More advice from Tessa - its a tsunami of *help* from the Staggers.
"Tessa Jowell has given a frank interview to the Independent on Sunday, in which she says that the public is not listening to Labour because of a breakdown in trust over the economy, its stance on welfare and immigration, and its relationship with the Murdoch empire. As the Labour party conference kicks off in Liverpool, this may not be the positive message that Ed Miliband wants to send. In her harshest comments, Jowell, said:
"What we've got to accept is that in the country more widely, nobody is listening. The biggest battle that Labour has at the moment is to be relevant and to be heard... For so many people, it's just white noise."
She is joined by two other Blairite MPs -- Liam Byrne and Alan Johnson -- in calling for Miliband to apologise for Labour's mistakes on the economy in his speech to conference. His aides have said that they believe the moment for an apology has passed, and he is not expected to go any further than saying that there is a "long way to go" to regain public trust. Her comments likening the last Labour government's relationship to the Murdoch empire to "crack cocaine" has also drawn headlines:
"I think that the mistake that we made - it's a bit like the crack cocaine of politics, isn't it? Getting a good write-up, or the horror of a bad write-up. At its worst, Westminster politics is like a private conversation between Westminster media and Westminster politicians, and the rest of the world are eavesdroppers on a private conversation, and that's got to change." ... http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/09/jowell-labour-listening-nobody
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either. Smart politics, but bad for the National interest.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
TBH, X thing I don't understand costs Ybns has bugger all PR cut through. To make it work: X = something I can imagine or have direct experience of Y = believable number of £££s - anything over several tens of million sounds made up Z = are the people saying this credible given their own track record Here Dr Death claiming XYZ has no traction. It may make Labourites cheer but it butters no electoral parsnips.
I hope you are right but the voters are angry about wasting their money and not tackling the debt. (deficit is more difficult to grasp). Portrayed as wasting money could be a PR gain.
Julia Gillard taking the piss? "Ousted prime minister Julia Gillard says she won't attend Labor's campaign launch because she doesn't want to distract from her successor's "powerful message"
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either. Smart politics, but bad for the National interest.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
That entirely depends on if you believe the reorganisation will save money.
We all know how well the Government's predictions elsewhere have turned out.
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either. Smart politics, but bad for the National interest.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
TBH, X thing I don't understand costs Ybns has bugger all PR cut through. To make it work: X = something I can imagine or have direct experience of Y = believable number of £££s - anything over several tens of million sounds made up Z = are the people saying this credible given their own track record Here Dr Death claiming XYZ has no traction. It may make Labourites cheer but it butters no electoral parsnips.
I hope you are right but the voters are angry about wasting their money and not tackling the debt. (deficit is more difficult to grasp). Portrayed as wasting money could be a PR gain.
The thing about PR is that angry ranting bounces off unless it hits a nerve. To do that it has *to matter* - so huge numbers rarely cut it as they're simply incomprehensible or sound made up.
Ditto the credibility of those claiming it. So Labour crying about NHS and waste doesn't tick the right boxes as they've a terrible rep on both.
It's like Wonga bitching about debt. Or lone sharks.
Getting cut through that sticks is the gold mine of PR and its very hard to do - otherwise the whole industry would cease to exist. Labour bashing on about subjects like NHS failures, immigration etc are just damage limitation. They convert very few because they simply aren't credible advocates.
Evidence of Tap-On: Reports are that a considerable ship of weaponry has just gone across the Turkish border to insurgents. The weapons have long been available, its about whether and when to deliver. Its perhaps no co-incidence that this ship has turned up shortly after events during the week.
Alleged chemical weapons attack: Reports suggest US apparently was aware of chemical weapons stocks being moved on Tuesday.
The thing about PR is that angry ranting bounces off unless it hits a nerve. To do that it has *to matter* - so huge numbers rarely cut it as they're simply incomprehensible or sound made up.
Ditto the credibility of those claiming it. So Labour crying about NHS and waste doesn't tick the right boxes as they've a terrible rep on both.
It's like Wonga bitching about debt. Or lone sharks.
Getting cut through that sticks is the gold mine of PR and its very hard to do - otherwise the whole industry would cease to exist. Labour bashing on about subjects like NHS failures, immigration etc are just damage limitation. They convert very few because they simply aren't credible advocates.
"Labour maintain their usual strong lead on the NHS, 32% to the Conservatives’ 20%. Only 21% think that Jeremy Hunt is doing a good job as Health Secretary, 52% a bad job."
The text (and links) within the tweet is fine, but posting the link to the actual tweet is causing the tweet to appear as a picture, and is causing bandwith issues
Re the LibDem lost deposit bets, I think you need to ask yourself two questions:
1. What will the LibDem vote share be in 2015 2. What will be the standard deviation of their vote
Let us assume - not unreasonably - that they get 13% of the vote in 2015. This is 3% below the 16% in the ICM wisdom poll, but 3% more than the latest YouGov (and roughly in line with the latest - real - ICM).
Now, in 2010, the LibDems had less statistical deviation from the mean in their vote share than either Labour or the Conservatives. If that holds true in 2015, then they will lose fewer than 50 deposits. On the other hand, if that deviation rises, then they will lose proportionately more deposits - but at the same time keep more seats.
Looking at history, the LDs had lower variation in their vote share than the other parties in '83, '87, '92, '05 and '10. They had more variation in '97 and '01. (In '97, they saw their vote fall by 1.5% but their seats more than doubled.)
While I think its easy to extrapolate from Holyrood and the Welsh Assembly votes, I would still be more attracted to the 4/1 on fewer than 50. Why? Because this isn't an each-way bet, it's a 4/1 one. We could see any one of a number of things happen that would cause the LDs to get nearer 15% than 10% - and if they're at 15%, then I'd be extremely surprised to see them lose more than 10 or 15 lost deposits.
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either. Smart politics, but bad for the National interest.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
That entirely depends on if you believe the reorganisation will save money.
We all know how well the Government's predictions elsewhere have turned out.
The interesting piece of research would be how many of those taking redundancy money get well-paid jobs with CCG`s...Am sure there are many playing the system
Re the LibDem lost deposit bets, I think you need to ask yourself two questions:
1. What will the LibDem vote share be in 2015 2. What will be the standard deviation of their vote
Let us assume - not unreasonably - that they get 13% of the vote in 2015. This is 3% below the 16% in the ICM wisdom poll, but 3% more than the latest YouGov (and roughly in line with the latest - real - ICM).
Now, in 2010, the LibDems had less statistical deviation from the mean in their vote share than either Labour or the Conservatives. If that holds true in 2015, then they will lose fewer than 50 deposits. On the other hand, if that deviation rises, then they will lose proportionately more deposits - but at the same time keep more seats.
Looking at history, the LDs had lower variation in their vote share than the other parties in '83, '87, '92, '05 and '10. They had more variation in '97 and '01. (In '97, they saw their vote fall by 1.5% but their seats more than doubled.)
While I think its easy to extrapolate from Holyrood and the Welsh Assembly votes, I would still be more attracted to the 4/1 on fewer than 50. Why? Because this isn't an each-way bet, it's a 4/1 one. We could see any one of a number of things happen that would cause the LDs to get nearer 15% than 10% - and if they're at 15%, then I'd be extremely surprised to see them lose more than 10 or 15 lost deposits.
In 1992 the LDs polled 18.3% and lost 11 deposits:
The text (and links) within the tweet is fine, but posting the link to the actual tweet is causing the tweet to appear as a picture, and is causing bandwith issues
This is getting really messy. I've linked to tweets for ages and only today have they appeared as links with images. What are we supposed to do? Can't you disable this?
SMukesh..It is time niumber 10 took control of the news output. Anything that annoys the MSM is good. No Headlines, no sales. If they want to interview or quote the top brass then they must abide by some rules. Crosby is all over this.
The text (and links) within the tweet is fine, but posting the link to the actual tweet is causing the tweet to appear as a picture, and is causing bandwith issues
This is getting really messy. I've linked to tweets for ages and only today have they appeared as links with images. What are we supposed to do? Can't you disable this?
And mine have been deleted!
We're looking into it, as noted below, just copy the text from with the tweet itself, such as
Anecdote.. I did a straw poll of my relatives in the UK this week re Camerons torso.The overwhelming majority said he looked like any other dad on the beach having a swim with the kids... the rest said he needs to work out a little...and errr.. so what, he looks like the average 40 something dad. Most bathrooms/bedrooms seem to have one apparently.
Unless you know someone in No.10,it`s just speculation!
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck,it is a duck!
The reason he doesn`t like interviews is he`s rubbish at it and can`t think on his feet. In fact his Wiki entry used to say Samantha recognised he`s useless at speaking spontaneously but it appears to have disappeared.
Anecdote.. I did a straw poll of my relatives in the UK this week re Camerons torso.The overwhelming majority said he looked like any other dad on the beach having a swim with the kids... the rest said he needs to work out a little...and errr.. so what, he looks like the average 40 something dad. Most bathrooms/bedrooms seem to have one apparently.
TBH, if anyone is judging the torso of the PM as a middle-aged bloke on holiday as anything other than very average, I wonder about their daily experience. It's not movie star stuff but then aren't we always moaning that politicians *aren't like me*.
When Cameron starts wrestling crocodiles a la Putin - I'll be worried. The chap is on holiday FFS. Times readers are very WTF about even reporting on it - pap stuff.
SMukesh.."Cant think on his feet" That would explain why he is the PM and rips new holes for the opposition every week at PMQ's. The news output has to be in the hands of the originators, that way they get to keep some form of control. Nowt to do with ducks or being inside Number ten.. just plain common sense.
That poll finding rather puts paid to the idea that just the sniff of Westminster producing another Tory Government would push the Scots into rushing off and voting Yes in the Indy Referendum next year. Take a Union supporting Scots Labour supporter, would they really vote yes as an anti Tory measure when it would also then prevent them from ever being able to do their bit by voting for a Labour Government at Westminster?
SMukesh.."Cant think on his feet" That would explain why he is the PM and rips new holes for the opposition every week at PMQ's. The news output has to be in the hands of the originators, that way they get to keep some form of control. Nowt to do with ducks or being inside Number ten.. just plain common sense.
That is just your opinion,nothing more!It`s not just the BBC complaining but ITN and Sky who are usually quite supportive.And also note how it`s noted that both Blair and Brown appeared in tougher interviews than Cameron.So Cameron gets twice the airtime than Brown and almost all of it is recorded stuff.It is nothing but an attempt to avoid questions in case he falters as he does in this interview.I gave the link to his interview to Gay Times where he falters unbelievably and ends up blaming the interviewer
Ed Miliband's personal polling does show that he has failed to connect with the electorate over the three years he has been Labour Leader. IIRC, even when his personal polling was in a slightly better place, it was marked by a high number of Don't Knows rather than a particularly high positive view. That those Don't Knows are now making their mind up and moving into the negative camp should be a real concern for him and his party.
There's nothing that much wrong with Ed Miliband. He's a bit undynamic and has not shown much consistency in messaging, but he seems intelligent, reasonably personable and is slowly hauling together a policy platform for the next election.
A lot of the polling reflects the public's justified general distrust of politicians at present.
The mighty oracle has spoken.. did you manage to get to Cornwall over the week..catch a wee peek?..must have been a bit of a schlep from the Pool. I hope it brought the satisfaction you so obviously craved. All PM.s move things to their requirements .. Both Blair and Brown did the same..Remember Browns late showing at the Lisbon treaty signing.. he went in just before the cleaning ladies.. blamed pressure of work..heheh
Steve Webb, (in the introduction to a new book of essays by LD peers and MPs):
“The most fundamental reason why Christians should feel at home in the Liberal Democrats is that the character of God, as revealed in the Christian Gospel, would suggest that God must be a liberal. This assertion will shock or offend some, but… there is no other conclusion that can be drawn from… the New Testament”.
SMukesh, you are now arguing against yourself..you said he was always available when everyone knows he ran like a scared rabbit..maybe that's the one the lefties keep pointig to. Cameron will als be given a vedict by the electorate. Want to assert he wont be seen giving live interviews. You seem to have developed amnesia.. remember Cameron Direct..never saw Brown do that ..and Blair closed down when the WI ripped a new hole in the seat of his pants. Haven't seen much of Ed in the last few weeks either.
Cameron Direct?When did he do that last? He`s hardly off the television,yet gives far fewer interviews than Blair or Brown...And that`s not me stating it but BBC,ITN and Sky. And we all know how he`s running scared from the TV debates!
That poll finding rather puts paid to the idea that just the sniff of Westminster producing another Tory Government would push the Scots into rushing off and voting Yes in the Indy Referendum next year. Take a Union supporting Scots Labour supporter, would they really vote yes as an anti Tory measure when it would also then prevent them from ever being able to do their bit by voting for a Labour Government at Westminster?
Why would a 'Union supporting Scots Labour supporter' vote Yes in any circumstances? The 20-30% of Labour supporters who regularly say they'll vote Yes plus Labour DKs will be much more important when it comes to the crunch.
Cameron Direct?When did he do that last? He`s hardly off the television,yet gives far fewer interviews than Blair or Brown...And that`s not me stating it but BBC,ITN and Sky. And we all know how he`s running scared from the TV debates!
"Taking part in a Cameron Direct question-and-answer session at Crewe's Bentley car plant, the prime minister was asked whether the possibility of a referendum would create uncertainty among businesses.
He replied: "I think a greater uncertainty would be to put your head in the sand and pretend there isn't a problem with Europe. There is a problem and I'm going to fix it."
Mr Cameron also reiterated his belief that the UK would not adopt the single currency, saying: "I don't think we are ever going to have the euro. I don't think we should have the euro. We are better off with pounds sterling"
Smukesh.. If everyone had a huge diamond they would all be worthless..keep them baying for interviews and they might just get one Being on th tv giving lots of interviews with very mediocre intervieweres is certainly not the way to go..and he seems to know that.
Steve Webb, (in the introduction to a new book of essays by LD peers and MPs):
“The most fundamental reason why Christians should feel at home in the Liberal Democrats is that the character of God, as revealed in the Christian Gospel, would suggest that God must be a liberal. This assertion will shock or offend some, but… there is no other conclusion that can be drawn from… the New Testament”.
Quoted from today’s Sunday Times, page 3.
Wasn't there a book 30-ish years ago by MPs explaining why God voted Conservative/Liberal/Labour?
Cameron Direct?When did he do that last? He`s hardly off the television,yet gives far fewer interviews than Blair or Brown...And that`s not me stating it but BBC,ITN and Sky. And we all know how he`s running scared from the TV debates!
"Taking part in a Cameron Direct question-and-answer session at Crewe's Bentley car plant, the prime minister was asked whether the possibility of a referendum would create uncertainty among businesses.
He replied: "I think a greater uncertainty would be to put your head in the sand and pretend there isn't a problem with Europe. There is a problem and I'm going to fix it."
Mr Cameron also reiterated his belief that the UK would not adopt the single currency, saying: "I don't think we are ever going to have the euro. I don't think we should have the euro. We are better off with pounds sterling"
That ruins your argument
Thank you Plato for answering a part of my question.The charge from the networks is that he avoids tough interviews and it tends to fit in with how he`s trying to avoid the television debates and asks the networks to send in a camera without an interviewer so he can do his `quote` and not be asked questions.
"However, a National Audit Office (NAO) report last month found that more one in five of NHS staff made redundant as part of the Government’s reforms had been re-employed by the health service."
Since 2007, many private companies have also made a large number of redundancies as they downsized or reorganised their businesses in a bid to ride out the recession. Is it really that uncommon a practice to then rehire some key skilled staff who had been previously made redundant? After living in the North East of Scotland for over twenty years, I have seen this happen many times in the Oil&Gas industry once the dust of a reorganisation has settled within a company.
The story here is also how many people got paid off and then re-employed or brought back in as consultants.
"The Department for Health said last night that the costs of the redundancy programme will be outstripped by the savings of the Government reforms to the NHS. A spokeswoman said: “Last year we started changes that put doctors and nurses in the driving seat as they are best placed to take decisions about care for their patients. “The changes made as a result of the reforms mean a huge net gain for the taxpayer. They will save £5.5 billion during this Parliament and £1.5 billion every year thereafter, to be reinvested back into patient care.” However, a National Audit Office (NAO) report last month found that more one in five of NHS staff made redundant as part of the Government’s reforms had been re-employed by the health service."
The one in five figure probably doesn't include management consultants paid on a daily rate.
Comments
"Tessa Jowell has given a frank interview to the Independent on Sunday, in which she says that the public is not listening to Labour because of a breakdown in trust over the economy, its stance on welfare and immigration, and its relationship with the Murdoch empire. As the Labour party conference kicks off in Liverpool, this may not be the positive message that Ed Miliband wants to send. In her harshest comments, Jowell, said:
"What we've got to accept is that in the country more widely, nobody is listening. The biggest battle that Labour has at the moment is to be relevant and to be heard... For so many people, it's just white noise."
She is joined by two other Blairite MPs -- Liam Byrne and Alan Johnson -- in calling for Miliband to apologise for Labour's mistakes on the economy in his speech to conference. His aides have said that they believe the moment for an apology has passed, and he is not expected to go any further than saying that there is a "long way to go" to regain public trust. Her comments likening the last Labour government's relationship to the Murdoch empire to "crack cocaine" has also drawn headlines:
"I think that the mistake that we made - it's a bit like the crack cocaine of politics, isn't it? Getting a good write-up, or the horror of a bad write-up. At its worst, Westminster politics is like a private conversation between Westminster media and Westminster politicians, and the rest of the world are eavesdroppers on a private conversation, and that's got to change." ... http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/09/jowell-labour-listening-nobody
We all know how well the Government's predictions elsewhere have turned out.
Ditto the credibility of those claiming it. So Labour crying about NHS and waste doesn't tick the right boxes as they've a terrible rep on both.
It's like Wonga bitching about debt. Or lone sharks.
Getting cut through that sticks is the gold mine of PR and its very hard to do - otherwise the whole industry would cease to exist. Labour bashing on about subjects like NHS failures, immigration etc are just damage limitation. They convert very few because they simply aren't credible advocates.
Two pieces of news:
Evidence of Tap-On: Reports are that a considerable ship of weaponry has just gone across the Turkish border to insurgents. The weapons have long been available, its about whether and when to deliver. Its perhaps no co-incidence that this ship has turned up shortly after events during the week.
Alleged chemical weapons attack: Reports suggest US apparently was aware of chemical weapons stocks being moved on Tuesday.
.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/category/nhs
So if Labour's rep is "terrible" on the NHS (32%) how would you characterize the Conservatives (20%)?
And kindly refrain from characterising my posts as "crying", "bitching" or "angry ranting", or at least clarify if you mean me or Andy Burnham.
Blair-the-Worm has turned. Only Al-Beeb would publish such slimey scum given his trail....
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/downing-street-hogs-the-remote-control-the-pms-use-of-tame-media-is-annoying-the-big-guns-at-sky-itn-and-the-bbc-8783680.html
Can posters not post the links to tweets
The text (and links) within the tweet is fine, but posting the link to the actual tweet is causing the tweet to appear as a picture, and is causing bandwith issues
1. What will the LibDem vote share be in 2015
2. What will be the standard deviation of their vote
Let us assume - not unreasonably - that they get 13% of the vote in 2015. This is 3% below the 16% in the ICM wisdom poll, but 3% more than the latest YouGov (and roughly in line with the latest - real - ICM).
Now, in 2010, the LibDems had less statistical deviation from the mean in their vote share than either Labour or the Conservatives. If that holds true in 2015, then they will lose fewer than 50 deposits. On the other hand, if that deviation rises, then they will lose proportionately more deposits - but at the same time keep more seats.
Looking at history, the LDs had lower variation in their vote share than the other parties in '83, '87, '92, '05 and '10. They had more variation in '97 and '01. (In '97, they saw their vote fall by 1.5% but their seats more than doubled.)
While I think its easy to extrapolate from Holyrood and the Welsh Assembly votes, I would still be more attracted to the 4/1 on fewer than 50. Why? Because this isn't an each-way bet, it's a 4/1 one. We could see any one of a number of things happen that would cause the LDs to get nearer 15% than 10% - and if they're at 15%, then I'd be extremely surprised to see them lose more than 10 or 15 lost deposits.
Fluffy Thoughts - I don't like hearing the phrase "Lord Blair", it has an eerie inevitability about it
http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge92/partycand.htm
And mine have been deleted!
Anything that annoys the MSM is good.
No Headlines, no sales.
If they want to interview or quote the top brass then they must abide by some rules.
Crosby is all over this.
Nick Boles @GeneralBoles 51m
Michael Gove gears up for intervention in #Syria pic.twitter.com/p1hAbGZkMU
Most bathrooms/bedrooms seem to have one apparently.
Unless you know someone in No.10,it`s just speculation!
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck,it is a duck!
The reason he doesn`t like interviews is he`s rubbish at it and can`t think on his feet.
In fact his Wiki entry used to say Samantha recognised he`s useless at speaking spontaneously but it appears to have disappeared.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/23820121
When Cameron starts wrestling crocodiles a la Putin - I'll be worried. The chap is on holiday FFS. Times readers are very WTF about even reporting on it - pap stuff.
The news output has to be in the hands of the originators, that way they get to keep some form of control.
Nowt to do with ducks or being inside Number ten.. just plain common sense.
Oz 20-Twenty 'til [late] Tea? England a smash-and-grab by 19:00-hours? [Just in time for Ovaltine!] The cricket is getting interesting.....
All PM.s move things to their requirements .. Both Blair and Brown did the same..Remember Browns late showing at the Lisbon treaty signing.. he went in just before the cleaning ladies.. blamed pressure of work..heheh
Atleast Brown din`t avoid interviews unlike your leader who hides behind recorded clips in case he gets asked tough questions!
“The most fundamental reason why Christians should feel at home in the Liberal Democrats is that the character of God, as revealed in the Christian Gospel, would suggest that God must be a liberal. This assertion will shock or offend some, but… there is no other conclusion that can be drawn from… the New Testament”.
Quoted from today’s Sunday Times, page 3.
Considering living in some warmer clime?
Me to.
Maybe SoWo is related to URW? Or not....
Brown`s been dealt with by the electorate.But your man needs to man up and take some questions.
Cameron will als be given a vedict by the electorate.
Want to assert he wont be seen giving live interviews.
You seem to have developed amnesia.. remember Cameron Direct..never saw Brown do that ..and Blair closed down when the WI ripped a new hole in the seat of his pants.
Haven't seen much of Ed in the last few weeks either.
Cameron Direct?When did he do that last?
He`s hardly off the television,yet gives far fewer interviews than Blair or Brown...And that`s not me stating it but BBC,ITN and Sky.
And we all know how he`s running scared from the TV debates!
"Taking part in a Cameron Direct question-and-answer session at Crewe's Bentley car plant, the prime minister was asked whether the possibility of a referendum would create uncertainty among businesses.
He replied: "I think a greater uncertainty would be to put your head in the sand and pretend there isn't a problem with Europe. There is a problem and I'm going to fix it."
Mr Cameron also reiterated his belief that the UK would not adopt the single currency, saying: "I don't think we are ever going to have the euro. I don't think we should have the euro. We are better off with pounds sterling"
That ruins your argument
Since 2007, many private companies have also made a large number of redundancies as they downsized or reorganised their businesses in a bid to ride out the recession. Is it really that uncommon a practice to then rehire some key skilled staff who had been previously made redundant? After living in the North East of Scotland for over twenty years, I have seen this happen many times in the Oil&Gas industry once the dust of a reorganisation has settled within a company.