Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?
OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.
Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.
People have rumbled lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
I know all that.
My question was "What has happened in the last week?"
Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?
OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.
Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.
People have rumble lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
Would you take a risk on being hit by a wrecking ball? What can Labour offer to improve things? Why would people want to change things?
@antifrank With the Libdems, I wouldn't be putting the house on the swing being uniform?
At 5% or less, UNS starts to apply and the LD's can't escape the electoral black hole.
No, they UNDER perform UNS.
The premise that the LD's will do about 10 seats better than UNS that the polls suggest due to incumbency and tactical voting is around for 4.5 years now, but at 5% Baxter says 3 seats and UNS says 11 seats.
So clearly the LD's at 5% are at the event horizon, where the physical laws of LD local outperformance no longer apply.
If you are suggesting the LDs are relying on Quantum Tunnelling then they do have a problem.
They are more relying on Quantum Leap for someone to possess Nick Clegg's body in early May 2010 and prevent him from entering a coalition with the Tories.
To what end? Politicians who never spend their political capital are cowards.
@antifrank With the Libdems, I wouldn't be putting the house on the swing being uniform?
At 5% or less, UNS starts to apply and the LD's can't escape the electoral black hole.
No, they UNDER perform UNS.
The premise that the LD's will do about 10 seats better than UNS that the polls suggest due to incumbency and tactical voting is around for 4.5 years now, but at 5% Baxter says 3 seats and UNS says 11 seats.
So clearly the LD's at 5% are at the event horizon, where the physical laws of LD local outperformance no longer apply.
If you are suggesting the LDs are relying on Quantum Tunnelling then they do have a problem.
They are more relying on Quantum Leap for someone to possess Nick Clegg's body in early May 2010 and prevent him from entering a coalition with the Tories.
To what end? Politicians who never spend their political capital are cowards.
The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)
Changes since the last election.
Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%
UKIP only hurts the Tories?
The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.
SNP taking some off Labour so that would mean more going to Labour to balance out. So say 5 missing? Then again some Labour will have gone to greens so maybe that counteract that .. er doesn't it? Any road up... It seems to me the LDs are a bit lower than they should be for the policies they represent, but not hugely so. Their vote above that has been built on protest, not for actually doing anything in government. They have been very poor in enunciating the issues of actually being in government and the people who had voted for them are not interested in that anyway. Those people only want to complain and protest.
Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
That's why I said it's an oversimplification. Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP. So why vote for the LD's?
Thats right. The LDs do not seem interested in government, other than to trash their own government. Its a big mistake. However. A week is a long time in politics and dare I say it the voluptuous soprano may be clearing her throat, but she has not started to sing yet.
There is a very close correlation between the upswing in English economic performance and the introduction of coffee to London.
Stick a bunch of bright, ambitious people in a small place, withdraw depressants and replace with a stimulant...
You might have an argument with tea but not with coffee.
Beer, tea and rum were what built an empire and revolutionised industry.
I read a book about it a decade ago. This is earlier than tes & rum: probably last 16/early 17 century. Innovations like Lloyd's Coffee Shop developing pooled insurance for trading ships made the mercentile trade viable (this was the roots of Lloyds of London)
The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)
Changes since the last election.
Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%
UKIP only hurts the Tories?
The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.
Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
That's why I said it's an oversimplification. Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP. So why vote for the LD's?
Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
Big Ashcroft day tommorow, both England and Scotland.
#Megasupermassivepollingwednesday
Unfortunately I'll miss it, i'm out for 2 weeks vacation tommorow, I won't have an internet connection which perhaps will piss me off, on the other hand though it's a vacation so no internet might be a plus.
The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)
Changes since the last election.
Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%
UKIP only hurts the Tories?
The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.
Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
That's why I said it's an oversimplification. Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP. So why vote for the LD's?
Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
But the Tories never won an election so talk of a majority is pointless. The Lib Dems have messed up. That struck a very bad deal on the coalition, stupidly adopting the Tories' fiscal plans, not running any major departments and then allowing it to run 5 years.
Still that is from a 2010 Lib Dem perspective. As we now know Clegg and those around him were utterly duplicitous and his soft left election campaign was nothing more than a pretence. In that way the coalition was more a convenience for him than a bungling negotiation. But the electorate don't forgive such shenanigans as he'll find out.
The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)
Changes since the last election.
Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%
UKIP only hurts the Tories?
The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.
Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
That's why I said it's an oversimplification. Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP. So why vote for the LD's?
Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
Very noble of the LD to sacrifice their existence to try to moderate the Tory party.
They destroyed themselves and lead to UKIP getting their place. Without the coalition the LD would still be here and UKIP would not have filled the vacuum created by the shift of the Tories to the centre.
Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?
OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.
Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.
People have rumbled lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
I know all that.
My question was "What has happened in the last week?"
All of your post applied equally 7 days ago.
Yes. But we are getting to the point where people are waking up, yawning, stretching, realising there is an election round the corner, starting to pay some attention... Ed making populist policy announcements has been a backdrop to people thinking about politics. Just not favourably for Labour.
Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.
I'm not sure they will. The Lib vote has continually declined since 2010: sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And everybody says they'll recover, or there's swingback, or they have a personal vote, or there's good constituency organisation, or, or or....
...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't
Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?
OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.
Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.
People have rumbled lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
I know all that.
My question was "What has happened in the last week?"
All of your post applied equally 7 days ago.
Yes. But we are getting to the point where people are waking up, yawning, stretching, realising there is an election round the corner, starting to pay some attention... Ed making populist policy announcements has been a backdrop to people thinking about politics. Just not favourably for Labour.
Anthony think's, if something is happening, it's likely just to be the "slow drift of public support"
Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.
I'm not sure they will. The Lib vote has continually declined since 2010: sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And everybody says they'll recover, or there's swingback, or they have a personal vote, or there's good constituency organisation, or, or or....
...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't
Good job OGH is away of you'd be out the door for that!
There is a tendency for politico-obsessives to assume everyone is more interested in politics - and more thoughtful as to why they support the parties they do - than is really true.
Thus the idea of a straight switch from Lib-Dem to UKIP is out of the question. They're supposed to be polar opposites. But the reality is there is a space for a third party of protest, NOTA voters. The Lib Dems and UKIP are the party of Others. If you're right-wing vote Tory, if you're left wing vote Labour. If you're neither or bitter or whatever vote Other. By entering government the Lib Dems forfeited the Other vote. Those who want a Right Wing government will still vote Tory, those who want a Left Wing government will vote Labour, those who want Other will vote UKIP, Green or SNP.
The LD's have lost their Unique Selling Point. They're literally pointless now.
On the day that the Mirror were accused of making NOTW phone hacking activities look like small fry...Piers Morgan has written this article...
Sorry, Hillary but I'm afraid coverup@stinkstohighheaven.com is no email address for a presidential contender
"This action automatically made all emails far less secure, and thus considerably easier for nefarious outsiders to access should they be so inclined."
Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.
I'm not sure they will. The Lib vote has continually declined since 2010: sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And everybody says they'll recover, or there's swingback, or they have a personal vote, or there's good constituency organisation, or, or or....
...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't
Good job OGH is away of you'd be out the door for that!
Keeping bad news from somebody is not a courtesy. Politeness demands it be presented with respect, not that it be withheld.
The UK government has announced that it is selling its 40% stake in the cross-Channel train operator Eurostar to an Anglo-Canadian consortium for £757.1m.
The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)
Changes since the last election.
Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%
UKIP only hurts the Tories?
The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.
Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
That's why I said it's an oversimplification. Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP. So why vote for the LD's?
Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.
But with the dramatic fall in the oil price Labour should have seen that their cost of living crisis message would lose resonance. Miliband should have been going on and on and on about the oil price for months. It'll feel like a tax cut.
@FrancisUrquhart Every little helps, but if it was intentional, you would expect several other share sales, if not, then it might just mean they think it is the best time?
This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.
I suspect a bit of politicing going on: "The IFS said tax increases and benefit cuts, part of the government's actions to reduce the deficit, had also had a negative impact on average incomes."
The gigantic impact of income tax thresholds and council tax freeze, far outweighs the vat increase.
Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).
Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).
It is another policy that they have been marching up the hill, with talk of a mutual public company that gets to bid on franchise etc, but they always fallen short of going for the big British Rail Reunion. I wouldn't put it past Ed to go with it, why not....he could hale marry it, and hey if he wins the election he can always drop it later when the cost of buying out existing operators contracts becomes clear.
Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).
At this point, it would be monkey tennis. He might as well go "Ah-ha!", just to drive home the point.
Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).
At this point, it would be monkey tennis. He might as well go "Ah-ha!", just to drive home the point.
I have just spilled my coffee from laughing at that.
There is a very close correlation between the upswing in English economic performance and the introduction of coffee to London.
Stick a bunch of bright, ambitious people in a small place, withdraw depressants and replace with a stimulant...
You might have an argument with tea but not with coffee.
Beer, tea and rum were what built an empire and revolutionised industry.
I read a book about it a decade ago. This is earlier than tes & rum: probably last 16/early 17 century. Innovations like Lloyd's Coffee Shop developing pooled insurance for trading ships made the mercentile trade viable (this was the roots of Lloyds of London)
Charles is right - there is a school of thought on Coffee replacing Beer being A Good Thing in British cities. Wonderful essay on it by that media theorist (the one I included in my final year dissertation but now cannot for the life of me remember his name....HABERMAS!)
Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).
At this point, it would be monkey tennis. He might as well go "Ah-ha!", just to drive home the point.
I have just spilled my coffee from laughing at that.
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Why former Liberal Democrat minister Jeremy Browne was really sacked by Nick Clegg
Former Lib Dem Foreign Office minister Jeremy Browne, once tipped as his party’s future leader, is leaving Parliament after being sacked by Nick Clegg.
Why? I am told: ‘He was too popular with the lobby, there was too much leadership speculation and he was blamed for not stopping the “racist ad vans”, aimed at illegal immigrants, when at the Home Office.’
5% for the Lib Dems in an opinion poll? So what? They only used up 4% in getting 57 MPs elected in 2010. The other 19% they got was not needed and can be discarded.
well I have to say the YouGov poll was a little underwhelming. Obviously delighted to see the Tories score 36 and be within touching distance of the 2010 score but Labour on 34 pretty disappointing. Yellow taxi anyone?
Plenty of time Easterross, the fact is that the Tories have broken away from the low thirties position that they have been anchored in for a few years. With hammer blows to be landed on Miliband by the weight of the Press assault over the next few weeks, the Labour share will only go one way and finally we will be talking majority territory for Cameron.
This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.
I suspect a bit of politicing going on: "The IFS said tax increases and benefit cuts, part of the government's actions to reduce the deficit, had also had a negative impact on average incomes."
The gigantic impact of income tax thresholds and council tax freeze, far outweighs the vat increase.
So they aren't comparing take home pay or disposable income ?
Comments
My question was "What has happened in the last week?"
All of your post applied equally 7 days ago.
I can agree with that. It might be people really did engage with student fees, but I feel it is unlikely to have moved the polls much.
However. A week is a long time in politics and dare I say it the voluptuous soprano may be clearing her throat, but she has not started to sing yet.
Could well be, but the Tories dropped a few during the week as well?
People wouldn't have noticed those?
#Megasupermassivepollingwednesday
#holdon2urhats
If one party was going to see their support collapse, the LDs would be the most likely candidate.
'With a 5% national score how realistic is the 30+ seats for the LDs?'
Must be an outlier,as only a week ago we were told that the Lib Dems private polling had shown them to be 'competitive' in seats like Solihull.
Still that is from a 2010 Lib Dem perspective. As we now know Clegg and those around him were utterly duplicitous and his soft left election campaign was nothing more than a pretence. In that way the coalition was more a convenience for him than a bungling negotiation. But the electorate don't forgive such shenanigans as he'll find out.
They destroyed themselves and lead to UKIP getting their place.
Without the coalition the LD would still be here and UKIP would not have filled the vacuum created by the shift of the Tories to the centre.
First Place?
Runners up?
Bronze place?
Penultimate Place?
Last place?
...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
We may well look back on the ICM/Guardian poll from February as a pivitol moment?
Thus the idea of a straight switch from Lib-Dem to UKIP is out of the question. They're supposed to be polar opposites. But the reality is there is a space for a third party of protest, NOTA voters. The Lib Dems and UKIP are the party of Others. If you're right-wing vote Tory, if you're left wing vote Labour. If you're neither or bitter or whatever vote Other. By entering government the Lib Dems forfeited the Other vote. Those who want a Right Wing government will still vote Tory, those who want a Left Wing government will vote Labour, those who want Other will vote UKIP, Green or SNP.
The LD's have lost their Unique Selling Point. They're literally pointless now.
Sorry, Hillary but I'm afraid coverup@stinkstohighheaven.com is no email address for a presidential contender
"This action automatically made all emails far less secure, and thus considerably easier for nefarious outsiders to access should they be so inclined."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2978177/PIERS-MORGAN-Sorry-Hillary-coverup-stinkstohighheaven-com-no-email-address-presidential-contender.html
Tories @ 1-4 in Truro
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31721334
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31711854
This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.
Selling off the family silver for "bribes" to the electorate....or "getaway" money?
Every little helps, but if it was intentional, you would expect several other share sales, if not, then it might just mean they think it is the best time?
"The IFS said tax increases and benefit cuts, part of the government's actions to reduce the deficit, had also had a negative impact on average incomes."
The gigantic impact of income tax thresholds and council tax freeze, far outweighs the vat increase.
1. Nottingham Trent University, Neil Gorman: £623,000 (including accrued bonuses)
2. London Metropolitan University, Malcolm Gillies: £453,000 (including payment in lieu of notice)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31715020
Jeez....
Former Lib Dem Foreign Office minister Jeremy Browne, once tipped as his party’s future leader, is leaving Parliament after being sacked by Nick Clegg.
Why? I am told: ‘He was too popular with the lobby, there was too much leadership speculation and he was blamed for not stopping the “racist ad vans”, aimed at illegal immigrants, when at the Home Office.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2978472/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-former-Liberal-Democrat-minister-Jeremy-Browne-really-sacked-Nick-Clegg.html
http://order-order.com/2015/03/03/milimetres-mystery-of-miraculously-massive-miliband/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2977991/What-tall-story-Labour-forced-deny-claims-Miliband-stood-box-pictured-6ft-6in-MP.html
UKIP's Farage rejects 'arbitrary' immigration targets
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31722779
Pretty crude then.