Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Apathy and the older voters might be the key for Out winnin
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Apathy and the older voters might be the key for Out winning the referendum
Looking at this month’s Ipsos Mori issues index above, as usual, the EU isn’t in the top 10 issues, whilst I sympathise, with those that say that Immigration is a proxy for the EU, when we look at the specific EU tracker below, by Ipsos Mori, the EU isn’t a priority as it has been in the past.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The demographics also point to the obvious strategy for other EU countries looking at what to do here: Let the UK leave, develop the EU as you see fit without the pesky Brits trying to hold things up, wait for the old people to die then let them back in on your own terms in 15 or 20 years.
Two further points should be noted, about the quote from the Independent article. (1) The referendum will occur on a date appointed by the Secretary of State, not later than 31 December 2017 (clause 1(2)-(3)). Clause 4(2) of the Bill allows the Secretary of State or the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to make provision combining the referendum with another poll, but not so as to alter the date of the latter. (2) The notion that there must be a minimum period of six months between Royal Assent and the referendum is not the case, as the government has a discretion to allow administrative preparations for the referendum to begin before Royal Assent (see section 101(4) of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000).
Arsenal 4
Aston Villa 0
or, to put it another way:
Team supported by Prince Harry 4
Team supported by Prince William 0
that sounds about right
Overall, we should expect a mid-point between an EU and a general election - so 45% to 50% is most likely. Of course, the closer it gets to GE levels the better it will be for Yes.
http://www.yle.fi/tvuutiset/uutiset/upics/liitetiedostot/RUS_Einreiseverbotsliste.pdf
I agree with Mr. Town that turnout will be decent, and Mr. Observer that No needs some sensible non-rightwingers on board (Frank Field?).
If Out is seen as the right, it'll lose, because all leftists will vote In [well, almost all] whereas the right is more split.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-32944886
She's rejected the break clause idea for the new leader.
The Daily Mail and other right wing newspapers would have had a go for a while and then the people would have got bored of it.
The idea of differential turnout arising from more motivated and generally older No voters seems sensible but I suspect the effect of that will simply be to make the result a little closer than it otherwise would have been, not change it.
Short of the other EU states basically humiliating Cameron and giving him nothing he can sell resulting in him campaigning for No I really cannot see a No vote.
Or something like that. Edmund Burke, IIRC.
I recall local committees being set up by the European Movement last time, with pro-EU activities. I would hope/expect that to happen again! Looks like they’re doing the same again, although the website doesn’t seem to have been updated very recently. Still refers to Laura Sandys as MP.
Bournemouth
Half of Norwich
Labour's problem is they're bloody incompetent and cowardly when it comes to regicide. Having two awful leaders in a row didn't help either.
Edited extra bit: interesting piece on militant Buddhism here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32929855
Because this referendum will be so much closer, I think a similar turnout level should be on the cards.
As an aside, and regarding immigration. My feeling - and this is just a feeling - is that people get much more incensed by low-skilled immigration from the commonwealth (especially from people who don't speak English) than by the pretty Polish girl serving them at Starbucks.
Something which may affect turnout is doubt over the polling. Pollsters will be very keen to get it close [even moreso than usual] and I'd expect them to be more willing to diverge from the average.
No, Labour's problem is that saying nothing for the past five years has allowed no new stars to emerge. What has any of the new generation actually achieved? Chuka and Dan Jarvis have vaguely interesting biographies but that's about it. Aside from Stella Creasy on payday loans, where she arguably prompted government action, it is hard to pin anything on any of them.
Funnily enough the older I get the more of an inner I become.
But the having been very left wing as a teenager I drifted right and even voted LD in my 40s only to revert to type in my 50s and can see by my 60s i can only see me voting for parties to the left of Lab.
Clearly not following the normal age profile trend.
I really do need to move to Scotland.
I *think* the nearest premiership team to me is Arsenal, although Norwich and Leicester must be options as well. That poses another question: where in mainland England and Wales is furthest away from a premiership ground as the crow flies? Initial thoughts have Land's End, but Swansea might qualify for them.
West Coast of Cumbria’s a long way from a Premier League club; Newcastle’s about the nearest I would think, now Burnley have been relegated.
I would think that a turnout of 60+% is on the cards, at least for this stage of what appears to be another neverendum.
Perhaps that's why I could never live in a town as they are hotbeds for lefties.
You can be anti-football, but it is silly to be anti-football only because FIFA is bent.
It is obvious that you can love this country, without reference to what you feel about the current govt.
I used to think the conflation between Europe and the EU was merely careless---now I think it is cynical.
The joker for referendums in Britain is that they are rare enough that people are tempted to use them to bash the Government of the day, which will help Out. But the structural weight of nearly every major politician that people have heard of recommending In makes it hard to see how Out can win: people will have Cameron+Lab leader+LibDem leader+SNP leader+Plaid leader+the CBI+the TUC vs... Farage... some Tory dissidents and ... the head of JCB diggers. In 1975, people thought it would be close and Out assembled an array of non-politicians to back up Benn and Powell, but it wasn't remotely enough.
Mind you, during the Greek sovereign debt crisis and [inexplicably] the rise of UKIP the Out numbers [according to the polls] have steadily declined. That might be because economic uncertainty makes people wary of change, whereas prosperity would instil greater confidence.
Remember, it's older voters who were lied to and voted YES in 1975... I don't think they'll let themselves be manipulated again...
Perfectly acceptable unlike Blair Witch Project.
Liz Kendall has "swallowed the Tory Manifesto"
If the economy is rattling along at the time of the referendum I suspect the Ins will be arguing don't ruin it. Also if the EZ picks up (with or without Greece) the argument that we are stuck with a millstone will have some effect. At the moment, and subject to revisions, the EZ growth in Q1 exceeded ours. The argument that we are stuck in a declining trading group as the world marches ahead was quite a good one and could lose some force if the EZ picks up.
I'm open to evidence that support for the EU is the former kind not the latter, but I'm guessing the difference is mainly about social attitudes and comfort zones.
Mr. Jessop, indeed. UKIP will frighten off more voters than they entice. I also think Farage's interest is Farage, not an exit [from the EU], which I did say some time ago, long before his hokey-cokey resignation.
Regarding the EU (or Europe as most people see it), apart from getting their Euros for summer holiday, until recently they were mostly ignorant or agnostic about its effects on the UK.
However to many people's minds, Immigration is part of the Europe problem. However if the question became split into non-EU immigration and EU immigration, the answers would vary according to geographical location.
Europe also crosses people's awareness on subjects like Human Rights and fishing (more location based).
So perhaps if all the implications of being part of the EU and the out-options available are simply explained to the electorate, then perhaps the electorate could become more engaged on this matter. However, could we trust HMG and the civil service to put forward, unbiased, all the potential options and implications for both IN and OUT. Somehow I think not - and this conclusion is not party political.
WRT age, the evidence does point to people getting more eurosceptic as they age. The older age cohort who favour leaving were very supportive of EU membership in 1975.
If you don't mind me saying I remember that sort of certainty (complacency?) about a nailed on Lab victory just a few week's ago...
I think those lie's are going to come back to haunt the politicians this time.
The best opportunity to win an OUT vote would be to point out we can still trade with the EU if we stay in the EEA. This would of course mean little change for all the foreigner haters who prop up the likes of ukip.
Were it not so, we would expect to see steadily increasing support for the EU and immigration as older generations are replaced by younger.
As far as British attitudes go I'd say the main driver is the _British_ economy improving. Recessions feed populist parties, and once the economy recovers they gradually come off the boil. The same thing has happened in the US, where the Tea Party has largely lost its mojo.
"Lib Dem Runners-Up: Just How Bad Things Are"
"while the party came fourth nationally, on a constituency level the results were even more sobering, with 54% of Lib Dem candidates coming fourth; and an even more galling 26.5% actually coming fifth; and more sixth places than first places. In numerous cases where the party came fourth or fifth, there were only four or five candidates standing, and so the Lib Dems came bottom of the poll. "
http://www.socialliberal.net/lib_dem_runners_up_just_how_bad_things_are
The eurozone countries are too diverse to be united under a single interest and exchange rate. Deepening integration will only further entrench the problem, exacerbating the pain for the countries who end up with the shit end of the stick and fostering nationalist movements.
Whilst it has proved more resilient than I expected (Greece remaining in for so long), the fundamental problem has not been remotely resolved. I expect to outlive the eurozone, and probably the EU as well.
If In win, that's exactly where the more enthusiastic EU supporters will want to head.
On another point: Nick, what is it about Labour and JCB? Roger hates Bamford with a passion (seemingly for the cardinal sin of being a Conservative donor), and you seemed to dismiss him rather lightly below. Which is odd, as he's done more for the country than either of you have or ever will.
We should listen to Bamford because he runs exactly the sort of company we need more of in this country, and which, according to the EU feshishists, should be in support of the EU. The fact he is not is important.
"Presently, the party is in first or second place in just 71 constituencies, or 11.3%."
Boasting about all these thousands of new members may be a comfort but are they where they have chances of winning?
Europe has the same demographic time-bomb as Nippon: England does not due to its tolerance of immigration (sans UKIP). Why do you think Europe will be in a position to dictate terms in some distant furture (outside of a plethora of parallel-universes)...?
The Conservatives will have a lot of BOOers amongst their MPs and often rather unappealing ones. The other parties will be pretty solid for In. The temptation to kick Tory Europhobes and Nigel Farage will be hard to resist.
I think this factor points to In not Out.
Also, you're making two separate arguments: stating a referendum can be used to kick a mid-term government and then saying it could be used against BOO Conservatives and UKIP, whereas the 'official' Conservative position is near certain to be In. I agree some on the right [Farage] will put off many, but if people want to kick the Government/Cameron, they'll vote Out.
I can't believe they'd do that. If they persuaded Cameron to vote Out, they'd also persuade millions of Britons.
Neutral's more possible. If Cameron allows ministers to campaign for Out then neutral might be the position [but as the Prime Minister and probably most of the Cabinet will be for In then In will still be seen to have the Government's stamp of approval, I think].
They were 7th in two.... Scrapping with Bus-Pass Elvis.
In such a situation I am sure that the likes of DrFoxNSox would be happy to vote for such a party. I would also assume that the - post-BrExit - Tory party would be happy to co-operate with their erstwhile allies again.
The In camp will have a few Tories (though most either grudgingly or agnostic) and the near entirety of other parties in the country.
Combined with the fact that it was the Tories that wanted the referendum (why have it at all if truly a party of In?), the referendum will be an opportunity to kick the Tories where it hurts, perhaps bringing about a fatal split.
Suits me!
If the last election taught us anything, it was to believe in your political instincts.
Also, it's not really kicking them to give Cameron a third referendum triumph on the bounce.
You are both Scottish and a lawyer: Do not emphasise your ignorance. The UK has - historically - been linked to the US economic-cycle and not that of the EU. We enter earlier and recover sooner: 2015 should be a slow-down (if you follow a seven-year cycle). The fact that we are doing quite well is due to the idoicy of your fellow country; one Gormless McBruin; over-inflating things prior to 2008.
:STFU:
Pros:
*) Will allow Conservatives to debate their true views.
*) Will make Labour + SNP 'own' the in campaign, which may cause them problems.
*) Might make the party less likely to fracture.
*) Might be seen as honest (politicians giving their true, unwhipped, views).
Cons:
*) Will be painted as weakness (too split to have a position)
*) May be dishonest, at least from Cameron's POV.
*) May (or may not) lead to more arguments within the party.
*) It may seem weak for the ruling party not to have an official position on such an important topic.
*) it may be hard for the government to be seen as genuinely neutral.
Personally, I'd like to see them take a neutral position, but I doubt it will happen.