AndyJS- Outside of Sydney and Melbourne Australia is one of the most conservative nations in the developed world. Queensland and Western Australia make Texas look almost liberal in some ways!
In some ways Australia appears to be one of the most modern, forward-looking countries in the world, which is why it's rather mystifying that it's probably about to election an anti-climate change, anti gay marriage prime minister:
Nothing against Oz, but I've never thought of it as especially modern or forward-thinking in the sense of being hospitable to mild-mannered European social democracy (there are of course a million other possible definitions of forward-thinking). Their political climate seems stuck at "wild brawl", with Abbott currently top wrestler, but it's not obviously a decision in classic left-right terms - as the article suggests, it's mostly about Rudd being seen as too wild even for Oz.
From the man himself: @MSmithsonPB UKIP still running strong in the latest fortnightly Opinium online poll for Observer CON 29% nc LAB 36% nc LD 8%-1 UKIP 18% +1
Pity really. If sustained this will mean that a bunch of incoherent voters will ensure rEd becomes PM.
Andy - just read your earlier post saying 2015 boundaries will be 15 years out of date whereas 2005 boundaries were only 14 years out of date.
My answer to that is please go and read the 2006 Boundary Commission report. You will find that:
1) The 2006 review (based on 2000 data) did a far better job in making constituencies more equal than any previous review.
2) The 2006 report also shows that the rate of obsolescence (ie from 2000 to 2006) was far slower than after previous reviews - presumably due to less new home building and more inner city regeneration.
The rate of new home building has continued to be very low since then due to the financial crisis - which means the rate of obsolescence has continued to be low. Plus there is quite a bit more inner city regeneration than pre 2000, plus children of immigrants reaching 18 are concentrated in inner city areas etc.
But I think Scotland is important: the boundaries there haven't changed since 2005 based on 2001 electorates and Labour relies on Scottish seats for its majority. So for example they will continue winning all of the seats in Glasgow with ever decreasing number of votes.
Scotland has strictly speaking 2 more seats at present then proportionately entitled to. But the two seats which are way below average electorate don't return Labour MPs.
AndyJS/NP - Just as many Americans talked about leaving for Canada when Bush won, many Australian leftwing metropolitans are talking about moving to New Zealand if Abbott wins (and New Zealand now has gay marriage)
In some ways Australia appears to be one of the most modern, forward-looking countries in the world, which is why it's rather mystifying that it's probably about to election an anti-climate change, anti gay marriage prime minister:
From the man himself: @MSmithsonPB UKIP still running strong in the latest fortnightly Opinium online poll for Observer CON 29% nc LAB 36% nc LD 8%-1 UKIP 18% +1
Pity really. If sustained this will mean that a bunch of incoherent voters will ensure rEd becomes PM.
Although it does highlight quite nicely just how important the "UKIP number" is.
Let's say the "real" number is 12% - and half of those go back to the Tories. That indicates it is all to play for.
Rudd did win in 2007. I don't know if Abbott will last that long, if his austerity regime pushes the Coalition down in the polls he could be ousted himself by the more Cameron-like Malcolm Turnbull (pro-gay marriage, supportive of measures to tackle climate change). He doesn't look to me like a long-standing leader of the calibre of Bob Hawke or John Howard, and the ALP also has a few good young potential leaders coming through like Jason Clare who could be future PMs (although Bill Shorten will almost certainly take over the ALP leadership if Rudd does lose)
From the man himself: @MSmithsonPB UKIP still running strong in the latest fortnightly Opinium online poll for Observer CON 29% nc LAB 36% nc LD 8%-1 UKIP 18% +1
Pity really. If sustained this will mean that a bunch of incoherent voters will ensure rEd becomes PM.
Although it does highlight quite nicely just how important the "UKIP number" is.
Let's say the "real" number is 12% - and half of those go back to the Tories. That indicates it is all to play for.
In fact, I'd got further.
This election will be determined by (a) how many 2010 LD-defectors return home and (b) how many UKIP sympathisers vote Tory (not-Ed)
From the man himself: @MSmithsonPB UKIP still running strong in the latest fortnightly Opinium online poll for Observer CON 29% nc LAB 36% nc LD 8%-1 UKIP 18% +1
Pity really. If sustained this will mean that a bunch of incoherent voters will ensure rEd becomes PM.
Although it does highlight quite nicely just how important the "UKIP number" is.
Let's say the "real" number is 12% - and half of those go back to the Tories. That indicates it is all to play for.
In fact, I'd got further.
This election will be determined by (a) how many 2010 LD-defectors return home and (b) how many UKIP sympathisers vote Tory (not-Ed)
I think the last ComRes poll had ~25% of 2010 LDs undecided.
Just one in five voters think Miliband is doing a 'good job'
Ed Miliband has suffered a new blow as a poll shows the number of people who think he is doing a “good job” as Labour leader is at an all-time low.
His embattled leadership was rated positively by only 21 per cent of those surveyed for the Telegraph, with 51 per cent describing his track record as “bad”.
In September 2011, the figure was 34 per cent. Although the poll, conducted by ICM, gave Labour a slight lead, it was within the margin of error and experts warned the Tories could retake the lead imminently if Mr Miliband’s performance does not improve.
The poll of 2,013 people online between August 21 and August 23 gave Labour 32 per cent of the vote, the Tories 30 and the Liberal Democrats 16. The UK Independence Party was on 12 per cent.
Politically odd, though militarily perfectly logical.
Assad is under some serious pressure in the Eastern suburbs. An insurgent offensive since July in the North east of the city has proven unshiftable despite attempts by Assad's forces to do so and the area hit by the alleged strike would potentially be a springboard location for that offensive. A look at the city map shows a fair slice of the city has been contested under that insurgent offensive.
Assad doesn't have the ability to fight consistently on as many fronts as are in place so they have resorted, a little like the Iraqis did in the Iran-Iraq War, of stemming things with sheer range firepower. It has been a common tactic, strategy in fact, that you make opposition areas uninhabitable and just clear them out because the Syrian government doesn't have the ability to go in on the ground and slug it out then hold it everywhere.
The area hit by the alleged attack have been subject to considerable shelling and aerial attacks since so it can be seen as fitting in with that approach. In short, it does have a military soundness to it.
In reality the strategic situation for the Assad regime isn't great at all in the whole country, maybe it was considered time to resort to something a lil more desperate to see if it reversed some tide, particularly in the precious Damascus.
The other theory doing the rounds is that the appearance of fresh US trained insurgents over the border from Jordan has triggered Syrian concerns and an implicit threat that if outside intervention kicked off, then the regime would use whatever they had at their disposal, gloves off.
Finally as other posters have mentioned., The Assad regime believes the US is chicken.
Just one in five voters think Miliband is doing a 'good job'
Ed Miliband has suffered a new blow as a poll shows the number of people who think he is doing a “good job” as Labour leader is at an all-time low.
His embattled leadership was rated positively by only 21 per cent of those surveyed for the Telegraph, with 51 per cent describing his track record as “bad”.
In September 2011, the figure was 34 per cent. Although the poll, conducted by ICM, gave Labour a slight lead, it was within the margin of error and experts warned the Tories could retake the lead imminently if Mr Miliband’s performance does not improve.
The poll of 2,013 people online between August 21 and August 23 gave Labour 32 per cent of the vote, the Tories 30 and the Liberal Democrats 16. The UK Independence Party was on 12 per cent.
Sunil/TSE - Indeed, although devoid of charisma and authority, both IDS and Ed Miliband actually did/have not done too badly in the polls, both producing leads for the Tories and Labour (as even IDS managed in some polls post-Iraq) despite trailing the more charismatic Blair and Cameron badly in the preferred PM polls. Both were actually better leaders for their party than, say, Foot or Hague who both led their parties to landslide defeats in 1983 and 2001 respectively despite being brilliant orators and far more interesting characters
Just one in five voters think Miliband is doing a 'good job'
Ed Miliband has suffered a new blow as a poll shows the number of people who think he is doing a “good job” as Labour leader is at an all-time low.
His embattled leadership was rated positively by only 21 per cent of those surveyed for the Telegraph, with 51 per cent describing his track record as “bad”.
In September 2011, the figure was 34 per cent. Although the poll, conducted by ICM, gave Labour a slight lead, it was within the margin of error and experts warned the Tories could retake the lead imminently if Mr Miliband’s performance does not improve.
The poll of 2,013 people online between August 21 and August 23 gave Labour 32 per cent of the vote, the Tories 30 and the Liberal Democrats 16. The UK Independence Party was on 12 per cent.
AveryLP - Yes, but the Tories are on 1997 levels, so Ed would still win ironically
It is the likely direction of travel which counts.
The argument to date from Labour supporters was that their share of 40%+ and lead of 10%+ was solid as the 2010 Lib Dem defectors weren't budging.
Then it became an impenetrable share of 38% and 6-9% lead over the Tories.
And all the while these figures withstood the battery of the winds and the rains, the supplementary questions, not just Ed Miliband's approval ratings, corroded the foundations.
ICM delivered a 36% tie poll and YouGov started to deliver Labour leads as low as 3% at frequency of once a week with top end down to 7%.
Simultaneously, the Conservatives started to reclaim a few percent from UKIP and edge up towards the middle 30s.
AveryLP - Yes, but the Tories are on 1997 levels, so Ed would still win ironically
It is the likely direction of travel which counts.
The argument to date from Labour supporters was that their share of 40%+ and lead of 10%+ was solid as the 2010 Lib Dem defectors weren't budging.
Then it became an impenetrable share of 38% and 6-9% lead over the Tories.
And all the while these figures withstood the battery of the winds and the rains, the supplementary questions, not just Ed Miliband's approval ratings, corroded the foundations.
ICM delivered a 36% tie poll and YouGov started to deliver Labour leads as low as 3% at frequency of once a week with top end down to 7%.
Simultaneously, the Conservatives started to reclaim a few percent from UKIP and edge up towards the middle 30s.
The trends are clear.
The Conservatives 'gain' from UKIP, seems to depend on pollsters not prompting for UKIP.
AveryLP - Yes, but the Tories are on 1997 levels, so Ed would still win ironically
It is the likely direction of travel which counts.
The argument to date from Labour supporters was that their share of 40%+ and lead of 10%+ was solid as the 2010 Lib Dem defectors weren't budging.
Then it became an impenetrable share of 38% and 6-9% lead over the Tories.
And all the while these figures withstood the battery of the winds and the rains, the supplementary questions, not just Ed Miliband's approval ratings, corroded the foundations.
ICM delivered a 36% tie poll and YouGov started to deliver Labour leads as low as 3% at frequency of once a week with top end down to 7%.
Simultaneously, the Conservatives started to reclaim a few percent from UKIP and edge up towards the middle 30s.
The trends are clear.
The Conservatives 'gain' from UKIP, seems to depend on pollsters not prompting for UKIP.
Yes the most accurate pollster at the locals was ComRes which didn't prompt for UKIP.
AveryLP- The Tories will need to get to 40% at least for a majority though and they are not even at 35% yet. I doubt the Tory right will allow another LD coalition either without a fight, and Labour is likely to still be the largest party until the Tories start making serious inroads into the UKIP vote. An Abbott victory in Oz will see Tory rightwingers start demanding similar red meat on issues such as immigration, and the EU and no further mention of gay marriage or climate change!
AveryLP - Yes, but the Tories are on 1997 levels, so Ed would still win ironically
It is the likely direction of travel which counts.
The argument to date from Labour supporters was that their share of 40%+ and lead of 10%+ was solid as the 2010 Lib Dem defectors weren't budging.
Then it became an impenetrable share of 38% and 6-9% lead over the Tories.
And all the while these figures withstood the battery of the winds and the rains, the supplementary questions, not just Ed Miliband's approval ratings, corroded the foundations.
ICM delivered a 36% tie poll and YouGov started to deliver Labour leads as low as 3% at frequency of once a week with top end down to 7%.
Simultaneously, the Conservatives started to reclaim a few percent from UKIP and edge up towards the middle 30s.
The trends are clear.
The Conservatives 'gain' from UKIP, seems to depend on pollsters not prompting for UKIP.
If Labour is really on 36% that's a rise of about 6 percentage points from 2010, but the question is how much of that increase is disproportionately concentrated in seats like Sheffield Central and Hull North where Labour almost lost to the LDs but will almost certainly get a huge swing in its favour next time?
Nor has Ed M lost an election, but the idea that IDS would have beaten Blair in 2005 is fanciful, though he would have done better than Hague did in 2001, as Ed M will probably do better than Brown in 2015 at least in terms of Labour voteshare
AveryLP- The Tories will need to get to 40% at least for a majority though and they are not even at 35% yet. I doubt the Tory right will allow another LD coalition either without a fight, and Labour is likely to styill be the largest party until the Tories start making serious inroads into the UKIP vote. An Abbott victory in Oz will see Tory rightwingers start demanding similar red meat on issues such as immigration, and the EU and no further mention of gay marriage or climate change!
I am not persuaded that the particular shade of blue in Australia will have any effect on UK voters. I doubt whether more than a handful percent of Brits would know the name of the Australian PM let alone his or her party.
I accept it might excite Conservative backbenchers but the effect will be muted to near-silence by the higher call for party discipline in the run-up to an election. If Cameron fails in 2015 it may effect MP nominations and votes for next leader, but not unless or until then.
The key to 2015 will remain the economy and, more particularly, prospects for a pay back for the 'years of austerity'. We haven't got close to this debate yet. With 60% of polling respondents expecting the economy to decline rather than improve, there is plenty of scope for movement in voting intention.
And yes I realise that a growing economy doesn't immediately deliver higher living standards but they do follow growth recovery with the inevitability of day following night.
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
They can`t even tell what poll it is and they are getting excited!We all know what happened after the ICM level poll...Things went back to business as usual
Nor has Ed M lost an election, but the idea that IDS would have beaten Blair in 2005 is fanciful, though he would have done better than Hague did in 2001, as Ed M will probably do better than Brown in 2015 at least in terms of Labour voteshare
Well this poll has Ed at 32.
So he only needs to lose another 2% to be in line with Brown's 30% (GB).
AveryLP - It will have an effect on Tory backbenchers though who DO all know who Abbott is. (Similar pressure would have come with a Romney win, Cameron avoided it when Obama was re-elected, but Abbott is even more of a hardcore conservative than Romney). As the key swing vote for the Tories at the moment seem to be Tory voters who have defected to UKIP, that will push their case even harder that what Cameron needs is some redmeat Toryism if those backbenchers are to hold their seats. The economy is important too, but if you are anti-austerity you will already support Labour anyway, and Cameron may at least take some comfort that on economic matters at least Abbott and Hockey are on much the same page as Cameron and Osborne on austerity, with a bit of populist spending thrown in!
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
Why does Mr Broom of ICM not also explain?
Agreed. As a wisdom poll it is still sobering for Labour. As an actual poll it is deeply unnerving.
So what the F is it?
Either way another moody weekend for Herr Miliband,
Feel sorry for the poor bugger who has to write the morning thread not knowing if it is a Wisdom poll or not.
"Labor is facing a wipeout in must-win seats along the eastern seaboard as the federal election campaign enters its final fortnight.
An exclusive Galaxy Poll for the Herald Sun reveals the marginal Victorian seats of Corangamite and La Trobe are set to fall to the Coalition on September 7.
Five critical Labor-held seats in western Sydney are also likely to tumble, including heartland seats such as Gough Whitlam's former electorate of Werriwa.
And the ALP's hope that it could make up losses by winning seats in Queensland has taken a blow, with a surprise Guardian poll reporting PM Kevin Rudd trailing in his own Brisbane seat."
AndyJS - Indeed, looks like Abbott will win confortably, though Rudd will have saved the ALP from a Gillard meltdown (though he may lose his own seat in the process)
It seems that Assads brother Maher was responsible for chemical attack in damascus:
Maher Assad’s 4th Armored Division of Syrian Army launched nerve gas shells that killed hundreds last Wednesday from base west of Damascus, report says.
MikeL - Brown got 29%. So even in this poll (and most polls show Labour on about 35-36% at least), Miliband would still be clearly above Brown's total.
Politically odd, though militarily perfectly logical.
Assad is under some serious pressure in the Eastern suburbs. An insurgent offensive since July in the North east of the city has proven unshiftable despite attempts by Assad's forces to do so and the area hit by the alleged strike would potentially be a springboard location for that offensive. A look at the city map shows a fair slice of the city has been contested under that insurgent offensive.
Assad doesn't have the ability to fight consistently on as many fronts as are in place so they have resorted, a little like the Iraqis did in the Iran-Iraq War, of stemming things with sheer range firepower. It has been a common tactic, strategy in fact, that you make opposition areas uninhabitable and just clear them out because the Syrian government doesn't have the ability to go in on the ground and slug it out then hold it everywhere.
The area hit by the alleged attack have been subject to considerable shelling and aerial attacks since so it can be seen as fitting in with that approach. In short, it does have a military soundness to it.
In reality the strategic situation for the Assad regime isn't great at all in the whole country, maybe it was considered time to resort to something a lil more desperate to see if it reversed some tide, particularly in the precious Damascus.
The other theory doing the rounds is that the appearance of fresh US trained insurgents over the border from Jordan has triggered Syrian concerns and an implicit threat that if outside intervention kicked off, then the regime would use whatever they had at their disposal, gloves off.
Finally as other posters have mentioned., The Assad regime believes the US is chicken.
"Finally as other posters have mentioned., The Assad regime believes the US is chicken."
Quite so. Obama spelled it out in bright red neon letters that he didn't want to intervene by effectively saying Assad could do what he liked as long as he didn't use chemical weapons.
This being a regime attack makes no sense unless it was local commander's reaction to a local setback and even then doesn't make any sense unless that local commander knew he was safe from Assad i.e. a close relative.
Syria: Iranian officials report Assad's government will allow UN inspectors to the alleged chemical weapons attack in Damascus.
A few more days before its sorted in practice will allow a couple of things if an attack occurred:
-Depending on the agent used, evaporation and dispersal can be extremely rapid so air detection can prove problematic. Preserved samples will be needed.
-Allow muddying of waters that if anyone wants to avoid doing anything they can say the UN officials investigations were inconclusive.
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
Why does Mr Broom of ICM not also explain?
Agreed. As a wisdom poll it is still sobering for Labour. As an actual poll it is deeply unnerving.
So what the F is it?
Either way another moody weekend for Herr Miliband,
Feel sorry for the poor bugger who has to write the morning thread not knowing if it is a Wisdom poll or not.
TSE
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
MrJones - The thing is Assad may be a dictator, but he is a Westernised urbane dictator, with a pretty wife which Gaddaffi and Saddam were not, and the rebels in Syria may be even worse. Unless there is a repeat of this Obama will not do anything and I doubt Cameron and Hollande will either
I know SeanT et al would like it to be a regular poll of Labour's standing, but presumably they wouldn't like an ICM with the Tories on 30. It's not credible for either party as an actual poll, but it's entirely credible as a wisdom thingy, for which it shows a minor shift to Labour. Sleep well Sean!
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
That'll be one of those hypothetical "would you emigrate?" polls which always show a third of the population in the exit lounge.
MrJones - The thing is Assad may be a dictator, but he is a Westernised urbane dictator, with a pretty wife which Gaddaffi and Saddam were not, and the rebels in Syria may be even worse. Unless there is a repeat of this Obama will not do anything and I doubt Cameron and Hollande will either
If this doesn't lead to US missile strikes then i'll be wrong. Won't be the first time.
I'm suspicious of the ICM poll being an everyday opinion poll because if it was they would surely have made much more of it than they are.
Can it be; could it be; that the Golden, Diamond, Saphire standard of ICM (or whatever it is), is no longer what it was? Has this poll in particular been infected with UKIPitis? LOL
MikeL - Brown got 29%. So even in this poll (and most polls show Labour on about 35-36% at least), Miliband would still be clearly above Brown's total.
No he didn't.
I specifically said GB - as opposed to UK.
The 2010 GB result was 37/30.
All opinion polls are GB only so the comparator has to also be GB - and in 2010 Lab got 30 in GB.
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
That'll be one of those hypothetical "would you emigrate?" polls which always show a third of the population in the exit lounge.
Yes, but I'm worried, Nick.
I can just about tolerate the Romanians and Bulgarians.
But if the Scots start taking our jobs it would be taking us back to 2007.
Looks like Assad's defence will be that the rebels were the ones in possession of chemical weapons, and it exploded when the rebels didn't know how to use them or that they exploded when Assad's forces bombed the rebel base.
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
Why does Mr Broom of ICM not also explain?
Agreed. As a wisdom poll it is still sobering for Labour. As an actual poll it is deeply unnerving.
So what the F is it?
Either way another moody weekend for Herr Miliband,
Feel sorry for the poor bugger who has to write the morning thread not knowing if it is a Wisdom poll or not.
TSE
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
Some scepticism you say Seth o Logue?
Surely not.
The only question is which one of the two Mystery Diana Death Cars they will all be leaving in.
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
Why does Mr Broom of ICM not also explain?
Agreed. As a wisdom poll it is still sobering for Labour. As an actual poll it is deeply unnerving.
So what the F is it?
Either way another moody weekend for Herr Miliband,
Feel sorry for the poor bugger who has to write the morning thread not knowing if it is a Wisdom poll or not.
TSE
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
Some scepticism you say Seth o Logue?
Surely not.
The only question is which one of the two Mystery Diana Death Cars they will all be leaving in.
Mike L - Yes, but NI results will be included in the 2015 result too. However, even on 30% the point remains the average Labour score is well above 30% and still above it even on this poll
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
Why does Mr Broom of ICM not also explain?
Agreed. As a wisdom poll it is still sobering for Labour. As an actual poll it is deeply unnerving.
So what the F is it?
Either way another moody weekend for Herr Miliband,
Feel sorry for the poor bugger who has to write the morning thread not knowing if it is a Wisdom poll or not.
TSE
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
Some scepticism you say Seth o Logue?
Surely not.
The only question is which one of the two Mystery Diana Death Cars they will all be leaving in.
Adam Boulton in his Sunday Times column has written this, I wonder where he got these facts from?
A second chance in Britain in 2015 would mean another hung parliament and another coalition, not the majority government that the Tories dream of. That is the post-election scenario Cameron has instructed his advisers to work on. Even coming out on top in a hung parliament won’t be easy. In the past half-century only two governments have increased their share of the vote in subsequent elections. Both were led by Harold Wilson — in 1966 and October 1974.
Mr Jones - Well the only impact of taking out his air defences would be if there were air strikes, and I doubt there will be agreement on that, Russia and China would veto any such action at the UN for starters
Mike L - Yes, but NI results will be included in the 2015 result too. However, even on 30% the point remains the average Labour score is well above 30% and still above it even on this poll
I am aware that NI is part of the UK.
The point is that every single poll we debate on here is GB only. So when talking about any poll and comparing to the 2010 result the only sensible thing to do is to compare to what happened in 2010 in GB.
That is what I did. You were wrong in attempting to correct me and why you are prolonging the issue I don't know.
Andy JS If the ALP lose probably best Rudd loses his seat then the ALP can make a fresh start with neither Rudd nor Gillard in parliament, Rudd will have served his purpose of avoiding an ALP meltdown
The Telegraph is being naughty if this is indeed a wisdom index as opposed to a VI poll: the article makes no mention and most readers will therefore naturally assume the latter.
Why does Mr Broom of ICM not also explain?
Agreed. As a wisdom poll it is still sobering for Labour. As an actual poll it is deeply unnerving.
So what the F is it?
Either way another moody weekend for Herr Miliband,
Feel sorry for the poor bugger who has to write the morning thread not knowing if it is a Wisdom poll or not.
TSE
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
Some scepticism you say Seth o Logue?
Surely not.
The only question is which one of the two Mystery Diana Death Cars they will all be leaving in.
Tomorrow’s Sunday Express front page: Diana death: The two mystery cars http://polho.me/16GNHvA
*chortle*
Two mystery cars?
Which one was passing the grassy knoll?
That will require another front page Express story by Desmond using a rigorous poll interpretation to determine how many members of the public may have been near the grassy knoll. Sadly Desmond would then have to inform his readers, with heavy heart, that house prices were bound to rocket as millions of Bulgarians and Romanians flock to the grassy knoll.
Mr Jones - Well the only impact of taking out his air defences would be if there were air strikes, and I doubt there will be agreement on that, Russia and China would veto any such action at the UN for starters
MikeL - But it remains the 29% score Miliband has to beat in 2015, but even on 30% no poll has yet showed him falling that low (and even on 30% on that poll he would be tied with the Tories)
Adam Boulton in his Sunday Times column has written this, I wonder where he got these facts from?
A second chance in Britain in 2015 would mean another hung parliament and another coalition, not the majority government that the Tories dream of. That is the post-election scenario Cameron has instructed his advisers to work on. Even coming out on top in a hung parliament won’t be easy. In the past half-century only two governments have increased their share of the vote in subsequent elections. Both were led by Harold Wilson — in 1966 and October 1974.
Although presumably Cameron would be pretty pleased with a 0.3% or 0.4% decrease in vote share such as the Tories achieved in 1987 and 1992.
Adam Boulton in his Sunday Times column has written this, I wonder where he got these facts from?
A second chance in Britain in 2015 would mean another hung parliament and another coalition, not the majority government that the Tories dream of. That is the post-election scenario Cameron has instructed his advisers to work on. Even coming out on top in a hung parliament won’t be easy. In the past half-century only two governments have increased their share of the vote in subsequent elections. Both were led by Harold Wilson — in 1966 and October 1974.
Glad to see some realism dawning among Tory leaders and supporters...Majority is pie in the sky stuff but perhaps a private deal with Clegg to carry on governing in case of a hung Parliament doesn`t seem improbable.
BRITISH and US military planners are drawing up potential targets for missile strikes on Syria amid growing certainty that the Assad regime was behind chemical weapons attacks which killed hundreds of civilians last week.
David Cameron and Barack Obama discussed “a serious response” including military action in a 40-minute phone call last night, according to a Downing Street source.
While there has been no decision on whether to go ahead with a strike, staff in London and Washington are compiling a list of targets, among a range of options.
On Topic: PP's 4/1 that the Scottish Indy turnout will be <60% looks like the value bet, especially with the adjacent band being their 15/8 favourite and covering such a narrow 4% field of 60 - 64%. Not that one can get too excited about this either way with the Irish bookie limiting stakes to a maximum of £4.70.
Mr Jones - If it is a missile strike it will be of the type Clinton launched against Saddam Hussein ie with virtually no impact at all
Well that does sort of depend on how how you define impact as Desert Fox paved the way for the Iraq Invasion.
And indeed paved the way for how the 'man of peace' Blair and new labour would then conduct themselves.
According to Department of Defense personnel with whom Arkin spoke, Central Command chief Anthony Zinni insisted that the U.S. only attack biological and chemical sites that "had been identified with a high degree of certainty." And the reason for the low number of targets, said Arkin, was because intelligence specialists "could not identify actual weapons sites with enough specificity to comply with Zinni's directive."
Dr. Brian Jones was the top intelligence analyst on chemical, biological and nuclear weapons at the Ministry of Defence.[18] He told BBC Panorama in 2004 that Defence Intelligence Staff in Whitehall did not have a high degree of confidence any of the facilities identified, targeted and bombed in Operation Desert Fox were active in producing weapons of mass destruction. Jones' testimony is supported by the former Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence, John Morrison, who informed the same program that, before the operation had ended, DIS came under pressure to validate a prepared statement to be delivered by then Prime Minister Tony Blair, declaring military activity an unqualified success. Large-scale damage assessment takes time, responded Morrison, therefore his department declined to sign up to a premature statement. "After Desert Fox, I actually sent a note round to all the analysts involved congratulating them on standing firm in the face of, in some cases, individual pressure to say things that they knew weren't true". Later on, after careful assessment and consideration, Defence Intelligence Staff determined that the bombing had not been all that effective.[19]
Within days of speaking out on the program, Morrison was informed by former New Labour cabinet minister Ann Taylor that he was to lose his job as Chief Investigator to the Intelligence and Security Committee.
Syria: The US has decided on its chosen military option that consists of both direct and indirect initiatives
Question is, will they push a button? There is a whiff of speed about this and that is viable. posted earlier this week that the US pretty much had what it needed in place for a multi faceted approach.
MickPork There is no way Obama, Kerry and Hagel will invade Syria they are masters of the diplomatic hotair all 3 with an extreme relunctance to engage in any concrete action
Syria: The US has decided on its chosen military option that consists of both direct and indirect initiatives
Question is, will they push a button? There is a whiff of speed about this and that is viable. posted earlier this week that the US pretty much had what it needed in place for a multi faceted approach.
MickPork There is no way Obama, Kerry and Hagel will invade Syria they are masters of the diplomatic hotair all 3 with an extreme relunctance to engage in any concrete action
It's not about invasion. They've got auxiliary boots on the ground already. It's about creating conditions where the US Navy can act as the rebel's heavy artillery.
Syria: The US has decided on its chosen military option that consists of both direct and indirect initiatives
Question is, will they push a button? There is a whiff of speed about this and that is viable. posted earlier this week that the US pretty much had what it needed in place for a multi faceted approach.
There's a surprise.
With what is speculated as the likely chosen options, they've had pretty much all of it in place for months.
Syria: The US has decided on its chosen military option that consists of both direct and indirect initiatives
Question is, will they push a button? There is a whiff of speed about this and that is viable. posted earlier this week that the US pretty much had what it needed in place for a multi faceted approach.
There's a surprise.
With what is speculated as the likely chosen options, they've had pretty much all of it in place for months.
Quite. All the more reason for Assad to not cross the red-line.
If it was regime and it was a local commander on his own authority i expect he's being molested with garden implements as we speak, brother or not.
MickPork There is no way Obama, Kerry and Hagel will invade Syria they are masters of the diplomatic hotair all 3 with an extreme relunctance to engage in any concrete action
Likely not but a military strike would rather escalate things just a touch particularly if it was done with a view to creating a no fly zone. Though of course there is always the option of arming the rebels with ever more serious firepower. Given that the Syrian rebels seem to have no qualms about using chemical weapons themselves to retaliate that may prove to be slightly problematic. As would air strikes on any suspected chemical sites that could then be overrun by those same rebels.
PS IF this goes ahead, forget the UN. The US will have plenty of moral justification as well as attempted legal over to satisfy themselves and others involved and are just as likely to bypass as use it
Mr Jones Without heavy air strikes or ground forces I do not think the rebels will be able to topple the regime, naval bombardments can only do so much and Assad is too well entrenched. Obama will not commit to anything more
Comments
Let's say the "real" number is 12% - and half of those go back to the Tories. That indicates it is all to play for.
This election will be determined by (a) how many 2010 LD-defectors return home and (b) how many UKIP sympathisers vote Tory (not-Ed)
Just one in five voters think Miliband is doing a 'good job'
Ed Miliband has suffered a new blow as a poll shows the number of people who think he is doing a “good job” as Labour leader is at an all-time low.
His embattled leadership was rated positively by only 21 per cent of those surveyed for the Telegraph, with 51 per cent describing his track record as “bad”.
In September 2011, the figure was 34 per cent. Although the poll, conducted by ICM, gave Labour a slight lead, it was within the margin of error and experts warned the Tories could
retake the lead imminently if Mr Miliband’s performance does not improve.
The poll of 2,013 people online between August 21 and August 23 gave Labour 32 per cent of the vote, the Tories 30 and the Liberal Democrats 16. The UK Independence Party was on 12 per cent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10264571/Just-one-in-five-voters-think-Miliband-is-doing-a-good-job.html
there gonna have to allow the English to vote.
Martin Boon, the director of ICM, compared Mr Miliband’s leadership to Iain Duncan Smith’s spell in charge of the Conservatives.
Politically odd, though militarily perfectly logical.
Assad is under some serious pressure in the Eastern suburbs. An insurgent offensive since July in the North east of the city has proven unshiftable despite attempts by Assad's forces to do so and the area hit by the alleged strike would potentially be a springboard location for that offensive. A look at the city map shows a fair slice of the city has been contested under that insurgent offensive.
Assad doesn't have the ability to fight consistently on as many fronts as are in place so they have resorted, a little like the Iraqis did in the Iran-Iraq War, of stemming things with sheer range firepower. It has been a common tactic, strategy in fact, that you make opposition areas uninhabitable and just clear them out because the Syrian government doesn't have the ability to go in on the ground and slug it out then hold it everywhere.
The area hit by the alleged attack have been subject to considerable shelling and aerial attacks since so it can be seen as fitting in with that approach. In short, it does have a military soundness to it.
In reality the strategic situation for the Assad regime isn't great at all in the whole country, maybe it was considered time to resort to something a lil more desperate to see if it reversed some tide, particularly in the precious Damascus.
The other theory doing the rounds is that the appearance of fresh US trained insurgents over the border from Jordan has triggered Syrian concerns and an implicit threat that if outside intervention kicked off, then the regime would use whatever they had at their disposal, gloves off.
Finally as other posters have mentioned., The Assad regime believes the US is chicken.
Another year of Ed would see Labour down to the vote share levels of Gordon in 2010.
32 Labour
30 Conservative
16 Liberal Democrats
12 UKIP
He is becoming Labour’s IDS and if it carries on like this it’s hard not to think that we’ll be seeing Conservative polling leads very soon.
The argument to date from Labour supporters was that their share of 40%+ and lead of 10%+ was solid as the 2010 Lib Dem defectors weren't budging.
Then it became an impenetrable share of 38% and 6-9% lead over the Tories.
And all the while these figures withstood the battery of the winds and the rains, the supplementary questions, not just Ed Miliband's approval ratings, corroded the foundations.
ICM delivered a 36% tie poll and YouGov started to deliver Labour leads as low as 3% at frequency of once a week with top end down to 7%.
Simultaneously, the Conservatives started to reclaim a few percent from UKIP and edge up towards the middle 30s.
The trends are clear.
Tories minus 1
Labour nc
LD nc
UKIP nc
I think the last Wisdom was a Lab lead of only 1% (32/31).
I think this is a regular ICM - but if so both main parties are down. The last one was 35/32 so this would be Lab -3, Con -2.
In the past the only online polling they do is the Wisdom Index
I accept it might excite Conservative backbenchers but the effect will be muted to near-silence by the higher call for party discipline in the run-up to an election. If Cameron fails in 2015 it may effect MP nominations and votes for next leader, but not unless or until then.
The key to 2015 will remain the economy and, more particularly, prospects for a pay back for the 'years of austerity'. We haven't got close to this debate yet. With 60% of polling respondents expecting the economy to decline rather than improve, there is plenty of scope for movement in voting intention.
And yes I realise that a growing economy doesn't immediately deliver higher living standards but they do follow growth recovery with the inevitability of day following night.
Why does Mr Broon of ICM not also explain?
So he only needs to lose another 2% to be in line with Brown's 30% (GB).
Not a massive margin is it?
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-features/galaxy-poll-reveals-marginal-seats-labor-must-win-likely-to-be-taken-by-coalition/story-fnho52jj-1226702447893
"Labor is facing a wipeout in must-win seats along the eastern seaboard as the federal election campaign enters its final fortnight.
An exclusive Galaxy Poll for the Herald Sun reveals the marginal Victorian seats of Corangamite and La Trobe are set to fall to the Coalition on September 7.
Five critical Labor-held seats in western Sydney are also likely to tumble, including heartland seats such as Gough Whitlam's former electorate of Werriwa.
And the ALP's hope that it could make up losses by winning seats in Queensland has taken a blow, with a surprise Guardian poll reporting PM Kevin Rudd trailing in his own Brisbane seat."
Maher Assad’s 4th Armored Division of Syrian Army launched nerve gas shells that killed hundreds last Wednesday from base west of Damascus, report says.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/?p=647620
If it is it's sensational, but it seems to be being reported in a slightly low key way for some reason.
Quite so. Obama spelled it out in bright red neon letters that he didn't want to intervene by effectively saying Assad could do what he liked as long as he didn't use chemical weapons.
This being a regime attack makes no sense unless it was local commander's reaction to a local setback and even then doesn't make any sense unless that local commander knew he was safe from Assad i.e. a close relative.
A few more days before its sorted in practice will allow a couple of things if an attack occurred:
-Depending on the agent used, evaporation and dispersal can be extremely rapid so air detection can prove problematic. Preserved samples will be needed.
-Allow muddying of waters that if anyone wants to avoid doing anything they can say the UN officials investigations were inconclusive.
You might wish to hunt down a Scottish poll report in the Sunday Express. The accompanying article claims the poll is indicating that 640,000 Scots will emigrate to England if Alex Salmond wins the IndyRef.
Discussed on Sky News Press Report with some scepticism about the Express's interpretation of the polling results. Nothing yet up on Express website.
I specifically said GB - as opposed to UK.
The 2010 GB result was 37/30.
All opinion polls are GB only so the comparator has to also be GB - and in 2010 Lab got 30 in GB.
I can just about tolerate the Romanians and Bulgarians.
But if the Scots start taking our jobs it would be taking us back to 2007.
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/second-poll-shows-rudd-facing-battle-for-own-seat-20130824-2si7r.html
BUT ASSAD'S FORCES DID NOT USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS.
Anyone who says otherwise is a Zionist puppet.
Some scepticism you say Seth o Logue?
Surely not.
The only question is which one of the two Mystery Diana Death Cars they will all be leaving in.
*chortle*
*chortle*
Pork.
Will you be one of the 640,000?
Con: 36.89%
Lab: 29.67%
LD: 23.56%
Others: 9.88%
Con lead: 7.22%
The Tories got 36.97% if you put John Bercow's votes in the Conservative column.
edit: and the ruski anti-ship missile batteries, mustn't forget them.
*chortle*
Two mystery cars?
Which one was passing the grassy knoll?
A second chance in Britain in 2015 would mean another hung parliament and another coalition, not the majority government that the Tories dream of. That is the post-election scenario Cameron has instructed his advisers to work on. Even coming out on top in a hung parliament won’t be easy. In the past half-century only two governments have increased their share of the vote in subsequent elections. Both were led by Harold Wilson — in 1966 and October 1974.
The point is that every single poll we debate on here is GB only. So when talking about any poll and comparing to the 2010 result the only sensible thing to do is to compare to what happened in 2010 in GB.
That is what I did. You were wrong in attempting to correct me and why you are prolonging the issue I don't know.
Which one was passing the grassy knoll?
That will require another front page Express story by Desmond using a rigorous poll interpretation to determine how many members of the public may have been near the grassy knoll. Sadly Desmond would then have to inform his readers, with heavy heart, that house prices were bound to rocket as millions of Bulgarians and Romanians flock to the grassy knoll.
BRITISH and US military planners are drawing up potential targets for missile strikes on Syria amid growing certainty that the Assad regime was behind chemical weapons attacks which killed hundreds of civilians last week.
David Cameron and Barack Obama discussed “a serious response” including military action in a 40-minute phone call last night, according to a Downing Street source.
While there has been no decision on whether to go ahead with a strike, staff in London and Washington are compiling a list of targets, among a range of options.
About 1.4 times as reliable...
Syria: Cameron and Obama move west closer to intervention
British prime minister and US president agree that alleged chemical attack 'requires a response'
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/24/syria-cameron-obama-intervention
PP's 4/1 that the Scottish Indy turnout will be <60% looks like the value bet, especially with the adjacent band being their 15/8 favourite and covering such a narrow 4% field of 60 - 64%.
Not that one can get too excited about this either way with the Irish bookie limiting stakes to a maximum of £4.70.
And indeed paved the way for how the 'man of peace' Blair and new labour would then conduct themselves.
-- The formula is 1/sqrt(n)
Question is, will they push a button? There is a whiff of speed about this and that is viable. posted earlier this week that the US pretty much had what it needed in place for a multi faceted approach.
If it was regime and it was a local commander on his own authority i expect he's being molested with garden implements as we speak, brother or not.
Likely not but a military strike would rather escalate things just a touch particularly if it was done with a view to creating a no fly zone. Though of course there is always the option of arming the rebels with ever more serious firepower. Given that the Syrian rebels seem to have no qualms about using chemical weapons themselves to retaliate that may prove to be slightly problematic. As would air strikes on any suspected chemical sites that could then be overrun by those same rebels.
This is not Iraq, its not even Libya.
Lab 38
Con 32
UKIP 13
LD 10