Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Even if the Tories clawed back all of their 2010 voters wh
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Even if the Tories clawed back all of their 2010 voters who’ve switched to LAB the most they’d put on less than 2pc
There’s a new Populus online poll out – the third in just eight days – and all the fieldwork took place over the weekend. The figures with changes on Friday’s poll are LAB 39 (↔); CON 32 (↑1); LD 12 (↔); UKIP 9 (↓1).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
NEWS OUTLETS: trying to gauge how enthused the British public are about the royal baby? Use this handy flow diagram. http://pic.twitter.com/d7T3YpyF5t
Cool US cities to visit, by the Guardian. DETROIT!!
I've passed briefly through Detroit. It is cool, but it is a bit scary off the beaten track.
Los Angeles may someday go a similar way. Parts of San Fernando Valley and almost all of South LA replicate the eastern parts of Detroit. Sketchy, drug-and-crime ridden and run by gangs.
LA is cool too though! And I had less trouble stumbling about at night pissed in Detroit and LA than I did in Sarf London.
Do you have a link to the data tables?
I would guess that the certainty to vote of Labour voters is higher than that for Tory voters - if this reverses as election day approaches then there can be the appearance of swingback without any voters changing their mind on which party to support. This is an enthusiasm gap, and is probably a more consistent reason for swingback than literal changes in support between the parties.
Likewise, if some of the 2010 Lib Dems who now say they will vote Labour do not do so, and some of the 2010 Conservatives who say they will vote UKIP return to the Tories, then there will be the appearance of swingback without any direct Labour to Conservative swing voters changing their mind.
@antifrank noted Richard Cromwell was one of those few who as Head of State outlived their successor. Indeed so but he is unique in outliving not only his successor Charles II but also James II, Mary II, William III and Queen Anne only survived him by a month in August 1714.
As a point of Scottish history Charles II as King of Scots 1649-51 outlived Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell.
The link to the data tables is just under the chart. Click "get the data".
I'm not sure that, on the face of it, this is exactly good news for Labour.
Does Cameron have any intermediate options, more than just making a speech welcoming the birth. but stopping short of a bank holiday?
Thing is voters are individuals not clubs or battalions. I occasionally think terms like 2010 lib dems are a little misleading. Its not like they're the 29th regiment of foot.
I think differential turnout will play a significant part in the 2015 GE.
The big questions have to be how sticky the LD-Lab and Con-UKIP moves will be, and if they're not to stay, where those voters will wind back up?
In the case of the Lib Dems who've gone Lab, and are sustaining Labour's leads, there are various groups:
- Claggasm voters who switched / decided to vote late in the 2010 campaign. These now feel let down by Clegg being 'just another politician' and are vaguely inclined to Labour as 'not the government'. At some point they'll take a look at Miliband as a potential PM and decide 'no thanks'. Most likely won't vote but could otherwise end up anywhere.
- High turn-out swing voters not convinced by Brown or Cameron. Again, could end up with any of the main parties. Mostly with Labour for now but that's a cost-free mid-term option; not one for a general election.
- Tactical voters who went Lib Dem to keep the Tories out and are going back to Labour 'on principle'. These voters will actively help the Conservatives.
- Genuine Left-wingers who left Labour due to Iraq / tuition fees / privatisation / whatever and now seek to repent their sins. Some will stick, though Miliband's evasiveness on policy is not exactly going to win much red blooded support. Small Labour gain.
The two biggest swing votes are the ex-2010 LDs and the ex-2010 Cons. Where these voters end up is likely to determine the election, and where they end up is likely to depend on how the government performs over the next two years. A steady economic recovery and a minimal number of Downing St gimmicks should see Dave back in No 10.
Includes VI and "best PM" questions.
http://order-order.com/2013/07/22/crosby-presentation-organised-by-labour-lobbyist-labour-mps-attended-event-held-in-commons/
The Guardian claims that the “leaked” presentation was made by CTF to private healthcare profiteers, it was actually organised by the lobbying firm Westminster Advisers to MPs - who were all given copies. Making it more of a handout than a leak. Westminster Advisers is headed by Dominic Church, a wealthy Labour supporter and a former Hammersmith and Fulham councillor for the party. He is a Blairite private healthcare lobbyist…
Church lobbies for the H5 Private Hospitals Alliance. The slideshow was shown at their parliamentary reception themed ‘Improving Britain’s healthcare’ on 29 November 2010 in the House of Commons. The invitation was open to all MPs and Guido understands that many Labour MPs enjoyed the hospitality served in Dining Room A. One attendee remembers seeing, for example, Gisela Stuart at the event. CTF merely providing polling data for the report. It was a briefing for MPs by private healthcare, not a briefing to private healthcare.
I'm told Lord Ashcroft's polling of Unite members, after Ed M proposed changes to party's union link, is out tonight. Not good for Labour.
A small taster already Mike
It's a good deal more common in republics. From the 20th Century, off the top of my head, I think Taft, Wilson, Hoover, Truman, Eisenhower, Ford and Carter have all outlived one or more of their successors.
Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes
Guardian cut 26 pages from "Crosby presentation", renumbered them. Claimed was a leak, when was given to Labour MPs guyfawk.es/1b7UK5x
Glad to be indoors and cool on this furnace of a day.
None of this matters now of course - there's a long way to go but the genesis of 1979, 1997 and 2010 was all in the willingness of voters to switch directly from one of the main parties to the other.
The two significant developments since the 2010 GE have been the shattering of the 2010 LD vote bloc with a third to a half shifting to Labour as a result of the formation of the Coalition and the emergence of UKIP as the traditional mid-term protest home for disillusioned Conservatives (primarily but not exclusively).
The degree to which the former remains true and the degree to which the vote of UKIP can be reduced is or are the main questions around which the 2015 GE will turn.
I wonder if the latter will change their online reporting to reflect that it was effectively a Labour supporter promoting private healthcare?
We had a rummage through the British history books on the last thread. So far we've had :
Edgar Aethling .. Edward IV .. Henry VI .. James II all of England.
James VI .. Charles II and James VII of Scotland
Richard Cromwell of the Commonwealth
Edward VIII of the UK
Unless other PBers know better ??
As usual this turned out to be a pack of lies (whew!) but I think there is still a significant wedge of floating voters who may have either stuck with Labour or not voted at all to play for. Now it has been demonstrated that a tory government, even in coalition, is more efficient and careful with peoples' money I think quite a lot of that wedge may be more open to voting tory than were in 2010. In short there is votes in the centre ground.
Whilst it makes sense to not unnecessarily irritate their natural supporters (particularly given the opportunity to squeeze UKIP back to something like 5%) this means policies that will be attractive to this centre ground voters. I think we will see more of this.
1. It's hot.
2. I'm still alive
Just over 10% of Unite members would join the Labour Party if invited to do so, Lord Ashcroft's polling shows. Full results out midnight
So Ed going to cut his union funding by 90% and bankrupt his party??
Masterstroke......
Meanwhile the witch hunt is already starting. The Telly reports that inmates of maximum security prisons are able to access violent and disturbing films like reservoir dogs and Saw.
This is going sour for Dave, and it serves him right.
Mr Kenny of the GMB felt 10% would be a good result for his members to join up. So if either the GMB or Unite decided to unaffiliate or if EdM doesn't want their money to pay for food and rations between elections - that's a very tricky position to be in.
The unions will still have the same money - they just won't rely on Labour as channel to spend it, but do more themselves directly.
It is a pity that IDS's reforms are taking so long to come into effect as that could have increased the changes to the electorate but it was always a massive task and it is more important in the long run that he gets it right.
It keeps them happy.
Quite. Plus, when this comes in, somewhere there will be data on who's in and who's out. The potential for misuse of that data is huge - as well as the potential for court cases.
Most worryingly for Labour, Ashcroft polling will show 46% of Unite members disagreed with £12M donation to Labour since 2010; 43% agreed.
Looks like Sunny is releasing all the juicy bits, and its all bad for labour.
I was surprised the government didn't want this weeks news to be all about Thursdays GDP announcenent....
"Paper which published thousands of secret US diplomatic cables says it was worried about copyright of a PowerPoint handout. Yeah right."
Indeed. Just like the BNP's membership list was published - look up your local racists.
We could be heading for a whole new strata of law here Plato.
After all, just because you opted in, that does not mean you necessarily accessed pornography. And so, anybody who published the lists could, conceivably, be guilty of defamation.
Plus there's the potential for abuse by the police. Oh the suspect's an 'opt in' so he must have done it.
Miliband to announce more details of Labour-trade union reforms tonight. Full report on @TheStaggers at 6pm.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2013/07/dont-let-bankruptcy-fool-you-detroits-not-dead/6261/
Good day to bury bad news?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom#Supporters
Current MPs in the list are as follows:
Norman Baker
Russell Brown
Ronnie Campbell
Jeremy Corbyn
David Crausby
Ian Davidson
Paul Flynn
Roger Godsiff
Kelvin Hopkins
Julian Huppert
Glenda Jackson
Caroline Lucas
Jim McGovern
Stephen Pound
Dennis Skinner
There are many more examples of pre-conquest / pre-English union monarchs who outlived successors; a time when abdications - both forced and voluntary - were much more common. Aethelred the Unready would be one obvious example but a more obscure and complex case is that of Olaf Sitricsson.
Olaf was the Viking king of Jorvik (and other realms and territories) from 941-3, when he was deposed by Ragnald II. Ragnald was subsequently killed in battle and Jorvik was temporarily subsumed into England, gaining Edmund, who died shortly after, and then Eadred as king in the process. In 948, Erik Bloodaxe successfully re-established Jorvik as outside of English rule, with himself as king. By this stage, Jorvik has Olaf and Eadred as living former rulers. Erik himself only lasted a year before he was deposed but Eadred was not sufficiently strong to subdue the territory and reinstated former Olaf as king. He lasted only another four years until 952 before Erik again forcefully wrested the crown but his second stint was little more successful than his first and within two years Eadred finally gained control over Jorvik, combining it as the final piece into what is now recognisably England. Erik and Olaf were both living at this stage, though Erik was killed shortly after. Olaf however, remained king of Dublin until 980, outliving a further four English monarchs in the process.
Thomas Paine too.
I suppose it must be all those horror stories about the Vodafone, T-Mobile, Orange, BT, and Virgin opt-in lists appearing in the media, day after day since they were introduced in 2002
At least a mobile phone is probably personal, whereas the home internet connection is increasingly likely to be used by the whole family, right down to five-year olds.
Thanks for the Viking information.
He was getting his porn the old fashioned way (videos) at the taxpayers expense I think?
By the way the top 3 selling books of 2012 were all basically porn, 10.5 million books in the Fifty Shades series. How's he going to draw a line round that ? Do we ban Kindle downloads ?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/dec/28/top-100-bestselling-books-2012
'Sunny Hundal @sunny_hundal 2m
Just over 10% of Unite members would join the Labour Party if invited to do so, Lord Ashcroft's polling shows. Full results out midnight
Can't be right,Tim's been telling us repeatedly that Ed's changes will result in a Labour membership surge.
His risible internet posturing is going to be wiped away by the tabloid baby frenzy.
LOL
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23404042
That's an interesting article EIT. The central premise is that the suburbs NEED the city and so will be amenable to helping it pay its gargantuan debt.
Maybe so, but they would surely want to see the creditors (ie council employees with pension schemes) take a hit too.
The way this goes is incredibly important as it could prove a model for other places. And not just in the US.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timwigmore/100226882/yes-ed-miliband-has-problems-but-here-are-five-reasons-why-he-will-still-be-prime-minister/
"The Lib Dem membership would clearly prefer installing Miliband as PM to a second term with the Tories. Nick Clegg may be politically closer to Cameron, but he has shown a willingness to work with Miliband on blocking boundary reform and the Leveson Inquiry.
If, as is very possible, the Lib Dems could form a viable coalition with either main party after 2015, they would be more inclined to do a deal with Labour: Lib Dems haven’t given up on Lords reform, for instance, which only Labour could deliver."
Can we get this straight: why haven't all those making these points been campaigning against opt-in filters since 2002? Oh, no, I know the answer - it's because a decade of experience disproves their points.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/10195191/Gloom-lifts-as-consumers-feel-more-confident-about-finances.html
It sounds like 'marching youths to the cashpoint to pay fines' thingy Blair talked about.
Ranty Man @ranty_man
“Yes m’lud the defendant opted IN to receiving pornography on his broadband. This speaks volumes about their character”
"Further evidence of Number 10 finding a hard-headed campaigning zeal reaches this blog, in the form of a campaigning website called Protecting Our Children. It includes a petition ‘to support David Cameron’s call for ISPs to introduce Family Friendly Filters as soon as possible’, and facts about internet safety and what it is that the ‘the Prime Minister and ISPs have worked together to ensure’."
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/07/pms-porn-crackdown-replicates-tory-eu-campaign-success/
What makes you think these broadband filters would be any more effective?
On topic.
I don't think that Nigel Farage knows which constituency he'll go for yet, theres an awful lot of organising to do.
I myself will be going to a UKIP hustings to pick London MEP's this coming Saturday. It will be the first one I'll attend; I will let you know how it pans out.
The LibDems only have a problem if you think the ex-Tories will re-Tory, but the ex-Libdems won't re-LibDem. I suppose this is possible, but I don't see any particular evidence for it.