Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris Johnson – the man who was overstated in every final p
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris Johnson – the man who was overstated in every final poll ahead of the 2012 London Mayoral election
Just before the Easter weekend we reported on a new YouGov poll that had a Boris-led Tory party level pegging with an EdM LAB one when the named leader voting intention question was put.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The two things that stick in the mind from last year's Mayoral election are Boris beating Ken (again), and the LibDem’s Brian Paddick vote collapse, which saw him beaten into fourth place behind Jenny Jones for the Green party.
But his back history and (again) precisely because of his 'loose cannon' reputation and approach to his job, he's completely unsuited to be a PM - he's a figurehead, not a team captain (IMO).
No - the next Conservative PM is already in the Commons, already showing they are capable of taking on The Establishment view of their Department's role: not managed decline but a genuinely fresh approach to what is possible, what is needed, and what can be in place by 2015.
So, forget Boris, despite his many appearances in the media and frenzied speculation by those who have a clear anti-Cameroon axe to grind (though there may be betting opportunities resulting from all this attention) and look towards Hammond, May and Gove as the Top Three (maybe with Hague too) who will fill what are usually called The Great Offices of State.
All have the right personal background, right credentials with the membership (and, crucially, with UKIP!), and shown skill and determination in office to be able to lay claim to be LoTO/PM. They all also have the necessarily dour media image for what will be a truly dreadful period of government: the one when REAL cuts to Welfare, public service and the size of the State will be implemented.
The fun lies in predicting which posts they'll each fill!
If Labour win in 2015, there are two options, I believe:
The application of Ballsian economics causes a collapse in sterling, a hike in interest rates and widespread bankruptcies; the arrival of the IMF and overnight imposed cuts in spending: Labour's reputation for economic competence is irredeemably destroyed
or
PM Milliband reins in Balls sufficiently, and the rate of increase in State spending is limited: some genuine cuts are made at the margins (no Trident replacement? Euro joined? Pension age raised to 70, not 68?) and the country staggers on for up to five years, becoming ever more deeply into debt and a true economic hell-hole. Labour becomes increasingly unpopular and is seen as economically inept, rather than utterly incompetent.
In either event, the position of an incoming Conservative government in 2020 would be both difficult, in terms of what has to be done, and easy, since there truly would be No Alternative, and the country would be grimly prepared for the serious sacrifices required.
The economic problem lies not with the electorate who understand where we are, but within Whitehall and Westminster, where those employed there are in full denial mode, all determined to pass the buck and delay the inevitable just long enough to allow The Other Lot to be in power when it all falls apart: a policy that has characterised Europe, if not the entire West, for the better part of a decade now. Since well before 2007/8, an imminent economic and social collapse was inevitable (hence Blair leaving office in 2007 on the crest of the economic wave - exquisite timing!)
Will Boris stand for London Mayor for a third term?
Or become an EU Commissioner?
Or become a PCC somewhere?
Or an MEP?
Or stand for/be appointed to some other public office (eg post-Leveson Press Tsar)?
Or return to being a mere backbench MP in 2015, but as the figurehead of a large faction within the Westminster party and hoping to be crowned LoTO > PM?
(there would then be a concerted 'Stop Boris' candidate in 2015 around whom many MPs would coalesce, as with Major v Heseltine in 1991 - who also had wayward, over-long, blonde hair, though he's not an OE!)
I'd suggest it all depends on what fun he'd like to have and the money he will be able to earn wherever he goes - and just how much time he wishes to spend at home with his children now they are older: he clearly loves London, which might be a significant factor.
It seems like quite a strong possibility to me.
Of 60+ voters only 4% would not vote and 16% support UKIP.
Also only 35% of 2010 LDs would vote LD.
I agree that one should be wary of hypothetical polling, but I reckon the 2012 election is a massive plus for Boris, despite the mismatch with the polls.
Nonsense, the breakdown of the poll OGH quotes reveals this little snippet for ‘Best Leader’
Con: Cameron 58, Boris 29.
LibD: Cameron 47, Boris 34.
Lab: Cameron 23, Boris 43.
UKIP: Cameron 21, Boris 51.
So, replacing Cameron with Boris would succeed in pissing off the very people who would vote for the party, - Much to the amusement of those who have decided not to...!
Do you think Theresa May would sort out the Tories' female vote problem?
It shows to me the limitations of personality politics. Boris is popular, even amongst Labour voters, but that does not mean that they will vote for him. And there is the small detail of him not even being in the Commons.
The thing that I find most alarming is the number of natural tories who think it might be alright to give Labour a go in 2015 by mucking about with UKIP etc, principally as a means of getting rid of Cameron. The last time the tories lost power it took them 13 years to regain it and the country was almost destroyed. I very much hope there is a greater sense of focus and urgency in the right by 2015. This country really cannot afford a Labour government for a long, long time, not until the current generation of Brownites have left the stage.
Indeed, I was on Ken at some tremendous odds.
Many would be sirprised by how good a PM BoJO would make. He is no fool and the jolly bonmoie largely an act.
Cameron: 31/36
Johnson: 31/37
As has been pointed out, Boris fans are among Labour/UKIP voters:
Best leader - Johnson lead vs Cameron
Con: -19
Lab: +20
LD: -13
UKIP: +30
If Boris is the answer its the wrong question.
This kneejerk welfare cultism that some Labour supporters have just makes more widespread the memes 'Labour loves layabouts' and 'Socialists support scroungers'.
Their whole mentality of everything is the envy of the world, nothing must be criticized and the only answer to problems is to spend more money will make them look like out of touch defenders of a rotten system by the end of the decade.
In much the same way those supporters of nationalised industries and union domination did during the 1970s.
The echoes have been remarked on frequently both here and elsewhere.
As for Boris for Prime Minister, the pollsters' results may be faulty, but the bigger problem is that it revolves around name recognition rather than getting the public's considered views on his suitability for the role.
One point that should be scotched: David Cameron may be more popular with Conservative supporters than Boris Johnson, but the question is not who Conservative supporters would prefer but whether they would still support a Boris Johnson-led Conservative party that was able to attract other supporters. (The polling seems to suggest that by and large they would.) Some of the pb Tories are falling into the same logical trap that led to Iain Duncan Smith being chosen as leader.
Incidentally, I think the Conservatives would be nuts to replace David Cameron with Boris Johnson or anyone else. But they do have form for being nuts.
Back in 1981 Margaret Thatcher was deeply unpopular. She was implementing cuts and reforms to institutions that were creating major discontent. One of those cuts was in defence, which the Argentinians took as a cue to invade a little known group of islands 8000 miles from Britain. The resulting 1982 war created a wave of nationalist fervour that saw Thatcher squaring up to a left-wing Labour leader and winning a landslide victory.
Roll on 30 years and we have a Gov't that is implementing cuts and reforms to institutions that are creating major discontent. 8000 kms away a nation is threatening to attack another, and drag the US into it. OK so North and South Korea aren't British sovereign territory but the potential for pulling us in to a show of strength is undoubtedly there. It's not the Gulf War yet, but there's a significant situation developing.
Were there to be an escalation of conflict the potential for Cameron to show his tough side is there. And we all know how many of the tabloids enjoy a bit of nationalist fervour. Is the scenario of a post-conflict Cameron wave worth a flutter? I think so.
(And NB for the record I'm a Labour supporter)
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4872605/unite-plan-general-strike.html
Cameron wont be replaced.
It is vital for the Conservatives that Cameron and his clique get responsibility for the defeat of 2015.
So he'll be weakened and undermined but remain in place to take the blame and then it will be byelections in Witney and Tatton and possibly Dorset West and Horsham. Which will at least give the Conservatives a chance to return to Westminster some of the more impressive defeated MPs of 2015.
LOL
How precisely is Cameron going to show his tough side in Korea?
Order one of our carrier battlegroups to launch strikes on Pyonyang? I think I detect a potential problem with that possibility.
Not that anybody would be bothered in any case.
A more likely scenario to move votes would be Falklands II - though we'd be more likely to lose than win. Which really would make Cameron the reverse of Thatcher in Conservative history.
Hard to believe.
I'm sure the next tory leadership contest won't be obsessed over Europe. It never has before.
Nor will the various factions fight over the various policy positions on keeping the referendum pledge and whether the party would campaign to stay OUT or IN.
but I am going to have to keep calling you on this. Dave's gender gap is "small". Not big. It is "small and consistent" as described by Anthony West in the piece you yourself linked to to prove your point.
Here it is again.
ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7209
"Small". So please, can you stop calling it big.
thx
Both parties are europhile, both are wastrels when it comes to the public purse and both have a misguided attachement to social democracy.
Your suggestion of Boris as an EU Commissioner is an attractive one.
He speaks French, but would probably address them in Latin or Greek and his irreverent attitude to institutions like the EU could well sweep away a lot of its cherished cobwebs and even bring about some degree of reform.
Unfortunately the timing appears to be wrong for such an appointment.
This one.
Incompetence and Osbrowne.
As long as Osbrowne is there as a AAA liability the tories 2015 election campaign is doomed to be a farce since it will be dominated by the economy. Even Cammie knows Osbrowne must be kept from the cameras as much as possible during an election campaign because of his toxicity to the voters. That's what happened in 2010 and he's even more toxic now.
"On reflection it is hardly surprising that the parties struggle as a whole to do an adequate job of representing the new classes which have evolved in partly post-industrial Britain. Since the three old parties are rooted in class identities which together now only account for 39% of the population, they have set themselves up to be unrepresentative, unpopular and ineffective.
Which is precisely how it has now turned out. Unless political parties recognise that they have to adapt and form coalitions across class lines, old and new, they will go on failing. If the sociologists are even nearly right about the kind of Britain we have become, the parties are overwhelmingly stuck in a country that no longer exists. The future belongs to the party that changes. Seven into three doesn't go, either in maths or in politics."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/03/seven-into-three-doesnt-go-maths-of-failure
Eastleigh, Schmeastleigh. Careful you'll fall off your pinhead.
Here it is in a (the big) picture:
"Small but consistent".
Actually, I can confirm I detest Abba's music more than the lyrics: I've never been one for cheesy pop hooks be it the Spice Girls or the Village People, and Abba's ingrain themselves in your skull more than most.
London: +9
Rosouth: +6
Mids/Wales: +3
North: +6
Scot: +2
None of it from Labour - virtually all from "other" - almost certainly UKIP
Its all well and good bossing around the likes of Iraq, Libya and some Somali pirates, but I'd like to believe our political leaders wouldn't think tweaking the tail of the Chinese dragon was suitable sport.
Or is it just your pet meme?
Over 400,000 people have signed the petition.
Triumph for the fops! ;^)
Distinct change of mood in the air I feel, welfare, budget, education - Oborne might be onto something. Certainly the left seem uncomfortable considering their nailed on poll position.
Japan has 200pc+ debt to GDP.
So low yields on UK debt nothing to do with Osborne's flailing about in No11.
http://redearedrabbit.com/2013/04/03/the-worst-speech-ever-made/
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/01/28/business/welfare-payments-to-be-slashed-¥74-billion-to-root-out-the-comfortably-poor/
"As has been pointed out, Boris fans are among Labour/UKIP voters:"
That makes sense and I can see the electoral significance of it. I'm struggling to understand the significance of Dave's problem with women whether real or imagined. It's not like a woman's vote counts double
It's another reason (fitting in with distrust and new technologies) why we will never again have a majority (single party) government because the national parties struggle to represent the variety within Britain today.
Whatever you think of IDS, he isn't a fop.
As an ex military man I'm sure he could survive on £53pw if he had to.
But of course he doesn't have to becuase he's got himself a job.
Perhaps we should extend the game and challenge Labour MPs to survive on the average earnings of their constituents?
Or Mirror journalists and Guardian columnists to survive on the average earnings of their readers?
Boris can pick up detail if he wishes, but I would be looking for him to change the mood of the EU and to start asking publicly very awkward questions - the EU would find it very hard to silence him.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/conspiracy-theory-poll-results-.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9969634/Politics-should-be-left-out-of-the-classroom-Mrs-Blower.html
"Fewer hours in the classroom, more time in the staff room, higher pay. Is that all?
Most teachers seem to think work is something you do between your sick days and your holidays."
Thing is, though, as opposed to "normal" canvassing, people on the (actual) Clapham omnibus knew the candidates. And both Boris and Ken inspired not only a strong reaction, one way or the other, but a familiarity and ownership that, as you are aware, is simply non-existent on other polling occasions.
You might have added BBC editors and correspondents to your list as well. Can anyone remember when they last heard the BBC do a piece where anyone argued that more savings should be made in any area of government expenditure?
His own MPs booted him out before an election so 'formidable' was he. Eric Joyce is an ex-military man and was was the first MP to claim more than £1 million cumulatively in expenses. So much for that being a guarantee of 'quality' or frugality. Yes, he's an MP in the cabinet. Want to know who the public trust almost as little as tabloid journos including the Mirror Sun Mail Express etc.? MPs.
By all means start your own petition to see if all MPs and journos could survive on £53/wk.
That would be entertaining indeed.
.@George_Osborne: Thank You for your support on UK foreign aid. The impact on lives saved will be tremendous.
I see this another way. They just want to protect their own border should the regime collapse.
Avery has pwned you on this before.
There's that and the possiblity of China wanting to move in sharpish to secure the N.Korea Nuclear installations etc. should it get calamitous.
Yet they have backed up N.Korea signalling they will stand by treaties and with them in any war. I agree they probably would prefer not to but they can hardly back down and dump them without causing huge loss of face for them and even more chaos and instability as who knows what the paranoid N.Korea leadership would do then? Nothing good I imagine.
What happened to rebalancing?
Edit: Uh-oh
@WilliamsonChris
#PMI is good news but possiblity of falling gov’t output and North Sea oil & gas production could tip the balance to another GDP fall in Q1
Edit 2 - first Q1 prediction:
@WilliamsonChris
Services #PMI rise from 51.8 to 52.4 suggests services GDP +0.2-0.3% in Q1 after 0.1% fall in Q4 http://twitpic.com/cgum9i
"29% of voters believe aliens exist"
How is this a conspiracy theory, I certainly think that aliens are more likely than not to exist - however due to the vast distances of space and the relatively slow speed we (Or they) could travel across it it is unlikely we will meet, certainly not in any of our lifetimes on this board.
On mood I think there's been some study on BPS and tones/discordance
In its latest report reviewing the Irish bail-out, it criticised the "inadequate progress" of Irish banks.
This was in dealing with non-performing loans and tackling home repossessions.
The IMF is also concerned that Irish banks are still losing money even before putting cash aside to cover those bad loans.
While acknowledging the progress that Ireland has so far made, the IMF warned that more needed to be done in dealing with banking issues including home repossessions.
It said that high unemployment could lead to the state's debts becoming unsustainable if growth forecasts were missed.
BBC NI's Dublin correspondent Shane Harrison said: "With the Republic of Ireland due to leave its bail-out programme at the end of this year, this latest IMF report will be seen by many as a reality check."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22024512
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/cristinaodone/100210423/family-is-key-to-childrens-attitude-to-school/
"The London School of Economics, bastion of Left-of-centre thinking on all serious issues, conducted the study on disadvantaged children in England. They found that growing up in an impoverished area did not doom the children to do badly at school. What did affect their performance was family."
"When I looked at faith schools for the Centre for Policy Studies, the prevailing attitude among sociologists (some of them at the LSE) was that these schools' success lay in cherry-picking middle-class kids.
These academics maintained that the schools' ethos, and the values that children were learning at home from their parents, had nothing to do with the children's high academic achievements
. Their interpretation was Marxist: it all boiled down to money. I'm glad to see they've been proved wrong."
Shame on the Marxists as well who have always said that it was all about wealth.
4/1 on a Labour minority govt ? - horrible price.
WRT the gender gap, the only pollster that shows a significant difference between Conservative support among men and women is ICM. MORI, Yougov, Conres, TNS, and Opinium, give very similar levels of Conservative support among men and women. As Peter Kellner says, the gender gap is more of a hairline crack
In most developing countries (where often the simplest of education charges a fee) the whole family sees education as the way out of a subsistence economy and a route to a more prosperous lifestyle (a bit like the UK in the 1900s-50s). Also there is rarely an economic bottom line support for the unemployed, disabled or old - if you do not work, you do not eat.
So everyone is keen to learn and (whilst on World Bank projects in sub-Saharan Africa) I have seen children paying rapt attention in class and seizing upon any piece of information they can find and retain and the education of their children is a source of pride to their parents and community.
So in the UK (in an electronic society where education is free and information has never been easier to source) we have truancy problems, attention problems and large numbers of children leaving school neither literate nor numerate to join their parents who often have the same lack of education and have become unemployable. So why did it all go wrong?
Before adjustment, the Conservatives polled 27% among men, and 26% among women. With Com Res, it was 27% among men, 29% among women. With Opinium, it was 28% each. With TNS, it was 27% among men, 26% among women. With Yougov (averaging out the past week's daily polls), it was 29% among men, 31% among women.
ICM is the stand-out, giving the Conservatives 31% among men, and 26% among women (before adjustment).
Averaging out the lot, gives the Conservatives 28% each, among men and women, while Labour get 37% among men, and 40% among women.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/04/is-andrew-mitchell-the-right-man-for-britain-in-europe/
"It now looks almost certain that Andrew Mitchell will be our next EU Commissioner in 2014. "
The other two both get 17 years.