Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes Phone Poll Out
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes Phone Poll Out
The fieldwork dates were between Friday the 30th August and Sunday the 1st September 2013, ComRes interviewed 1,000 British adults by telephone, so all post the Government defeat on Syria.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
LOL
The US and its allies should not however bank everything on the G20. It is as much an opportunity to demonstrate that they are the ones being reasonable and to show up Russia and China as being intransigent as it is an opportunity for diplomatic closure. I think we will see the press conferences and journalist briefings being as important as the back rooms in St Petersburg.
Making sure the world sees that the US is doing his best to secure a last minute diplomatic solution makes it much easier to justify a wider scope of intervention as a response to Russian and Chinese blocking.
"David Cameron showed that he is out of touch with Britain in his handling of the Syria crisis" - is there a corresponding positive, such as "David Cameron showed respect for the people by putting the matter to a vote in Parliament?"
Also "The United States, without Britain, should launch military air strikes on Syria to deter it from using chemical weapons in future" has multiple ideas (US involvement, UK non-involvement) making it poor for discerning people's views.
I think we, as a country, are between states. Before, we were told stuff by politicians, which we believed and none of which turned out to be true, whereas we are now in a state of being told stuff by politicians, some of which may turn out to be true, but we don't believe them.
The third, dare I say, Zen state will be a more demanding one where we actually listen to the arguments.
For me, I think the arguments in this case have been well made by Cameron, Kerry, etc but those stats show that we're just not in the mood right now.
Move along.
http://www.espn.co.uk/redbull/motorsport/story/122971.html
It is tempting and all too easy to blame Tony Blair and his set-up.
So I will.
When the dust settles UKIP will take dix points
Before action is authorised the public is against.
When action is authorised the public is split 50/50.
On realising the initial military goal (the taking of Port Stanley or Baghdad) the public is two thirds in favour.
The risk is a long tail of inconclusive outcomes, unclear objectives and a slow build up of casualties. Then public support goes down to below a third.
Taking action is a big risk with large upsides and downsides.
If the government gets it right they are rewarded (Thatcher). If they get it wrong they are defeated (Blair by his party).
Around 1 May the Labour lead was over 9 and now it is under 6 taking a rough average of polls, and that's including the couple that have recently shown Labour improvements.
Still no room for hysteria, granted, although personally I haven't expressed any.
Now we can all rule out electoral success for UKIP.
And PB Tories don't make errors.
I thought that at first but he never pressed home his advantage and before the week was out it was obvious he didn't know what he wanted to do. I still don't know what he wanted to do.
He should have made the case for non involvement just like Charlie Kennedy did over Iraq. No ifs No buts.
http://www.comres.co.uk/poll-digest/11/margin-of-error-calculator.htm
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/Independent_Political_Poll_3_September_2013.pdf
For the avoidance of confusion, I've removed my comment about it being a MOE change.
Anyone want to write a guest thread on MoE?
Maybe, I am oversimplifying. But it is clear that unless there is clear and present danger to the UK directly, the British peopel want to stay out.
I believe he does Sunil, I believe he does.
Miliband must have really, really, twisted their arms to get them to do that.
Ah, the lucky families of the few thousand more Syrians who have to die of chemical attacks before Ed will get his act together.
As Grandiose posted , though , if a pollster's samples are not random and/or it's methodology is faulty then the MofE calculation will always be too low .
Sadly, he could not convince enough people. Some people were against for good, moral reasons; others because they wanted to give the government a bloody nose. The latter people were not thinking of the people of Syria.
But your diversion is irrelevant to the point.
Thanks to Miliband's and Labour's behaviour, both his do-nothing amendment and the government bill got voted down. This has caused severe problems for our international partners, and also puts the Syrian people at risk of further chemical weapons attacks.
Which would be reasonable if Miliband had an alternative plan. But he doesn't. It's a shame that this doesn't concern you.
On other sorts of error, consider the fact that all the companies are supposed to be asking the same question of the same population.
49% of voters said parliament “should hold a debate” if UN weapons inspectors conclude a chemical attack was launched by the Syrian regime, while 37 per cent believe that there would be “no need for a new debate”.
and
Conservative voters were most likely to approve of another debate (60 per cent), with 56 per cent of Lib Dem voters in favour and 47 per cent of Labour voters.
However, 49 per cent of all voters said that confirmation of a chemical attack and approval from Congress for a US military strike on Syria should not reopen the question of Britain’s involvement in military intervention.
Only 36 per cent said those developments would represent a “new situation”, making it “reasonable for the Prime Minister to ask Parliament to look again at whether Britain should take part in military action”.
Pleeeeeeeeeze, Seany, be a good boy!
Miliband needs to show some leadership and quickly.
He should have explained clearly why he didn't think it was right to get involved in Syria and that the days of following the US like a well trained poodle were a thing of the past. He should then have laid into the Cameron for his pathetic party management and his feeble leadership.
He should have then sent his MPs out to the studios to repeat the message. So when these polls on Syria started to come out Miliband could be seen to be the one leading public opinion. The template was there from 2003 when the Lib Dems did it over Iraq
I'm rapidly losing confidence that he has the slightest idea how to sell himself and his party
If MPs/voters want another debate after the UN returns, they can want. Miliband's merry band of followers have scuppered that.
And neither do the government. Except at least they had a plan. And now no-one does, and the chemical warfare treaties are worthless.
Well done Ed!
'An apparently this was the 14th chemical attack Cameron knew about '
And the Weasel that leads the Labour party still decided to play party politics.
A majority of the HoC did vote for UK intervention in Syria.
A vast majority of Toriy and Lib Dem MPs voted in favour of the Government motion supporting intervention.
A vast majority of Labour MPs voted in favour of the Opposition amendment supporting intervention.
Now whose fault was it there were two votes?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23938128
And while some people are for intervening for good, moral reasons, others because (in Avery's words) they never want to miss an opportunity to 'bomb ragheads'.
http://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/archives/education/churchill_era/exercises/appeasement/part_B1.php
Kerry has apparently just described this as the US' "Munich moment"......wonder which country that dig was aimed at.....
It's the equivalent of dropping laxatives in the monkey house.
You should see the abuse we get on twitter when we do so, is so enjoyable.
Tommy Cooper
Morecambe & Wise
Cyclists
Shopping
The internet
Whales
Endangered species
Tolstoy
Shakespeare
James Joyce's Ulysses
Salman Rushdie
The Beatles
Brazil
The Pope
The list is endless.
The young prince
That will have them choking on their cornflakes.
These things ebb and flow
Really, say its not so
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/10281034/Labour-and-Lib-Dems-got-mansion-tax-sums-wrong.html
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/09/03/nielsen-53-47-to-coalition-in-queensland/
Cameron bestriding the world stage like an homunculus
SeanT Polly Toynbee is of course the perfect target for you
"Yet what actually is the land that we are so desperate to protect really being used for? Well, this piece in Inside Housing by Colin Wiles makes an interesting point. One of the biggest uses of the green belt, around London at least, is grazing horses. He estimates that around 600,000 hectares of land in Britain is occupied by the country’s 1m or so horses. To put that in perspective, the amount of land that is built on is roughly double that. So horses probably use up almost as much space as we do.
The reality of the green belt is that it is an enormous subsidy for any activity which doesn’t involve changing the land use from green fields. People who want big pony paddocks within a short drive (or ride?) of their suburban houses in north London can easily get them. People who would rather like suburban houses within a short train journey of their job in central London are instead forced to go and live in places like the Thames estuary."
http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2013/08/planning-policy
Industrial areas
Suburbia
Farmland
Forests
Mountains
Young people
Middle aged people
Old people
Enclosed spaces
Open spaces
Pizza
Pasta
Italian food in general
And get all your facts wrong and then steadfastly refuse to admit you're wrong - get Hugh Laurie and Hugh Grant mixed up for example or Herbert Sutcliffe and Peter Sutcliffe. Or refer to Jerry and Margo Leadbetter as Jerry and Mungo Leadbetter and say that was the origin of the name Mungo Jerry.
IIRC the Liberals did paricularly well in Queensland at the last election and it looks like Rudd's return isn't helping Labor.