30.1 (+0.6), Lab 39.4 (+0.1), Lib 9.5 (-0.3), UKIP 14.6 (-0.1)
LD 8 CON 29 LAB 37 UKIP 18
The Wisdom Index looks most credible to me, though I'm not sure the Con-Lab gap is that small. I do think the Lib Dems will bounce back rather a lot and the UKIP vote will decline, at least in proportional terms.
Did you really say that you were only an office junior in charge of making tea and paper clips, and that it was all Ed Balls' fault?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/may/18/ed-miliband-pledge-tax-avoidance?guni=Keyword:news-grid main-1 Main trailblock:Editable trailblock - news:Position2
Did you really say that you were only an office junior in charge of making tea and paper clips, and that it was all Ed Balls' fault?"
Exactly! Where were the progressive tax changes? That was one good reason why the Lib Dems appeared to be left of labour in 2005 and 2010 and why many of their supporters of that time were/are so appalled by the idea of the coalition.
Edmund for the double quote.
Can`t see how the 3 main parties could ignore, especially over the arguments over any possible debates with party leaders.
PS. Ed Miliband should advocate letting Farage join the debates. If Cameron agrees it pumps up the UKIP score which probably hurts Con more than Lab, and if it doesn't he gets to drive another wedge between Cameron and UKIP-curious Tories. Admittedly it could all blow up in his face, but if people hadn't played with fire they'd never have invented cooking.
On the EU, I want a referendum, but can see valid points in both those who want one immediately, and in Cameron's renegotiate position. I've little idea which would be best for Britain, or how I would vote if/when a referendum is called. I just want a say.
On gay marriage, the Tory right are out of line with public opinion and even Tory voters. I've changed my position on it over the last couple of years as I have read up more on it and discussed it with both gay and religious people, and I think the trend to support the change will continue to grow.
So they are mostly right on one issue, and wrong on a second.
There's the makings of a really good TV series in there on countries that don't legally exist, their origins and the problems they face. Kosovo, Transnistrian Moldova, Northern Cyprus and Abkhazia would all be good for inclusion.
It was not in the conservative manifesto gay marriage.
It was in the Lib Dem manifesto to abolish student tution fees.
So a goverment no one voted for has decieved them.
This isn't a dig at you BTW EiT as you raise valid and interesting strategies.
The thing is, however crazy the tories are acting over Europe and likely gay marriage next week, it is still as nothing compared to the barking mad insanity that some tories like Dorries seem to be harbouring over UKIP just because some of their views coincide with the kippers more than Cammie's. UKIP don't want to be best friends with tories. What they want is tory voters and as many of them as possible. They also aren't going to apologise for that or be reluctant to take them. Particularly when they appear to be so freely given.
Problem is Cammie has clearly given a masterclass in how to alienate his base and backbench MPs. As you said EiT, someone needs to ram it home that the kippers are not allies they are opponents and it can't be anyone from the chumocracy for obvious reasons.
If they kick off so much that the country's led by either Miliband or Miliband & Clegg (hardly a force for EU-scepticism) then all they're effectively working *for* Brussels.
The only realistic way we'll get a referendum is for Cameron to win a majority. His backbenchers will then be in the perfect position to politely deliver a request for such a vote, which he'll go ahead with or not (and, if not, the 1922 Committee will end his tenure as Conservative leader and PM).
Be less likely to vote for a party that supports same-sex marriage (small sample)
Overall (42)
Con (72)
Lab (8)
LD (0)
Ukip (76)
Con10 (74)
18-24 (20)
60+ (92)
Would you support or oppose changing the law to allow same-sex couples to marry? (net)
Overall (+17)
Con (-3)
Lab (+26)
LD (+48)
Ukip (-15)
Con10 (-10)
18-24 (+57)
60+ (-35)
Wanting out of the EU and BOO are both mainstream, and correct. A more reasoned attack on it maybe: but how much better? Will the improvements be so great as to be worth the grief? I think yes, although put it that way, it is closer.
The Euro-phile view would gain more respect if it were better made. Is it simply that the benefits of staying in the EU have been badly sold, or is it because they really haven't a case to make?
Sometimes a minister explains that a policy of his govt is 'both right and popular, but the message hasn't been well made to the electorate'. Then, for sure, the policy is nowhere near as good as he thinks it is.
As past experience tells us, the more oxygen you provide for the third or fourth party fire, the brighter it will burn. I remember Norman Tebbit famously attacking the Alliance parties in 1987 only for the Alliance parties to soar as people suddenly realised that if Tebbit was taking them seriously, perhaps the electorate should as well.
I suspect what Cameron, Clegg and Miliband want more than anything else right now is a recess and a long, uneventful summer. There's nothing like a period of masterly inactivity to damp down the flames of insurgency.
The problem for the Coalition is that, statistics aside and the talking up of the economy by Avery (presumably to bait Tim) and others notwithstanding, for most people (indeed the vast majority), things remain very difficult witha lot having to run hard to stand still. I don't feel in any way "better off" since 2010 and I'm earning a good wage. The man who runs the cafe where I get my breakfast on the way to work is a lovely man, hard working and always cheerful with his customers. Yet he says his business isn't making enough money so he has to work in another restaurant four nights a week to get by.
I suspect this is not atypical - the volume of jobs may seem by some to be a measure of success, the number of hours worked may seem by some to be a measure of success but these statistics hide the truth of living in London at any rate. A lot of people running frantically to stand still - it's not a vision of society with which I feel comfortable.
As I have said on here before, a society in which only the top few percent see material improvements in their lives is not sustainable. None of our parties, UKIP included, gives any indication that it has understood this.
I'd also like to agree on the point that the more UKIP are attacked by the mainstream pols and media the better, it proves we're right :-)
'"It is part of a culture of irresponsibility. If everyone approaches their tax affairs as some of these companies have approached their tax affairs we wouldn't have a health service, we wouldn't have an education system.'
Is Ed going to include IHT avoidance trusts?
Cammie is fully to blame for acting like John Major and posturing to appease the most gullible of them yet they are the ones who just can't let it go and keep running about like headless chickens at the drop of a hat or a good kipper opinion poll.
The UK, like many other western European countries has developed this state of affairs over the years. In general we are uncompetitive globally, have paid ourselves too much, and have too large a part of our population that is reliant on the State for its income or part of its income. Our public services have become grossly inefficient and parts have become self-serving rather than public-serving.
We have created a false house price bubble that demands too high a portion of personal income and have in general allowed our educational standards to decline instead of aspiring for the best for all, so that our young people nowadays find it difficult to compete for jobs globally. At the same time we have joined an expensive and inefficient club that has artificially raised energy prices above their globally competitive norm.
Disposable incomes will not rise until we sort out all these problems.
It is hopeless to moan about events of over 20 years ago - why no focus on the future and what is needed to put this right.
On the substantive, I would say that the argument for not staying in has been put forward far more coherently than the argument for coming out of the EU. By that I mean even someone like me who might be classed as an unrepentant Europhile am not blind to the inadequacies of the EU as it currently stands. I yearn for the institutional root-and-branch reform of the edifice to make the whole thing more accountable to the people of the member states. That said, I am of the view that while some powers currently at Westminster should be devolved to local authorities and some powers currently at EU level should come back to Westminster, I do believe there are issues where the pooling of sovereignty is necessary. In effect, through NATO, we have surrendered part of our sovereignty over defence policy since 1949.
That said, I'm nowhere near convinced of the advantages of withdrawal - noone has created for me a coherent picture of the UK post-EU and what it would mean for me and Mrs Stodge financially. There's a lot of rose-tinted sophistry from the anti-EU brigade but if it were really that beneficial for us to withdraw, we'd have done so.
I'm also of the view that in a single free market (from which we have derived huge benefit), the free movement of capital has to be accompanied by the free movement of labour so people go where the jobs are and businesses can set up in areas with cheap labour. The collective western European failure post 1989 was to fail to invest deeply and heavily in the former Warsaw Pact countries. Instead of the Poles, Balts and Bulgarians coming here and being our cheap labour, we should have gone there and built factories and developed their infrastructure to help them rebuild from the ravagers of communism. Instead, we opened the borders, invited them over and made them serve us coffee and fix our broken toilets and then resent them for having the audacity to want to build better lives for themselves and their families.
The coaliton agreement was 3 years ago. Cammie's leadership election was 8 years ago. If you don't like the result of either you can either jump on board Farage's plane or join Dorries in her lunatic quest for a kipper pact in 2015.
Cammie is a latter day John Major on Europe because he has only himself to blame for encouraging the swivel-eyed loon behaviour of his MPs when they have proved they do not have the stomach or the numbers to get rid of him. The headbanger backbenchers sense that weakness in Cammie to stick to his guns and exploit it every single time.
Con 285 .. Lab 280 .. LibDem 45 .. SNP 12 .. PC 3 .. Ukip 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 1 .. Speaker 1 .. NI 18
New Labour, of course, with similarly distant from its activists and supporters, being an upper-middle class elite who, by and large, thought of the working class as uneducated, violent chavs, if it thought of them at all. But at least the Blairites knew there was a problem so went out of their way, at least in Opposition and the first term, to cement relations.
The Cameroons seem not to comprehend that most of their party is not like them. Most Conservative supporters, even the rich ones, work for a living rather than relying on inherited wealth. This is what leads to clumsy errors like VAT on church volunteers' pasties or attacks on GPs, for instance. The small town solicitor, dentist, shopkeeper and garage owner no longer recognise their party. The craftsman or educated professional might have no view one way or another about gay EU directives but they do know their lives are not getting better and no-one seems to care.
Read The Tatler and Country Life from the Blair years. You know what they were in favour of? Polish builders. But most Conservative voters don't have country houses, even if they aspire to them.
And that is David Cameron's problem. He simply does not understand that he and his privileged circle are not typical.
Major did not have UKIP on 18%, he did not have Southern Europe on its back and the whole euro project being questioned.
His rebels were far more self indulgent than Cameron's.
Not trusting Dave, in fact not trusting any of the three parties is the issue
I get that you don't want to air internal party difficulties in public, but that has to be one of the most deluded political statements I've ever read in my life.
Which means any future Conservative government would need to be a coalition, either with UKIP or the LibDems.
In which case the Cameroons have permanently crippled the Conservative party.
I wonder how Avery would view Charles's defeatism.
How many millions has he personally benefitted from our membership?
A proof is a tough ask. You accept that the EU doesn't work very well at the moment, and represents an expensive extra layer of corrupt bureaucracy. Its original purpose, to provide a 1950's solution to a 1930's problem (Germany) has been and gone. Free trade areas are getting less important---look at the % of govt revenue that comes from import duty; it is trivially small. The internet is now more important than free trade areas. EU requirement for ever-closer-union by definition requires a common currency. If the Euro had never been invented, we'd all be better off---including you and Mrs Stodge.
An increasing number of UK economists and politicians recognise that giving notice to quit the EU should not worry any of us. It would not be merely humouring 'loons and headbangers', but a positive act, which would remove uncertainty at a stroke. As a good European, you would be pleased that it would be also good for Europe, as they'd have to re-design their edifice to take more account of their people.
The Euro crisis obviously had an impact yet Eurosceptics are never slow to say they had always seen such a thing coming so why should their position have to change? Euroscepticism is supposed to be the mainstream tory position after all. In truth it just emboldened the BOOers since that is where the fault line now is. As should have also been foreseen years ago. Too late now. The time to draw a line on that position has long since passed which is why there is so much navel gazing and splits on the subject.
The more the tories bang on about Europe and immigration the better it gets for the kippers but the tories really started tanking way back at Osbrowne's omnishambles budget.
2015 is still going to be about the economy when all is said and done.
"...the devastating fire which consumed most of the [Westminster] Palace in 1834. ... on that dramatic night, as the Commons went up in flames, a crowd gathered on the South Bank to clap and cheer" :-)
although I am completely antipathetic to the concept of large overly powerful multi-national organisations like the EU, I do see that for those who like the idea of a supra national body, the question of how to reform the EU into something more democratic, accountable and functional is a very difficult one.
Personally I am afraid I am of the opinion that the old joke Irish answer is best:
"If I wanted to get there I wouldn't start here".
For those in favour of an EU type organisation of Europe I think the best thing that can happen is that the EU completely and utterly fails and that something far more cohesive and honest grows up in its place. I realise this is impractical in any real sense but I think that just highlights the major problem with teh EU as it stands. It is not fit for purpose, was never designed to be fit for the purpose it is now supposed to have and will never be fit for purpose.
It cannot and will not be reformed. hence the best that can happen is that it is utterly removed.
By the way, your " if it were really that beneficial for us to withdraw, we'd have done so." argument is utterly spurious and wrong headed.
The reason we have not withdrawn is because successive leaders have bought into the myth that the EU is good for Britain. On the left they have done so because they believe in the socialist, communitaire roots whilst on the right they have done so because they believed the EU could provide the free trade they desired. Both have been proven wrong and it is only now that the population at large is coming to realise this.
Previously she was rude about the leadership, and was kicked out. Within 10 days of being let back in she is being fundamentally disloyal to the party that got her elected.
While she, a single MP, may think that UKIP-Tory joint candidates are a good thing it is against party rules.
She should advocate to change in private, not in public. It's an utter contemptuous betrayal of everyone who worked so hard to get her elected. Deselection is the right way forward.
Would be interested in David Herdson's views though