Chuka (his name rhymes with “cooker” and means “God is the greatest”) was born in 1978 in London, the son of Bennett, a Nigerian immigrant from the Igbo tribe, who arrived at Liverpool docks in the 1960s carrying a suitcase on his head and no money.
@AveryLP These things can be misleading. My two given names mean "leader of men" and "the crowned one".
I had always thought that my parents had unhealthy ambitions for me. But a candid friend pointed out that this could equally be translated as "a queen that leads men on".
@AveryLP These things can be misleading. My two given names mean "leader of men" and "the crowned one".
I had always thought that my parents had unhealthy ambitions for me. But a candid friend pointed out that this could equally be translated as "a queen that leads men on".
"Leader" or "defender"?
Stephen?
But what about the suitcase on your dad's head? That has to be in the back-story of every man of ambition.
In 1997 I thought to myself I could never ever vote Tory given how crap they were. But 11 years later I voted for Boris at the London Mayoral election!
I've noticed that people who say they're never going to vote for a party ever again often change their minds a short time later.
Indeed so. I seem to remember that, in the early glorious days of the coalition, Southam Observer was absolutely vehement that he'd never vote LibDem again, but as I understand it he has now gone back to at least considering doing so (as I told him he would!)
[Apologies in advance if I've mis-represented his position].
Did you read the final paragragh about other spokesmen being forced to quit for the same reason?
It's a plan of pure genius. Make Salmond a figure of fun. Goad spokesweasels from rival parties to make fun of him. They are forced to resign. Repeat from (1) until all rival parties run out of spin doctors.
Admittedly it's a bit of a longer term strategy but it's got potential. Especially as the first stage is so easy.
As we thought. Pitched outside leg stump, missing leg stump, might have hit a third set. Apart from that, a good shout. "That was Jimmy's call" chirps Matt Prior.
Don't record the news; create the new in your image....
Labour not only need to hold 2010 LD voters, they also need to hold 2010 Labour voters. Not sure Ed can take the latter group entirely for granted.
Wise words. In fact, from a Conservative point of view, I suspect that we could persuade more ex-Labour than ex-LibDem-now-considering-Labour voters to switch to the Conservatives (in numeric if not percentage terms)
I've noticed that people who say they're never going to vote for a party ever again often change their minds a short time later.
Indeed so. I seem to remember that, in the early glorious days of the coalition, Southam Observer was absolutely vehement that he'd never vote LibDem again, but as I understand it he has now gone back to at least considering doing so (as I told him he would!)
[Apologies in advance if I've mis-represented his position].
I have been working on SO, Richard.
Even to the extent of recommending he gets a blue suit made by a good tailor.
Even the client list was designed to tempt him in.
Neha Ramu from Surbiton in south-west London is only 13 - but she is already a genius, with a higher IQ than Stephen Hawking.
She scored 162 in a Mensa IQ test for people under 18, the highest possible mark - putting her in the top one percent of the UK's brightest people. Any score of above 140 is considered to be that of a genius.
Neha came to the UK from Bangalore in India when she was seven, but it was only in recent years that her parents started to realise the true level of her intelligence."
Labour not only need to hold 2010 LD voters, they also need to hold 2010 Labour voters. Not sure Ed can take the latter group entirely for granted.
Wise words. In fact, from a Conservative point of view, I suspect that we could persuade more ex-Labour than ex-LibDem-now-considering-Labour voters to switch to the Conservatives (in numeric if not percentage terms)
In which case I think you might have shot yourself in the foot with this weeks agressive and rather polarising campaign. Cheered the faithful, but at a cost. Not exactly making switching easy for those considering a switch.
In which case I think you might have shot yourself in the foot with this weeks agressive and rather polarising campaign. Cheered the faithful, but at a cost. Not exactly making switching easy for those considering a switch.
No, I don't think that's right. It may be polarising in the sense of putting off the Guardianista style of Labour voter, but that sub-group is never going to switch anyway.
Probably the perfect situation when bowling last in a test match is to set the other side 600 runs to win and to have two full days in which to bowl them out with the weather set fair.
It looks like that is what England may be able to do on this occasion. I don't think I've ever seen it happen before, at least not for England.
Labour not only need to hold 2010 LD voters, they also need to hold 2010 Labour voters. Not sure Ed can take the latter group entirely for granted.
Wise words. In fact, from a Conservative point of view, I suspect that we could persuade more ex-Labour than ex-LibDem-now-considering-Labour voters to switch to the Conservatives (in numeric if not percentage terms)
I largely agree with Mike - 2010 Labour and Tory voters are now largely Labour and Tory respectively, albeit with seepage to UKIP. But a third or so of 2010 LibDems have switched to Labour and remained unwaveringly firm ever since. Interestingly this doesn't extend to local voting - they seem bent on punishing the Parliamentary party, but willing to back local councillors.
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.
That seems a very strange tactic. It didn't do them much good though as they only gained 0.8% in Broxtowe. They also gained 2.5% in Notts E but lost share in the other 2 Notts seats.
Yes, but it negated our squeeze on them which ought to have worked in the pre-2010 situation, as lots of voters decided the situation was just confusing so they might as well vote for the "most left-wing mainstream" party, the LibDems.
Not that I'm bitter or anything. :-) But it won't work twice.
In which case I think you might have shot yourself in the foot with this weeks agressive and rather polarising campaign. Cheered the faithful, but at a cost. Not exactly making switching easy for those considering a switch.
No, I don't think that's right. It may be polarising in the sense of putting off the Guardianista style of Labour voter, but that sub-group is never going to switch anyway.
You clearly weren't trying to make friends or broaden the church. Just telling the world how much you dislike Labour for the umpteenth time.
@MikeS - But you keep on missing the big picture. Which is that at this stage of the Parliament for Labour to be only 5-8% ahead is seriously bad news for them. You surely realize that, don't you?
If that lead is still there three weeks before the election, then it's seriously bad news for the Tories. But hardly now.
Ed is strong and decisive, and his fight with Len will be good for him
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB Just 22% tell ComRes that they expect EdM to be the PM in 2015 Poll found 42% to 20% saying LAB would perform better at GE2 with new leader
Those ComRes numbers will make painful reading for Ed Miliband, though it's a shame that there are no voting intention figures and the order of the questions could well have influenced some of the responses. The wording of some questions is not great either.
On the "Do you, or would you, trust each of the following politicians to see the country through the current economic situation?", George Osborne scores better than Ed Miliband. Women seem to be markedly less trusting of politicians than men - which shows that women are the smarter sex.
The SWIFTIndex is published today. It managed to predict the last two quarter's UK GDP growth figures bang on.
So here is their latest and last 'nowcast' before we get ONS's first estimate on Thursday of next week (25/7):
UK GDP Growth estimated Period QoQ% YoY% Nowcast Q2 2013 0.7% 1.4% Forecast Q3 2013 0.8% 1.5%
These are some mighty good figures if they are right. The OECD, IMF and most external forecasters have uprated the UK's 2013 figures recently but none are forecasting 1% growth in the first half year (0.3% + 0.7%).
The SWIFT index is especially surprising as it has been predicting 0.1% QoQ growth for Q2 2013 for their last few issues.
@MikeS - But you keep on missing the big picture. Which is that at this stage of the Parliament for Labour to be only 5-8% ahead is seriously bad news for them. You surely realize that, don't you?
If that lead is still there three weeks before the election, then it's seriously bad news for the Tories. But hardly now.
IMO, the Lib Dems won't be polling 10% or so in 2015, and to a large extent, the leftward-leaning vote was already lined up behind Labour, in Con/Lab marginal seats, in 2010.
have we got such a things as a 2010 LD on this site ?
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.
Exactly - knowing that Messrs Smithson, Senior and Corporeal intend to vote LD again isn't exactly much of a revelation!
IIRC @FoxInSoxUK is toying with the idea of LDing in 2015 but I can't recall who he voted for last time.
I voted Lib Dem in 2010 in York Outer, even though I made money betting on a Conservative Victory. I told everyone who would listen, that the new seat was only nominally Lib Dem, because Conservatives voted Lib Dem in the local council elections to stop Labour. Labour will increase their vote in this seat next time, because many now know that the Lib Dems have no chance of taking this seat.
- A majority of the British public (57%) do not see Ed Miliband as an election winner.
- Twice as many (42%) agree that Labour would have a better chance in the next General Election without Ed Miliband as party leader as disagree (20%).
- One-third (33%) say that they would prefer a Labour-Lib Dem coalition to a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition. More than two-fifths (43%) disagree.
- Two in five (42%) agree that the Labour Party understands the concerns of ordinary people better than the Conservatives. However, this is down 5 points from last September and more than one in three (36%) disagree.
- Almost half (46%) say that Labour cannot be trusted to run the economy – unchanged from last year.
@tim - Not sure I've asked you this recently, but what would you say the Labour lead currently is?
6/7%
I agree with Dave that to stand a chance of keeping his job he needs to drive UKIP down to 5%
Yep, that would be my estimate too.
You're probably (as is Dave) broadly correct on the UKIP figure too, perhaps it can reach 6-7 but definitely no higher, to deny a second-term Tory led government.
Coming soon to a TV and smartphone near you: a channel dedicated to all things Ron Paul! From some time this summer there's going to be an "exclusive channel to the truth".
www.ronpaulchannel.com/landing/ron-paul-landing/
I'll have to phone our cable bloke, see if they're going to be carrying it locally...
Quincel ..amused of Italy here.. are you saying Ed M is charismatic and if so how does he save money for real people (whatever/whoever, they are) on a daily basis..when do I get mine. Or are you a spoof.
Hasn't Andy been in hiding since he pulled out of that C4 intv the other day? Balls is entirely invisible too - its been a week or two since I've heard or seen him.
2010 Election to 2015 Election: There are differences beyond tribal voting habits that separate 2015 from many previous elections.
In 2010 the plus side for Gordon Brown (I know to many that is an oxymoron): He had experience and was in control in a crisis, and the media gave him a good crisis. His economy with the truth was not exposed to the extent that it should have been by the media, he had loyalty of the party (out of fear in retrospect?). He polled higher in GE 2010 because of the financial crisis, if there were no crisis his vote would have collapsed further.
Cameron had a bad election 2010, and is not likely to be so bad again. He has one under his belt for experience, and I would think he has learnt. Labour has no more gloss than in 2010, it lacks big beasts and gravitas. Assuming the economy continues in an upward trend, the plea to complete the work started will be compelling. Not many babies have were served at tables between 2010 and 2015, the working poorest will do relatively better than they did under Labour.
LibDems will have to rely on local personalities. They have tried to alienate most of the supporters they once had and most of those they could hope to collect. They have a really difficult task in 2015, they can not expect protest votes which were a useful source of X's in the box for them.
General: 2015 is an election where in the run up there are two governing parties and one main opposition. A new and unusual situation. The government will ram down our throats the fact that they are clearing up the economic mess that was inherited, not the mess they made. Labour have lost the advantage of incumbency. There are so many variations in 2015 from 2010 that the emotion and instinct that drives a voter in the ballot box will be hard to predict right up to polling day.
"The team that brought you Ed Miliband’s “Blackbusters” tweet and other awkward pop-culture references is trying a new latest social media trick: spamming Twitter. Taking a leaf out of a playbook beloved by those accounts with buxom ladies flogging Viagra, Labour’s latest effort involves aggravating the Prime Minister by encouraging supporters to blast him with the same tweet over and over again. The topic is, unsurprisingly, Lynton Crosby and cigarette packaging. Labour is obsessed with the story but it’s not exactly getting much traction beyond Westminster.
The garishly designed page encourages visitors to tell David Cameron to “come clean about his conversation with Lynton Crosby about cigarette packaging”. Having failed to land a killer blow at PMQs, Team Miliband is trying to crowdsource some outrage. Press the “Ask Him” button and you’re taken to Twitter and prompted to send this message: “.@David_Cameron Have you ever spoken to Lynton Crosby about cigarette packaging? #YesOrNo?”.
Now I’m sure Labour and Tangent Snowball, which developed this little wheeze along with campaigns for Carlsberg and Nails Inc, would burble on about “creating a viral loop” and “empowering digital activists” but this is spam, pure and simple..."
So bad for Labour that it's probably off the scale though.
Once you've worked it out you'll realise why the Lebo and Norpeth model is applicable to numbers 3 months before the election.
OK, so we should also try to suppress opinion polls, since there ain't no election "tomorrow"...
I'm sure the intelligent people here would like to know what the L&N is saying at the moment since, unlike opinion polls, it attempts to peer into the future...
In answer to your original question, it looks like L&N were saying in July 2008:
Jeremy has gone over Andy's head and written to Ed:
"There is absolutely no reason why a new policy on hospital inspections cannot be introduced on a bipartisan basis as I know we both share a commitment to ensuring there can never be a repeat of what happened at Mid Staffs. However I am very concerned that Labour still appears to be opposing a policy on hospital inspections that has widespread support and will drive up standards for patients. As such, I would be grateful if you would clarify Labour’s position on the new Chief Inspector of Hospitals as soon as possible."
Jeremy has gone over Andy's head and written to Ed:
"There is absolutely no reason why a new policy on hospital inspections cannot be introduced on a bipartisan basis as I know we both share a commitment to ensuring there can never be a repeat of what happened at Mid Staffs. However I am very concerned that Labour still appears to be opposing a policy on hospital inspections that has widespread support and will drive up standards for patients. As such, I would be grateful if you would clarify Labour’s position on the new Chief Inspector of Hospitals as soon as possible."
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK RT @LabourList: Did Lynton Crosby lobby ComRes to rig the poll that says Ed Miliband is unelectable? comres.co.uk/poll/964/itv-n…
The chances of Labour winning most seats and the Tories most votes in 2015 must be over 50% IMO.
I'm a bit sceptical. There is obvious a range of results that have that effect, up to say a 3% Tory lead. But I'd expect something more decisive either way - either Cameron breaks through with a "we're getting there, don't change course" narrative or he doesn't. You're betting on a narrow range of the spectrum being precisely hit.
The chances of Labour winning most seats and the Tories most votes in 2015 must be over 50% IMO.
The latest L&N is saying about 5%, as a matter of interest... (Tories near certainties for vote lead, 95% chance of a seat lead)
But... it does jump around from month to month, and this month was on the high side. We'll have to see if it's a trend. It's starting to look like one...
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK RT @LabourList: Did Lynton Crosby lobby ComRes to rig the poll that says Ed Miliband is unelectable? comres.co.uk/poll/964/itv-n…
Love the Russian for "European Commissioner" - "Evropeyskiy Komissar"
@MikeS - But you keep on missing the big picture. Which is that at this stage of the Parliament for Labour to be only 5-8% ahead is seriously bad news for them. You surely realize that, don't you?
If that lead is still there three weeks before the election, then it's seriously bad news for the Tories. But hardly now.
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK RT @LabourList: Did Lynton Crosby lobby ComRes to rig the poll that says Ed Miliband is unelectable? comres.co.uk/poll/964/itv-n…
In the past this might have generated an "Ed is crap" thread, but in the brave new world of "swift and decisive Ed" I am not sure that meets the editorial policy any more
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK RT @LabourList: Did Lynton Crosby lobby ComRes to rig the poll that says Ed Miliband is unelectable? comres.co.uk/poll/964/itv-n…
In the past this might have generated an "Ed is crap" thread, but in the brave new world of "swift and decisive Ed" I am not sure that meets the editorial policy any more
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at PMQs yesterday must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! He absolutely wiped the floor with his Tory opponents!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
Con Maj 189, I could've got that from ScottP and fitalass
Cobblers. I'm not misusing anything. We know there's no election yet. The model doesn't need to know that. FFS, the coalition could break down tomorrow and there could be a snap election. Would the model's output change, for knowing that? Course not...
Intelligent people can draw their own conclusions from the model's output and trend, up to the present time...
In a nutshell, so far, it's never put Labour ahead in 2015, and the trend is with the Blues...
Quincel ..amused of Italy here.. are you saying Ed M is charismatic and if so how does he save money for real people (whatever/whoever, they are) on a daily basis..when do I get mine. Or are you a spoof.
I was talking about Alexander Orlov, hence the quote in my post.
On Topic, if Labour focuses on retaining the LD 2010 defectors it will get about 36% of the vote, that will be enough if UKIP stay strong, but if Cameron gets the UKIP vote down to 5% or less he will be at least tying Labour and can then focus on pushing the total up to 40% and a little beyond for a majority. He can do that by winning a few centrist 2010 LD defectors of his own!
Con Maj 189, I could've got that from ScottP and fitalass
Cobblers. I'm not misusing anything. We know there's no election yet. The model doesn't need to know that. FFS, the coalition could break down tomorrow and there could be a snap election. Would the model's output change, for knowing that? Course not...
Intelligent people can draw their own conclusions from the model's output and trend, up to the present time...
In a nutshell, so far, it's never put Labour ahead in 2015, and the trend is with the Blues...
I am prepared to accept that the L and N model is a good predictor of GE 2 years hence . However , I would like to see the predictions for 1990 , 1995 , 1999 , 2003 and 2008 for the GE's 2 years later before coming to a conclusion . Can you give us the relevant figures please ?
The chances of Labour winning most seats and the Tories most votes in 2015 must be over 50% IMO.
I'm a bit sceptical. There is obvious a range of results that have that effect, up to say a 3% Tory lead. But I'd expect something more decisive either way - either Cameron breaks through with a "we're getting there, don't change course" narrative or he doesn't. You're betting on a narrow range of the spectrum being precisely hit.
Point of information: If the average swing since 1974 occurs in 2015, the Tories would finish about 2.5% ahead in the popular vote, and Andy's scenario would come to pass...
@MikeS - But you keep on missing the big picture. Which is that at this stage of the Parliament for Labour to be only 5-8% ahead is seriously bad news for them. You surely realize that, don't you?
If that lead is still there three weeks before the election, then it's seriously bad news for the Tories. But hardly now.
Lots of Lab voters went to LD. Those that didn't vote for Blair or Brown are now going to come back to Ed?
Too much work, and not possible anyhow since the model was only invented in 2002. The model's autoregressive parameters would have been different for the earlier years, and I am not in a position to calculate them from scratch.
And it's not trying to predict the election from two years out. The final datapoint in the series is the only one the matters (Tim's point), but judging from the trend, you can take an educated guess what that might be...
Basically, it's all down to PM approval, and Cameron is doing very well so far. Well enough to win next time...
CarlottaVance - This is pure political calculation by Rudd. He knows that most Australians are sceptical about asylum so has pushed through a policy that will appeal to swing voters. It may lose the ALP a few votes on the liberal left to the Greens on the PV, but on 2PP most of those will hold their noses and vote ALP to keep out Abbott!
If you had been a member of the jury, would you have voted to find George Zimmerman guilty of murder, guilty of manslaughter, not guilty, or would you have been unsure? Not guilty 41% Guilty of manslaughter 23% Guilty of murder 15% Not sure 21% Among Whites Not guilty 46% Guilty of manslaughter 22% Guilty of murder 12% Not sure 20% Among Blacks Guilty of manslaughter 39% Guilty of murder 36% Not guilty 14% Not sure 11%
The jury found George Zimmerman not guilty. Which word best describes how you feel about the verdict? Pleased 22% Relieved 19% Disappointed 27% Angry 13% Not sure 19% Among Whites Pleased 25% Relieved 21% Disappointed 23% Angry 12% Not sure 19% Among Blacks Pleased 5% Relieved 11% Disappointed 53% Angry 25% Not sure 6%
In the way they covered the case, would you say the news media were biased in favor of Zimmerman, biased against Zimmerman, or did they not show any bias one way or the other? Biased in favor of Zimmerman 12% Biased against Zimmerman 48% Not biased one way or the other 18% Not sure 22%
Too much work, and not possible anyhow since the model was only invented in 2002. The model's autoregressive parameters would have been different for the earlier years, and I am not in a position to calculate them from scratch.
Then there is insufficient data to show whether the model is of any use in accurately predicting the future .
Many of the LD 2010 voters who now favour Labour are tactical voters who voted tactically to harm the Tories. If they choose to vote Labour in 2015 , it will benefit the Tories and damage Labour.
'Scottish independence: Better Together targets voter 'tribes''
The group campaigning for a no vote in Scotland's independence referendum has said it will embark on the most sophisticated targeting of voters seen in British political history.
Pro-union Better Together has launched its new "Patriot" system.
It will divide Scotland's four million voters into 40 different tribes.
This will then allow the campaign to speak directly to undecided voters using letters, emails and face-to-face discussions.
Better Together said the technology, which has been developed with information from credit rating agency Experian and input from former advisers to President Obama, will allow them to identify lifestyle indicators like the number of cars a family has and local house prices.
'Scottish independence: Better Together targets voter 'tribes''
The group campaigning for a no vote in Scotland's independence referendum has said it will embark on the most sophisticated targeting of voters seen in British political history.
Pro-union Better Together has launched its new "Patriot" system.
It will divide Scotland's four million voters into 40 different tribes.
This will then allow the campaign to speak directly to undecided voters using letters, emails and face-to-face discussions.
Better Together said the technology, which has been developed with information from credit rating agency Experian and input from former advisers to President Obama, will allow them to identify lifestyle indicators like the number of cars a family has and local house prices.
Comments
How could you ever resist quoting this paragraph;
Chuka (his name rhymes with “cooker” and means “God is the greatest”) was born in 1978 in London, the son of Bennett, a Nigerian immigrant from the Igbo tribe, who arrived at Liverpool docks in the 1960s carrying a suitcase on his head and no money.
What fun the journalist was having.
I had always thought that my parents had unhealthy ambitions for me. But a candid friend pointed out that this could equally be translated as "a queen that leads men on".
Muslims fast; then feast.
Australians "play" cricket and....
Stephen?
But what about the suitcase on your dad's head? That has to be in the back-story of every man of ambition.
[Apologies in advance if I've mis-represented his position].
It's a plan of pure genius. Make Salmond a figure of fun. Goad spokesweasels from rival parties to make fun of him. They are forced to resign. Repeat from (1) until all rival parties run out of spin doctors.
Admittedly it's a bit of a longer term strategy but it's got potential. Especially as the first stage is so easy.
Pasted from Al-Beeb just now....
Don't record the news; create the new in your image....
There'll == ???
Edited:
There <> Their: AveryLP should hold his keyboard in shame....
Even to the extent of recommending he gets a blue suit made by a good tailor.
Even the client list was designed to tempt him in.
See: http://samstailor.com/
Great stuff!
By tomorrow night they'll be about 600 runs behind.
I'd be on the phone to Katich and Ponting. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
It looks like that is what England may be able to do on this occasion. I don't think I've ever seen it happen before, at least not for England.
According to today's Populus poll just 3% of 2010 LAB voters now say CON
Meanwhile 4% of 2010 CON voters now say LAB
As there were more CON voters than LAB ones at GE2010 the balance is very much with Labour
http://www.populus.co.uk/uploads/130715 Online Voting Intention.pdf
ComRes have just released some devastatingly bad numbers for @Ed_Miliband in their latest polling for @itvnews http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/964/itv-news-index.htm …
Not that I'm bitter or anything. :-) But it won't work twice.
Top tip. They know that already.
If that lead is still there three weeks before the election, then it's seriously bad news for the Tories. But hardly now.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB
Just 22% tell ComRes that they expect EdM to be the PM in 2015 Poll found 42% to 20% saying LAB would perform better at GE2 with new leader
On the "Do you, or would you, trust each of the following politicians to see the country through the current economic situation?", George Osborne scores better than Ed Miliband. Women seem to be markedly less trusting of politicians than men - which shows that women are the smarter sex.
The SWIFTIndex is published today. It managed to predict the last two quarter's UK GDP growth figures bang on.
So here is their latest and last 'nowcast' before we get ONS's first estimate on Thursday of next week (25/7): These are some mighty good figures if they are right. The OECD, IMF and most external forecasters have uprated the UK's 2013 figures recently but none are forecasting 1% growth in the first half year (0.3% + 0.7%).
The SWIFT index is especially surprising as it has been predicting 0.1% QoQ growth for Q2 2013 for their last few issues.
Are we all being too optimistic?
Link: http://www.swift.com/zdoc/swift_index/SWIFTIndex_July2013.pdf
[You may need to register to download]
IIRC @FoxInSoxUK is toying with the idea of LDing in 2015 but I can't recall who he voted for last time.
Labour are heading for a drubbing. WTF can they do? Will Ed throw in the towell?
I told everyone who would listen, that the new seat was only nominally Lib Dem, because Conservatives voted Lib Dem in the local council elections to stop Labour.
Labour will increase their vote in this seat next time, because many now know that the Lib Dems have no chance of taking this seat.
I also made money on Harrogate going blue.
Media coverage on Unions, awesome speech on party funding, lobbying and MPs 2nd jobs, NHS coverage, so it must all point to the high point for Ed.
- A majority of the British public (57%) do not see Ed Miliband as an election winner.
- Twice as many (42%) agree that Labour would have a better chance in the next General Election without Ed Miliband as party leader as disagree (20%).
- One-third (33%) say that they would prefer a Labour-Lib Dem coalition to a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition. More than two-fifths (43%) disagree.
- Two in five (42%) agree that the Labour Party understands the concerns of ordinary people better than the Conservatives. However, this is down 5 points from last September and more than one in three (36%) disagree.
- Almost half (46%) say that Labour cannot be trusted to run the economy – unchanged from last year.
They'd have a better chance with Aleksandr Meerkat as leader...
You're probably (as is Dave) broadly correct on the UKIP figure too, perhaps it can reach 6-7 but definitely no higher, to deny a second-term Tory led government.
www.ronpaulchannel.com/landing/ron-paul-landing/
I'll have to phone our cable bloke, see if they're going to be carrying it locally...
So bad for Labour that it's probably off the scale though.
Andy Burnham, after Stafford and Keogh
Yvette Cooper, after Abu Qatada
Ed Balls, after all the recent economic numbers
Chuka, your time is now...?
Hunt prods Burnham for NHS policy details http://specc.ie/13T6s16
In 2010 the plus side for Gordon Brown (I know to many that is an oxymoron): He had experience and was in control in a crisis, and the media gave him a good crisis. His economy with the truth was not exposed to the extent that it should have been by the media, he had loyalty of the party (out of fear in retrospect?). He polled higher in GE 2010 because of the financial crisis, if there were no crisis his vote would have collapsed further.
Cameron had a bad election 2010, and is not likely to be so bad again. He has one under his belt for experience, and I would think he has learnt. Labour has no more gloss than in 2010, it lacks big beasts and gravitas. Assuming the economy continues in an upward trend, the plea to complete the work started will be compelling. Not many babies have were served at tables between 2010 and 2015, the working poorest will do relatively better than they did under Labour.
LibDems will have to rely on local personalities. They have tried to alienate most of the supporters they once had and most of those they could hope to collect. They have a really difficult task in 2015, they can not expect protest votes which were a useful source of X's in the box for them.
General: 2015 is an election where in the run up there are two governing parties and one main opposition. A new and unusual situation. The government will ram down our throats the fact that they are clearing up the economic mess that was inherited, not the mess they made. Labour have lost the advantage of incumbency. There are so many variations in 2015 from 2010 that the emotion and instinct that drives a voter in the ballot box will be hard to predict right up to polling day.
Who do you trust to see the country through the current economic situation (net)
Cameron: -10
Miliband: -36
Osborne: -30
Balls: -40
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/ITV_News_Index_3.pdf
The Labour Party understands the concerns of ordinary people better than the Conservatives do
Agree: 42
Disagree: 36
"The team that brought you Ed Miliband’s “Blackbusters” tweet and other awkward pop-culture references is trying a new latest social media trick: spamming Twitter. Taking a leaf out of a playbook beloved by those accounts with buxom ladies flogging Viagra, Labour’s latest effort involves aggravating the Prime Minister by encouraging supporters to blast him with the same tweet over and over again. The topic is, unsurprisingly, Lynton Crosby and cigarette packaging. Labour is obsessed with the story but it’s not exactly getting much traction beyond Westminster.
The garishly designed page encourages visitors to tell David Cameron to “come clean about his conversation with Lynton Crosby about cigarette packaging”. Having failed to land a killer blow at PMQs, Team Miliband is trying to crowdsource some outrage. Press the “Ask Him” button and you’re taken to Twitter and prompted to send this message: “.@David_Cameron Have you ever spoken to Lynton Crosby about cigarette packaging? #YesOrNo?”.
Now I’m sure Labour and Tangent Snowball, which developed this little wheeze along with campaigns for Carlsberg and Nails Inc, would burble on about “creating a viral loop” and “empowering digital activists” but this is spam, pure and simple..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compare_the_Meerkat
Lab 38%
Con 33%
LD 11%
UKIP 11%
I'm sure the intelligent people here would like to know what the L&N is saying at the moment since, unlike opinion polls, it attempts to peer into the future...
In answer to your original question, it looks like L&N were saying in July 2008:
Con vote lead: 17.7%
Con seat lead: 189 seats
If the Tories do the same, they finish in front in 2015...
"There is absolutely no reason why a new policy on hospital inspections cannot be introduced on a bipartisan basis as I know we both share a commitment to ensuring there can never be a repeat of what happened at Mid Staffs. However I am very concerned that Labour still appears to be opposing a policy on hospital inspections that has widespread support and will drive up standards for patients. As such, I would be grateful if you would clarify Labour’s position on the new Chief Inspector of Hospitals as soon as possible."
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK
RT @LabourList: Did Lynton Crosby lobby ComRes to rig the poll that says Ed Miliband is unelectable? comres.co.uk/poll/964/itv-n…
But... it does jump around from month to month, and this month was on the high side. We'll have to see if it's a trend. It's starting to look like one...
ICM and Populus were giving LAB & CON shares very close to what happened two years later.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at PMQs yesterday must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! He absolutely wiped the floor with his Tory opponents!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
It's not quite as funny as "sweaty man in a heatwave", but it still raises a smile.
Intelligent people can draw their own conclusions from the model's output and trend, up to the present time...
In a nutshell, so far, it's never put Labour ahead in 2015, and the trend is with the Blues...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-19/manus-island-detention-centre-to-be-expanded-under-rudd27s-asy/4830778
https://twitter.com/David_Cameron/status/358231366065848320/photo/1
In a nutshell, no.
Too much work, and not possible anyhow since the model was only invented in 2002. The model's autoregressive parameters would have been different for the earlier years, and I am not in a position to calculate them from scratch.
And it's not trying to predict the election from two years out. The final datapoint in the series is the only one the matters (Tim's point), but judging from the trend, you can take an educated guess what that might be...
Basically, it's all down to PM approval, and Cameron is doing very well so far. Well enough to win next time...
If you had been a member of the jury, would you have voted to find George Zimmerman guilty of murder, guilty of manslaughter, not guilty, or would you have been unsure?
Not guilty 41%
Guilty of manslaughter 23%
Guilty of murder 15%
Not sure 21%
Among Whites
Not guilty 46%
Guilty of manslaughter 22%
Guilty of murder 12%
Not sure 20%
Among Blacks
Guilty of manslaughter 39%
Guilty of murder 36%
Not guilty 14%
Not sure 11%
The jury found George Zimmerman not guilty. Which word best describes how you feel about the verdict?
Pleased 22%
Relieved 19%
Disappointed 27%
Angry 13%
Not sure 19%
Among Whites
Pleased 25%
Relieved 21%
Disappointed 23%
Angry 12%
Not sure 19%
Among Blacks
Pleased 5%
Relieved 11%
Disappointed 53%
Angry 25%
Not sure 6%
In the way they covered the case, would you say the news media were biased in favor of Zimmerman, biased against Zimmerman, or did they not show any bias one way or the other?
Biased in favor of Zimmerman 12%
Biased against Zimmerman 48%
Not biased one way or the other 18%
Not sure 22%
As a Swede you don't get a vote Scotland's referendum . Why are you so preoccupied by other people's business ?