Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remember when the Tories recovered from a poll share of 23p
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Remember when the Tories recovered from a poll share of 23pc to win a landslide 18 months later
Whenever people raise the question of whether the Tories can win the next election I like to point to the above opinion poll by Gallup in December 1981.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Not sure UKIP is quite as helpful to the Blue cause.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/jun/13/raise-interest-rate-student-loans-secret-report
Changing the terms of loans retroactively will not go down well.
On topic - yes, the SDP/UKIP surges have clear similarities, and the SDP surge was bigger because as a centrist phenomenon it appealed to the general British sense that moderation, balance and splitting the difference is a good thing - especially when the choice was otherwise a notably right-wing Tory Party and a notably left-wing Labour Party. It was simultaneously the exciting new choice and the warm and cuddly choice. UKIP, as David Kendrick has fairly observed, is held back by the perception painted by others that they are a party of angry old men, which is not a self-image that most people are comfortable with.
A closer parallel may be that the SDP didn't have enough infrastructure - it was very much led from the top, with little local organisation beyond what the Liberals already had in place. When Labour fought back to second place, it was on the back of a lot of hard work against the tide by the trade unions in particular.
That said, I was active in politics at the time, and the turnaround really was mainly about the Falklands, an event that was pretty unique in recent years. Mrs T was very unpopular before that and very popular afterwards. I wonder how the 80s would have turned out if we'd not fought that war.
" The Labour creed proceeds from the sense of injustice to the demand that something be done. But then comes the flight of fancy that gets them into trouble. Labour people compliment themselves that they are optimistic about human nature. Well, they might be optimistic about people in general but they tend to be pessimistic about people in particular. Labour has not been known for trusting people. Its optimism is not really about people at all, it is about the capacity of the State.
This optimism is the fuel of public spending. Labour ministers think that, using the State, they can mark out the road to the promised land. Labour governments buy a bigger State because they think that is the same thing as buying better services. The bossy Mr Cripps gets the better of them and it’s never long before a Labour minister is unveiling some scheme for the betterment of the people with a multiple of millions of pounds attached. The spending crises of Labour governments are the sum total of all this well-intentioned bossiness. The historic failure of the Labour Party is thus a failure of method that goes all the way back to the victory won by the state-addled Fabians in the party’s infancy..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/philipcollins/article3790804.ece
Labour don't believe they spent too much when they were in power, fine, no lessons learned is the message they put out. This is why the Tories have to hammer them on this matter. If they managed to utterly mess up the inheritance they got in 1997 what would they do to a fragile recovery in 2015? A scary thought indeed!
What is more to the point is that these local thursday by-elections are putting UKIP well into a 22/25% average of the vote. These elections are all over the country and differ remarkably from what the pollsters are saying are a national average.
We have two more results to come this morning, lets see if what I say holds true for them.
Will voters think 'oh the worst is over, now time to start spending again!' ? Who knows. I doubt it - but the Tories need to be much crisper in their messaging and sooner rather than later.
Men of conviction - not quivering jellies.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/feb/02/mid-staffs-report-cover-ups
Or was it Gillian Astbury?
http://metro.co.uk/2013/04/11/criminal-probe-opens-into-diabetic-womans-death-at-stafford-hospital-3593020/
Or the 2-300 other cases being examined?
" UK plants run by the likes of Jaguar Land Rover (JLR), BMW and Nissan are operating at close to full capacity amid increasing demand from countries such as China.
Tim Abbott, managing director of BMW’s UK operations, believes that Britain will produce more cars than their French rivals by 2018 if this trend continues.
“All the indications appear to be saying Britain will be second in a few years,” he said yesterday on the sidelines of the SMMT automotive conference in London.
“It will be about the demand for the cars made in the UK but that looks to be there judging by the recent performance of the likes of JLR, Nissan and BMW.”
Last year, 1.5m cars were made in Britain, according to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, with expectations this could hit 2m by 2018..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/10119450/Britain-could-overtake-France-to-become-second-largest-car-maker-in-Europe.html
b. But spending, and borrowing, less than Labour would.
Real incomes may well continue to fall but there is a question of job security and of improving economic trends. If people feel more optimistic that the years from 2015-2020 will show an improvement in their own finances. Then again why risk the recovery with Labour?
There's a few other parallels I discovered.
Though the questions weren't the same Sir Geoffrey Howe and his policies were even more unpopular than George Osborne has achieved thus far and Ed's lead over Dave in the Mori leader ratings is similar to Michael Foot's lead.
Oh as in 1981, 2013 sees a new Doctor being cast, and an Ashes series
The article is mostly crap. The long-and-the-short-of-it is that Scottish Shipyards will drastically shrink come independence (thanks to the EU). The subject is excellently discussed here:
http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/22848/Type-26-Build
A particular point in the article I'd highlight is this:
- Ireland's warships are now built in Devon.
- Danish hulls have been built in Poland
- The latest Dutch JSS/AOR vessel is being built in Romania
- MARS is about to start building in S. Korea
Most European navies are sailing left-overs from the Septics, Labour's defence-cuts and the Dutch Navy. Where ships are being built it is increasingly with the aid of the South Koreans.Lab 864 (-23%)
UKIP 731 (+27%)
CON 704 (-6%)
TUSC 136 (nc)
LD 120 (-3%)
GRN 107 (+4%)
%age change on 2012
It's like all the recessions since world war 2 until 2008 hadn't occurred under Tory governments!
What we're living with today is the long run failure of Thatcherism and the small state creed.
It turns out funnily enough that when you attempt to slash the state for ideological purposes risk is heightened and ordinary people lose out.
I once worked with an IT guy who was a WW2 fighter pilot earlier in his career.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4968183/Massive-Ed-as-Mili-bottles-EU-vote-relaunch-flops.html
"But Mr Miliband was accused of not having the guts to make tough decisions.
Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps said: “He has made clear yet again that he is too weak to give his MPs, let alone the public, a say.
“We know there are Labour MPs who want that referendum and we would urge them to ignore their weak leader, back our Bill and let Britain decide.”
Tory backbencher Douglas Carswell, a leading Eurosceptic, added: “Keir Hardie founded the Labour Party so that ordinary working man could have a voice.
“What does the Labour leadership do about an EU referendum? Abstain.”
"Meanwhile, a member of Mr Miliband’s frontbench team suggested Labour would not hold a referendum if it won the next election.
Shadow work and pensions secretary Liam Byrne said: “It would all be very high risk.
At a point when our economy is in the tank, can it be a priority now? Surely it can’t be. Putting our membership of a free trade club in jeopardy, that isn’t going to help, it’s going to hurt.”"
"You've got to love your average Tory columnist. "
Mr Collin's was Blair's speechwriter - I doubt he's ever voted Tory...
Our zero attraction to voters from the aspirational classes could be a strength as much as weakness. Any change in our appeal there can only be good for us.
The more our policies are examined, the better. At least that will provide some respect, however grudgingly given. Will it matter to many people that our flat-tax policies are more an general expression of hope, rather than a ready-to-roll initiative for the first 100 days of an incoming UKIP govt? I suspect not. The LDs have had years of experience presenting policies that everyone knows won't be tested, and it hasn't damaged them.
Lol
I'm testing the Samsung S4 for ease of posting. Seems excellent.
Test? 10/7.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/teams/england/fixtures
The theatre coming up in the commons will be a big story.
Still - chicken rEd running away at least gives him the platform to do one of his trademark flip flops closer to the election - if Unite let him.
Kiwis on Sunday ?!?!
Richard Moss @BBCRichardMoss
Unemployment was down in the other northern regions - by 28,000 in the North West (7.9%), 2,000 in Yorkshire & Humber (8.9%).
- Employment rate highest in the South East (74.8%) and lowest in the North East (66.6%).
- Unemployment rate highest in the North East (10.1%) and lowest in the South West (6.2%).
- Inactivity rate highest in the North East (25.8%) and lowest in the South East (19.8%).
- Claimant Count rate highest in the North East (7.2%) and lowest in the South East (2.7%).
Full data here http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-labour/regional-labour-market-statistics/june-2013/stb-regional-labour-market-june-2013.html#tab-Overview-of-regional-labour-market-statistics-published-12-June-2013
How does this different and potentially significant skill set (social media is another obvious area) get translated into mass employment and the world of work? It is a challenge outside the small world of IT but I am aware of some who make money sorting out websites for businesses who paid a lot of money for something that did not really work and don't understand the need to update. There must be real opportunities in marketing and reaching different demographics that are not being taken up.
The 300 is also close to the 400 of the '400-1200' figure often, wrongly, stated. It;s certainly nearer than your claim of 'possibly one'.
You based your claim on a blog which is statistically nonsensical and misrepresents the evidence of Dr Laker. It's a shame you haven't been able to work out where his blog entry is so wrong, even after the pointers I have given you. So here's another pointer: look at what Dr Laker said to the inquiry, and what is claimed about what he said on the blog. The two do not match.
It's good to know that you want to brush Labour mismanagement of the NHS under the carpet, however many people suffered. It's also good to know that the woman leading the attempts to uncover what happened is, in your mind, a 'loudmouth'.
Will you do the same when (and not if) the same thing happens in the NHS under the Tories? Will you be searching for deep and dark corners of the Internet to find bogus evidence to clear them?
I think not.
The point about the Falkland's War is that it's an example of an event that can completely change the narrative and balance of political forces. Cameron also does not need such a dramatic change in fortune.
While the two main poll movements are from 2010 Lib Dems to Labour [17% of the 2010 Lib Dem vote] and 2010 Conservatives to UKIP [12% of the 2010 Conservative vote], I would caution that these movements are dwarfed by the percentages that say they don't know [LD: 39%, Con: 23%, Lab: 17%]. It also looks as though about one-third of those telling ICM that they will vote Labour did not vote for one of the main three parties in 2010 [Table 2].
There's lots of potential upside for the Tories and downside for Labour in the polling innards. The public appear to be willing to be persuaded by either side.
I'm not expecting either Labour or the Conservatives to find a convincing pitch for the next election, so I think a Hung Parliament with Labour as largest party is most likely, but defeat for Cameron is a long way from being the sure thing it is widely assumed to be.
At the moment I think it's a toss up as to whether the Conservative or Labour will get most seats.It depends a lot on the economy, but also discipline and restraint that is currently lacking in the Tories, and whether Miliband repels or appeals to voters when they see him properly in an election campaign.
But if Labourites are serious in thinking the Conservatives won't pick up support the closer we get to the election then they are deluded.
I vividly recall an SDP conference in Harrowgate where Shirley Williams was promoting an idea from her book, Politics is for People, which involved putting the amount invested in staff onto the balance sheet of companies. The idea was torn apart by those involved in business in a way that Thatcherites would probably have been proud of. Owen did represent a significant strand of that party.
With the benefit of hindsight I would concede that his ego was ultimately out of control damaging not just himself but everyone he sought to work with. Denis Healey probably got it right. One of the best put downs in politics.
I'd also add access to investment to that.
" Ancient history though it now seems, he was the last Tory chairman, in 1992, to oversee a winning election campaign (although impressively he also managed to lose his own seat the same night). Today he offered a quiet word of warning to today’s Tory MPs: stop the in-fighting and stand united. Otherwise, the rebelliousness of backbenchers and the manoeuvrings of aspiring leaders could put them in trouble, come 2015.
Once upon a time, he said, the Tories “were more interested in running the country than in who ran the Conservative party… If people start to think you’re more interested in fighting one another than fighting for the country, then the game’s up.”
Maybe the Tories should bring him back as chairman. I’m sure with a little light rearranging of his diary he could squeeze a twelfth job in. " http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10119140/Sketch-Patten-putdowns-and-paninis.html
I quite agree and said so at the time. The way Hester has been pushed out has damaged RBS, the Government and our stake in the bank, the chances of a successful privatisation and has made it harder to get an equally good replacement. The reaction in the City has been uniformly negative.
Now many might think that what the City thinks is neither here nor there, especially given the way they've behaved, and that's a fair point. But the damage is done to our stake in RBS, our chance of recovering that and our chances of putting our banking industry on a solid footing in the near future.
Undermining the person in charge of an organisation is utterly stupid and self-defeating behaviour.
Hester's rather gracious way of dealing with it has shown him to be a better and bigger man than Osborne.
The risk is that if you do have a certain proportion of grouchy know-alls they will get in the way of the competent organisers, demanding that they submit all plans for review, never release a statement without approval, blah blah.
Julian Hubbert will be a very strong opponent in 2015.
Is it just me that uses this low-tech protection or just my macho colleagues who are too tough for such Walter Softy stuff?
You can't always get what you want.
Quentin Letts is rather cutting to Mr Huppert - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2341349/The-day-MPs-stop-teasing-likes-Mr-Muppert-day-democracy-dies.html
Correction, worst joke that's ever going to be on here.
Meanwhile most of fleet street are taking bets on which of the UK tabloids breaks the unwritten rule because this one is flying around Hollywood and elsewhere.
Hester was never really a conventional banker and showed little feel for the major part of the business. Allocation of blame is difficult without knowing the facts and the extent of political interference but the way that RBS has traded (and, incidentally, the shocking way it has treated its customers, particularly small businesses in my experience) is no great advert for him. More radical steps really should have been taken more quickly. RBS is big enough for this failure to have negative macro effects for the whole country.
As I say, it would be completely unfair to blame Hester for this without all the facts but to claim he is some sort of saviour for the bank would be absurd. The bank should have been broken up years ago increasing competition, increasing the availability of credit and increasing the change in culture that is somewhat less than evident.
I'm amazed that Mr Hester wanted to stay on at all after all the crap he took over his non-bonus. That was an appalling load of politically motivated manure which I hold EdM largely responsible for starting.
It isn't often I feel sorry for someone of Mr Hester's great wealth - but how he was vilified for something he never did was just cowardly and populist.
How about Mauritius? A war would obviously help with the right, but it could also be a way to revive Cameron's environmental credentials, because the British would be defending their "marine protected area" against the people who used to live there and - outrageously - want to go back.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagos_Archipelago_sovereignty_dispute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdOr5FpLKR8
Average CEO tenure for the FTSE 100 is between 5 and 6 years so if Hester leaves by the end for the year he will be in that range, so there is nothing extraordinary in his departure. Once privatisation begins, you can't really have the CEO leave and since the sell off process will last 2-4 years, he either leaves now or commits to stay in post of almost a decade - although time dealing with whatever criticisms he has flung at him.
The failure to address the culture of entitlement so rife in banking is part of the failure of RBS.
These are very brief extracts from the very long RBS report:
UK Retail
Performance highlights 2012 2011
Return on equity (%) 24.4 24.5
Cost:income ratio (%) 51 49
Loan:deposit ratio (%) 103 106
Corporate
Performance highlights 2012 2011
Return on equity (%) 14.5 15.2
Cost:income ratio (%) 44 44
Loan:deposit ratio (%) 82 86
So in both return on equity fell, costs either increased or remained the same and the proportion of loans to deposits fell.
As I say Hester inherited the proverbial crock but the argument for a bonus is not clear cut.
On-topic, I'm not quite sure of the relevance of the unique set of circumstances which prevailed between late 1981 and June 1983. I hope no one sees Syria as a second Falklands though the Americans do seem to be creeping toward a more active involvement as Aleppo threatens to become what Benghazi might have been.
Whether an enforced no-fly zone will make the same difference in Syria as it did in Libya also remains to be seen.
On other matters, I think it's fair to say the SDP was supremely successful as a party, not on its own of course, but the way in which it usurped both the Labour and Conservative parties and turned them into recognisable facsimilies. Blair and Cameron are less the heirs of Thatcher than the heirs of David Owen.
Congratulations, it is very rare to find a sentence in the English language that has never before been uttered or written.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?197666-Gibraltar-Slams-New-Incursion-By-Spanish-Navy/page38
Please try to keep up....*
* Report to Master GeoffM for remedial current-affairs tutorial!
I enjoyed Peston's protestations of puzzled yet curious bafflement. As if he didn't know precisely what was being referred to about the divorce.
Obama has apparently authorised providing the Syrian rebels with more military aid:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22899289
Edited extra bit: misread the story slightly and thought it mentioned arms explicitly.
"Ben Rhodes did not give details about the military aid other than to say it would be "different in scope and scale to what we have provided before"."
Assad's obviously a vile dictator, but the rebels seem to be thoroughly infiltrated by Al-Qaeda. The time for supplying arms was long ago.
However, it's worth mentioning that when this first started as peaceful demonstrations the opponents of the regime did say they did *not* want foreign involvement. When they changed their minds it was post-Libya and China/Russia were vetoing UN motions [whether we should have a committee including China and Russia act as some sort of moral authority for foreign military involvement is itself a question that ought to be asked more often].
Excellent.
RT @bbcpress: Follow-up film to The Secret Life Of The Cat - Little Cat Diaries, tonight on BBC2, 10pm bbc.in/16ltCKG #horizoncats
It's no good saying Assad's a dictator (he is) without considering what the alternative is.
In related news, isn't it the Iranian presidential election today?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGBfYoldZQ4&feature=related
Ashbourne Tories 315 27.9%
Bonnett Lib Dem 456 40.4% ELECTED
Charles UKIP 184 16.3%
De Hoest Green 75 6.6%
Scott Labour 92 8.2%
Total 1128
Turnout 24.70%
What I did object to was Tim's inevitable efforts to paint this is as another example of Osborne's incompetence or Hester as some sort of victim. As usual the real world is a little more complex.
The Sunni/ Shia confrontation in hatred is being played out in all the Middle East and the rest of the muslim world.
http://www.channel4.com/news/sunni-shia-islam-muslim-syria-middle-east-key-questions
http://blogs.channel4.com/lindsey-hilsum-on-international-affairs/war-politics-and-sectarianism-in-syria/2110
Tim is a spinner and tries to turn everything into a political win or lose. The real-life realities of the politics of banking and lending are really complex. I knew a print company with full order books last year which went bust. The banks squeezed and squeezed and demanded faster repayment of the money they'd lent, eventually pushing the company (and about 100 employees) into administration because there was no cash-flow. The bank argument was that the business was insolvent because the cash was coming in less quickly than it was going out (customers were constantly arguing they were struggling with cash-flow, therefore struggling to pay) and I can see that. In an ideal world, all companies would be trading with cash-reserves. But the 90s and 00s were years when the banks pushed and pushed companies to lend cheaply, and then when things went BANG they pulled up the drawbridge.
I can see both sides of the argument, and at the micro level what happened with that company (I knew a lot of people who worked there, we did business with them) is a microcosm of the Osborne/Hester spat. Over the medium to long term I guess that what the banks are doing is correct-practice, and that efficient, well-run companies will emerge from the tough times intact, whereas less efficient companies will fail, and although this is ruthless (and tragic for the people who work in these failing companies) I suppose in the end it is a good thing. But for Osborne, handling the political difficulties of this sea-change from cheap-lending to sensible lending must be awkward (as can be seen with his housebuyers scheme, loved by some, hated by others). It's a tough time to be a Chancellor.
I'm sure your lot are congratulating themselves in catapulting a euro-surrender lib dem into office in Berkhamstead.
UKIP 179 Con 115 Lab 99
UKIP GAIN FROM LD
It is now too late: We - in the West - have allowed Salifi fascism to become the norm in Syria. Human life seems expendable just so long as Labour can get elected (and their MPs tax the plebs to fund their dachas).
Should I blame the sheep, the shepard or the general lack of common intelligence? Maybe I should ask a Syrian child...?
* I was an early proponent for deployments of GR4B and Sentinel to Cyprus. Even EiT failed to understand the importance of such a strategic move. :rolls:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10118371/Statistically-speaking-politicians-place-too-much-faith-in-figures.html
What's Miliband's position on this? After Libya we know the correct position on such matters is the opposite of what he initially thinks.
I'm personally becoming increasingly convinced that we're at least six months too late, and that some amongst the rebels are as bad (if not worse) than Assad. We should have moved earlier.
I'm not at the stage where I'm saying we should keep out, but I need a heck of a lot of convincing that any action would not worsen the situation, both inside and outside Syria.
Obama's really f'ed this up. His 'red line' has been painted in blood.
(*) Successful so far; hopefully it will remain so. But large problems face the country; however, I cannot imagine it being in a better state if we had allowed the civil war to continue with Gadaffi in charge.
April 13 output was slightly lower than April 12 and much lower than April 11. But the rate of annualised decline was the slowest since xmas 11 and much better than expectations. Also the March to April monthly fall in output on a non-seasonally adjusted basis was the smallest for April in the last four years.
Due to Q1 2013 being so weak, the April number is relatively ok. If May/June follow a similar pattern seen since 2010, construction in Q2 should be at worst flat after seasonal adjustment. Maybe the collapse of the last 12 or so months is finally over.
When you have a visceral and all consuming hatred of the current crop of senior tories, I guess reason must take a back seat.
The somewhat patronising and condescending tone towards the different branches of Islam does not come easily from a continent still bearing those and many, many other scars from religious wars.
I also think the false bubble of our superiority was burst by the calamity that was Iraq. We should be cautious, realistic, constructive where possible and very aware of our own limitations.
There is an argument for threatening to counter balance Russia's involvement but it would be highly desirable if it was kept to a threat. I was somewhat alarmed to hear the reports of Obama's latest contribution this morning. This is not Libya and it is certainly not the Falklands.
I fall well inside the It's Nothing To Do With Us camp - we have no particular relationship with Syria and frankly we've messed up enough Middle Eastern regimes already by thinking we know best.
If they came across here and stuck their oars in - we'd be very peed off about it.
"They would rather the poor were poorer provided the rich were less rich" Margaret Thatcher
How could it be otherwise?? LOL
But, local elections, and national voting intentions, are quite different things.
As a matter of interest, did you think the same about the Libyan intervention before the event?
We have a UN that is supposed to decide how countries behave towards each other and their citizens. Sadly, like its predecessor the LoN, the UN is a toothless tiger. It can only talk and occasionally put peacekeepers on the ground who sometimes get to watch the slaughter without helping.
When countries break the rules that are agreed by the international community via the UN, we have two choices: to sit on the sidelines and tut-tut, or intervene in some way or another.
Both alternatives have benefits and significant risks.
Sleazy Lab/Lib/Con on the slide.
27.5%. 16.3%. 45.5% = average of 29.7%.
Not bad, from a supposedly moribund UKIP. LOL
10.15 But there is some good news for the UK - the annual decline in UK construction output has slowed sharply.
British construction output posted the smallest annual fall in almost a year and a half in April, raising hopes that construction might contribute to economic growth in the second quarter.
Output dropped 1.1pc compared with April a year ago - the slowest fall since November 2011, the Office for National Statistics said today.
On the month, output fell 6.5pc - the first decrease since January. However, new work in private housing rose 3.6pc.
While the construction sector only accounts for 6.8pc of total UK output, the extent of its weakness meant that it knocked 0.6 percentage points off GDP growth in 2012 which was limited to 0.3ps.
Construction output then knocked a further 0.2 percentage points off GDP growth in the first quarter of 2013.
It's a bit like the Iran/Iraq war. We kinda want them both to lose.