Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Both LAB and CON up 2 in the October ICM phone poll

2

Comments

  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    @Carola
    If the kids can analyse and understand David Law's expenses, they should be given an A* for maths.

    Do you have to read that crap?

    No, I don't have to.

    I'm in favour of the shift from the C/D boundary tbh. And these changes may equal things out a bit for schools with a more challenging intake - from an initial scan, anyway.

    The problem is the speed of change and incompetent headless chicken management. I've run out of brick walls to bang my head against.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Hugo Rifkind in the Times
    No meaningful debates happen in Parliament any more; not for years.

    Politicians have become the boring, snoring ones on Newsnight, too shackled by party politics to interest anybody in anything. Look today at the culture battles raging. On the one side you’ll find the Daily Mail, fighting the corner of Middle England (they’d have you believe) with all the ferocity of another era’s Chingford polecat. On the other sits The Guardian, sipping a latte, unshakeable in the belief that North London knows best. Where today, in the world of politics, do you find convictions half as clear? I keep reading that regulation is the politicians’ revenge for the expenses scandal, but perhaps it goes much deeper. Maybe it’s an antipathy born out of a sense of being usurped.
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/hugorifkind/article3894634.ece
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    The observation in Woods piece that the Tories are only talking to their Tea Party core with their "Marxist" riffing is a point I've been making on here, it doesn't work when the public is way to the left of Miliband on all these issues.
    Bizarre Michele Bachmann type strategy.

    You can't have it both ways, tim.

    GDP measures wealth creation and RHDI shows how it is distributed. Both are aggregates and disguise variations in regional, sectoral and social groups, but they are nonetheless an evidential extract of reality.

    A couple of weeks ago TSE quoted Mike as saying that one of the joys of editing PB was to confound prejudice with fact.

    An article which states that Cameron "relies on pointing people towards GDP graphs produced by the Treasury, and telling voters that their life experience shouldn't affect how they vote" is profoundly based in prejudice. The measured facts state the opposite.

    But Wood's article was not rooted in fact. It was partisan pamphleteering. If you are not convinced by the point on GDP-RHDI linkage take this paragraph as an example:

    In their silly desperation to paint Labour as a bunch of commies, they find themselves talking to a small section of their core electorate, while Labour speaks for the broad majority of the British public. Lynton Crosby must be choking on his clients' tobacco leaves.

    Crosby chewing the baccy: you would have been proud to have said that, tim.


  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:


    Aha. Ahahahah. AhahahahahHAHAHAHAHHA.

    The fightin' Irish. Bravely resisting the English for 200 years so they can have their heads shoved down the toilet by the Germans.

    You gotta laugh. So I did.

    Fancy a little wager on the rate of corporation tax in Ireland after next year's budget? I reckon it will still be 12.5%.
  • If I were to repeat a relative's views of the McCann case on this site, I'd be banned for life.

    Not referencing you in particular, but I'm fascinated by the reaction of many to the "ongoingness" of the McCann story. On the face of it, we have the human tragedy of a young couple who are haunted by the loss of their daughter, and being forced to relive their anguish in public after so many years.
    Yet, we have tim regularly decrying the ongoing police investigation (or maybe that's just an opportunity for a bit of soft Cameron-bashing) and comments implying that somehow these poor people are not entitled to continue to grieve for her loss. As if somehow they should just get over it, move on, stop reminding us all of our mawkish interest at the beginning.
    Or maybe it reminds us all of the ephemeral nature of the news cycle - yesterday's heart-rending tragedy is yesterday's chip paper. Go on - name the island where so many Somalis died on a capsized boat - but, but, but that was last week.
    Or maybe we object to the Express selling newspapers on the back of it.

    So sad.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    Labour peer pens a " cost of living crisis " piece of garbage.

    Do you disagree with the premise?
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Good to see Comrade Boris joining the revolution. I always knew he was One of Us.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    HYUFD said:

    Mark Senior - The point remains as the lowest they LDs have got since 1979 is the 16% they got in 1992, and anyway the difference between 13% and 13.8% is nothing and on NI and uncontested seats a minor difference in figures can be given as to whether you look at the UK or only the mainland but again the point remains, pre-SDP, post war, and with the exception of Thorpe's 1974 performance the LDs were between 5-15%, post SDP they were between 15-25%, they have now returned to their former figure!

    You are being over simplistic , The Liberals polled 11.2% in 1964 but it would have been circa 18% plus with a full slate of candidates as post 1979 and 1966 would similarly have been around 16% .
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013
    Bobajob said:

    Do you disagree with the premise?
    Yes, Bobajob.

    Woods's premise is that Cameron has presided over an economic recovery which has increased GDP but failed to raise standards of living and that this is a failing of Conservative Party priorities when compared to those of the Labour Party.

    As the ONS graph I posted downthread demonstrates, this is an unfair criticism when considered in the context of the performance of the economy during the two Labour governments between 2001 and 2010.

    What the graph shows is that Brown raised GDP without there being any correlational increase in Real Households' Disposable Income, whereas under Osborne growth in GDP has been broadly matched by growth in disposable incomes. The gap between wealth creation and standards of living was far more marked under Labour than it ever has been under the Coaltion government.

    Of course, the financial crisis in 2007-09 played a significant role in the trends but this does not justify the argument being advanced by Woods.

    Not only is Woods's premise flawed. It is simply wrong.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    Tim Well you have a point there
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,592

    You are being over simplistic , The Liberals polled 11.2% in 1964 but it would have been circa 18% plus with a full slate of candidates as post 1979 and 1966 would similarly have been around 16% .
    Over half those voters are brown bread.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    AveryLP said:

    Yes, Bobajob.

    Woods's premise is that Cameron has presided over an economic recovery which has increased GDP but failed to raise standards of living and that this is a failing of Conservative Party priorities when compared to those of the Labour Party.

    As the ONS graph I posted downthread demonstrates, this is an unfair criticism when considered in the context of the performance of the economy during the two Labour governments between 2001 and 2010.

    What the graph shows is that Brown raised GDP without there being any correlational increase in Real Households' Disposable Income, whereas under Osborne growth in GDP has been broadly matched by growth in disposable incomes. The gap between wealth creation and standards of living was far more marked under Labour than it ever has been under the Coaltion government.

    Of course, the financial crisis in 2007-09 played a significant role in the trends but this does not justify the argument being advanced by Woods.

    Not only is Woods's premise flawed. It is simply wrong.

    Real terms disposable income has been falling, minus the odd blip, for about four years.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    maaarsh said:

    Over half those voters are brown bread.
    True , as of course are the Labour and Conservative boters of those days which makes HYUFD's point even more problematic ,
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    MarkSenior Even in the 2 elections you quote, 18% and 16% would be around the same level as the lowest level the LDs polled post 1979, 17% in 1992 and 16% in 1997. Of the other post war elections pre-1979, the Liberals polled 9% in 1945 and 1950, 2.5% in 1951 and 2.7% in 1955, 5.9% in 1959, 8.5% in 1966 and 7.5% in 1970, and as the LDs have never polled that low since the SDP Alliance at a general election, but are now frequently polling that low, I think it proves the point!
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013
    tim said:

    @Avery

    "whereas under Osborne growth in GDP has been broadly matched by growth in disposable incomes."

    Real disposable income has fallen every month bar one since the election, so he's crap at both then?

    Real Household Disposable Income is not simply a product of salary/wage/earnings increases. It is affected by changes in applicable tax, mortgage and rental costs etc.

    For a useful and reasonably short explanation of the drivers of RHDI see this ONS YouTube video released in 2011.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2eQPzTyApY

    Just saying that incomes have risen less than inflation in every month bar one since the election does not give a true picture of households' disposable incomes. You need to track RHDI against GDP and CPI to get a truer picture.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    tim said:

    To be honest I was simply pointing out the rank hypocrisy of people on here who rail against charities for paying high wages at the top and politicisation when the biggest payers are private health organisations who are heavily politicised, I've never once heard a PB Tory mention that when they are ranting about the RSPCA or Macmillan Cancer homes.
    When did you last see a private healthcare provider employing chuggers?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MikeK said:

    You must be joking! If more than 1% of UKIP support is from the hunting fraternaty I'd be very surprised. Cameron needs a lot more than that to draw even weak UKIPers back to the failing Tories,
    .
    What percentage comprises people who believe in liberty?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    edited October 2013
    Maarsh/Mark Senior True, but they came from the same ideological poll as the Liberals that remain today, ie economically centrist, socially liberal and internationalist, and concentrated in the south-west and the celtic fringe
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    AveryLP said:

    I don't know what Lord Wood was doing during the noughties but he may well have been chasing Bambi in the deer park, over-indulging in the college port or knocked senseless by the beauty of the choristers singing from the top of Magdalen bell-tower.

    Cameron has spent far more attention to the link between GDP and Real Households' Disposable Income than his predecessors Brown or Blair. This ONS graph demonstrates this fact without admitting any possiblity of dispute.

    image

    Thank you Mr ALP. You are a reason why I bother to read this site. You have the ability to cut through the crap on here and present facts .

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,010
    Off-topic: one for Sunil.

    A train spotter station quiz from the Ordnance Survey
    http://blog.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/2013/10/its-the-train-station-spotter-quiz-part-two/
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Next said:

    Money-laundering is often through cash businesses.

    LOL! Cash purchases of houses don't actually involve suitcases of used twenties, you know ;-)
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    JackW hasn't been around much recently. :)

    Twitter
    David Meikle ‏@cllrdmeikle 17m
    Really hope the Jacobite candidate is on #scotnight. Judging by his interview in @dunfermlinep he's an 'interesting' candidate! #Dunfermline
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    tim said:


    Hopefully Osborne will be slightly more mature than he was last year inventing Libor conspiracies when under pressure.

    Oh yes, immature conspiracy theories, like someone trying to make out that the privatisation of the Royal Mail was arranged to benefit friends of the Chancellor?!

    If only everyone maintained your standards, tim.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    perdix said:

    Thank you Mr ALP. You are a reason why I bother to read this site. You have the ability to cut through the crap on here and present facts .

    Spot the credit bubble

    (and hence one of many reasons why raw GDP is so meaningless as a metric)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,010
    Charles said:

    LOL! Cash purchases of houses don't actually involve suitcases of used twenties, you know ;-)
    When we were buying our house last year, our estate agent told us that a man turned up to exchange with suitcases filled with notes of differing used denominations. The man got angry when she refused to accept it, and only calmed down when she threatened to call the police. The deal didn't go through because he refused to do it through a British bank, despite having already proved he had funds in a relevant account.

    Weird. But it was Peterborough ...

    Not sure if that's just one of the estate-agent stories that does the rounds, but it sounds plausible.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    tim said:

    Too busy putting in dodgy breast implants and leaving the NHS to pick up the tab, and all those liposuction clinics are registered charities with CEOs on up to a million a year.
    So moan about Shelter and Cancer charities all you like.
    Are you trying to fit a record number of non sequiturs into one post?

    Private schools and private healthcare providers are businesses which relieve the public sector of a significant proportion of work. For this it makes sense to allow them charitable status. That their CEOs are paid so highly does confuse this issue somewhat, but they're not appealing to the public for charitable donations.

    The fact that charities which appeal to the public for donations are paying their CEOs so highly is far more controversial. I'm sure you're not too stupid to understand this. So you must, as usual, be doing it to make partisan party political point.

    As pointed out earlier by some sensible poster (apologies I can't remember who), private schools offer very generous bursaries to poorer kids. Would you prefer this to end with the end of charitable status?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013
    Bobajob said:

    Real terms disposable income has been falling, minus the odd blip, for about four years.

    Not true, Bobajob.

    It hasn't been rising like a rocket, more flatlining, but it has definitely risen overall with most of the growth coming in 2012.
    Real Housholds' Disposable Income (RHDI)
    ONS Series KHJ3
    Percentage change, quarter on
    corresponding quarter of previous year

    2010 Q3 0.4
    Q4 −0.6
    2011 Q1 −1.8
    Q2 −0.9
    Q3 −1.6
    Q4 −0.4
    2012 Q1 1.1
    Q2 2.2
    Q3 1.4
    Q4 1.5
    2013 Q1 -0.4
    Q2 -0.7

    ONS Series NRJR
    Real Households' Disposable Income
    at Chained Volume Prices
    (i.e. in real terms)
    £ million

    2010 Q3 250,941
    2013 Q2 251,349
    Note: RHDI is published as part of the ONS Series UK Economic Accounts. Data from latest release of 2013 Q2 (except 2010 Q3 - 4 figures which were not included in this release but come from an earlier release (2012 Q3).
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24372509

    Wow, not all non-white people are racially blind after all. What a shock.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    JonnyJimmy Agreed and it was me who made the bursaries point
  • A cynic might say that it less the salaries some charity bosses are earning and more that at times they are critical of the government. Funnily enough this seems to have been less of an issue before May 2010.
  • MikeK said:

    You must be joking! If more than 1% of UKIP support is from the hunting fraternaty I'd be very surprised. Cameron needs a lot more than that to draw even weak UKIPers back to the failing Tories,
    .
    Indeed wasn't there a suggestion that UKIP had the highest percentage of its voters being working class people of any party? The working classes tend not to go hunting much!
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    edited October 2013
    IIRC the real terms disposable income of people who had unpaid mortgages went up a lot (edit cos of interest rates).

    I'd expect that would effect the average figure and in the process partially disguise the underlying reality.
  • The Tories need to follow the Avery line and tell voters that they are wrong to believe they are enjoying lower living standards. It would be a real winner.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Indeed wasn't there a suggestion that UKIP had the highest percentage of its voters being working class people of any party? The working classes tend not to go hunting much!
    What percentage of the people who work in hunting do you think aren't working class?
  • Just watching 40 years on the Moon on BBC Four. It really is amazing, watching the old footage. James Burke and Patrick Moore. Technology that wouldn't even power today's Smart phones. Mission control that is full of cigarette smoke. The huge crowds watching black and white telly.
    Just the huge scale of the Saturn V.

    I only hope we get to experience that thrill again.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    Indeed wasn't there a suggestion that UKIP had the highest percentage of its voters being working class people of any party? The working classes tend not to go hunting much!
    I think it was UKIP had the largest chunk of C2s, Tories C1s and Labour DEs with AB split more evenly (from memory though so prob wrong).
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Twitter
    Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 41s
    YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour lead down to 1% again. LAB 38%, CON 37% LD 10%, UKIP 10%. An outlier, but suggests contraction under way.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    HYUFD said:

    JonnyJimmy Agreed and it was me who made the bursaries point

    It's a shame that there doesn't seem to be an equivalent in the healthcare system; or is there that I don't know about?

    Is there any feasible way they could help out with the A&E problems at the moment?
  • Indeed wasn't there a suggestion that UKIP had the highest percentage of its voters being working class people of any party? The working classes tend not to go hunting much!

    Not sure that's true. I used to ferry my father-in-law round the back roads of Warwickshire to follow the Warwickshire hunt. He was as working class as they come; and there were plenty of hunt followers like him. They didn't ride, but they loved it all the same. It was a real passion and when you saw the horses and hounds stretched across a field in full flight you could see why. He stopped voting Labour the day the ban came in.

  • fitalass said:

    Twitter
    Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 41s
    YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour lead down to 1% again. LAB 38%, CON 37% LD 10%, UKIP 10%. An outlier, but suggests contraction under way.

    Yep, definitely an outlier :)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013

    A cynic might say that it less the salaries some charity bosses are earning and more that at times they are critical of the government. Funnily enough this seems to have been less of an issue before May 2010.

    No so, SO.

    I have never suggested that voters are primarily influenced by economic metrics. What economic metrics tell us (with a fair margin of error) is what the actual position was for a particular past period.

    There is then a time delay between reality and perceptions, quite significant in the case of standards of living measurements which are lagging indicators of economic recovery.

    For example, in the table of RHDI increases/decreases set out in my post to Bobajob, the 2012 increases in standards of living were probably lagging effects of late 2009-2011 growth.

    But there are indices of consumer and household confidence in the economy and family's own household finances. Once such index, commented on by a polling company (ComRes?), was linked on the last thread.

    A useful tracker of changes in confidence and expectations in the area of personal living standards and household finances is Markit's regular UK Household Finance Index. The last issue is well worth a read as it demonstrates growth in confidence in almost all measures, differences between different social groups and future trends. Overall most indices remain negative (below 50) but the trend is very clear: if the economy continues to grow at or near the current rate, perceptions will turn positive during mid 2014.

    Well worth a read. See here:

    http://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/ad7d49f87902424bae6024efd6bbddb8
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Yep, definitely an outlier :)
    Anyone (other than Sunil) offering odds that he'll be back to supporting the Tories by May 2015?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    jonnyjimmy given that it would have to presumably be based on the most needy that may be difficult to judge, and of course NHS hospitals are actually probably better at emergency surgery than private hospitals. Many hospitals were originally founded as charitable bodies though
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    MrJones said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24372509

    Wow, not all non-white people are racially blind after all. What a shock.

    Saw that on BBC news earlier... Western civilisation to blame I suppose for corrupting
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    fitalass said:

    Twitter
    Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 41s
    YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour lead down to 1% again. LAB 38%, CON 37% LD 10%, UKIP 10%. An outlier, but suggests contraction under way.

    ONE PERCENT.

    A measly single unitary solo lonely one per cent.

    ROFLWMTITA

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    Mr Jones LDs now have their largest support from ABs I think
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    HYUFD said:

    jonnyjimmy given that it would have to presumably be based on the most needy that may be difficult to judge, and of course NHS hospitals are actually probably better at emergency surgery than private hospitals. Many hospitals were originally founded as charitable bodies though

    But an awful lot of A&E "customers" are neither accident nor emergency. Some of them, at certain times, could surely be diverted at a fairly low cost to nurses at private hospitals?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I had a Saturn V rocket from Airfix - it was about 3ft tall and just wonderfully impressive!

    Just watching 40 years on the Moon on BBC Four. It really is amazing, watching the old footage. James Burke and Patrick Moore. Technology that wouldn't even power today's Smart phones. Mission control that is full of cigarette smoke. The huge crowds watching black and white telly.
    Just the huge scale of the Saturn V.

    I only hope we get to experience that thrill again.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Based on a fall which has since been revised down from -1.7% to -0.4%.

    And the real term figures quoted in the article are now superceded with those state in the table downthread and show a very small increase in RHDI since Q3 2010.

    Perhaps you could quote some vintage Telegraph articles on the gap between GDP and RHDI from the early noughties under Brown. That would be almost as fun as a link to the latest Matt cartoon.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    The Tories need to follow the Avery line and tell voters that they are wrong to believe they are enjoying lower living standards. It would be a real winner.

    Why not? Keep telling a person something over an over again and in the end they will believe it is true.

    See the claims that a "Bedroom Tax" exists, or that the Community Charge was somehow 'unfair' as examples.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    A cynic might say that it less the salaries some charity bosses are earning and more that at times they are critical of the government. Funnily enough this seems to have been less of an issue before May 2010.

    You're right. In the main a lot of charities were less critical of the government before May 2010.

    Charities shouldn't be getting involved in politics. Full stop.
  • Big Tory YG leap without any decline in Labour vote share. Must be a UKIP thing. No doubt someone will tell me I'm wrong, but the Labour vote share does seem to have been consistently higher this last fortnight than it was before the conference season.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013

    Yep, definitely an outlier :)
    Comrade Sunil, the panzer tanks are at Khimki.

    Set the traps.

    http://m8.i.pbase.com/o3/94/913594/1/145968158.moR7CN0C.KhimkiTankTrapMemorial.jpg

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    fitalass said:

    Twitter
    Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 41s
    YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour lead down to 1% again. LAB 38%, CON 37% LD 10%, UKIP 10%. An outlier, but suggests contraction under way.

    More interesting that it seems to have been driven by a Tory shift upwards, with Labour still stuck in the 38-40 range
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Charles said:

    What percentage comprises people who believe in liberty?
    Depressingly few if PB is a representative sample.

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Charles said:

    You're right. In the main a lot of charities were less critical of the government before May 2010.

    Charities shouldn't be getting involved in politics. Full stop.
    Where's that Like button gone again?

  • Charles said:

    You're right. In the main a lot of charities were less critical of the government before May 2010.

    Charities shouldn't be getting involved in politics. Full stop.

    Probably more a case of you not noticing it. Charities like Oxfam, Save the Children, The Taxpayers Alliance (!!) were frequently very critical of the last government.

  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,740
    Miliband has had a very good couple of weeks so no surprise that Lab share is holding up very well.

    However what is encouraging for Con is that they are holding up well and Lab is not widening the gap DESPITE Miliband's very popular energy announcement.

    Miliband won't be able to make such popular announcements every two weeks all the way to the GE so Con holding up so well during this period is very encouraging.

    Con share has also "withstood" the unpopular Royal Mail privatisation.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    Charles said:

    More interesting that it seems to have been driven by a Tory shift upwards, with Labour still stuck in the 38-40 range

    Possibly I've missed a poll, but the Tories haven't had a 37% or above poll figure since March 2012
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    HYUFD said:

    Mr Jones LDs now have their largest support from ABs I think

    I thought i remembered that but wasn't sure. Quite interesting really.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    Charles/GeoffM What about the liberty of the fox? (Or I suppose the rabbit or the hare!)
  • AveryLP said:

    Based on a fall which has since been revised down from -1.7% to -0.4%.

    And the real term figures quoted in the article are now superceded with those state in the table downthread and show a very small increase in RHDI since Q3 2010.

    Perhaps you could quote some vintage Telegraph articles on the gap between GDP and RHDI from the early noughties under Brown. That would be almost as fun as a link to the latest Matt cartoon.

    We've never had it so good!

    That has to be the Tory slogan for 2015.

    Go for it Dave.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    Mr Jones, Indeed, according to a yougov poll I have just looked up the LDs got 11% of their support from ABC1s and only 6% from C2DEs, the Tories had a higher percentage amongst ABC1s but both were in the thirties, UKIP and Labour both had more support amongst C2DEs than ABC1s
  • AveryLP said:

    Comrade Sunil, the panzer tanks are at Khimki.

    My history's a little hazy, Comrade Avery, but aren't the Barbarians supposed to lose the Battle of Carthage Stalingrad?
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    SeanT said:

    As Labour lurch wildly to the Left, you'd expect Tories to recoup UKIP voters. But that's not enuff. The Tories need Labour to shed 7% of their present support at the ballot box, as sane people quail at the idea they are about to elect ED MILIBAND and ED BALLS as LEADERS OF THE COUNTRY.

    Is this feasible?

    Reckon so. Think about it. Do you, Southam, HONESTLY want Balls and Miliband running the economy, after the f*ck up they made of it last time? Be honest, Southam, do you? Really?

    Are you saying that without any qualms you'd just hand the house-keys back to Labour and say "TRY not to blow up the kitchen and kill all the pets this time"?

    I think you WOULD have qualms because you are not stupid. And you are naturally a lefty. Ergo...


    Of course he does SeanT. SO often talks about right wingers being slaves to their philosophy no matter what. SO is the exactly that in reverse, a left wing fanatic (Labour type) come hell or high water.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Would have been useful if the Gov approval rating had been included in those YouGov figures tonight. I noticed that its been bouncing around a wee bit recently, but it does seem to be on a downward trend towards low 20's just as the Labour lead has declined to the mid single figures recently.
    SeanT said:

    Intriguing. Remember that YouGov were showing the parties equal just before the Conferences - and crossover seemed imminent.

    Miliband staved this off with his rather cunning energy price cap, however insane in the long term -


    http://www.cityam.com/article/1381721764/miliband-s-policies-have-already-damaged-britain-s-economy?utm_source=website&utm_medium=TD_EditorsLetter_Homepage&utm_campaign=TD_EditorsLetter_Homepage

    And also with his well-timed slapping of the Daily Mail, which made his core voters spontaneously ejaculate.

    The question is: will the pre-Conference momentum, which belonged to the Tories, now return? We shall see.
  • I did say with the perceived perception (if not the actualite) of Ed Miliband veering left during the conference season, it could boost both Lab and Con, and see the Lib Dems and UKIP getting squeezed like a Chippendale's arse on a hen night in Blackpool.

    Off topic, just saw a advance screening of Captain Phillips, Tom Hanks great as usual
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited October 2013
    Note to Peter Kellner: Much appreciated, but my bet with Paddy Power only pays out if YouGov report a Conservative lead by the end of the year. Just one will do, which given the daily polling shouldn't be too hard. I'll be happy to certify that I think it's an outlier.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Charles said:

    What percentage comprises people who believe in liberty?
    100%
  • According to some idiot on twitter, we shouldn't believe a word of what Mike Smithson says when it comes to polling because

    miss bracey ‏@missbracy 2h

    @2cvdolly1 @Xlibris1 @UKIP @MSmithsonPB Is this the same Mike that's married to Baroness Aston?

    Either that, or Mike's involved in a scandal that he's not telling us about.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    HYUFD said:

    Charles/GeoffM What about the liberty of the fox? (Or I suppose the rabbit or the hare!)

    ...or the cockroach, or the tapeworm.

    Equal Rights For The Ebola Virus!

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Probably more a case of you not noticing it. Charities like Oxfam, Save the Children, The Taxpayers Alliance (!!) were frequently very critical of the last government.

    To be honest, I don't pay any attention to Oxfam or Save the Children precisely because they are so political. So I may have missed something.

    I would put Taxpayers' Alliance into a different category. I suppose that they, and other institutes, provide a useful function (we host both the Institute of Philanthropy and the Institute for Statecraft) and there may be an argument for tax benefits, but they aren't "charities" in the common use of the word
  • SeanT said:

    As Labour lurch wildly to the Left, you'd expect Tories to recoup UKIP voters. But that's not enuff. The Tories need Labour to shed 7% of their present support at the ballot box, as sane people quail at the idea they are about to elect ED MILIBAND and ED BALLS as LEADERS OF THE COUNTRY.

    Is this feasible?

    Reckon so. Think about it. Do you, Southam, HONESTLY want Balls and Miliband running the economy, after the f*ck up they made of it last time? Be honest, Southam, do you? Really?

    Are you saying that without any qualms you'd just hand the house-keys back to Labour and say "TRY not to blow up the kitchen and kill all the pets this time"?

    I think you WOULD have qualms because you are not stupid. And you are naturally a lefty. Ergo...


    I'd be surprised if I voted Labour in 2015. They've done nothing to earn my vote except not be the Tories. EdM says a few interesting things, but is not exactly convincing. Ed Balls is just a mirror image of George Osborne - someone totally insulated from the real world playing JCR politics. After my 2010 experience I really want to make a positive choice in 2015. I'll always be sympathetic to Labour and I will never vote Tory, but right now I am a vaguely left-wing person in search of a party. The thing I would like most to see is a new voting system. That would lead to many new things. But I doubt it'll happen in my lifetime.

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Adrian Baker UKIP ‏@t20racerman

    As Farage Warned: "In Two Months Of EU Membership, Croatian Exports Fall 11%"
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-14/nigel-farage-warned-two-months-eu-membership-croatian-exports-fall-11

    Farage right again, sadly for Croatia.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    My history's a little hazy, Comrade Avery, but aren't the Barbarians supposed to lose the Battle of Carthage Stalingrad?
    A little bit of irony to go with the ironware, Tovarich Sunil.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Charles/GeoffM What about the liberty of the fox? (Or I suppose the rabbit or the hare!)

    Stewardship & dominion. Foxes don't have the same rights as humans.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MikeK said:

    100%
    So a policy of reaffirming some of the ancient liberties of the people of the UK won't have any appeal?
  • SeanT said:

    "I'll always be sympathetic to Labour and I will never vote Tory, "

    What? Even if the Tories had clearly better policies for the nation and the people?

    This, as I say, is why you are a twat.

    I do not share the Tory world view. Therefore, I do not believe they are capable of having the best policies for people or the nation.

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Charles said:

    So a policy of reaffirming some of the ancient liberties of the people of the UK won't have any appeal?
    There will always be ways to appeal decisions.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I do not share the Tory world view. Therefore, I do not believe they are capable of having the best policies for people or the nation.

    What, precisely, is the "Tory worldview"?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    SO Well you could vote Green or TUSC/RESPECT? If you live in Brighton or Bradford even under FPTP you might elect an MP!
  • Charles said:

    What, precisely, is the "Tory worldview"?

    That's easy to answer:

    I repeat...that all power is a trust; that we are accountable for its exercise; that from the people, and for the people all springs, and all must exist.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    Charles True, but we should set an example and treat them in a civilised manner, which is why I generally prefer shooting them unless the hounds are really trained enough to kill straight at the neck. For the same reason I prefer organic to factory farming
  • Charles said:

    What, precisely, is the "Tory worldview"?

    A small state, trickle down economics, weak employee rights, the market is king.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    GeoffM I do not equate the cockroach or the tapeworm with the same level of consciousness as the fox or rabbit, although even so I would still not treat them in a barbaric manner
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,811
    edited October 2013
    SeanT Actually the Tories can still win even if Labour loses not one voter from now until polling day, if they squeeze UKIP down to at least 5% with those voters switching directly to them they can get to about 40%. Today some polls have the Tories on 34% while UKIP is at least at 10% in most polls
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited October 2013
    @Southam - You should swat up on your Disraeli.

    He also said this, prophetically, of Ed Miliband:

    He was one of those men who think that the world can be saved by writing a pamphlet.
  • Right here's the YouGov polling averages before and after conferences.

    In the eleven YouGov polls before conference season began.

    Con 32.73, Lab 38.64, LD 9.09, UKIP 12.45, Lab lead 5.91

    In the eleven YouGov polls post the end of conference season, it is

    Con33.64, Lab 39.00, LD 9.73, UKIP 11.18, Lab Lead 5.36

    Changes from the two periods

    Con plus 0.91, Lab plus 0.36, LD plus 0.64, UKIP minus 1.27, Lab lead minus 0.55
  • @tim - Good one!
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    edited October 2013

    A small state, trickle down economics, weak employee rights, the market is king.

    We enact policies that increase the size of the pie. We ensure that everyone gets more pie, but we aint too fussed about the proportions.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    Under this leadership all power is a trust fund.
    The Ebola virus hits back.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Right here's the YouGov polling averages before and after conferences.

    In the eleven YouGov polls before conference season began.

    Con 32.73, Lab 38.64, LD 9.09, UKIP 12.45, Lab lead 5.91

    In the eleven YouGov polls post the end of conference season, it is

    Con33.64, Lab 39.00, LD 9.73, UKIP 11.18, Lab Lead 5.36

    Changes from the two periods

    Con plus 0.91, Lab plus 0.36, LD plus 0.64, UKIP minus 1.27, Lab lead minus 0.55

    It would be interesting to hear from Sir Roderick whether these trends are matching his swingback theory or, his newer passion, the Lebo and Norpeth model.

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,588
    Charles said:



    To be honest, I don't pay any attention to Oxfam or Save the Children precisely because they are so political. So I may have missed something.

    You certainly did. NGOs are by their nature critical of sitting governments, because they want policy focused on their particular issue, and governments always spread their atteniton and love. The NSPCC think governments don't do enough for children, Christian Aid thinks foreign aid too low, and so on. Throughout my time as MP it was quite exceptional for an NGO to say anything that wasn't basically critical - the range was normally from "A step forward but we want much more" to "A disgraceful dereliction of duty". Oxfam in particular was always critical (Christian Aid and Save the Children were a bit milder), though War on Want and Greenpeace probably topped the vehemence league.

    It used to annoy me - but, on reflection, isn't it a fairly natural function of campaigns? Whether campaigns should count as charities is a separate issue, but presumably supporters of NSPCC do want them to harry the government ceaselessly to do more for children, etc., and it's perhaps an important part of the democratic process that different interest groups should have coherent lobbies to pitch their case.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013

    You certainly did. NGOs are by their nature critical of sitting governments, because they want policy focused on their particular issue, and governments always spread their atteniton and love. The NSPCC think governments don't do enough for children, Christian Aid thinks foreign aid too low, and so on. Throughout my time as MP it was quite exceptional for an NGO to say anything that wasn't basically critical - the range was normally from "A step forward but we want much more" to "A disgraceful dereliction of duty". Oxfam in particular was always critical (Christian Aid and Save the Children were a bit milder), though War on Want and Greenpeace probably topped the vehemence league.

    It used to annoy me - but, on reflection, isn't it a fairly natural function of campaigns? Whether campaigns should count as charities is a separate issue, but presumably supporters of NSPCC do want them to harry the government ceaselessly to do more for children, etc., and it's perhaps an important part of the democratic process that different interest groups should have coherent lobbies to pitch their case.

    Not content with launching a naval attack in Russian waters, Greenpeace is now planning to litigate against fracking on the grounds that parallel drilling hundreds of metres under private property is a trespass in common law.

    And Greenpeace continues to enjoy the tax privileges of charitable status.

    I'd much rather we taxed them to the full and spent the savings on trying to find Maddie.

  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,740

    Right here's the YouGov polling averages before and after conferences.

    In the eleven YouGov polls before conference season began.

    Con 32.73, Lab 38.64, LD 9.09, UKIP 12.45, Lab lead 5.91

    In the eleven YouGov polls post the end of conference season, it is

    Con33.64, Lab 39.00, LD 9.73, UKIP 11.18, Lab Lead 5.36

    Changes from the two periods

    Con plus 0.91, Lab plus 0.36, LD plus 0.64, UKIP minus 1.27, Lab lead minus 0.55

    Are you sure that's right?

    The Con conference only ended on Wed 2 Oct.

    Ignoring the YouGov which came out on the morning of Thurs 3 Oct there have only been 8 YouGovs:

    Fri, Sun, a full week of 5, Tues.

    I would ignore the first two and start with Tues 8 Oct.
  • MikeL said:

    Are you sure that's right?

    The Con conference only ended on Wed 2 Oct.

    Ignoring the YouGov which came out on the morning of Thurs 3 Oct there have only been 8 YouGovs:

    Fri, Sun, a full week of 5, Tues.

    I would ignore the first two and start with Tues 8 Oct.
    Yes, you're right, I made a mistake, the conference season didn't end with Labour's conference.

    The revised polling for the 8 day average before and after conference

    8 Day average before conference season

    Con 32.88, Lab 38.38, LD 9.13, UKIP 12.38, Lab Lead 5.50

    8 Day average after conference season

    Con 34.00, Lab 38.63, LD 9.88, UKIP, 11.00, Lab Lead 4.63

    Changes

    Con plus 1.13, Lab plus 0.25, LD plus 0.75, UKIP minus 1.38, Lab Lead minus 0.88

  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,001
    These are pretty terrible ICM figures for the Lib Dems. As OGH has always gone to such lengths to explain, ICM tend to be best for the yellows. Doesn't surprise me though. Clegg's pitiful strategy unveiled at conference is just asking to have the life squeezed out of it by the other parties, which duly appears to be happening.
This discussion has been closed.