Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tories drop to record low in today’s YouGov daily poll

SystemSystem Posts: 11,007
edited April 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tories drop to record low in today’s YouGov daily poll

Tories drop to a record low of 28%in latest YouGov.CON 28%: LAB 42%: LD 12%: UKIP 11%

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    28% is bad however you look at it. Last week the Tories claimed to have captured the nations mood on welfare. Clearly they were wrong.
  • Options
    JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Jonathan said:

    28% is bad however you look at it. Last week the Tories claimed to have captured the nations mood on welfare. Clearly they were wrong.

    Not bad enough at this stage. Need to be unpopular in order to win.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    There are two possibilities for the rather depressing Conservative results in the latest Yougov poll.

    1. That all this talk of an ex leader reminds them of the shortcomings of their present one

    2. Or that as the dust settles people start to remember what she was like. Her support for apartheid. Her support and friendship for the tyrant Pinochet. Section 28. Her support for the Contras. Her gift of an hereditary peerage to her son Mark. For turning the country from a compassionate one to an avaricious one.

    My guess is it's the second and as people wake up to the ugly realization that the current lot are her spawn they are starting to feel nauseous.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,919
    As I posted on the previous topic, the big difference in the admittedly one by-election last night was the much bigger drop in the Tory vote than any of the other parties. Which is similar to what happened in 1979.
  • Options
    All of the changes are within moe and I suspect have little to do with anything other than the general economic malaise. All the benefit polling suggests support for the coalition programme.

    "It's always gonna be the economy stupid which will decide the next GE.
  • Options
    For

    @Roger ">There are two possibilities for the rather depressing Conservative results in the latest Yougov poll.

    1. That all this talk of an ex leader reminds them of the shortcomings of their present one

    2. Or that as the dust settles people start to remember her support for apartheid. Her support and friendship for the tyrant Pinochet. Her support for the Contras. Her gift of a hereditary peerage to her son Mark. For section 28. For turning the country from a compassionate one to an avaricious one.

    My guess is it's the second and as people wake up to the ugly realization that the current lot are her spawn they are starting to feel nauseous."

    Lol - How very Glenda Jackson - guardianistaland is not the real world dear.
  • Options
    @Tim

    "I hope I've made this clear enough for everyone to understand."

    Lol. It's good to have something to laugh at in the morning.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    I don't normally comment on the polls but if blues are allegedly closing the gap yesterday followed by falling hugely behind today it's probably saying more about You Gov than how people intend to vote.

    You Gov tells us nothing more than the other pollsters ie that the blues are behind the reds but the red lead is soft. The daily poll is becoming a waste of time.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited April 2013
    @Jonathan. "28% is bad however you look at it. Last week the Tories claimed to have captured the nations mood on welfare. Clearly they were wrong."

    I think you're on to something. Being reminded of Thatcher and the current lot squeezing welfare from the most needy creates an interesting juxtaposition. People with dim memories might have thought her a necessary evil at the time but this reminds them that Tories have it in their blood.

    It's not attractive.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,320
    The 6-point change in lead on yesterday is outside the MOE and presumably indicates something other than the economic malaise (which is not as bad as it has been - people are gradually cheering up a bit on the economy).

    My guess is that it's a combination of Roger's factors. People who really liked Maggie are making unfavourable comparisons with the current incumbents. People who really didn't are more determined to vote the Tories out. So even now she's polarising us, but not in a way helpful to Cameron.
  • Options
    RicardohosRicardohos Posts: 258
    edited April 2013
    I think the Righteous Right are making a massive mistake in criticising those raising some anti-Thatcher points. With time most people can look back and see she did some good things, but she also did some damned bad ones. The censorship of any critique under the nonsense that somehow this is disrespectful, when she was as public a figure as can be, may be turning off a lot of centrist voters, the more so when the Righteous Right describe them as 'lefties'.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited April 2013
    If YouGov is anything more than dodgy sampling - what I think is more interesting is how Mrs T's passing may actually impact on the Tories/Labour/Kipper/LD psychologically.

    If she'd died closer to GE2015, I suspect it would have an higher impact - but with two years to go - has it brought forward the time when all parties start to see themselves through the prism of her period in office again... and in doing so start to define themselves more clearly.

    I suspect that it will shape the narrative for a while to come even subconsciously.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    Roger said:

    @Jonathan. "28% is bad however you look at it. Last week the Tories claimed to have captured the nations mood on welfare. Clearly they were wrong."

    I think you're on to something. Being reminded of Thatcher and the current lot squeezing welfare from the most needy creates an interesting juxtaposition. People with dim memories might have thought her a necessary evil at the time but this reminds them that this is what Tories like to do.

    It's not attractive.

    Roger

    Would you agree with me that the government should instead be squeezing the rich?

    With pay cuts in the public sector, BBC and nationalised banks for anyone earning over twice the average national wage and with a maximum wage for everyone in the public sector, BBC and nationalised banks of ten times the national minimum wage.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    Roger said:
    My guess is it's the second and as people wake up to the ugly realization that the current lot are her spawn they are starting to feel nauseous.

    My guess is that your attribution of MOE swings say much more about your wish fulfilment than anything about the electorate.

    The polling directly on Thatcher suggests that while still highly polarising she's still net popular,

    Why this should have any bearing on a Coalition government in power 23 years after she left office is for the birds...
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    edited April 2013
    Roger said:
    Her support for apartheid.

    "Johannesburg - Former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher had a better grasp of the complexities and geo-strategic realities of South Africa than many of her contemporaries, former president FW de Klerk said on Monday.

    A steadfast critic of apartheid, she had consistently and correctly believed that much more could be achieved through constructive engagement with the South African government than through draconian sanctions and isolation, De Klerk said in a statement."

    http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Politics/Thatcher-had-better-grasp-of-SAs-complexities-FW-20130408

    Then there was her championing of white minority rule in Rhodesia....oh, hang on.....
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    "Or that as the dust settles people start to remember her support for apartheid. Her support and friendship for the tyrant Pinochet. Her support for the Contras. Her gift of a hereditary peerage to her son Mark. For section 28. For turning the country from a compassionate one to an avaricious one."

    We might all laugh at Roger's uber champagne socialist comment and have memories brought back of his Gordon Brown / Jade Goody comparison but he is at least too honest to pretend an interest in miners and factory workers.


  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    Roger said:
    My guess is it's the second and as people wake up to the ugly realization that the current lot are her spawn they are starting to feel nauseous.

    My guess is that your attribution of MOE swings say much more about your wish fulfilment than anything about the electorate.

    The polling directly on Thatcher suggests that while still highly polarising she's still net popular,

    Why this should have any bearing on a Coalition government in power 23 years after she left office is for the birds...

    Well if you have no policies It's much easier to harp on about events in the past as if they're the present, I think Roger would enjoy being in The Orange Order.

  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    And can I thank those among the PB lefties who have mentioned section 28 in recent days.

    Their faux outrage is always amusing.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    Dan says Tony says Ed is crap:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100211660/tony-blairs-critique-of-ed-miliband-is-harsh-but-accurate-labour-has-left-itself-on-the-wrong-side-of-every-debate/

    Tony Blair's critique of Ed Miliband is harsh but accurate: Labour has left itself on the wrong side of every debate
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    FPT:

    Another "automatic membership" for an independent Scotland falls - this time NATO:

    In a written response on the question of membership, a Nato statement said this week: “It appears widely agreed that, as a matter of law, a Scotland which has declared its independence and thereby established its separate statehood would be viewed as a new state.”

    It continued: “If it were to choose to apply for Nato membership, its application would be subject to the normal procedure, as outlined in article ten of the treaty.”

    Mr Salmond has argued that Scotland is already a member of Nato “by virtue of our membership of the United Kingdom.”

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/our-nato-spot-is-safe-after-yes-vote-insist-snp-1-2887431
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576

    And can I thank those among the PB lefties who have mentioned section 28 in recent days.

    Their faux outrage is always amusing.

    Funnily enough they (almost) never mention the AIDS campaign which saved the lives of tens of thousands of gay men..... - a mere detail, eh?
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    Anecdote warning.

    Everyone I've heard mentioning Thatcher this week has said she deserves respect.

    She's regarded as doing some things right and some things wrong but whatever she did it was necessary to do because of the state of the country in those days.

    She's thought of as someone with ideas and the courage to try them out.

    The present political 'elite' have been derided in comparison.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited April 2013

    And can I thank those among the PB lefties who have mentioned section 28 in recent days.

    Their faux outrage is always amusing.

    Funnily enough they (almost) never mention the AIDS campaign which saved the lives of tens of thousands of gay men..... - a mere detail, eh?
    I find this obsession really weird - IIRC no one sanctioned as a result of Section 28, it was a silly idea that popped up in response to the loony Left pushing of gay rights on a large section of the population who weren't ready for it. Both sides were as bad as each other IMO. But we can't judge then using today's standards.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    tim

    How many people would have beendependent on unemployment or disability benefit in 1991 if Labour had been in government during the 1980s?

    I'll have a guess at 6 million.

    Out of interest how many people were dependent on unemployment and disability benefit in 1997 and how many in 2010?
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited April 2013
    @Carlotta. "Why this should have any bearing on a Coalition government in power 23 years after she left office is for the birds..."

    Actually for the reasons given by NickP and also possibly Plato. Sometimes something happens which makes people reappraise. Her passing reminds me how much I despise the Tory Party-past present and probably even future.

    A week ago my pen might have hovered over Cameron in a contest with Ed. Today I'd campaign for Ed! I was in a cafe yesterday and at the next table someone was going on about 'how they don't make them like that anymore'. His colleagues grunted. I'm not sure any of them were warming to the present incarnations.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    edited April 2013
    The MOE range for YouGov (assuming Labour 40, Con 30, base size 1800, rounded)

    Con:26 - 34
    Lab: 37 - 43

    So leads between 3 and 17 are within MOE.

    (MOE for Con is 3.53, Labour 2.83, so to be precise the MOE lead range is 4 - 16)
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    Plato said:

    And can I thank those among the PB lefties who have mentioned section 28 in recent days.

    Their faux outrage is always amusing.

    Funnily enough they (almost) never mention the AIDS campaign which saved the lives of tens of thousands of gay men..... - a mere detail, eh?
    I find this obsession really weird - IIRC no one sanctioned as a result of Section 28, it was a silly idea that popped up in response to the loony Left pushing of gay rights on a large section of the population who weren't ready for it. Both sides were as bad as each other IMO. But we can't judge then using today's standards.
    Unsurprisingly the same people who have so much faux outrage about section 28 had no problem with Ken Livingstone saying that the Conservative party was "riddled with homosexuals".

  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914

    And can I thank those among the PB lefties who have mentioned section 28 in recent days.

    Their faux outrage is always amusing.

    Funnily enough they (almost) never mention the AIDS campaign which saved the lives of tens of thousands of gay men..... - a mere detail, eh?

    It's not unreasonable to expect a government to take action to prevent the deaths of tens of thousands of its citizens.

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,821
    Dan Hodges LOL.

    Sure he will be still banging the same drum under PM Ed
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    Moving on from all the discussions about Thatcher, what is out government doing to protect out economic interests?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/9985673/Tobin-Tax-is-madness-for-Europe-and-economic-war-against-Britain.html
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    @Roger

    "A week ago my pen might have hovered over Cameron in a contest with Ed"

    Roger that one made me laugh ! ;-)
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Peter Watt has words of warning re MEP selections and union control.

    "And twitter is full of stories of the “I can’t believe that x isn’t on the list” ilk. At the same time one particular faction appears to have got a lot of their favoured candidates selected. Apart from anything else, all of this concern about the process is a shame for the many excellent members who have made it to the lists of candidates.

    So how has this happened? How come in the age of Ed’s new politics have we had such a clumsy and potentially biased selection? The answer is actually quite simple. It really is a stitch up.

    I should know one when I see one after all! The regional panels are supposed to be balanced between local parties and trade unions but in reality many of the local party reps are really trade union place men and women. So, many of the panels are pretty much controlled by the trade unions.

    And of course, “trade union” generally means Unite, GMB and Unison. The trade unions have then used their power to select who they want and block those that they do not. So if you are pro-business for instance – sod off! Easy really.

    We shouldn’t be surprised; it is what the trade unions have been saying that they would do. Unite have a political strategy that explicitly says that they will operate on this basis; get onto local committees, selection panels and regional boards and then wield power to get sympathisers selected.

    If you really are going to build a new politics then you can’t just say that you are and then sit back assuming that it will happen. You can have all the community organising you like but if the party is still operating a closed shop then the community will notice... http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/04/11/why-has-ed-allowed-the-unions-to-stitch-up-the-euro-candidate-selections-what-happened-to-the-new-politics/
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,320

    I don't normally comment on the polls but if blues are allegedly closing the gap yesterday followed by falling hugely behind today it's probably saying more about You Gov than how people intend to vote.

    You Gov tells us nothing more than the other pollsters ie that the blues are behind the reds but the red lead is soft. The daily poll is becoming a waste of time.

    It might well be mostly random fluctuation though it's too large a shift to be likely to be entirely accidental. I'd disagree that the red lead is soft, at least in terms of Labour's share (clearly the Tory share fluctuates with UKIP etc.) - I don't remember a time when a party's support has been so entirely stable over such a long time. Around 38-40% of the electorate seem to have made up its mind to vote Labour, regardlesss (sorry, Hodges) of their view of events and issues and personal ratings (all of which fluctuate) and indeed regardless of the economic news.


  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576

    And can I thank those among the PB lefties who have mentioned section 28 in recent days.

    Their faux outrage is always amusing.

    Funnily enough they (almost) never mention the AIDS campaign which saved the lives of tens of thousands of gay men..... - a mere detail, eh?

    It's not unreasonable to expect a government to take action to prevent the deaths of tens of thousands of its citizens.

    Tell the French that who only started their campaign years after the UK...
  • Options
    @Roger

    Roger, I might be mistaken, but I think a few threads ago, you were saying you could never vote Tory because of Thatcher! Now you're telling us you're actually a floating voter. That champagne you quaff must be strong stuff.
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Labour in disarray over welfare! On wrong side of argument! Hitting the poor over and over and over again IS popular!

    Will Tory talking heads ever get it right?
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Eastern European migrants are more likely to have jobs than native Britons, a research study revealed yesterday.

    The finding is in contrast with other countries with high levels of immigration from Eastern Europe, where the reverse is true.

    Researchers found that in the UK, workers from the countries that joined the EU in 2004 and later were 7 per cent more likely to be in work than British-born people.

    But in Germany, the Netherlands and Finland locally-born workers have a higher employment rate than migrant workers from the new EU countries, the study said.

    The report, by two Finnish academics, was presented yesterday to a conference on migration at University College London organised by NORFACE, a European organisation of state-funded research councils.

    It said that while Eastern European workers in Britain are more likely to have jobs than locals, their jobs are often among the most low paid.

    This appears to support the long-held argument that many migrants are more willing to take low-paid jobs than those of British birth. As early as 2007, official figures showed that four out of five newly-created jobs were going to migrants.

    The findings that migrants are filling vacant jobs while many British people draw the dole comes as a heated debate rages over welfare spending......

    The Finnish report, by Mari Kangasniemi and Merja Kauhanen, said that one of the key factors affecting the job chances of Eastern European migrants is labour market conditions in the countries to which they move.

    They said: ‘We find that Eastern European immigrants had a lower probability of employment on average in comparison to natives in all other countries except for the UK during the period 2004 to 2009.’

    According to the findings, Eastern European migrants were 16.1 per cent less likely to be employed than locals in the Netherlands, where workers from Poland and the seven other countries that joined the EU in 2004 were allowed to work freely in 2008.

    In Finland, where Eastern Europeans could work from 2007, they were 5.7 per cent less likely to have a job than locals.

    Germany kept strict restrictions on Eastern European workers until 2011, but in the period covered by the report Eastern European workers who did move to Germany were around 11 per cent less likely than Germans to have a job.

    ‘In the UK, the employment gap in favour of new member state immigrants is around 7 percentage points,’ the report found.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2307216/


  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    BenM said:

    Labour in disarray over welfare! On wrong side of argument! Hitting the poor over and over and over again is popular !

    You are Dan Hodges and I claim my £5!

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Good morning, everyone.

    That looks bad for the blues. On the other hand, wasn' it reported the other day that Thatcher was concerned that Major's government wasn't far enough behind in the polls at the mid-term?

    Meanwhile, over at pb2, discussion on the forthcoming China race continues: http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/china-early-discussion.html

    The forecast remains almost certainly dry.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    The mood chez Jack W is dark this morning.

    The overnight news that the LibDem held sway in the Luton by-election has brought the crushing prospect that the yellow peril will attempt to breach the borders of neighbouring Harpenden.

    Mrs Jack W suggests we expand fine pie production down to Hertfordshire but will this extreme measure be enough to contain the impending glut of sandals, beards, brocoli quiche and "winning here" litter ??

    I haven't felt this low since the late Dowager Lady Jack W almost appeared in a issue of the News of the World with the rector, a Georgian silver marrow scoop, the editor of a communist magazine and a newly patented pair of vibrating linen bloomers !!
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    tim said:

    PB Tories are forgetting why Cameron apologised for Section 28 and Thatchers branding of Mandela as a terrorist.

    Cameron apologised for section 28 for the same reason he increased overseas aif and went hugging huskies.

    Because he thought it was the fashionable metro-progressive thing to do.

    In reality 90% of the country didn't give a toss about section 28 one way or another.

    And we're still waiting for Labour's condemnation of Ken Livinstone's homophobic comments.

    As to Mandela in the 1980s he WAS a convicted terrorist, he did plead guilty at his trial after all.

    Of course one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter but with Thatcher's personal experience of terrorism from Airey Neave onwards her views are understandable.

    But what really upsets leftists re Thatcher and South Africa is that she was proved right on how South Africa should progress to democracy.

    A harder western line on South Africa could easily have caused civil war there.

    Perhaps they would have preferred that?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    @Financier - tricky one for the Mail!

    Benefits Tourists Sponge off Welfare

    Ah!

    British Jobs for British Workers!

    Lazy Brits skive on Welfare Benefits!

    Whew!
  • Options
    MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    Considering this is holiday polling, the reaction is a bit overblown. More likely the lead is somewhere between yesterday's 8% and today's 14%, but let's see how things are this time next week.

    Anyone know if ICM are in the field this weekend?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576

    On the other hand, wasn' it reported the other day that Thatcher was concerned that Major's government wasn't far enough behind in the polls at the mid-term?

    It was the current government!
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Miss Vance, well then, the Government is embarking upon Thatcherite unpopularity by doing the right thing immediately before achieving a crushing election victory. Right... ? :p
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576

    Miss Vance, well then, the Government is embarking upon Thatcherite unpopularity by doing the right thing immediately before achieving a crushing election victory. Right... ? :p

    I fear the "Thatcher dictum" is based on "doing things" rather than "screwing them up"...so the Jury very much remains out!
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    @Financier - tricky one for the Mail!

    Benefits Tourists Sponge off Welfare

    Ah!

    British Jobs for British Workers!

    Lazy Brits skive on Welfare Benefits!

    Whew!

    I had a quick scroll down the Mail's menu column and almost every single story was about Mrs T... they've really pushed the boat out - and amusingly the comments are being trolled something chronic by Labour supporters judging by how different they are to the usually stuff.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,793
    edited April 2013
    I've been noticeing for some time that the Conservative deficit is gradually slipping down to a level where they are getting perilously close to the point of no return even with swingback.

    I don't think it has much to do with Thatcher, it's just part of a process of Conservative decline which has been slowly gathering pace since Spring 2012.

    How long before Cameron is forced to take action and has to sack Osborne?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    I don't normally comment on the polls but if blues are allegedly closing the gap yesterday followed by falling hugely behind today it's probably saying more about You Gov than how people intend to vote.

    You Gov tells us nothing more than the other pollsters ie that the blues are behind the reds but the red lead is soft. The daily poll is becoming a waste of time.

    It might well be mostly random fluctuation though it's too large a shift to be likely to be entirely accidental. I'd disagree that the red lead is soft, at least in terms of Labour's share (clearly the Tory share fluctuates with UKIP etc.) - I don't remember a time when a party's support has been so entirely stable over such a long time. Around 38-40% of the electorate seem to have made up its mind to vote Labour, regardlesss (sorry, Hodges) of their view of events and issues and personal ratings (all of which fluctuate) and indeed regardless of the economic news.


    If this is to be a large shift Nick, it will need to be held for a week or two before we can say it is. It's more likely that we'll be be back to the 9-11% range next week imo. As for the Labour lead, you have a point but I'd say it's soft since it should be much higher at this point in the cycle with a not all that popular govt. To me this says, sublect to events, we're still in HP territory. The difficulty I'd say for Labour is I'd expect us to see some sort of economic comeback as recovery finds its feet this year and continues in to 2014 and 2015. None of this is due to GO but he'll claim the credit anyway, but hey that's politics.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Plato

    Isn't the origin of "bungalow" derived from Bedford slang - not much up top ??
  • Options
    MBoyMBoy Posts: 104
    Wow. Who could have imagined that such a completely over the top and divisive love-fest for Maggie would have this effect? Oh, yeh, anyone could.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited April 2013

    I don't normally comment on the polls but if blues are allegedly closing the gap yesterday followed by falling hugely behind today it's probably saying more about You Gov than how people intend to vote.

    You Gov tells us nothing more than the other pollsters ie that the blues are behind the reds but the red lead is soft. The daily poll is becoming a waste of time.

    It might well be mostly random fluctuation though it's too large a shift to be likely to be entirely accidental. I'd disagree that the red lead is soft, at least in terms of Labour's share (clearly the Tory share fluctuates with UKIP etc.) - I don't remember a time when a party's support has been so entirely stable over such a long time. Around 38-40% of the electorate seem to have made up its mind to vote Labour, regardlesss (sorry, Hodges) of their view of events and issues and personal ratings (all of which fluctuate) and indeed regardless of the economic news.
    My emphasis added. It's worth remembering that the MOE we often think of is based on a 95% confidence interval. This means that 5%, or about 1 a month, of the 250 daily YouGov polls a year will fall outside of the margin of error.

    I'm not saying that this poll is definitely such a poll - we will only find that out after another few polls - but we have to expect that about one poll a month is going to be a massive outlier, and you can also generate large oscillations simply by moving from one extreme (within margin of error) to the other.

    Looking back over the YouGov polls for the year to date, the only change that I can identify* that appears to be anything other than noise is a slight decline in the Labour and Tory scores around the time of the Eastleigh by-election, presumably related to the credibility that UKIP gained from their second place.

    The daily YouGov polls are an amazing resource for interested people to analyse, but looking at the day-to-day changes in isolation is probably the worst way to do so.

    * Also worth noting is that the Lib Dems are a little bit up on 2012 in 2013, though this change seems to have occurred towards the end of 2012.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    tim said:

    @AnotherRichard.

    I appreciate that some Tories can't see why demonising gay people and accepting the judgements of a racist govt alienates a mass of people in this country.

    This Thatcher thing really is reliving your student youth, you remind me of all those saddos I used to see at Warwick University when I occasionally used their library.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    JackW said:

    @Plato

    Isn't the origin of "bungalow" derived from Bedford slang - not much up top ??

    LOL - I got to my shame llama wrong, as well as samovar [no idea what that is] and honcho
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    So how did section 28 'demonise gay people'.

    Give some facts instead of your faux outrage frothing.

    And explain why the homophobic Ken Livingstone was allowed to remain Labour's London mayoral candidate.

    As to racism I'll leave that to you again - after all it was Labour who shouted "British Jobs For British Workers" and plotted 'to make the white folk angry'.

    BTW did you ever explain why you moved from Birmingham to a 98% white area?


  • Options
    MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    Interesting Labour pick in South Shields. I wonder what Mark Walsh has been promised for withdrawing - he was apparently endorsed by the NUM and most local councillors (according to the Guardian). I like the description that she comes from "a family of shipbuilders", and I wonder how much tax she has saved from her personal service company.

    Good luck to her anyway, nothing wrong with having more 30 something women in parliament (compared to middle aged white men).
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited April 2013
    @GIN1138

    Don't be such a wet !!

    As Mrs T indicated such a small mid term lead for the opposition is pathetic. One might slightly arch an eyebrow should Ed's mob garner a 20% lead with ICM for several months .... but really these soufle leads with YouGov are laughable.

    Go and see matron and reflect on the fact that some have real problems with the yellow peril on manoeuvres not a few hundred yards away !!
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Millsy said:

    Interesting Labour pick in South Shields. I wonder what Mark Walsh has been promised for withdrawing - he was apparently endorsed by the NUM and most local councillors (according to the Guardian).

    I wondered what skeleton fell out of his closet at the last minute and hence his withdrawal. I hope he hasn't experienced a sudden family misfortune or illness - but that's not often the reason for late stepping down.

    Given SShields is rock solid Labour - I'm more interested in how well the Kippers do.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    edited April 2013


    The daily YouGov polls are an amazing resource for interested people to analyse, but looking at the day-to-day changes in isolation is probably the worst way to do so.

    A bit like checking your share portfolio on a daily basis - useless and just adds stress
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    One final comment before I do some work.

    Roger criticized Thatcher for supporting an authoritarian Latin American, Pinochet, and then criticizes Thatcher for supporting the Contras who fought against the authoritarian Latin American Sandinistas.

    Now its possible to support authoritarianism on principle or support 'freedom fighters' on principle or its possible to look at each case on a 'which is on my side' basis.

    But why does Roger instinctively support the Marxist side in every conflict?

    I dare say that's the fashionable thing in champagne socialist circles but considering that Roger is a 'creative' I would have hoped he would have opposed Marxism with its record of oppression against 'creatives' from Russia to Cuba to China.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    Plato said:

    JackW said:

    @Plato

    Isn't the origin of "bungalow" derived from Bedford slang - not much up top ??

    LOL - I got to my shame llama wrong, as well as samovar [no idea what that is] and honcho
    Samovar - a Russian teapot
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    @another_richard

    Livingstone isn't a homophobe.
  • Options
    hughphughp Posts: 11
    Jack W - the Yellow Peril on Manoeuvres. No cause for alarm : in Harpenden, Herefordshire and Huntingdonshire hurricanes hardly ever happen.
  • Options
    tim said:

    @AnotherRichard.

    I appreciate that some Tories can't see why demonising gay people and accepting the judgements of a racist govt alienates a mass of people in this country.

    You mean like accusing a party of being 'riddled with gays'?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    edited April 2013

    tim said:

    @AnotherRichard.

    I appreciate that some Tories can't see why demonising gay people and accepting the judgements of a racist govt alienates a mass of people in this country.

    This Thatcher thing really is reliving your student youth, you remind me of all those saddos I used to see at Warwick University when I occasionally used their library.

    It's so predictable, isn't it? The roles Thatcher played in ending the Cold War, Communist Dictatorships, White Minority Rule in Rhodesia and Apartheid in South Africa (depending on whether you believe Peter Hain or FW deKlerk) must really piss them off - "it does not compute, it does not compute!"
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Blue_rog said:

    Plato said:

    JackW said:

    @Plato

    Isn't the origin of "bungalow" derived from Bedford slang - not much up top ??

    LOL - I got to my shame llama wrong, as well as samovar [no idea what that is] and honcho
    Samovar - a Russian teapot
    Ah ha! One of those items I don't have in the cupboard...
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited April 2013
    Plato said:
    Thanks for that link Plato.

    Graph 5 is the damning one in my opinion - the 10th percentile worse off in real-terms after housing costs.

    Also worth noting is graph 1. Average growth under Thatcher of 0.6% per quarter - exactly the same as the average from 1955-2013.

    I'd go as far as to say that graph 5 makes a good case for Kenneth Clarke being the best post-war Chancellor. For various reasons, the country missed out on making the most of his talents.
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Hodges has stuck his neck out.

    Labour to poll < 35% in 2015.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    tim said:

    @Alanbrooke.

    Only a PB Tory would think that Section 28 and Thatchers stance on Mandela alienated simply fringe groups.

    The toxicfication of the Tory brand remains the strongest factor in electoral politics in the UK

    As I said tim, it's reliving your youth, is just a middle-age thing ? Instead of wanting a Porsche and a pony tail you want demos and campaigns, but this time with proper printing and Chablis and ticket onlymeet the guest speakers?

    The world has moved on and you're stuck in the late 80s.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    F1: no more team orders for Red Bull, apparently:
    "RT @legardj In response to question about #redbull owner saying no more team orders @AussieGrit said, after some thought "probably easier" @andrewbensonf1 28 minutes ago"

    I wonder if it'll end up being like a four-wheeled version of Road Rash... [for those who remember Road Rash I've heard rumours that it might be making a comeback].
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    @OblitusSumMe

    "Graph 5 is the damning one in my opinion - the 10th percentile worse off in real-terms after housing costs."

    There's a bit of bun-fight in the comments re that chart - may be worth having a read of the various interpretations.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    tim said:

    @Carlotta

    It's a Tory problem, the Tory leader has apologised,don't get so wound up about "the left", an intrinsic part of Camerons detoxification project was to crap all over elements of the party's past.

    Now he's got Toxic George chasing coffins, go figure.

    Blank sheet of paper.
  • Options
    anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,578
    IMHO the move in the polls is partly down to Thatcher's death - the wall-to-wall coverage reminds those who disliked her how strong their dislike was (and remember she was massively unpopular when she was ousted). And it reminds those who liked her that (as they see it) her Tory successors have failed to live up to the standards she set. So it's a negative for the Tories.
  • Options

    F1: no more team orders for Red Bull, apparently:
    "RT @legardj In response to question about #redbull owner saying no more team orders @AussieGrit said, after some thought "probably easier" @andrewbensonf1 28 minutes ago"


    I wonder if it'll end up being like a four-wheeled version of Road Rash... [for those who remember Road Rash I've heard rumours that it might be making a comeback].

    I still have a copy, along with numerous other Sega Mega Drive games and the console.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    @Alanbrooke

    A lot of people seem to be stuck in the 80s - I have no idea why. I've no desire to return to them nor to judge today by them. They were a thing of their time - good and bad bits. Just like the 90s or 00s.

    Though TBH, I can't think of anything bar Iraq and political correctness that stands out in the latter two decades.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Stopper, so do I.

    Biff was such a dick.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @hughp

    LOL .....

    but the news worsens with as yet unconfirmed reports that "bar chart" leaflets have been spotted in north Harpenden near Kinsbourne Green !!

    Has Mark Senior been spotted in Sussex recently ?? .... I may have to call in a few favours from NASA to track his activities !!
  • Options

    Mr. Stopper, so do I.

    Biff was such a dick.

    I liked the Biker chicks who used to greet you after a successful ride!
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited April 2013
    I see the first Emo Hate Crime arrests have been made in Manchester. Surely a crime is a crime - whether you're gay or Sikh or wear lots of black and purple make-up?

    This tweet sums it up

    RT @WelshToy: It's not as if there would ever be a hate crime created with the description "white male christian hate crime" is there.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    tim said:

    @Alanbrooke.

    The world has moved on and you're stuck in the late 80s.



    You appear to be stuck in the mid-high twenties.

    And that's after playing your benefits card.

    Ashes to Ashes Series three

    A middle class Brummy wakes up one morning and finds himself with a mullet and a ticket to the NUS bop . Meanwhile over at Longbridge no-one in the TGWU gives a shit about gay and lesbian week, so where's he going to find a token partner ........
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    :^ )

    RT @WelshToy: Is the witch dead? No! She's alive and well in the form of free market capitalism #recordsales. Ding dong!!
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    tim said:

    @alanbrooke

    2013

    A PB Tory intent on rambling about the eighties to avoid the polling news tries desperately to distract attention from the fact that David Cameron is prepared to let George Osborne lose him another election.

    More than happy to talk about 2013 tim, shall we look at policies ? Ooo Labour haven't got any. Bostin.
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    The Coalition Was The Wrong Choice For The UK Electorate (even Ed Balls expected an election in 6 months).

    The Con/LD Coalition was formed to provide economic and political stability and has failed its primary objective.

    In May 2010, the UK faced crises on too many fronts and was left, by the previous government, ill-able to turn things around easily and quickly. Global events: bad weather and subsequent food shortages, increased demand for energy and the continuing failure of the EZ, resulted in unwelcome cost increases for most consumers and a squeeze on their disposable incomes, so limiting growth, and facing these problems:

    Finance: "There is no money" said it all. A FSA/BOE/HMG banking regulation disaster that resulted in bank failures and a false house price bubble, that could put thousands in negative equity or minimised first time buyers and put them at the mercy of private landlords. Thus, very little money for capital projects restricted that form of growth and meant more than five years to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt.

    Globalisation & Technology: Electronic communications has eliminated many former white collar clerical jobs and automation had reduced the blue collar jobs - a problem that had not been solved in the previous decade. Globalisation meant many countries are far more competitive than the UK and with lower wage rates.

    Education standards had been falling since the mid-1970s and despite ministers' regular exultations about improving results, the UK continued to drop in international tables. Employers have constantly complained about the educational inabilities of school leavers and graduates. With opposition from educationalists and teaching unions, education reform was clearly more than a five year project.

    Welfare & Employment: The use of Incapacity Benefit to mask growing unemployment and the growth of welfare payments over that of employment pay presented an unsustainable social and financial problem. The growth of unproductive public sector employment also was unaffordable.

    Energy: Total lack of a long term energy policy put the consumer at the mercy of spot prices. Also HMG signed up to expensive EU renewable plans without due technical R&D having been started. High energy costs makes the UK uncompetitive in many fields.

    Culture & Immigration: Nigh uncontrolled immigration imposed cultural and financial pressures on a small island that were unsustainable.

    Coalition = Compromise. Having suffered for at least two years and with a bleak outlook, the electorate required quick workable solutions (practicalism) and not abstract political theory (idealism).

    Without a courtship, a marriage rarely works and this coalition was a forced marriage - not ideal for either party. The pre-nuptial contract (Coalition Agreement) always had different agenda priorities on both sides and so abstract items like AV Referendum, HoL Reform and HoC reduction were prioritised (normal boundary review should not have been affected). AV was firmly rejected by the electorate and that message should have been received by both parties to stop politicing, when more urgent matters had yet to be resolved.

    The lack of finance and the depth of the problems meant that solutions could not be achieved within five years and some of the problems not resolved within ten years.

    The Coalition failed to tell the electorate in depth the true extent of the problems and the probable time it would take for their solution.
    Macbeth said, " If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well it were done quickly." People do not like to take nasty medicine for a long period - they prefer a short, sharp intense shock with the ability to foresee a calmer and more predictable future. Currently it looks like a long draw-out affair to achieve a real (and not the previous false) economic stability.

    In contrast, Ireland, in order to be bailed out economically, and with its private sector on it knees, imposed severe cuts on its public sector, including wages, pensions and jobs. Whilst Ireland is now showing signs of growth, more austerity has been required in order to balance its books.

    If the UK had imposed the same or even stronger degree of austerity in 2010, would it be now in stronger economic state and more able to spend on capital development with a retrained and more globally competitive workforce - or would a crippling series of politically inspired strikes prevented the UK from stepping out of its self-created mire?
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    BenM said:

    Hodges has stuck his neck out.

    Labour to poll < 35% in 2015.

    I've offered Hodges a wager that it won't

  • Options
    hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    Interesting as to whether the passing of Mrs T has any effect on Tory VI ? Possible that many view Cameron in a poor light compared with Mrs T and are missing having a PM who has a sense of what their overall policy direction is. Unfair in part, as Cameron is in a coalition and the world economic situation is very challenging. But not unfair in regard to the performance of Cameron as PM, compared to Mrs T. Cameron does not appear to have the same drive level and does not appear to have any real grip on his cabinet colleagues. You sometimes get the feeling that government policies are announced that Cameron was not informed about or does not know the details of. Mrs T, would never allowed this to happen.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576
    BenM said:

    @another_richardLivingstone isn't a homophobe.

    And 'riddled with [homosexuals]' is a compliment!

    At least Livingstone hasn't called someone who described homosexuality as 'perverted and abominable' an 'honoured guest' when he hosted him at City Hall.....oh, hang on.....
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited April 2013
    Do none of the Tories on here see anything other than coincidence in the party spending decades trying to detoxify-code for getting the public to forget about Margaret Thatcher-and their collapse in the polls this week?

    Think back to the 'Be Afraid Be Very Afraid' poster featuring a morph between Thatcher and Hague which effectively finished his career....Thatcher poisoned every well she drank at

    Now not only can't Cameron disown her but he's forced to eulogize her

    Someone up there has a sense of humour
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,576

    tim said:

    @alanbrooke

    2013

    A PB Tory intent on rambling about the eighties to avoid the polling news tries desperately to distract attention from the fact that David Cameron is prepared to let George Osborne lose him another election.

    More than happy to talk about 2013 tim, shall we look at policies ? Ooo Labour haven't got any. Bostin.
    They've got some out for consultation!

    On, tax, immigration, education, Europe....er.....

    http://www.yourbritain.org.uk/news/labour-launch-new-policy-documents-for-consultation

    * A British Investment Bank: making it a reality

    * Tax avoidance: tax havens

    * Protecting workers: including the role of agency workers, the living wage, and Gangmaster Licensing Authority

    * Vocational education, apprenticeships and the role of job guarantees in tackling youth unemployment.

    * Our buses and railways: giving communities more of a say

    * Childcare: what matters to parents and children?

    * The housing crisis: house building and a private rented sector that works for Britain’s families

    * 21st Century NHS and social care: delivering integration

    * Young people and politics: making a fresh start

    * Britain's role in a post-2015 development vision
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited April 2013
    @anothernick
    IMHO the move in the polls is partly down to Thatcher's death - the wall-to-wall coverage reminds those who disliked her how strong their dislike was (and remember she was massively unpopular when she was ousted). And it reminds those who liked her that (as they see it) her Tory successors have failed to live up to the standards she set. So it's a negative for the Tories.

    Yes. I said yesterday that the death of Thatcher effect, is and will be, the cause of weird polling and I am being proved right. I call it weird because it appears ghoulish to me, that a corps can have such an effect on any right thinking person. But then we have a lot of weirdos on the left.

    BTW @Financier: Nicely written, re your article.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914
    Plato said:

    @Alanbrooke

    A lot of people seem to be stuck in the 80s - I have no idea why. I've no desire to return to them nor to judge today by them. They were a thing of their time - good and bad bits. Just like the 90s or 00s.

    Though TBH, I can't think of anything bar Iraq and political correctness that stands out in the latter two decades.

    The internet, perhaps? Twitter? Mass ownership of computers, exponetial advances in smartphone and tablet technology, the rise of China as an economic superpower, with India and Brazil close behind, the implosion of the EU, the first black President of the US, Africa'a advance out of grinding, perpetual poverty, England winning back the Ashes, England winning the rugby World Cup, the London Olympics.

    It's true - the last two decades have been pretty light on memories!!

  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    South Shields CLP Secretary didn't know last night what happened to Mark Walsh. Walsh wasn't present at the hustings.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Blue_rog said:

    Moving on from all the discussions about Thatcher, what is out government doing to protect out economic interests?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/9985673/Tobin-Tax-is-madness-for-Europe-and-economic-war-against-Britain.html

    FTT/Tobin Tax/Robin Hood Tax doesn't raise any money shock - hope they take it to the EU courts otherwise the Eurozone is going further down the toilet - France first.
  • Options
    TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited April 2013
    The truth is, there really wasn't any justification for recalling parliament. A waste of time and money, and no matter how fine the speeches ( and Milliband and Cameron both did well, but Milliband edged it)
    there is a valid question for Cameron to answer in why he pushed for it.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914
    The overriding theme of the Thatcher coverage is how the world has changed and the [political centre has moved. Basically, we keep getting told that Labour is not scary any more. Cameron essentially said that yesterday in the Commons.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,320

    I don't normally comment on the polls but if blues are allegedly closing the gap yesterday followed by falling hugely behind today it's probably saying more about You Gov than how people intend to vote.

    You Gov tells us nothing more than the other pollsters ie that the blues are behind the reds but the red lead is soft. The daily poll is becoming a waste of time.

    It might well be mostly random fluctuation though it's too large a shift to be likely to be entirely accidental. I'd disagree that the red lead is soft, at least in terms of Labour's share (clearly the Tory share fluctuates with UKIP etc.) - I don't remember a time when a party's support has been so entirely stable over such a long time. Around 38-40% of the electorate seem to have made up its mind to vote Labour, regardlesss (sorry, Hodges) of their view of events and issues and personal ratings (all of which fluctuate) and indeed regardless of the economic news.


    If this is to be a large shift Nick, it will need to be held for a week or two before we can say it is. It's more likely that we'll be be back to the 9-11% range next week imo. As for the Labour lead, you have a point but I'd say it's soft since it should be much higher at this point in the cycle with a not all that popular govt. To me this says, sublect to events, we're still in HP territory. The difficulty I'd say for Labour is I'd expect us to see some sort of economic comeback as recovery finds its feet this year and continues in to 2014 and 2015. None of this is due to GO but he'll claim the credit anyway, but hey that's politics.
    Yes, as Oblitus observes it could be an outlier and tomorrow we might be back at 40-32. But my point is more that we're not seeing normal midterm behaviour. On the one hand, you're right that we're not seeing gigantic Opposition leads as in the past (though some of those seem to have related to methodology). But we're also seeing an immunity to issue-based impact. It's not hard to find people who respected Thatcher, agree with Government policy on benefits, believe the economy is recovering, think Cameron is a bit more prime ministerial, and nonetheless are perfectly clear that they're going to vote Labour, sometimes because they find the Tories alien, sometimes as a matter of habit and culture. It's that combination of 29% who voted for Gordon and 10% who were on the left edge of the LibDems which is completely resistant to Conservative appeal and not soft at all. I can't see them voting suddenly Tory because economic growth in 2015 is, say, 1.2%.
  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    The Labour lead will drop in tomorrow's YouGov.
This discussion has been closed.