Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes marginals poll is out
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes marginals poll is out
The sample size is 1,000 people in total, so much smaller than the Lord Ashcroft marginal polls we’re used to, these are the same seats ComRes have polled earlier on this year.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Again, Cameron beats Ed, but as so often public marginally prefer a Labour government to Tory one.
Imagine Ed as leader of the Tories, they would be at Lib Dem levels !!!
Is there something wrong with it generally, or is it just me?
"For those looking for further evidence for tactical voting against UKIP, 51% say I’d never consider voting UKIP, 33% say I would consider voting UKIP at the General Election next year.
When asked specifically about their constituency 51% say I’d never vote for UKIP, even if they could win in my constituency, whilst 30% I’d vote for UKIP if I thought they could win in my constituency."
I blame PB...
How has this got anything to do with tactical voting? it doesn't mention voting for another party other than the one a voter supports let alone asking whether Labour voters would vote Tory hindering Labour's chances of winning the election or asking Tory voters if they would vote Labour hindering Tory chances ( and hindering them moreso than if UKIP won).
What this says is 51% would not vote UKIP. Now if I recall in the past we have had polls which have suggested over 60% would not vote Tory so its hardly a significant statistic.
The most interesting figure is that 30% would consider voting UKIP which is a much higher figure than I would have thought in highly competitive marginal seats. After all few of UKIPs target seats would have been included in this poll so given the potential that suggests it must be seen as encouraging for UKIP.
Can we pick this up in the morning, I'm off to bed.
I'm sure my answers will make you feel more optimistic.
The 30% figure is a good thing for UKIP since they are only polling 17% in this poll.
So where UKIP can project them as potential winners in a seat they should get a boost in that seat as people won't see it as a wasted vote.
The BBC red button on my TV hasn't been working today.
Is there something wrong with it generally, or is it just me?
All it takes is for somebody to try the red button on their TV, see if it's working, and report back. I use the red button to check the news headlines about 8,537 times a day.
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/IoS_SM_Political_Poll_28th_September_2014_8723.pdf
This poll looks a lot closer to what you'd expect in the marginals than their previous marginals polling...
"Well, Clarice. Have the lambs stopped screaming?"
The 1st major integrated air land offensive in Iraq should be underway within days in the Sunni triangle.
There are rumours of an aircraft shot down in Iraq but its nightime and it could be anything. The stories copme from Ramadi, a critical battleground city and one identified months ago as a key IS target.
Meanwhile, keep an eye on the reported new friendly relations between IS and the Al Nusra front, the local loose al Qaeda affiliate in Syria. Previously deadly rivals, I posted on here a number of nights ago that IS had released a number of Nusra front prisoners shortly after Nusra front positions took as much of a battering from the 1st set of US-led airstrkes as IS did.
I see the Guardian today reports that the two groups are talking.
Fantastic....
His army is knackered and heavily dependent on militias, many imported and some of whom in the form of the NDF seem to operate outside of his military structure, leading to occasional clashes with his own forces. To boot the guy has just fired one of his top right hand men, Hafez Makhlouf and this is not the kind of guy he wants turning up against him. Makhlouf has reportedly done a runner with his family.
Of course the general Western media sources tell you Assad is winning. This is balls, He's surviving. The insurgents cant shift him, but he cant shift them enough either.
As for the Western strategy of the usual ground-averse approach of going in from the air it can blunt both Nusra and IS but it sure as hell wont finish them, nowhere near. It also killed one of their own top assets in Syria in a recent bombing from the air.
There is as yet no sign of an intelligence led approach to gradually strangling these outfits, which is the only way to do it long term. Talk of a Sunni Awakening exercise mysteriously formented by the US has fallen on stony ground already. The Sunnis will do it themselves, and many tribes already are turning against them in both Syria and Iraq but the aren't yet buying the US grand plan.
Outside of this 'Awakening' approach, US ground intelligence assets are miserable. They are being used as targeting assets rather than infiltration. My understanding is that the old method of working through relief agencies in the area is as good as its got in Syria at the moment and so far its use of those tentacles is tactical not strategic.
Ironically Syria actually presents a less permissive environment as regards support for IS than Iraq where Sunni support does exist. In Syria direct population sympathy for IS is less strong.
You are absolutely correct that Islam needs to change. People say the religion needs a reformation, but it has already had one: Wahhabism is the Lutheranism of Islam. It doesn't need a reformation, it needs an Enlightenment. You need a Muslim equivalent of the Quakers or Reform Judaism. The only way we will get that is by prolonged intellectual assault on every negative tenet of Islam, even the widely held ones (e.g. that Muslim girls shouldn't marry non-Muslims), that doesn't fit in with modern post-Enlightenment society. This will get rid of this mistaken "only the terrorist-types are the problem" philosophy. The traditional defences obviously won't hold water in a public debate, and it will cause people to leave Islam. In response to that, I imagine a reform, Western-compliant Islam will be created. Then those who want to cling to their religion can adopt that. It's the only way.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/rumours-salmond-may-bid-for-a-seat-in-the-commons.25448467
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/28/ukip-chris-kelly-defection_n_5896972.html
Better get the green ink out...
The obvious solution is that their June 2014 poll was a rogue and that this poll has reverted to the norm. In the current poll compared to the GE the tories being down 7% puts them at the bottom of their current range nationally at 30% but with Labour up only 4 it puts them somewhat lower than their current average at 33%. It would also give a gap of 3 points which again is consistent with current polling.
I remain to be convinced that anything very special is going on in the marginals.
" I'm joining team 2015, to campaign in Rochester and Strood. "
You would make better use of your time if you asked your local MP what the government was going to do about a certain local issue.
Not good for the blues but let's wait for another in 'normal' times before going all reckless.
17% will vote them generally
33% in their constituency
30% if they think they will win
Presumably that indicates:
(A) a bunch of people don't want to be seen to be supporting UKIP generally (ie not part of the 17%) but will vote for them in this specific situation (ie the 33%). This emphasises the protest element rather than the philosophical agreement
But (B) a bunch of those are "pure protest" and don't want them to actually win...
Is there another intepretation that works?
Lets look at some numbers.
What's the average wage ? £25K perhaps.
Now at what earnings does 45% income tax apply ? £150K I think.
So that's 6x average pay.
Now compare with housing.
What's the average house price ? £180K perhaps.
Now at what level would a mansion tax apply ? £2M.
So that's 11x average house prices.
Even with a mansion tax there's going to be much less high end property affected than high end income.
Which is why both Osborne and Cable wanted to bring in a mansion tax in return for getting rid of the highest income tax rate.
@jimwaterson: Tory MP to BuzzFeed on Mark Reckless defecting: "I can't say the word c**t but he's a f**king c**t who deserves a hot poker up his arse."
Carswell's decision people seem to respect. He's liked, he's seen as thoughtful, and he didn't time his departure in a way that seemed to wound his former colleagues.
Reckless behaved in a much less honourable way.
It's not so much his departure, as the manner of his leaving that speaks volumes as to his character: and his elicited such a hostile reaction
So yes, the improvement since June is probably exagerrated by the last one being an outlier. But there's probably some further progress.
If any Tory MP defects during Dave's speech....
http://www.ianmortimer.com/EdwardII/death.htm
Even before the Newmark story came out there was a lot of anger at Reckless.
It is to do with the timing of his defection.
Normally I'm a placid chap who isn't prone to swearing however Reckless has brought the worst out in me.
Candidate for “You couldn’t make that up!”
Although sadly it might be true. I still don’t undersdtand why there just aren’t a couple more Council Tax bands. All that would be necessary is to cut the Council grant by the amount raised!
Although sadly it might be true. I still don’t undersdtand why there just aren’t a couple more Council Tax bands. All that would be necessary is to cut the Council grant by the amount raised!
Morning all,
I agree with @oldkingcole - council tax bands makes more sense and stops the creation of a new class of tax - effectively a state ground-rent on property.
As to the Queen, at least there would be no dispute that the property she owns are, indeed, mansions!
That's an incredibly offensive comment with absolutely no basis in reality.
Today is an example. Tories have had a bad start to their conference, so Osborne is centre stage announcing some pension tax change that would affect very few people. But it creates a positive headline for the right wing media to talk about.
According to Huffington, referenced upthread, there’s a possibility of the Member for Dudley South defecting at some point. He’s the boyfiriend of Nadine Dorries daughter, apparently, and according to Huffington, she says that if he does defect, "that’s the last roast dinner he’ll have in my house!"
Here's a lesson in life for them:
If you want loyalty you first have to show loyalty to others.
If you want to be treated with respect you first have to treat others with respect.
However, in this context "assault" may be an unfortunate word to use. I would prefer to see an engagement or dialogue between the Western view that society and the family are there to enable the happiness of individuals and the pre-Modern (for it is by no means exclusively Muslim) stance that individuals are the means by which families, clans and cultures themselves survive. It is that, rather than creed, which is at issue - no one feels threatened by the Sufism of the likes of Richard Thompson.
Looks bad for the blues. Then again, a marginals poll last term gave them a predicted majority of over 100. These things can change.
I don't think your mate could have been that sophisticated if that came as a post vote revelation to him.
Also, what happens if the tax - presumably set at a punitive level, otherwise what's the point - exceeds the benefit cap? A forced eviction?
Granted that's happening already to some, but some Labour MPs have an eye on their own seats which happen to have lots of asset millionaires in them.
As an aside. the better off seem to have a greater proportion of wealth in pension funds than property according to ONS.(page 12)
ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_368612.pdf
The sample size are just too small for the changes to be taken seriously.
Hence the more problematic integration of some more observant Muslims, with a belief of Islam as that political system, into non-Islamic state societies. A Christian, Jew, Zoroastrian, etc can more easily be of that religion, because it is only a religion and not a political system, and be a citizen of whichever country they are in. Such religions of course were, classically, tolerated in Muslim countries, as dhimmi.
Islam demands more.
Of course, millions of Muslims do not support the concept of Islam as a political structure and imperative and live their lives as religious Muslims happily and contentedly in non-Muslim societies.
What needs saying is "Islam teaches that women should get less inheritance rights than men, that their word is worth less as a witness and that wives should obey their husbands as subsidiaries. That's terrible - how can you justify that?", leaving the defenders of mainstream Islam spluttering for air.
When you see Muslim scholars defending this they come out with responses that are weaselly and clearly don't hold water, but the debate is not being had loudly enough for it to actually change minds. Mosques need to know that such challenges are destroying their recruitment prospects and that they need to ditch long-standing beliefs (or "reinterpret" to let them save face). Just like the Catholics did with indulgences and like the Mormons did with polygamy. A softly, softly approach won't cut it. I know people like to believe that a touchy-feely session could sort out the intellectual evolution, but history has shown that it doesn't work that way. Nuanced discussion has its role but you also need loud, brash argument on the points of intellectual weakness.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/japan-early-thoughts.html
"I think the problem for the blues is that the country as a whole has not yet accepted that we have an unsustainable welfare state."
That's true but the Blues make it worse by seemingly spending money on their own pet projects. The sustainability appears selective. Any tax cuts are viewed in this way unless directed at the lower-paid.
Even Ed can occasionally fall over his own feet .and shuffle the ball into an open goal.
The winding-up of the unaffordable welfare state may also require us to look again at our love affair with individualism, and see the merit in the pre-Enlightenment stance.
Margaret Hodge is against it, no self interest there then.
I was a bit disappointed to see Suzanne Evans denouncing the 'bedroom tax'/spare room subsidy, and the notion of getting people off disability benefit.
What you're asking is for Muslims to stop being Muslims.
That's not going to happen and why would it?
It was the fundamental mistake of the people like Roy Jenkins and Lord Lester, the architects of multiculturalism. They thought that mass immigration was ok because the immigrants would be so happy to live in England, they would behave like English people culturally in time. For all their progressive views, this was very presumptious of them, a presumption possibly based on a feeling imperial superiority. When whole towns became predominantly Muslim, and they acted like Muslims living in England, even Jenkins rumbled that it wasn't going to work.
You're trying to square a circle, well intentioned no doubt, but I don't think it is possible. It will carry on as it has been developing
Unless that’s the point, of course.
I don’t think that, by and large, Council Tax is set at punitive levels. And, again, generally speaking, people who live in big houses can afford to pay it. And for those who cannot, there are arrangements available.
In this, it is very much like Christianity in Europe until a few centuries ago. As such, religion is not about faith; it is about control. People of faith submit to 'control' from some (often self-certified) religious figures, and act like unquestioning sheep to those figures. People who question those figures are branded as heretics.
It is a system that has broken down in Europe because that system of deference has been shown to have utterly failed. The same has to happen with Islam, but that is made difficult by the money and power wielded by those with, or wanting, the ultimate control of the various Islamic sects.
As such, we're in a good state in this country atm. People are free to practice their faith of whatever stripe, but the religions have, or at least should have, minimal control over our lives, and especially over the lives of the non-adherents.
We can't do the test, but a parallel universe where we had the same number of new Muslims but they'd come from Turkey instead of Pakistan would be interesting to observe.
Numbers do matter, but so does culture.
The reception they received also encouraged a lack of integration (goes against multi-culturalism to suggest when in Britain do as the British do), and the very high numbers made it easy for enclaves to be formed.