Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ipsos-MORI: The demographic group which has most moved away
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ipsos-MORI: The demographic group which has most moved away from the Tories since GE2010 – low paid working women
The FT is reporting this morning that aggregate polling data from Ipsos-MORI covering the twelve months until March 2013 shows that the group most likely to have been turned off the Tories since GE2010 have been low paid working women.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
1. Reduce their, and their family's IT bill: the LDs seek to claim credit for this - but their ambition of £10k personal allowance by 2015 has already been exceeded and the Con Manifesto for 2015 will surely indicate a rise to Min wage levels (or above) by 2020. The New Orthodoxy is not a lower rate of IT, but a vastly higher starting point.
2. Point out that every £ borrowed by the State is a £ that they, and their children, will be taxed in the future to repay. Adding interest payments and every £ borrowed now will require £2 in additional taxes to repay it - and it is their children who will be paying that additional money - for 50 years or more.
3. Provide what Conservative governments could and should have done over many years (and have been frustrated by Whitehall's mentality) namely provide a large Married Tax Allowance and allow free transfer of of the IT allowance between married couples and ONLY between married couples. A strengthening and reinforcement of marriage is long, long overdue.*
* Other life-style choices are available to those who wish to choose them. The State just chooses to recognise marriage as the most important to Society. It's called discrimination, and it's an absolutely normal part of Life, the Universe and Everything and not something to be ashamed of: some actions and choices are inherently better than others (charity donations v mugging for example) and discriminating between them is perfectly normal.
Politicians should be proud of discriminating in favour of certain lifestyle choices and not ashamed to show their beliefs - 'for evil to triumph, it is necessary only for good men to stay silent' - and 'progressive' changes to Society on the social context have advanced on that basis, thus inflating the Welfare costs, harming children, damaging families, communities and society and substituting rules, mores and traditions, with a 'do what you like - anything goes - every choice is valid and equal' approach which leads to cases like the Phillpotts.
So, in summary, point out that their children will be far, far, better off under a hard-line, right-wing Conservative government than they ever could or would, be, under a variation of the failed Social Democracy which has so comprehensively screwed the UK since 1945 (Wilson, Heath, Callaghan, Major, Blair, Brown: they're all the same debt-addicted vote-buyers).
Edit: This preferred option (small-State, lower taxes, balanced Budget) form of government will not be on offer to the UK voter in 2015, but will surely be in 2020 and it is to secure Cameron's replacement having a thumping mandate that we all need to consider our 2015 GE vote very carefully indeed.
A recent poll (6670 adults) splits 4:1 in favour of having a successful marriage over a successful career. The State has, for 40 years, actively encouraged us all to regard only the second as the measure of our personal success (since it means higher taxes).
The additional costs of marriage breakdowns and unhappiness caused by the 'strivers' seeking to add career ambitions and demands to those of family and friends are ignored.
Remember - the State wants only your taxes and all politicians want only your votes: nothing else about you and your life is of any importance to them. You may choose to think differently!
http://www.businessinsider.com/intrade-700-thousand-dollar-cash-shortfall-2013-4
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2013/04/tory-candidate-to-face-ed-balls-in-terrible-amateur-music-video/
It was an interesting if rather sad experience.
If someone suggested something similar for this country, I would be emphatically against after seeing the pawn shops and their equivalents in that town.
On the other hand, Carson City was great with its dinky state house and very friendly people who worked in it.
So the very last thing Cammie or Osbrowne would want to do is appear gleeful and posture like peacocks when introducing yet more austerity measures. Well, they blew that then.
"The challenge is not about the rhetoric but addressing the reality of those managing on tight household budgets in difficult times. "
The austerity is set to continue with no end in sight certainly until after 2015 and the next election. That being the case rhetoric is all the parties have but their problem is you can't fool those on the sharp end of austerity about how it affects them.
They will hardly respond very well to being told a variation on how 'they've never had it so good,' since they will know precisely how every rearrangement/removal of child credits/child benefit/tax credits impacts when they have to budget for them.
Equally any promises of jam tomorrow will also have to be far more credible than a few vague soundbites about 'Aspiration One Nation' or whatever.
"The hope of the Tories is that Labour will not be seen to offer a viable alternative."
If that's the case, and it may well be, what do the lib dems hope? A return to 'a plague on both your houses' voting? That won't come easily after they've been in coalition with the tories.
Most likely just keep hoping everything can be solved for them with tactical voting as usual.
This seems somewhat unsurprising. Plus, aren't women likelier to be in public sector jobs, and therefore likelier to have lost them as the public sector workforce is reduced?
I'm pretty sure women get more benefits too, because they're either part of couples or single parent (not many single parent fathers).
As I've suggested before, the best way to make work pay is to cut benefits and taxes. Then people keep more of what they earn, and earning is encouraged (not, dear God, 'incentivised'. What an awful word).
Incitement of maths education under 13 years of Labour.
The Mirror's front page on Clegg is quite frankly pathetic. If it was printed on soft, red, absorbent, perforated paper it would hardly be a surprise.
MPs and political leaders are entitled to some holidays with or without their children. The Mirror made no issue of Ed M driving a locomotive during a holiday at New Year 2012.
I'll put up the early discussion thread on Monday. In the meantime, those of you excited by front end grip might like this article: http://thewptformula.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/the-evolution-of-the-modern-front-wing-part-2/
It's rather technical but I found it pretty interesting.
Surely the best idea would be for the nasty party to tell the voters that they are too stupid to know 'they've never had it so good'? Even better, get Osbrowne to do it personally after he pops out for a pizza.
What could possibly go wrong? ;^)
O/T A funny tag running on Twitter this morning.
My favorite so far: #horsenames Top-rate Striver two lengths clear of Undeserving Poor
Mirror is becoming unfit for purpose as lining for the budgie's cage. Am amazed it thought that Cable wasn't shirking when he went dancing on tv.
Of course, that only matters if the reasoning behind voting is to maximise Treasury income rather than punitively hit the rich.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/134255558/24m-Tax-Cut-Leaflet
https://twitter.com/EllyOldroyd/status/320439187105013761/photo/1
Didn't Mervyn King advise firms not to do that, and get at least some big names to confirm they wouldn't?
Would we have time to get the 2014 figures (whether whole or just H1) prior to the 2015 (presumed) General Election.
Furthermore, how could Osborne have cut the rate without being 'cynical', in your eyes? It's not like he slashed his own salary six minutes before an expected electoral defeat.
Not that the voter is ever particularly impressed by such vapid soundbites.
And that still utterly ignores the wider fiscal picture (ie massive deficit and debt).
Some big companies have not delayed payments; many, many more have; or have given staff the option. There is nothing illegal about it. It's not just the top rate that's been cut though; the tax on dividends has been too. It's a super double boost for the wealthiest.
: “Labour is the party of hard workers not free-riders. The clue is in the name. We are the Labour party. The party that said that idleness is an evil. The party of workers, not shirkers.”
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/01/09/this-is-why-liam-byrne-cannot-lead-labour-on-welfare/
If the Tories last until 2020, what makes you think we will have a (meaningful) minimum wage by then?
I was appalled when Labour suggested the introduction of super casinos.
It was a ludicrous idea to suggest they would regenerate deprived areas.
Can someone (andrea!) give an overall picture of the % of English seats being contested by UKIP? Probably the most significant new item of information in terms of the May elections.
DavidL - response to your comment on my blog is up, though I still want to add a post on tax credits. (If you sub to the blog you'll get an auto-notification.)
so Balls policy is we'd do lots of nice things, but don't ask me to commit to anything since the election is a long way away. It sort of raises the question why anyone should interview him until 2015 since he has nothing to say.
Labour have spent the last few months quoting individual cases as they've ranted against every single welfare reform - odd that you don't criticize them.
They need to start doing the right thing and working harder. Then the Tories will look after them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2013/apr/05/iain-duncan-smith-53-a-week
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9974373/Welfare-reform-53-a-week...-You-do-the-maths.html
UKIP is aiming to build on its good performance in the Eastleigh by-election by fielding a record 1,700 candidates for the local council elections on May 2.
Some pollsters predict the party could get as much as 15% of the vote, up from 6% in the 2009 elections.
Link Politics Home.
If Miliband D resigns from Sunderland because Di canio is a fascist, will Miliband E cut himself off from any Union with Communists on its board ?
However her whining - "I bought a Lucozade for £1.99 because I was feeling light-headed" - is just garbage. It's possible to live on £53 per week after rent and bills (my wife - admittedly 10 years ago - lived for a while on $60/£40 a week) but it is pretty soul-destroying after a while
EDIT: Socrates's link is to the Telegraph a far better article. And it reminded me of the most irritating thing about Zoe Williams article. She complained she had to buy little pots of (chopped and pre-prepared) peppers at £1 a go for her kids. At my local Tesco (in central London, so presumably not the cheapest) you can buy 3 peppers for 99p. Use one knife and 5 minutes and you have already saved £2 from her spending.
What evidence is there that anyone seeks to censor debate about a benefit reduction?
Although I feel people should be free to do broadly what they wish, I am uncomfortable with it.
Not to mention that the adverts are overwhelmingly all crap.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/05/labour-draw-sting-welfare-or-lose-2015
"Above all, Labour has to address the sentiment that lies at the heart of those anti-welfare poll numbers: resentment at the thought that people are getting something for nothing."
"The extraordinary restrictions placed on staff at more than 200 GP practices have been drawn up by Clinical Commissiong Groups (CCGs), which took responsibility for the NHS budget on Monday.
The decisions were taken even though Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, last month said any clauses which stopped staff from speaking about patient safety or care should be banned.
Documents seen by the Daily Telegraph show that CCGs covering swathes of the country have issued hundreds of doctors with restrictions which mean they can say nothing about the work of their CCG, without written permission from those in charge of it.
The clauses are significant because the organisations hold responsibility for most of the NHS budget, and will make crucial decisions affecting patient safety and care - such as which drugs and treatments to fund, and whether to close any local services.
NHS Newbury and District, NHS Sutton, NHS Dorset, NHS Thurrock and NHS Windsor, Ascot and Maidenhead CCGs have all placed clauses in their constitutions that prevent all GPs working in local practices from saying anything about the work of the CCG without prior approval from the senior figures running it.
I could not agree more about people not taking work when it is available. But the thing about the Bulgarian is that he/she has just turned up. There are no issues to worry about, work does not have to fit in around, say, a family, a sick relative, a disability and so on. No-ne serius would deny that there are people out there who are abusing the system. The issue is whether there enough of them to justify a wholesale reworking of the benefits regime that does and will have an impact on a great many extremely vulnerable people who are desprate to "do the right thing" but for one reason or another can't.
Many people do manage to adjust to this (and then not unnaturally resent being depicted as idle scroungers with a leaning to child murder). Others just stagger from one crisis to another. Over the long haul, either way, it's barely tolerable without falling into either depression or illegal activity.
And if the fridge or cooker packs in, you are truly screwed.
Well, there is always Wonga or Brighthouse.
Of course it would be easier if there was a larger float of vacant property, but holding this stock has a carrying cost in its own right
https://twitter.com/Fascinatingpics/status/320310405203382272/photo/1
I don't think she's talking about pre prepared peppers. She's talking about the veg/fruit that street sellers flog in big plastic bowls for a quid - usually when it's on the turn.
My point was that Zoe Williams' article was bad - that she didn't think through her spending habits to live within the available budget. Basically she flunked the challenge.
I am not sure Charles actually lives in the real world!!!!!
But your point is valid
Today:
- The NEC Panel interviews longlisted applicants for South Shields
- Tower Hamlets Labour select their Mayoral candidate
On Monday
- The NEC will ratify Euro candidates shortlists (basically the available number of sposts +1 in each region). Then the ranking will follow (ballot this summer)
On Wednesday
- South Shields CLP meet to pick up the candidate.
Lots of selections in target seats are about to start and so runners and riders are already declaring.
Where's Neil? I have 2 names for Bermondsey & Old Southwark.
Three at least. Usually more from what I've seen. Certainly cheaper than the high street (which tend to be more expensive than the not as easily accessible out of town superstores, esp for fresh produce) big name store prices.
When I last caught up with David about it, they are considering a sale of the business as part of the overall process of cleaning up the brand portfolio within the Consumer Division. Emma has been doing a great job of this since she took over and Andy is very happy with the outcome. Simon's just a deal junkie so he won't stand in Emma's way, provided that the multiple achieved is acceptable. And that's the problem - in the past David has said that the business is valued by shareholders as an OTC business (I disagree) but that the highest multiple that someone will pay for it is X (a substantial discount to the valuation of an OTC business). That said, if it is a pruning exercise, they will probably accept a lower price - and there will be substantial tax to pay despite the losses that they have tucked away in the UK companies.
Is that enough? I can talk a lot about Lucozade.
They are not saying that Labour is ignoring welfare. What they are saying is that Ed Milliband has a lack of credible policies to address the views of voters on welfare.
Simply opposing every cut is not viewed (by them) as a credible political platform.
Many people do manage to adjust to this (and then not unnaturally resent being depicted as idle scroungers with a leaning to child murder). Others just stagger from one crisis to another. Over the long haul, either way, it's barely tolerable without falling into either depression or illegal activity.
It does seem to be that way if you don't have children, where the benefits system does seem tough on spend (if maybe not eligibility). However, people with large numbers of children do seem to have much more spare capacity with a generous system.
*chortle*
After lumch
It is an interesting game to watch being played out. These Labour supporters many of whom are a generation older than Ed Milliband, are giving advice from their experience.
It is a bad strategy for oppositions to go into policy detail two years beforehand though you can undestand why Tories would like them to.
I suspect this group may well be voting heavily UKIP in future.
Here goes then: 1. Rare Bob, 2. Teatforthree, 3. Seabass, 4. Chicago Grey. #GrandNational
"Many members urged him to pledge to reverse the bedroom tax, where social housing tenants lose benefit if they are judged to have too many rooms. Ed Balls described the tax as wrong morally and economically. . ......
However he would not make specific promises two years out from an election and risk being hammered by “tax bombshell” propaganda. He was backed by Ken Livingstone, who took part in pre-1992 policy decisions when the NEC was still a power in the land and described them, with hindsight, as errors. "