Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why to LAB strategists the fight with the Tories is their l
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why to LAB strategists the fight with the Tories is their least important battle
A couple of months ago I had an interesting dialogue with one of Labour top strategists who set out the four battleground which they thought would decide GE2013.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
On-topic:
Why does OGH not filter-out the "don't knows"...? Surely an even distribution of cluelessness in endemic to "Liberals" (and clubs in SoHo thereof)...?
Edit that's the Lib Dems who voted in 2010, not the 2010 Lib Dem voters left in the country right now
Oh, and antifrank may be a 2015 one.... *
* Edited: He was a green in 2010, but is now even more confused....
Clearly could do better -deduction of pocket money perhaps. Would DM have got a better report?
"The parliamentary term came juddering to an end yesterday. MPs have packed up their files and returned to their constituencies, holidays have been booked and passports searched for. There are now less than two years until the election, so with that in mind – how’s Ed Miliband doing?
Here’s his end of term report – this year focussing on the delivery on The Three Ps – Polling, Policies and Party:
Polling – the question is, which polling? At present it’s unclear whether Labour’s lead is in double digits or low single digits – if there’s a lead at all – as the polls leap around all over the place. .... But of far more concern for Miliband personally are his troubling (and falling) personal ratings, with IPSOS MORI rating him as unpopular as William Hague was at a similar point in his party leadership tenure. GRADE – B-
Policies – what policies? No, that’s unfair – the party does now have a range of policies that have been unveiled over the last 12 months or so. The problem is that none of them are, so far, the kind of barnstorming, pledge-card adorning, attention grabbing ideas that the party probably needs....................Clearly there’s an agenda under the surface, but when will be see it? And what will it look like. I’d bet the house on a house building programme – but it hasn’t been announced. Yet. GRADE – C
Party – Until a few weeks ago, it might have been possible to argue that Ed Miliband didn’t really have a passion for party organisation. Sure, he cares hugely about the kind of organisation that Arnie Graf is trying to deliver across the country. ...But the passion Miliband had during the leadership election for doing Labour politics differently and changing the party fundamentally appeared to have fallen by the wayside.........But we now have to say – whatever we think of Ed’s plans – that he has been “brave”, and that he’s sure as hell going to have to be passionate about the minutiae of party organisation now
GRADE – B+
Overall – Not a bad year for Miliband or the Labour Party by any stretch of the imagination, although it looks worse right now, following the events of Falkirk, the resignation of Tom Watson and everything that came after. ....If everyone is still saying the same next year, start worrying. GRADE – B"
EU funded wind turbines for Palestine ?
2010 LibDem
Ed Milband net
Doing "well": -43
Strong Leader: -36
Ed & Unions
No difference - had negative opinion of him anyway: 40
Ed has far from "sealed the deal"....
However, if you don't have the capital for a 25% deposit on a first time house purchase, then my advice would be to take the current government support as its availability is likely to be short-lived.
Eventually terms will get easier for first time buyers as the banks are recapitalised, dis-intervened and they respond to the return of market confidence with more aggressive and competitive lending terms, particularly in the area of high loan to value offers.
But when you are offered a leg up onto the ladder why refuse?
* Only joking Mark: Your's can be read and comprehended....
You banned me, IIRC, for first revealing it!
Why you didn't just brush it off as one of "my theories", I'll never know...
For example, in the past a large part of the LD vote was a protest vote.
There is also a conflict between a view of often expressed that LDs rely on a massive incumbency vote and in this article the impliation is that so many of the Lib Dem voters are open to any punter. For example past research into Lib Dems voters have also been split almost 50/50 in pro/anti the EC, and voting almost in ignorance of the actual LD party policy.
fluffy me old chap,England U-19's have just picked 5 Yorkshire lads and next yorkshireman in England team could be Alex lees,youngest yorkshireman to hit double century yesterday,he finished on 275 not out aged 20,his 2nd ton in 3 matches ;-)
:long-lost-summers:
The last I heard antifrank was growing a moustache, buying a red Jaguar F Type and off to run a think tank specialising in political probabilities.
He is therefore the leading edge of Cameron's Big Society revival. A blue vote in 2015 is his only option.
Is the key problem now that these detached voters just cannot be attracted back and the LDs will do very very badly at the next GE. PS Eastleigh b/e was only won with 32% of the actual vote. My own expectation is for LDs around the 30 seat mark, but maybe I am too generous?
http://www.greenprophet.com/2012/10/largest-palestinian-hospital-wind-powe/
EU-funded Palestinian solar power is also good policy, Israel-permitting:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/5327404/5327404
2) If Labour think that they can afford to rank their tussle with the Conservatives as the least important of their battlegrounds, they are going to be flattened, just as they were in the 2011 local elections when they tried out exactly the same approach. You'd have thought that they'd learned their lessons from that.
PS I assume "GE2013" should read "GE2015". Unless I've missed a very major news story.
LD 2010 voters.
5% WNV and 19%DK.
Of the other 76%: (at100% equiv)
Cons:10%
Labour: 31%
LD:43%
UKIP:6%
Nats: 4%
Green:6%
BNP 1%
Other 2%
my fault Mike, I've expressed it badly by using lazy short hand, I meant a 2010 LD who currently intends to vote Labour. Unless of course you're telling me that's where you are.
I was just interested in hearing some of the views of those who have switched and what the prime motivants are.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/snp-lifted-by-uk-ireland-common-visa-plan.21643027
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/73349_10151737178264904_1522876319_n.jpg
I mean, seriously, apparently 35% of people at least know his name. That's the same number as people who claimed to know what Michael Gove looked like in the Ashcroft polling last month. I know it isn't quite a like for like comparison, but Gove is far more prominent than Ashcroft.
Geoffrey Boycott's my hero, says Labour's Ed Miliband
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11095180
Any CCHQers or LDHQers who may be online should get to it. Queen's Speech 2014 please.
1) Core LD voters
2) Green voters who vote LD
3) Labour voters who switched to LD over Iraq/tuition fees or saw LDs as Labour Lite
4) Labour voters who tactically vote LD in the south to keep out Con
5) Anti-politics/anti-big 2 voters
The question then is which of these groups is most likely to switch to Labour. I would say group 3. University constituencies like Manchester With, Cardiff C and Cambridge look likely to revert to Labour due to tuition fees. However, it is worth remembering that the LDs pre-2010 also had a big Labour-Lite vote in the northern cities e.g. Liverpool Wavertree, Manchester Gorton, Hull North, Sheffield Central, Newcastle North without taking any of these seats. Having seen what happened at the local elections, we can reasonably predict 10-20% LD-Lab swings in these seats but of course Labour already hold these seats so it won’t help them.
The second most likely to defect seem to me to be group 4 who voted for LD to keep out Con but ended up with a LD supported Con government. Eastleigh by election suggests a LD-UKIP swing but it seems likely that there were some LD-Lab defectors and then Lab lost some to UKIP or Lab voters stayed at home. Certainly looking at a seat like Somerton it is hard to see a result like LD 47.5%, Con 44.5% again. It may be a case of which party loses the least votes to Lab and UKIP respectively. Either way winning votes in seats like this are all wasted for Labour.
Group 5 may defect but are unlikely to go to Labour and seem more likely to go to Green, UKIP, SNP or Plaid
Groups 1 and 2 seem the least likely to defect or if they do may go Green.
The question then is if you look at a key marginal like Worcester Con 39.5%, Lab 33.4%) is how much of the 19% LD share is made up of each group. We can’t say but we know that there aren’t any group 4s. The LD gained 3.1% share in 2010 and 3.7% in 2005 so there may be group 3s but the question is if these people are really Labour supporters why didn’t they vote for the party when it was really needed in 2010? I suspect that in a constituency like this LD-Lab switchers won’t be enough and it will also require Con-Lab or Con-UKIP switchers as well to switch hands.
If our Scottish cousins ever thought that they were of interest to We Anglo-Saxons; fear naught! The way the Australians are behaving you'd never need our attention again....
Meanwhile the SNP carry on promising things not within their gift - an opt-out of Schengen being one...along with currency, the EU rebate.....
It is all empty rhetoric, tim.
There has no house price inflation under Osborne. Only real term deflation. Even the above inflation rises of the past two months (unevidenced yet in official stats) won't go anywhere near returning house prices to the real terms levels of 2007.
You keep on making this point but you are unable to present any statistical evidence to back up your claims.
And as for "a massive pledge on housing" and a "refutation of the last forty years of housing policy", please give even a simple, worked example of what Labour might be proposing. Because as they stand such promises appear to be no more than empty waffle.
Oh, wait...
Apparently Dave has a dicky shoulder because of all the tennis.
as a father, man of the people, well done to the lions, can of Guinness.......
To respond to Gareth: I think you underestimate how well the LibDems played vulnerable Labour seats in 2010. The basic message in my patch was "Labour is obviously losing here, but the LibDems are doing well and might just stop the Tories, and what's more we're more left-wing than Labour". In my particular area they were helped by a Nottingham Post voodoo poll of 20 shoppers in a random mall in the city which suggested that the LibDems were ahead of us and just behind the Tories. With the best will in the world, I can't see them successfully repeating that line in Con-Lab marginals next time.
Nah I've got every confidence TSE.
After all, you backed wales for the six nations....
I've backed Wales to win the 2015 Coupe du Monde
But they won't enforce the follow on.
They don't want to bat last on this pitch.
That is also wise. Under the radar, their touring team were awesome against Argentina. They spanked the pumas in what is regarded as a very tough tour.
'Christians are sometimes challenged with "If Heaven exists, what does it look like?' This. This."
The Telegraph reports that George Osborne has pledged to make Britain’s tax regime "the most generous for shale in the world"..
The government will support the industry with a new tax allowance that will see a certain portion of income from each shale gas production site receive an effective tax rate of 30% rather than 62%.
Shale gas deposits are expected provide an important new source of gas for the UK.
“Shale gas is a resource with huge potential to broaden the UK’s energy mix,”, Osborne said.
“We want to create the right conditions for industry to explore and unlock that potential in a way that allows communities to share in the benefits. This new tax regime, which I want to make the most generous for shale in the world, will contribute to that."
The British Geological Survey said last month there could be 1,300 trillion cubic feet of gas in northern England. Just 10% of that could meet Britain’s England's needs for more than four decades.
I suggest you ask tim for some of that sun cream.
Observation:
Engerlundt have only conceded two* extras so far. Summinck to watch...?
Src.: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/scorecard/87720
* @ 1530 Z+1
Another rib broken laughing
Barbied Australians.
No cricket Sunday....
We'll be sweltering between da' puhb; da' kitch; and da' Plasma on Sunday. Nuffinck' but some Zambian Kenyan winning da' Toah innit!
Phil Tufnell has made the first good point of his life today.
If the Aussies can't get a score on this track, where will they get a score??
In terms of share of the vote:
Lab: 39.0%
Con 37.0%
LD: 14.3%
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/files/2013/07/spamalot.jpg
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/micwright/100009390/labours-latest-online-strategy-spam/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Secondly, there are uncertainties in the geology, so the risks for the first company to frack commercially in the UK are a bit larger than some people make out.
Thirdly, if all goes according to plan, Osborne can easily increase the tax later once the companies have proved to themselves and the banks that the risks are not as high as they might be.
How firm these switchers are is a different matter: Miliband's personal ratings with them is not high. Will they vote at all?
There are probably two key groups who've made the switch. One is those who are genuine Guardian-reading, muesli-eating, sandal-wearing voters who would never vote Tory in a month of Sundays, wanted to protest against Labour for Iraq, Blair and whatever else and thought the Lib Dems a safe option. The other is the Cleggasm group who feel let down by the Lib Dems and Clegg in particular and by the government in general.
Neither of these groups is solidly in Labour's camp, though they have been consistently there (which is a subtly different thing). The first group could just as easily defect again once they have to think of the consequences of voting Labour when the government is at stake, where they may be morally responsible for What Happens Next. The second will be driven by leadership competencies and could be won over by any of the parties who are represented in the leadership debates. Labour for both is a cost-free residence of convenience.
Crosby's task is simple: paint Labour as responsible for the last mess and more than likely to create the next one, and contrast it against the Tories' steadiness in government and delivery on the economy.
GE2013 ?!?
Does Mike know something we don't?
https://mobile.twitter.com/Aggerscricket/media/grid?idx=1&tid=358216362935607296
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/b2e9e3a6-ef46-11e2-bb27-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2ZV0mpMBu
Salmond and Mickelson = how dreadful
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/5009151/Phil-Mickelson-gives-his-swing-vote-to-Salmond.html
Didn't think it would last long. Hills have just cut their 5/1 on Yes to 9/2.
Best No price is 2/9 (Bet365).
Hell, please. Probably cooler than London anyway.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scots-labour-spin-doctor-probed-over-salmond-jibe-1-3007304
All three of them are difficult ones for Labour so the choice of candidate could be crucial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE
Src.: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-23376792 :and-no-one-knew: