From that article: "Households feel more optimistic about family budgets than at any time over the last six years, a report says.
The seasonally adjusted Markit Household Finance Index measure of financial well-being for the next 12 months climbed to a record 51.6 in December, from 50.3 last month, as inflation fell and concerns about job security eased.
A level over 50 separates pessimism from optimism.
By region, the brightest assessment of household finances came in the East Midlands, while pessimism was most pronounced in the North East"
A very different picture from Ipsos Mori, the exact opposite in fact.
People who don't mind their children and grandchildren paying their bills and the interest on them for all eternity don't, I grant you.
There are plenty of people who take a different view, I would suggest.
Ben is quite right (I never thought I'd write that), except of course he is not accurate. If he had written "Some, and a growing number of, people" he would have nailed it.
Interesting to see the effect of the Autumn Statement on the polling: Ozzy has a poor record of delivering statements to the house. Most of them unravel within 24 hours. You could argue that this was worse than the fabled omnishambles budget as it is closer to the election. Certainly the IFS critique cut through and proved damaging for the government, after sycophantic coverage from much of the press.
Explain how this statement 'unravelled' then? if you mean scaremongering from the IFS then if you are interested in truth, maybe you should look to other commentary.
''So a better measure of the squeeze on day-to-day spending is public sector current expenditure, which is mainly the spending on public services. This also needs to come down, to 32.7% of GDP to eliminate the deficit and 31.9% to achieve a 1% surplus. You also have to go back into history for times when this measure of spending was this low. It was 32.4% in 1973-4 and 31.1% in 1972-3. The economy, by the way, is roughly 2.5 times the size it was then. Is it pie in the sky to think such numbers can be achieved? Does it mean, as Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies says, “spending cuts on a colossal scale” and the smallest state for generations? I bow to nobody in my respect for the IFS but I think that is overstating it. Public spending on this measure has come down from its peak of 40% of GDP in 2009-10 to an estimated 36.9% this year and a projected 36% in 2015-16. Reducing it further, by just over three percentage points of GDP to eliminate the deficit, will be very hard but it is not impossible.'' http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002066.html#more
Johnson has regularly criticised stamp duty and the Chancellor has actually reformed it as he suggested. And previously according the The Telegraph anyway, the IFS has argued the public sector cuts 'are not as radical as the Chancellor believes'. Now it says the opposite.
If you are representative of the public and only taking in the headlines the BBC feeds you then that might explain things. It was another Smith, Norman Smith of the BBC who threw out some quite pathetic comments like 'Road to Wigan Pier' on the news. Perversly the critics of Osborne are happy to use %ages and ignore the 6 fold growth in GDP since the 30's but criticise Osborne for saying the deficit has been haled in %age GDP terms. They also ignore the large component of capital (ie pulic authority) spending that was part of spending in the 1930s and 70's which is now in private hands.
Obviously very disappointing poll for Con. But ICM has bounced around quite a bit - ICM Lab leads:
Aug - 7 Sep - 2 Oct - 4 Nov - 1 Dec - 5
Looking at the polls as a whole there is no evidence that the Autumn Statement has moved things - YouGov is polling 5 days a week and no discernible change.
As usual everyone on here is thinking the public is following the minutiae of what politicians are saying - they aren't. 95% of people won't have the faintest idea about any figures in the Autumn Statement.
Ah yes, don't like the findings = rubbish the poll
It does appear to be at odds with much of the other polling.
We know the Lib Dems have been decimated at nearly all by elections, so do the 10% of seats where they are likely to be in contention = 14% of the GB vote ?
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
That's a weird one. I'm in favour of the international aid budget myself, if we could spend it more effectively (eg, none to places with space programmed), but what is wrong with wanting welfare money to remain here? Even if it's fine, why would we want to create tax refunds like she suggests?
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
From that article: "Households feel more optimistic about family budgets than at any time over the last six years, a report says.
The seasonally adjusted Markit Household Finance Index measure of financial well-being for the next 12 months climbed to a record 51.6 in December, from 50.3 last month, as inflation fell and concerns about job security eased.
A level over 50 separates pessimism from optimism.
By region, the brightest assessment of household finances came in the East Midlands, while pessimism was most pronounced in the North East"
A very different picture from Ipsos Mori, the exact opposite in fact.
Ipsos have only 30% believing the economy will deteriorate.
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
Obviously very disappointing poll for Con. But ICM has bounced around quite a bit - ICM Lab leads:
Aug - 7 Sep - 2 Oct - 4 Nov - 1 Dec - 5
Looking at the polls as a whole there is no evidence that the Autumn Statement has moved things - YouGov is polling 5 days a week and no discernible change.
As usual everyone on here is thinking the public is following the minutiae of what politicians are saying - they aren't. 95% of people won't have the faintest idea about any figures in the Autumn Statement.
Pretty much correct in all you are saying here. I do not see labour on 33 as being any good at all for them. The govt parties are on 42. What looks interesting if the poll can be regarded as stable - which your figures do not - is that LDs are doing better than Tories out of that share. I do not see LD to Labour defectors coming back, so is this right or centrist leaning LDs returning? Will these people vote for Tories in tactical situations rather than Labour? Will this and left leaning tory votes prop up the LDs? It cerainly looks like UKIP hurts Tories. Its what Labour will be relying on in England.
From that article: "Households feel more optimistic about family budgets than at any time over the last six years, a report says.
The seasonally adjusted Markit Household Finance Index measure of financial well-being for the next 12 months climbed to a record 51.6 in December, from 50.3 last month, as inflation fell and concerns about job security eased.
A level over 50 separates pessimism from optimism.
By region, the brightest assessment of household finances came in the East Midlands, while pessimism was most pronounced in the North East"
A very different picture from Ipsos Mori, the exact opposite in fact.
Ipsos have only 30% believing the economy will deteriorate.
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
Maybe now we're so close to the election people can almost feel the yoke of Tory governance being relieved from them - allowing themselves to be more optimistic?
Tories v Reckless - case will probably disappear into the ether about 3.30 on December 24th hidden behind a string of press releases about poor Xmas trade, revised profit expectations, Man United's New Year shopping list and attempt to catch up with Chelsea & City.
Looks like a threat to other defectors or that someone is worried by Dave's party management.
From that article: "Households feel more optimistic about family budgets than at any time over the last six years, a report says.
The seasonally adjusted Markit Household Finance Index measure of financial well-being for the next 12 months climbed to a record 51.6 in December, from 50.3 last month, as inflation fell and concerns about job security eased.
A level over 50 separates pessimism from optimism.
By region, the brightest assessment of household finances came in the East Midlands, while pessimism was most pronounced in the North East"
A very different picture from Ipsos Mori, the exact opposite in fact.
Ipsos have only 30% believing the economy will deteriorate.
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
Governments blame any less than positive economic news on events outside their control. People I think are therefore less inclined to attribute good economic news to actions from the government. Not that people will entirely discount the impact of the government of the day, but I don't think it sways people as much. Whether we grow or contract people may see as largely outside government influence, but how well they spend and tax still has some relevance.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
Tories v Reckless - case will probably disappear into the ether about 3.30 on December 24th hidden behind a string of press releases about poor Xmas trade, revised profit expectations, Man United's New Year shopping list and attempt to catch up with Chelsea & City.
Looks like a threat to other defectors or that someone is worried by Dave's party management.
From that article: "Households feel more optimistic about family budgets than at any time over the last six years, a report says.
The seasonally adjusted Markit Household Finance Index measure of financial well-being for the next 12 months climbed to a record 51.6 in December, from 50.3 last month, as inflation fell and concerns about job security eased.
A level over 50 separates pessimism from optimism.
By region, the brightest assessment of household finances came in the East Midlands, while pessimism was most pronounced in the North East"
A very different picture from Ipsos Mori, the exact opposite in fact.
Ipsos have only 30% believing the economy will deteriorate.
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
Maybe now we're so close to the election people can almost feel the yoke of Tory governance being relieved from them - allowing themselves to be more optimistic?
I cannot say the Labour yoke is that much more pleasant than the Tory yoke, but people seem to get less angry at Labour for doing the same things as Tories sometimes, so I guess it must be. Perhaps it is cushioned, or at least talks about fairness more often, which makes the yoke ok.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
With that much time to focus on it, I expect there shall be no trace of Reckless left in the constituency by the end, it will be as though he never existed.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
Are you going to behead him personally, TSE?
"Enemies of Cameron, go to hell!"
No. I'm going to make him feel like Hannibal after Zama.
This time 5 years ago, you wonder how the Lib Dems would've reacted if you told them that 14% would soon be considered an outrageously good poll result for them.
@paulwaugh: Blimey. @gordonrayner says Bookies Coral has suspended betting on Queen abdicating in her Christmas message after rash of bets
That would seem quite out of character, though I guess with other monarchs increasingly doing it and even a Pope doing it, it is at least conceivable HM might reconsider her position.
hmm. 1/2 for queeny to step down by the end of the year?
Coral have taken a staggeringly huge wager of.... TWO HUNDRED POUNDS.
They move on £200, yet...
rethink gambling @rethinkgambling · Dec 15 .@Coral You took this from a known #gambling #addict on Friday. Anything to say to his children this Christmas? pic.twitter.com/5JIfztXZrL
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
I think it is more pour encourager les autres for any other potential defectors
Personally I wouldn't have done it.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Exactly but actually there is a point to it also - you can't or shouldn't actually lie in your job.
Pledging or seeming to pledge yourself to one party while at the same time conspiring to join another is not good form, especially from the this-time-it's-different party.
Not sure how it would be otherwise but some flagging up of intentions might have been better albeit would and would have been riskier for defectors.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
With that much time to focus on it, I expect there shall be no trace of Reckless left in the constituency by the end, it will be as though he never existed.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
Didn't you say you were going to campaign against him last time? How did that work out for you?
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
I presume TSE will be fighting for Screaming Lord Sutch and the Raving Looney Party.
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
We might also wonder whether the Mail provided an entirely accurate summation of her remarks. It is possible that it may have embellished or distorted them. Hard to believe, I know, but the Mail is not always a disinterested aggregator of the news.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
Didn't you say you were going to campaign against him last time? How did that work out for you?
I was there one day and made sure Reckless' majority was less than forecast.
@hmtreasury: Next year’s Budget will take place on Wednesday 18 March, Chancellor @George_Osborne has announced #Budget15
Last chance. He's not been known for winning the narrative wars before though, given that pasty-gate nonsense and all that.
I'm not at all sure the 2015 budget will have any influence unless it raises taxes for everyone (ie negative). So don't go putting words in peoples mouths. I expect if anything it will raise tax allowances, which may be good politics but nothing will come into effect until the following year. Its the changes already announced that begin next April that voters will notice. I expect it to be neutral with little 'give aways'. We are already seeing low inflation and low oil prices. If they continue there is little more 'feel good' the chancellor can do. He would be wise to concentrate on 'debunking' and extolling the virtues of lower govt expenditure.
Oh Tories. Now what? They get no credit if it's withdrawn, and continued mockery it they continue on.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
Well, it's a better reaction than the standard reaction to UKIP from the Tories before the defections, which was to pretty much wish them well, in an understated fashion, no matter how much UKIP said they hated the Tories now.
I'm taking a six week sabbatical from work next April and May so I can focus on PB and campaign in Rochester to destroy Reckless.
Didn't you say you were going to campaign against him last time? How did that work out for you?
I was there one day and made sure Reckless' majority was less than forecast.
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
We might also wonder whether the Mail provided an entirely accurate summation of her remarks. It is possible that it may have embellished or distorted them. Hard to believe, I know, but the Mail is not always a disinterested aggregator of the news.
Surely if the remarks were not true she would have sued them?
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
This time 5 years ago, you wonder how the Lib Dems would've reacted if you told them that 14% would soon be considered an outrageously good poll result for them.
Something we forecast and expected . There were periods in the last parliament when that was also true
Labour have had a couple of half decent weeks for the first time in living memory.
Osborne helped a lot by providing a massive hole in his books.
People are living the nasty dream. Cons come in after the economy's been malleted and lo, the self-fulfilling prophecy of the ideological state-haters.
No one cares whether or not Lab would have done the same thing to within a billion or two, it turns out that actually 2010 was not the GE to win.
But....but....there will still be a nagging doubt amongst the electorate, IMO, as they trudge towards the polling stations next May...will Lab c*ck it up all over again?...have we been through all this pain only for us to have to go through it again after Lab's tax & spendathon?....Maybe we go with the devil we know who may be harsh but are not putting our sovereignty (in the shape of the bond markets) at risk....
Perhaps the Lib Dems differentiation campaign is having some influence on their improved poll results.
However, they need to be careful not to undermine the idea that a coalition government can work effectively through collective responsibility, as do the Conservatives also.
Maybe we go with the devil we know who may be harsh but are not putting our sovereignty (in the shape of the bond markets) at risk....
We were downgraded on the Tory watch, breaking manifesto promise. Not sure they can stoke fear of bond markets in quite the same way again.
I think that as a currency-issuing sovereign state which talked tough we were, as we have seen, given a large amount of slack. At the end of the day it is and was in our own hands so I don't think default was an option.
But you have to contextualise the times we were in. Relatively grown-up countries were put on credit-watch and debt servicing became significant.
A downgrade, as we have seen in the US, would surely not be decisive but the greater public & private indebtedness gives far less room for manoeuvre.
I think a period of reassuring the markets (I don't hold with those who say they needed no reassuring) and then an investment programme, as we have seen from GO, is a pretty good course of events.
Of course the household deleveraging together with deficit reduction has been painful (arguably the former more than the latter) and that is where the nastiness has kicked in.
Unless you think there is no need to reduce the deficit while maintaining some kind of monetary control?
Unless you think there is no need to reduce the deficit while maintaining some kind of monetary control?
Before the election the Tories claimed that a loss of AAA would be apocalyptic. They claimed that only they could avoid it.
Some people believed them on both counts. They can't spin that line again.
Fair enough.
The tanker couldn't be turned around in time and we lost the rating. Equally, looking at our 10-yr yields vs our deficit when all around Europe it was kicking off with "better" conditions was a surreal experience.
But Lab gave out equally contorted pronouncements:
"We will invest immediately, what is this austerity of which you speak?" And..."We will have to and will cut deeper and further..."
They didn't nail a coherent policy that voters could understand, perhaps because they didn't expect to win and therefore could hedge their bets. But they have the same problem now:
"We will tackle the deficit and increase welfare spending and..."
No one really knows what they will do apart from the fact that it will be inherently "nicer" than what the Cons plan to do because it will be Lab doing it.
"What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"
I remember an interview with William Hague probably around the 2005 General Election where he said the evidence is that election campaigns don't affect the result. In other words polls taken immediately before an election campaign invariably arrive at the same result as on election day.
I remember posting this just after the 2010 election was called where people were seeing huge rises in the Lib Dem position and sure enough it returned to its starting position on election day.
Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing
On the face of it, an excellent poll for the Liberal Democrats and a thoroughly dreadful one for the Conservatives. As I always say though, ICM is not averse to throwing out some outlier numbers for one or two parties (remember UKIP at 8%) so this could very easily be in that mode.
Being around or below 30% is hardly comfortable for the Conservatives barely four months before Polling Day but it's not of course irretrievable. The duopoly number of 61 sits in marked contrast to Populus on Monday at 70 so make of that what you will.
On these numbers the LD-CON swing is negligible though the LD-LAB swing is a healthy (from a Labour perspective) 6.5%. A 6% CON-LAB swing will carry many marginal Conservative seats as well though the presence of UKIP at a respectable 14% complicates matters somewhat. Even on these numbers, the duopoly wins the overwhelming majority of seats in England and Wales.
There were those forecasting a 10% CON lead by Christmas - perhaps in Witney, Beaconsfield and Surrey East but seemingly not nationally.
This time 5 years ago, you wonder how the Lib Dems would've reacted if you told them that 14% would soon be considered an outrageously good poll result for them.
Something we forecast and expected . There were periods in the last parliament when that was also true
The LibDems were polling comfortably above 14% for most of the last Parliament, barring occasional polls.
Post-election in 2005, the party was on 18% or better. There's a single 13% in 2006. There was a period around when Menzies resigned as party leader where polls slumped: most of October 2007 was below 14%, with three polls on as low as 11%. That wasn't for a very long period though. November polls ranged from 13-21%; December polls ranged from 14-18%.
Late 2008 has a smattering of poorer polls. There was a 12% in September, then twice in November, plus an 11% in December, but those were the bottom of a range. By 2009, 14% is the lowest in the whole year, and everything in the second half of the year is 16% or above. A rogue 15% is the worst in 2010.
So, while the LibDems were below 14% in polls in the last Parliament on some occasions, 14% could never have been described as "outrageously good", with the possible exception of a month around Ming going.
This new perspective on poll performances hasn't only come for the LibDems though. In much of the last Parliament, the leading party was in the high 30s or low 40s. The idea that 33% would put you in the lead would have been very strange for most of that period.
I'm not convinced that Labour are going to ride on a successful crest of misinformation by trying to pretend that the tories are intent on returning us to an era of rickets and diphtheria. And in 2000-01 govt spending as %age of GDP was - 35%
In real terms (2011 prices) govt spending has grown from just over 200 billion in 1968 to just under 700 billion in 2011. But the economy had grown nearly 3-fold since then. Can Labour get away with pretending things like that do not happen? If this is the cause of current polls then this is the issue betting people have to consider.
"What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"
I remember an interview with William Hague probably around the 2005 General Election where he said the evidence is that election campaigns don't affect the result. In other words polls taken immediately before an election campaign invariably arrive at the same result as on election day.
I remember posting this just after the 2010 election was called where people were seeing huge rises in the Lib Dem position and sure enough it returned to its starting position on election day.
Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing
The idea that 2010 would produce a 40-30-20 result (Con-Lab-LD) fitted with the narrative of polling since 2007 and the onset of the financial crisis.
I do think the increased publicity for Clegg made a small difference to the final outcome - I remember a poll on the Monday after the election was called showing 39-31-18 so the LDs gained a small shift from both parties from the campaign and the debates but nothing as dramatic as the first debate suggested.
The campaign this time, given the presence of Nigel Farage, is much harder to read. The view of some on here seems to be that as soon as people see Ed Miliband up close, they'll recoil. Perhaps but Cameron has some difficult questions to answer on the Government's record and especially in the key area of immigration which will be meat and drink to Farage.
I honestly don't know what's going to happen but I believe we can throw the form book out of the window as this will be a new game compared to what has gone before.
"What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"
I remember an interview with William Hague probably around the 2005 General Election where he said the evidence is that election campaigns don't affect the result. In other words polls taken immediately before an election campaign invariably arrive at the same result as on election day.
I remember posting this just after the 2010 election was called where people were seeing huge rises in the Lib Dem position and sure enough it returned to its starting position on election day.
Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing
So now you're against cross dressing. I sometimes doubt you're a metropolitan lefties luvvie at all.
The most important issues to voters seems to be immigration & the economy
David Cameron made an explicit promise to reduce net migration to the tens of thousands before the last election with the sign off...
"If we don't deliver, kick us out in 5 years time"
The number is no less than it was five years ago, and today the headlines about immigration are the failure of the home office to deport even 1% of illegal immigrants
George Osborne said he would get rid of the deficit and rubbished Labour plan to reduce it by 50%
He has reduced it by 50%
At the AS people were praising GO for a great piece of politics... he hadn't done what he said he would, but he had made it look like he had..
Well people don't seem to have been deceived by the smoke and mirrors... and they are fed up of "clever politics" as much as I as an Arsenal supporter get fed up of clever football while we draw at home to Hull
There is no need to look that much further into it. Petty squabbling over minor details cant hide the bigger picture, that being that promises made have been broken
I'm not convinced that Labour are going to ride on a successful crest of misinformation by trying to pretend that the tories are intent on returning us to an era of rickets and diphtheria. And in 2000-01 govt spending as %age of GDP was - 35%
In real terms (2011 prices) govt spending has grown from just over 200 billion in 1968 to just under 700 billion in 2011. But the economy had grown nearly 3-fold since then. Can Labour get away with pretending things like that do not happen? If this is the cause of current polls then this is the issue betting people have to consider.
"What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"
Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing
That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you. The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that. The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
Tories v Reckless - case will probably disappear into the ether about 3.30 on December 24th hidden behind a string of press releases about poor Xmas trade, revised profit expectations, Man United's New Year shopping list and attempt to catch up with Chelsea & City.
Looks like a threat to other defectors or that someone is worried by Dave's party management.
Or panic due to lack of crossover in the polls?
LD/UKIP crossover almost there, but what happened to Tory/Lab crossover, it's going the wrong way.
@paulwaugh: Blimey. @gordonrayner says Bookies Coral has suspended betting on Queen abdicating in her Christmas message after rash of bets
That would seem quite out of character, though I guess with other monarchs increasingly doing it and even a Pope doing it, it is at least conceivable HM might reconsider her position.
hmm. 1/2 for queeny to step down by the end of the year?
Coral have taken a staggeringly huge wager of.... TWO HUNDRED POUNDS.
They move on £200, yet...
rethink gambling @rethinkgambling · Dec 15 .@Coral You took this from a known #gambling #addict on Friday. Anything to say to his children this Christmas? pic.twitter.com/5JIfztXZrL
"What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"
Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing
That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you. The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that. The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.
The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.
Comments
People who don't mind their children and grandchildren paying their bills and the interest on them for all eternity don't, I grant you.
There are plenty of people who take a different view, I would suggest.
"Households feel more optimistic about family budgets than at any time over the last six years, a report says.
The seasonally adjusted Markit Household Finance Index measure of financial well-being for the next 12 months climbed to a record 51.6 in December, from 50.3 last month, as inflation fell and concerns about job security eased.
A level over 50 separates pessimism from optimism.
By region, the brightest assessment of household finances came in the East Midlands, while pessimism was most pronounced in the North East"
A very different picture from Ipsos Mori, the exact opposite in fact.
Baffling.
''So a better measure of the squeeze on day-to-day spending is public sector current expenditure, which is mainly the spending on public services. This also needs to come down, to 32.7% of GDP to eliminate the deficit and 31.9% to achieve a 1% surplus. You also have to go back into history for times when this measure of spending was this low. It was 32.4% in 1973-4 and 31.1% in 1972-3. The economy, by the way, is roughly 2.5 times the size it was then.
Is it pie in the sky to think such numbers can be achieved? Does it mean, as Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies says, “spending cuts on a colossal scale” and the smallest state for generations?
I bow to nobody in my respect for the IFS but I think that is overstating it. Public spending on this measure has come down from its peak of 40% of GDP in 2009-10 to an estimated 36.9% this year and a projected 36% in 2015-16. Reducing it further, by just over three percentage points of GDP to eliminate the deficit, will be very hard but it is not impossible.''
http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/002066.html#more
Johnson has regularly criticised stamp duty and the Chancellor has actually reformed it as he suggested. And previously according the The Telegraph anyway, the IFS has argued the public sector cuts 'are not as radical as the Chancellor believes'. Now it says the opposite.
If you are representative of the public and only taking in the headlines the BBC feeds you then that might explain things. It was another Smith, Norman Smith of the BBC who threw out some quite pathetic comments like 'Road to Wigan Pier' on the news.
Perversly the critics of Osborne are happy to use %ages and ignore the 6 fold growth in GDP since the 30's but criticise Osborne for saying the deficit has been haled in %age GDP terms. They also ignore the large component of capital (ie pulic authority) spending that was part of spending in the 1930s and 70's which is now in private hands.
Aug - 7
Sep - 2
Oct - 4
Nov - 1
Dec - 5
Looking at the polls as a whole there is no evidence that the Autumn Statement has moved things - YouGov is polling 5 days a week and no discernible change.
As usual everyone on here is thinking the public is following the minutiae of what politicians are saying - they aren't. 95% of people won't have the faintest idea about any figures in the Autumn Statement.
We know the Lib Dems have been decimated at nearly all by elections, so do the 10% of seats where they are likely to be in contention = 14% of the GB vote ?
Personally I wouldn't have done it.
But a few people have lost their faculties when it comes to the traitorous pig dog defector.
The deputy Labour leader was speaking to voters with foreign backgrounds in her Southwark constituency
Helping hand: Harriet Harman gives some advice to one of her Muslim constituents
Harriet Harman has praised ‘heroic’ immigrants who claim welfare payments in Britain and use the cash to support families living abroad. She said the Government should make it easier for them to send the money home and called for tax refunds to encourage more immigrants to follow suit, in particular those who paid for their children to be educated in the Third World.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1337876/Harman-praises-hero-immigrants-send-welfare-handouts-home.html#ixzz3MASPLzw7
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
I do not see labour on 33 as being any good at all for them. The govt parties are on 42. What looks interesting if the poll can be regarded as stable - which your figures do not - is that LDs are doing better than Tories out of that share. I do not see LD to Labour defectors coming back, so is this right or centrist leaning LDs returning? Will these people vote for Tories in tactical situations rather than Labour? Will this and left leaning tory votes prop up the LDs?
It cerainly looks like UKIP hurts Tories. Its what Labour will be relying on in England.
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
Maybe now we're so close to the election people can almost feel the yoke of Tory governance being relieved from them - allowing themselves to be more optimistic?
Looks like a threat to other defectors or that someone is worried by Dave's party management.
70% expect no change (which may be a positive response) or an improvement.
It's also the case that some may feel a change of government would be a threat. That's the Tory election gambit.
Governments blame any less than positive economic news on events outside their control. People I think are therefore less inclined to attribute good economic news to actions from the government. Not that people will entirely discount the impact of the government of the day, but I don't think it sways people as much. Whether we grow or contract people may see as largely outside government influence, but how well they spend and tax still has some relevance.
"Enemies of Cameron, go to hell!"
I cannot say the Labour yoke is that much more pleasant than the Tory yoke, but people seem to get less angry at Labour for doing the same things as Tories sometimes, so I guess it must be. Perhaps it is cushioned, or at least talks about fairness more often, which makes the yoke ok.
Or Starfleet at the Battle of Wolf 359
rethink gambling @rethinkgambling · Dec 15
.@Coral You took this from a known #gambling #addict on Friday. Anything to say to his children this Christmas? pic.twitter.com/5JIfztXZrL
Pledging or seeming to pledge yourself to one party while at the same time conspiring to join another is not good form, especially from the this-time-it's-different party.
Not sure how it would be otherwise but some flagging up of intentions might have been better albeit would and would have been riskier for defectors.
I'm glad the Tories aren't peaking too soon.
I expect if anything it will raise tax allowances, which may be good politics but nothing will come into effect until the following year. Its the changes already announced that begin next April that voters will notice. I expect it to be neutral with little 'give aways'. We are already seeing low inflation and low oil prices. If they continue there is little more 'feel good' the chancellor can do. He would be wise to concentrate on 'debunking' and extolling the virtues of lower govt expenditure.
Osborne helped a lot by providing a massive hole in his books.
US shale oil company bites the dust.
USD down 10% against the Rouble.
No one cares whether or not Lab would have done the same thing to within a billion or two, it turns out that actually 2010 was not the GE to win.
But....but....there will still be a nagging doubt amongst the electorate, IMO, as they trudge towards the polling stations next May...will Lab c*ck it up all over again?...have we been through all this pain only for us to have to go through it again after Lab's tax & spendathon?....Maybe we go with the devil we know who may be harsh but are not putting our sovereignty (in the shape of the bond markets) at risk....
Your starters for ten:
Ed Milipede
David Shameron
However, they need to be careful not to undermine the idea that a coalition government can work effectively through collective responsibility, as do the Conservatives also.
Garcia resigns from FIFA: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30522170
But you have to contextualise the times we were in. Relatively grown-up countries were put on credit-watch and debt servicing became significant.
A downgrade, as we have seen in the US, would surely not be decisive but the greater public & private indebtedness gives far less room for manoeuvre.
I think a period of reassuring the markets (I don't hold with those who say they needed no reassuring) and then an investment programme, as we have seen from GO, is a pretty good course of events.
Of course the household deleveraging together with deficit reduction has been painful (arguably the former more than the latter) and that is where the nastiness has kicked in.
Unless you think there is no need to reduce the deficit while maintaining some kind of monetary control?
Some people believed them on both counts. They can't spin that line again.
Afternoon, Mr Dancer.
These aren't the Polls you're looking for?
Lib Dems appear to be rising as well.
Edited extra bit: not sure it's off-topic, Mr. Eagles
The tanker couldn't be turned around in time and we lost the rating. Equally, looking at our 10-yr yields vs our deficit when all around Europe it was kicking off with "better" conditions was a surreal experience.
But Lab gave out equally contorted pronouncements:
"We will invest immediately, what is this austerity of which you speak?" And..."We will have to and will cut deeper and further..."
They didn't nail a coherent policy that voters could understand, perhaps because they didn't expect to win and therefore could hedge their bets. But they have the same problem now:
"We will tackle the deficit and increase welfare spending and..."
No one really knows what they will do apart from the fact that it will be inherently "nicer" than what the Cons plan to do because it will be Lab doing it.
And no one likes uncertainty.
CON 40%
LAB 31%
LD 18%
OTH 11%
With the notable exception of the LDs this is all MoE for general election the following year. Food for thought.
I remember an interview with William Hague probably around the 2005 General Election where he said the evidence is that election campaigns don't affect the result. In other words polls taken immediately before an election campaign invariably arrive at the same result as on election day.
I remember posting this just after the 2010 election was called where people were seeing huge rises in the Lib Dem position and sure enough it returned to its starting position on election day.
Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing
I can still point to the UKs AAA rating. You lose.
http://www.debka.com/article/24301/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
On the face of it, an excellent poll for the Liberal Democrats and a thoroughly dreadful one for the Conservatives. As I always say though, ICM is not averse to throwing out some outlier numbers for one or two parties (remember UKIP at 8%) so this could very easily be in that mode.
Being around or below 30% is hardly comfortable for the Conservatives barely four months before Polling Day but it's not of course irretrievable. The duopoly number of 61 sits in marked contrast to Populus on Monday at 70 so make of that what you will.
On these numbers the LD-CON swing is negligible though the LD-LAB swing is a healthy (from a Labour perspective) 6.5%. A 6% CON-LAB swing will carry many marginal Conservative seats as well though the presence of UKIP at a respectable 14% complicates matters somewhat. Even on these numbers, the duopoly wins the overwhelming majority of seats in England and Wales.
There were those forecasting a 10% CON lead by Christmas - perhaps in Witney, Beaconsfield and Surrey East but seemingly not nationally.
They failed, we all lost.
Post-election in 2005, the party was on 18% or better. There's a single 13% in 2006. There was a period around when Menzies resigned as party leader where polls slumped: most of October 2007 was below 14%, with three polls on as low as 11%. That wasn't for a very long period though. November polls ranged from 13-21%; December polls ranged from 14-18%.
Late 2008 has a smattering of poorer polls. There was a 12% in September, then twice in November, plus an 11% in December, but those were the bottom of a range. By 2009, 14% is the lowest in the whole year, and everything in the second half of the year is 16% or above. A rogue 15% is the worst in 2010.
So, while the LibDems were below 14% in polls in the last Parliament on some occasions, 14% could never have been described as "outrageously good", with the possible exception of a month around Ming going.
This new perspective on poll performances hasn't only come for the LibDems though. In much of the last Parliament, the leading party was in the high 30s or low 40s. The idea that 33% would put you in the lead would have been very strange for most of that period.
And in 2000-01 govt spending as %age of GDP was - 35%
In real terms (2011 prices) govt spending has grown from just over 200 billion in 1968 to just under 700 billion in 2011. But the economy had grown nearly 3-fold since then. Can Labour get away with pretending things like that do not happen? If this is the cause of current polls then this is the issue betting people have to consider.
ICM Dec 1986
Con 39, Lab 38, Lib 21
GE Jun 1987
Con 43, Lab 32, Lib 23
The Con vote did not move above 40% until May 1987. The Labour vote fell steeply from Jan to Mar and stayed broadly flat through to polling day.
I do think the increased publicity for Clegg made a small difference to the final outcome - I remember a poll on the Monday after the election was called showing 39-31-18 so the LDs gained a small shift from both parties from the campaign and the debates but nothing as dramatic as the first debate suggested.
The campaign this time, given the presence of Nigel Farage, is much harder to read. The view of some on here seems to be that as soon as people see Ed Miliband up close, they'll recoil. Perhaps but Cameron has some difficult questions to answer on the Government's record and especially in the key area of immigration which will be meat and drink to Farage.
I honestly don't know what's going to happen but I believe we can throw the form book out of the window as this will be a new game compared to what has gone before.
David Cameron made an explicit promise to reduce net migration to the tens of thousands before the last election with the sign off...
"If we don't deliver, kick us out in 5 years time"
The number is no less than it was five years ago, and today the headlines about immigration are the failure of the home office to deport even 1% of illegal immigrants
George Osborne said he would get rid of the deficit and rubbished Labour plan to reduce it by 50%
He has reduced it by 50%
At the AS people were praising GO for a great piece of politics... he hadn't done what he said he would, but he had made it look like he had..
Well people don't seem to have been deceived by the smoke and mirrors... and they are fed up of "clever politics" as much as I as an Arsenal supporter get fed up of clever football while we draw at home to Hull
There is no need to look that much further into it. Petty squabbling over minor details cant hide the bigger picture, that being that promises made have been broken
I would have expected at least an 18 wasted years of Thatcherism back from you ;-)
I doubt that very much political has been going in for a week or two.
The polls really don't look wildly different to a few weeks ago, except ICM.
The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
But it's because its Christmas...
Sorry
To the man in the street three big promises were made by the Coalition parties
Cut net migration
Eliminate the deficit
Scrap tuition fees
None have been made good on. Whatever the reason it just looks like slippery politicians making excuses
For as many GEs as I can remember the coverage rules have been 5/5/4.
If UKIP doesn't get major party status, what will it be - 5/5/4/? 1? 2?
If UKIP does get major party status will it be 5/5/4/4? or maybe 5/5/3/3?
In my view this is the single biggest issue yet to be determined which will affect the result.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A8KT365wlA
The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.