politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP the least liked party and LAB move to 8pc lead with TN

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited November 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP the least liked party and LAB move to 8pc lead with TNS-BMRB

This is from a survey that looks at views of the parties in different parts of the country which doesn’t produce any startling conclusions – the Tories are less popular in the north while LAB had problems in the South outside London.
These YouGov numbers are very similar to what Ipsos-MORI found in August when they asked about liking and disliking parties.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    edited November 2013
    The poll doesn't say that UKIP are the least liked, merely that they are disliked by the most people. Without knowing how much the remaining people like/are neutral to/tolerate UKIP and the other parties we can't actually say for sure. It may be (and indeed I suspect it is the case) that more of those who would vote UKIP feel strongly about it than the other parties.

    EDIT: My wording seems really unclear. I'm saying they may be divisive instead of simply disliked.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    It's because leftism is like a religion to some people. They can't stand anyone else being different or having a different viewpoint. Take a look at all of that year zero crap as an example of how the left tries to extinguish opposing views in order to advance their cause. People on the left are the least open minded I have ever come across.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    More good polling for Lab.

    Interesting that all the 4 companies who have reported this week give almost identical VI figures.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    MaxPB said:

    It's because leftism is like a religion to some people. They can't stand anyone else being different or having a different viewpoint. Take a look at all of that year zero crap as an example of how the left tries to extinguish opposing views in order to advance their cause. People on the left are the least open minded I have ever come across.

    My right-wing friends are just as evangelical about the all-powerful and perfect free-market as my lefty friends are about the helping hand of the state. I don't think this is the cause of this poll's results.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MaxPB said:

    It's because leftism is like a religion to some people.

    It's the voters' fault.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    ukip (imo) should be aiming at the 20% to the left of the socio-economic median and 30% to the right of it so luckily for them they have 57% to play with.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    tim said:

    This is more worrying for the Toxics

    [...]

    How much of that is permanent brand damage and how much of it will be solved when the Cameron fop clique is removed is the interesting debate

    It's permanent, it's not the end of the world. The Tories are always seen as less understanding of people and their situations, but it hasn't stopped them winning plenty of elections over the years including (well, kinda) 2010.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    The Conservatives' problems in the North are specifically, problems in Merseyside, Manchester, Sheffield, and Newcastle. Some of their safest seats are in the North. The parallel with Scotland might work if some other party (Lib Dems, or UKIP?) started winning Conservative votes, but it won't apply so long as it's a Con/Lab battle.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    The Dean of the Faculty of Advocates (my great leader) Richard Keen QC has just announced that he is to stand down in January and become chairman of the Conservative party in Scotland.
    An interesting move and perhaps indicative that someone thinks the tories might get a majority in the next election.

    I can loyally and honestly say he has been an excellent Dean. As a debater he is so many levels above the level of public discourse in Scotland as to be absurd. It will be interesting to see what he can do.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited November 2013
    A priori, and accepting all the usual caveats about reducing politics to a simple left/right axis, you'd expect a party on the left or right end of that axis to get the largest number of people saying they would never vote for it. Therefore the least surprising finding here is that UKIP gets the highest figure on this question. Of course, in itself it doesn't matter anyway - the key figure is how many people will vote for you or might seriously consider voting for you, not how many are never going to vote for you.

    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem. I suspect that a very low figure is exactly what a similar poll anytime in the decade or two leading up to 2010 would have found, yet now it's the second highest of the four.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Clegg's language on the Roma show how utterly out of touch politicians are.

    He hopes the people he has let into Britain against the wishes of a big majority of his own voters aren't nasty to those voters and respect their traditions

    I mean I ask you....

    I think the polls for the coalition are going to get worse before they get better. Its going to be a bad winter.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited November 2013
    DavidL said:

    The Dean of the Faculty of Advocates (my great leader) Richard Keen QC has just announced that he is to stand down in January and become chairman of the Conservative party in Scotland.
    An interesting move and perhaps indicative that someone thinks the tories might get a majority in the next election.

    I can loyally and honestly say he has been an excellent Dean. As a debater he is so many levels above the level of public discourse in Scotland as to be absurd. It will be interesting to see what he can do.

    Isn't that an office which usually functions as a hereditament of the Hope dynasty?

  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    taffys said:

    Clegg's language on the Roma show how utterly out of touch politicians are.

    That's the bit that gets to me. I can never decide for sure if they're really as insulated from reality as they seem or they know full well what they're doing and don't care.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    tim said:

    Do you think the leader after Cameron will support AV if Dave has succeeded in splitting the right so badly it costs him his job?

    No.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Shades of Ankh MorPork - step forward Mrs Palm and Cornwall Council.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-24941336

    Is she a 'seamstress'?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    RichardNabavi said:

    A priori, and accepting all the usual caveats about reducing politics to a simple left/right axis, you'd expect a party on the left or right end of that axis to get the largest number of people saying they would never vote for it. Therefore the least surprising finding here is that UKIP gets the highest figure on this question. Of course, in itself it doesn't matter anyway - the key figure is how many people will vote for you or might seriously consider voting for you, not how many are never going to vote for you.

    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem. I suspect that a very low figure is exactly what a similar poll anytime in the decade or two leading up to 2010 would have found, yet now it's the second highest of the four.

    Historically, Labour have usually led on likeability questions, the Conservatives on competence questions.

    The 35% saying they'd never vote Lib Dem are probably a mix of bitter leftwingers, and people who think the Lib Dems would be a wasted vote.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    @Peter_the_punter Any place money ?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Yet another poll giving the Other Others a relatively high score.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    dr_spyn said:

    Shades of Ankh MorPork - step forward Mrs Palm and Cornwall Council.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-24941336

    Is she a 'seamstress'?

    Does she have five daughters?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    AndyJS said:

    Yet another poll giving the Other Others a relatively high score.

    SNP up high ?
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Pulpstar said:

    AndyJS said:

    Yet another poll giving the Other Others a relatively high score.

    SNP up high ?
    Especially in England
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    @Sean_F Daughters of Negotiable Virtue?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    RichardNabavi said:

    Pulpstar said:

    AndyJS said:

    Yet another poll giving the Other Others a relatively high score.

    SNP up high ?
    Especially in England
    2 SNP voters in the Midlands in the data tables...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    RichardNabavi said:

    A priori, and accepting all the usual caveats about reducing politics to a simple left/right axis, you'd expect a party on the left or right end of that axis to get the largest number of people saying they would never vote for it. Therefore the least surprising finding here is that UKIP gets the highest figure on this question. Of course, in itself it doesn't matter anyway - the key figure is how many people will vote for you or might seriously consider voting for you, not how many are never going to vote for you.

    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem. I suspect that a very low figure is exactly what a similar poll anytime in the decade or two leading up to 2010 would have found, yet now it's the second highest of the four.

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    Pulpstar said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    A priori, and accepting all the usual caveats about reducing politics to a simple left/right axis, you'd expect a party on the left or right end of that axis to get the largest number of people saying they would never vote for it. Therefore the least surprising finding here is that UKIP gets the highest figure on this question. Of course, in itself it doesn't matter anyway - the key figure is how many people will vote for you or might seriously consider voting for you, not how many are never going to vote for you.

    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem. I suspect that a very low figure is exactly what a similar poll anytime in the decade or two leading up to 2010 would have found, yet now it's the second highest of the four.

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.
    Depends on if they replace Clegg as leader. He's to the liberal/right side of the party (plus if he stays they'd have consistency anyway).
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited November 2013
    RichardNabavi said:


    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem.

    They're in the middle of the left/right axis but they're at the liberal end of the liberal/authoritarian axis, whereas the median voter leans authoritarian.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    I actually find it hard to say I'd never vote for anyone. Never is a big word after all.
    tim said:

    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 22m
    Latest polls show a remarkable consistency
    YouGov LAB lead 8%
    TNS-BMRB LAB lead 8%
    ICM LAB lead 8%
    Populus LAB lead 8%

    Equivalent week last month

    YouGov Lab lead 1%
    TNS-BMRB Lab lead 2%
    ICM Lab lead 4%
    Populus Lab lead 5%

    Martin Kettle has written a pretty bold piece in the Graun saying Cameron might have lost himself the next election in apparently calling for permanent austerity. he's done very little to disassociate himself from the rich. Presumably he thinks by appealing to ordinary people like Chris and Kayleigh with Help to Buy (help to vote one tory backbencher apparently calls it) he doesn't need to.

    I was delighted to see this merciless attack on HTB on conhome of all places from Boris biogragher Andrew Gimson.

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2013/11/help-to-buy-is-immoral-because-it-encourages-ordinary-people-to-risk-ruin.html
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Quincel said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    A priori, and accepting all the usual caveats about reducing politics to a simple left/right axis, you'd expect a party on the left or right end of that axis to get the largest number of people saying they would never vote for it. Therefore the least surprising finding here is that UKIP gets the highest figure on this question. Of course, in itself it doesn't matter anyway - the key figure is how many people will vote for you or might seriously consider voting for you, not how many are never going to vote for you.

    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem. I suspect that a very low figure is exactly what a similar poll anytime in the decade or two leading up to 2010 would have found, yet now it's the second highest of the four.

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.
    Depends on if they replace Clegg as leader. He's to the liberal/right side of the party (plus if he stays they'd have consistency anyway).
    The only way I can see him staying on is in a continuation of the coalition. That's probably about a ~ 6-1 shot at the moment. Can't see him working with Ed Miliband, or being there if either of the big two scores a majority
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    Pulpstar said:

    Quincel said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    A priori, and accepting all the usual caveats about reducing politics to a simple left/right axis, you'd expect a party on the left or right end of that axis to get the largest number of people saying they would never vote for it. Therefore the least surprising finding here is that UKIP gets the highest figure on this question. Of course, in itself it doesn't matter anyway - the key figure is how many people will vote for you or might seriously consider voting for you, not how many are never going to vote for you.

    Having said that, the most striking figure is the LibDem one. This is a centrist party, so a priori you'd expect a very low number of people saying they'd never vote LibDem. I suspect that a very low figure is exactly what a similar poll anytime in the decade or two leading up to 2010 would have found, yet now it's the second highest of the four.

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.
    Depends on if they replace Clegg as leader. He's to the liberal/right side of the party (plus if he stays they'd have consistency anyway).
    The only way I can see him staying on is in a continuation of the coalition. That's probably about a ~ 6-1 shot at the moment. Can't see him working with Ed Miliband, or being there if either of the big two scores a majority
    Agree with you about him and Miliband, but if Labour win a majority so that isn't in question I could see him remaining. The party haven't turned on him so far despite everything, you never know.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Pulpstar said:

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.

    Not necessarily, after all Ed Miliband will be cornering the market in populist irresponsibility. If he is in Number 10, there will therefore be an excellent opening for a fiscally sane party of the centre-left, which is a position the LibDems have (somewhat inconsistently) espoused for a while. As the two Eds lead the country back into crisis, the message 'now you see why we joined the coalition to save the economy' could be quite a strong one for the LibDems.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    RichardNabavi said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.

    Not necessarily, after all Ed Miliband will be cornering the market in populist irresponsibility. If he is in Number 10, there will therefore be an excellent opening for a fiscally sane party of the centre-left, which is a position the LibDems have (somewhat inconsistently) espoused for a while. As the two Eds lead the country back into crisis, the message 'now you see why we joined the coalition to save the economy' could be quite a strong one for the LibDems.
    Hmm good point - If the Lib Dems go to Farron as the leader and attack Miliband from... the left, I can see the conservatives cleaning up in 2020 !
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    In other news, the economic recovery looks to be more stable than we previously thought, retail sales and retail spending all came in below expectations today. So far this is not a consumer boom like Labour's 2001-2007 boom.

    On the other side of the Channel, France contracted over the last quarter, so much for the new model over there. German growth has gone back to anaemic levels and Italy is still in recession. All very precarious. On the other side of the world, India is faltering hard. Inflation is up to 10% and economic growth is bottoming out. Bring on Narendra Modi. India needs strong economic and social reforms. They must look at the Chinese model (planned) and the British model (information/services) while also cutting out corruption. The UPA has absolutely f***** India over in the last few years. I fear for India's future if the UPA pull off a victory on the back of giveaways and the Gandhi/Nerhu dynasty.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    RichardNabavi said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.

    Not necessarily, after all Ed Miliband will be cornering the market in populist irresponsibility. If he is in Number 10, there will therefore be an excellent opening for a fiscally sane party of the centre-left, which is a position the LibDems have (somewhat inconsistently) espoused for a while. As the two Eds lead the country back into crisis, the message 'now you see why we joined the coalition to save the economy' could be quite a strong one for the LibDems.
    Also - they have already lost lots of voters (and to a smaller degree members) to the left already - if they lurch left then they might hope to pick some of them up, but will lose (a large proportion of) the ones on the right.

    Better a bird in the hand...
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Pulpstar said:


    The only way I can see him staying on is in a continuation of the coalition. That's probably about a ~ 6-1 shot at the moment. Can't see him working with Ed Miliband, or being there if either of the big two scores a majority

    I don't see why he shouldn't work with Ed Miliband - he's a professional politician, and he doesn't seem to have any particularly strong, unbending ideological principles that would prevent it.

    I agree it's hard to see him keeping his job if the LibDems end up out of government, but that's another reason to think that if the arithmetic allowed for a deal to be cut, he'd be prepared to cut it.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited November 2013
    tim said:

    @FrankBooth

    This piece

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/david-cameron-permanent-austerity-lose-election-2015

    Martin Kettle has lost his marbles. I know he writes for the Guardian, but surely even a Guardian columnist ought to be able to understand, in the abstract at least, the distinction between 'building a leaner, more efficient state' which does 'more for less' (i.e better efficiency in delivery of public services) and 'permanent austerity' (i.e. reducing the services provided).

    Maybe I'm wrong. Sometimes the left really give the impression that they think the more money spent, irrespective of outcomes, the better, and that getting better value for the taxpayer is actively a bad thing.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    edmundintokyo said:

    Pulpstar said:


    The only way I can see him staying on is in a continuation of the coalition. That's probably about a ~ 6-1 shot at the moment. Can't see him working with Ed Miliband, or being there if either of the big two scores a majority

    I don't see why he shouldn't work with Ed Miliband - he's a professional politician, and he doesn't seem to have any particularly strong, unbending ideological principles that would prevent it.

    I agree it's hard to see him keeping his job if the LibDems end up out of government, but that's another reason to think that if the arithmetic allowed for a deal to be cut, he'd be prepared to cut it.
    I think Miliband demands CLegg's head in any deal though...
  • Gerry_ManderGerry_Mander Posts: 621
    RichardNabavi said:



    Maybe I'm wrong. Sometimes the left really give the impression that they think the more money spent, irrespective of outcomes, the better, and that getting better value for the taxpayer is actively a bad thing.

    Surely it is if you're employed by the state.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Gerry_Mander said:

    RichardNabavi said:



    Maybe I'm wrong. Sometimes the left really give the impression that they think the more money spent, irrespective of outcomes, the better, and that getting better value for the taxpayer is actively a bad thing.

    Surely it is if you're employed by the state.
    True, in the short term at least.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    FrankBooth said:

    I actually find it hard to say I'd never vote for anyone. Never is a big word after all.

    tim said:

    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 22m
    Latest polls show a remarkable consistency
    YouGov LAB lead 8%
    TNS-BMRB LAB lead 8%
    ICM LAB lead 8%
    Populus LAB lead 8%

    Equivalent week last month

    YouGov Lab lead 1%
    TNS-BMRB Lab lead 2%
    ICM Lab lead 4%
    Populus Lab lead 5%

    Martin Kettle has written a pretty bold piece in the Graun saying Cameron might have lost himself the next election in apparently calling for permanent austerity. he's done very little to disassociate himself from the rich. Presumably he thinks by appealing to ordinary people like Chris and Kayleigh with Help to Buy (help to vote one tory backbencher apparently calls it) he doesn't need to.

    I was delighted to see this merciless attack on HTB on conhome of all places from Boris biogragher Andrew Gimson.

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2013/11/help-to-buy-is-immoral-because-it-encourages-ordinary-people-to-risk-ruin.html
    HTB is win-win for the tories. Either it wins them the election or it leaves an utterly toxic legacy for Labour, because the perception atm is that governments control the housing market (sometimes true in the short term, never in the long). So a crash will = the govt. of the day plunging hardworking families into negative equity.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited November 2013
    Pulpstar said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    Pulpstar said:


    The only way I can see him staying on is in a continuation of the coalition. That's probably about a ~ 6-1 shot at the moment. Can't see him working with Ed Miliband, or being there if either of the big two scores a majority

    I don't see why he shouldn't work with Ed Miliband - he's a professional politician, and he doesn't seem to have any particularly strong, unbending ideological principles that would prevent it.

    I agree it's hard to see him keeping his job if the LibDems end up out of government, but that's another reason to think that if the arithmetic allowed for a deal to be cut, he'd be prepared to cut it.
    I think Miliband demands CLegg's head in any deal though...
    Why on earth would he do that? Clegg is clearly capable of playing a constructive and collegiate role as the junior partner in a coalition, and a more obviously left-wing leader would just take fewer votes off the Tories and more off Labour. And even if he did prefer not to work with Clegg, he'd be better using the leverage on policy concessions or jobs for his own team.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    tim said:

    @FrankBooth

    This piece

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/david-cameron-permanent-austerity-lose-election-2015

    Assumes that people take Camerons "philosophies" seriously, he's had so many fake stances on everything now that I can't see why another one will make much difference.

    It's incompetence that will do for Cameron, not changing his stance

    Tim,

    if Cameron and Osborne are such incompetent fops can you explain the performance of the UK economy compared to France. What is Hollande then? You know the chap Miliband said this about

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18966541

    Was Ed right to say this?

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    Good to see Guido is behind me.

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/14/labour-delete-entire-history-pre-2010-from-website/

    I pointed that out on a thread yesterday, when the 'story' first blew. There are some earlier stories, but they appear to be remnants, rather than well-organised data. Some do not even have the right templates, making them seem like forgotten arcana.

    The real scandal is that the Labour website does not even have a search engine. If I want to find whatever their latest position is on (say) HS2, I cannot find it without laboriously going through lists. Then again, they may not want me to know which of their three positions they currently favour ...

    So we had a manufactured story, told in an exceptionally nasty way (remember the reference to paedophiles), misrepresenting the purpose of the robots,txt file, when the Labour website did not contain the data either.

    Terrible journalism on the part of computerweekly. And congratulations to the register for getting it right.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    tim said:

    @Pulpstar.

    What Richard deliberately forgets and the rest of the PB tories don't understand is that on the issues where he sees Miliband as dangerously left wing, planning land grabs, nationalisation of utilities, market interference in utilites etc the public is way to the left of Miliband
    Indeed the polling shows that every single measure, every single one, attacked on here as being left wing Marxism has actually commanded the support of Tory voters.

    That's quite true. Although by the PB Tory measure pretty much everyone in the country is a Marxist, including Boris Johnson, Peter Hitchens, and many of the Tory cabinet.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Sean_F said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Shades of Ankh MorPork - step forward Mrs Palm and Cornwall Council.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-24941336

    Is she a 'seamstress'?

    Does she have five daughters?
    A field day for the subeditor. Caption: Mrs Palm has twice come second

    Guffaw!
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Just got in and v concerned that a ctrl-f search of the thread reveals nothing for "IHT" or unbelievably "Falkirk"

    Falkirk
    Ed
    Resignation

    thank you.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    tim said:

    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 22m
    Latest polls show a remarkable consistency
    YouGov LAB lead 8%
    TNS-BMRB LAB lead 8%
    ICM LAB lead 8%
    Populus LAB lead 8%

    Equivalent week last month

    YouGov Lab lead 1%
    TNS-BMRB Lab lead 2%
    ICM Lab lead 4%
    Populus Lab lead 5%

    Should be 12pts.

    Falkirk.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    JosiasJessop said:

    Good to see Guido is behind me.

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/14/labour-delete-entire-history-pre-2010-from-website/

    I pointed that out on a thread yesterday, when the 'story' first blew. There are some earlier stories, but they appear to be remnants, rather than well-organised data. Some do not even have the right templates, making them seem like forgotten arcana.

    The real scandal is that the Labour website does not even have a search engine. If I want to find whatever their latest position is on (say) HS2, I cannot find it without laboriously going through lists. Then again, they may not want me to know which of their three positions they currently favour ...

    So we had a manufactured story, told in an exceptionally nasty way (remember the reference to paedophiles), misrepresenting the purpose of the robots,txt file, when the Labour website did not contain the data either.

    Terrible journalism on the part of computerweekly. And congratulations to the register for getting it right.

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.
  • SouthCoastKevinSouthCoastKevin Posts: 158
    RichardNabavi said:

    ...Sometimes the left really give the impression that they think the more money spent, irrespective of outcomes, the better, and that getting better value for the taxpayer is actively a bad thing.

    Well, this is the impression the last Labour government gave, isn't it? They were always talking about the increased funds they were 'investing' in education, healthcare and so on, instead of about the quality of the services and the effectiveness of their expenditure.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    JosiasJessop said:

    Good to see Guido is behind me.

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/14/labour-delete-entire-history-pre-2010-from-website/

    I pointed that out on a thread yesterday, when the 'story' first blew. There are some earlier stories, but they appear to be remnants, rather than well-organised data. Some do not even have the right templates, making them seem like forgotten arcana.

    The real scandal is that the Labour website does not even have a search engine. If I want to find whatever their latest position is on (say) HS2, I cannot find it without laboriously going through lists. Then again, they may not want me to know which of their three positions they currently favour ...

    So we had a manufactured story, told in an exceptionally nasty way (remember the reference to paedophiles), misrepresenting the purpose of the robots,txt file, when the Labour website did not contain the data either.

    Terrible journalism on the part of computerweekly. And congratulations to the register for getting it right.

    Guido and the register haven't got it right though - the entire story is not even a 'non story'. Unless you are suggesting crap archiving is somehow equivalent to blocking parts of a site via a robots script (Which is itself a non story)
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    tim said:

    Bobajob said:

    tim said:

    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 22m
    Latest polls show a remarkable consistency
    YouGov LAB lead 8%
    TNS-BMRB LAB lead 8%
    ICM LAB lead 8%
    Populus LAB lead 8%

    Equivalent week last month

    YouGov Lab lead 1%
    TNS-BMRB Lab lead 2%
    ICM Lab lead 4%
    Populus Lab lead 5%

    Should be 12pts.

    Falkirk.

    Don't say that, as Dan Hodges writes the polls this month are bad news for Ed, a few 12 point leads would be a resigning matter
    I like the cut of your jib.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    tim said:

    @Pulpstar.

    What Richard deliberately forgets and the rest of the PB tories don't understand is that on the issues where he sees Miliband as dangerously left wing, planning land grabs, nationalisation of utilities, market interference in utilites etc the public is way to the left of Miliband
    Indeed the polling shows that every single measure, every single one, attacked on here as being left wing Marxism has actually commanded the support of Tory voters.

    The public aren't to the left of EdM. The public has been through hell these past five years and are more than receptive to someone who tells them it will all be ok. They are at the point whereby in the heat of the moment they aren't going to question Lab policies too closely and are content with a general "they'll sort it out" feeling about them hence the (subdued) popularity in the polls.

    But like everything else that seems too good to be true, so will they realise that Labour Party promises and pledges are actually utter bollocks. And, perhaps more in sorrow than anger, come GE2015 they will realise they only have one option which is to vote Cons.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edmundintokyo said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Good to see Guido is behind me.

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/14/labour-delete-entire-history-pre-2010-from-website/

    I pointed that out on a thread yesterday, when the 'story' first blew. There are some earlier stories, but they appear to be remnants, rather than well-organised data. Some do not even have the right templates, making them seem like forgotten arcana.

    The real scandal is that the Labour website does not even have a search engine. If I want to find whatever their latest position is on (say) HS2, I cannot find it without laboriously going through lists. Then again, they may not want me to know which of their three positions they currently favour ...

    So we had a manufactured story, told in an exceptionally nasty way (remember the reference to paedophiles), misrepresenting the purpose of the robots,txt file, when the Labour website did not contain the data either.

    Terrible journalism on the part of computerweekly. And congratulations to the register for getting it right.

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.
    Why does the Way Back Machine only go as far back as the Brown premiership for Labour?

    How do you think that happened?

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    CarlottaVance said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Good to see Guido is behind me.

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/14/labour-delete-entire-history-pre-2010-from-website/

    I pointed that out on a thread yesterday, when the 'story' first blew. There are some earlier stories, but they appear to be remnants, rather than well-organised data. Some do not even have the right templates, making them seem like forgotten arcana.

    The real scandal is that the Labour website does not even have a search engine. If I want to find whatever their latest position is on (say) HS2, I cannot find it without laboriously going through lists. Then again, they may not want me to know which of their three positions they currently favour ...

    So we had a manufactured story, told in an exceptionally nasty way (remember the reference to paedophiles), misrepresenting the purpose of the robots,txt file, when the Labour website did not contain the data either.

    Terrible journalism on the part of computerweekly. And congratulations to the register for getting it right.

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.
    Why does the Way Back Machine only go as far back as the Brown premiership for Labour?

    How do you think that happened?

    I hear Tony enjoyed shredding stuff.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    edmundintokyo said:



    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.

    Okay, now you are suggesting that it was 'intentionally blocking'. Evidence, please.

    Firstly, as I said yesterday, some CMSs certainly used to alter the robots.txt whenever you deleted directory structures. Secondly, robots.txt does not block anything. It is a request to a web crawler not to go to those places, and they can choose to ignore that request. They can still be accessed by the public.

    The fact that some archives choose to delete files kept in areas mentioned in robots.txt is hardly the Conservatives' fault.

    I'm not sure what your second point is; the files I found were more likely remnants than purposefully-kept files. Hence the poor templating.

    See it this way: since the last election, the Labour Party website has over 800 pages of news stories. You would expect there to have been just as many from before the election. Where are they?

    Finally, we have to ask what the purpose of the websites are? Are the Conservatives / Labour / Lib Dem etc websites meant to be places of record, or just marketing websites. I would suggest that they are the latter. Indeed, you would not want to rely on them as being places of record, as they could easily change the content.

    A totally manufactured story, and one you fell for.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    edmundintokyo said:

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.

    I fear for the technical competency of the Tory online team if they really are using a robots.txt to keep stuff hidden. Would have been better to create a backup of the current file and then purge all of the old data, hope no one notices, if they do call it an error and restore the backup.

    That's how everyone does it I think!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Pulpstar said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Good to see Guido is behind me.

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/14/labour-delete-entire-history-pre-2010-from-website/

    I pointed that out on a thread yesterday, when the 'story' first blew. There are some earlier stories, but they appear to be remnants, rather than well-organised data. Some do not even have the right templates, making them seem like forgotten arcana.

    The real scandal is that the Labour website does not even have a search engine. If I want to find whatever their latest position is on (say) HS2, I cannot find it without laboriously going through lists. Then again, they may not want me to know which of their three positions they currently favour ...

    So we had a manufactured story, told in an exceptionally nasty way (remember the reference to paedophiles), misrepresenting the purpose of the robots,txt file, when the Labour website did not contain the data either.

    Terrible journalism on the part of computerweekly. And congratulations to the register for getting it right.

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.
    Why does the Way Back Machine only go as far back as the Brown premiership for Labour?

    How do you think that happened?

    I hear Tony enjoyed shredding stuff.
    Gordon certainly enjoyed shredding Tony's stuff - he 404'd Blair's entire Downing Street archive.....

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Strip Sri Lanka of Commonwealth chairmanship, Ed Miliband urges
    Call comes as David Cameron heads to Colombo for summit overshadowed by host country's alleged human rights abuses

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/14/sri-lanka-president-commonwealth-chairmanship-miliband

    Of course the government should have done something when the CHOGM was awarded to Sri Lanka in the first place.

    In 2009.......
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    MaxPB said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.

    I fear for the technical competency of the Tory online team if they really are using a robots.txt to keep stuff hidden. Would have been better to create a backup of the current file and then purge all of the old data, hope no one notices, if they do call it an error and restore the backup.

    That's how everyone does it I think!
    Exactly. I'd bet on the robots file being a CMS issue. When you move or delete directories, at least two CMSs I recall add the location to the robots.txt file so that search engines will no longer search for it in the old location. If the search engine doesn't actively delete it from their archives, the links will grow increasingly stale.

    Although as I said yesterday, if it is deliberate, then they deserve a good Streisanding. And so do Labour for the same reason ...

    But I've now flip-flopped back to it being a totally manufactured story. And one some people were all too willing to fall for ...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Another columnist who can't read polls:

    Northerners hate David Cameron but love his policies. Ukip will reap the rewards

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timwigmore/100245882/northerners-hate-david-cameron-but-love-his-policies-ukip-will-reap-the-rewards/

    Would never vote for this party (North)
    Lab: 21
    Lib Dem: 38
    Con: 39
    UKIP: 40
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Carlotta..brilliant.. I wonder if the MSM will pick up on that..
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Tim

    'The toxic Tories are always more disliked than Labour'

    And toxic Labour managed 29% at the 2010 GE, they would be lucky to be in double figures now if they had won & for once had to clean their own $hit up.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    tim said:

    David Cameron’s solution to his cost of living crisis cannot be found

    Nor can Tony Blair on the Labour website - current (only Miliband) or archived (only Brown).

    Odd how a party would wish to erase the thoughts of a three-time election winner......
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    I love OGH spin perspective:

    There’s little doubt that if party wants to be liked then it’s better to be in opposition.

    So much nicer than "The Lib Dems are more toxic than the Tories"
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    tim said:

    MaxPB said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    The pedophile thing was twattish, but Guido is full of shit. Not having old stuff on your website is a completely different thing to intentionally blocking it with the robots.txt. And it's hard to believe Guido really doesn't understand how to search a site in Google.

    I fear for the technical competency of the Tory online team if they really are using a robots.txt to keep stuff hidden. Would have been better to create a backup of the current file and then purge all of the old data, hope no one notices, if they do call it an error and restore the backup.

    That's how everyone does it I think!

    Shapps is a genius, maybe he thought he was sending the speeches to the dead people he canvasses in by elections.
    Good. So we can add the Internet on to the long list of things you do not understand, and yet talk about incessantly.

    Like infrastructure, housing, funerals, and apologies, amongst others.

    Why don't you just go into a corner of the room and mutter to yourself about the two things you do seem to know about: wine (with or without an 'h') and killing cats.
  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Falkirk.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Is Mori out today?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Good evening, everyone.

    F1: Lotus get their thirty-seventh choice driver (Kovalainen):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula-one/24946180
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    I feel like being mischievous. The recent ICM poll showed that 39% of 2010 Lib Dem voters now intend to vote Labour at the next election. So let's look at the 2010 GE result from, I don't know, Sheffield Hallam

    Liberal Democrat (Nick Clegg) - 27324
    Conservative (Nicola Bates) - 12040
    Labour (Jack Scott) - 8228

    So all else being the same, what happens if 39% of Lib Dem voters switch to Labour? By my maths:

    Labour - 18884
    Liberal Democrat (Nick Clegg) - 16668
    Conservative - 12040

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    Labour's GOTV in Sheffield Hallam will be crucial.

  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    CarlottaVance said:

    tim said:

    David Cameron’s solution to his cost of living crisis cannot be found

    Odd how a party would wish to erase the thoughts of a three-time election winner......
    He's become a serious embarrassment to the party and it's difficult to know what to do with him. He's not rehabilitated himself in the court of public opinion and his galivanting around the world earning millions, from shall we say very 'interesting' sources, hardly helps Labour.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    edited November 2013
    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    eh?
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    edited November 2013
    FrankBooth said:

    I feel like being mischievous. The recent ICM poll showed that 39% of 2010 Lib Dem voters now intend to vote Labour at the next election. So let's look at the 2010 GE result from, I don't know, Sheffield Hallam

    Liberal Democrat (Nick Clegg) - 27324
    Conservative (Nicola Bates) - 12040
    Labour (Jack Scott) - 8228

    So all else being the same, what happens if 39% of Lib Dem voters switch to Labour? By my maths:

    Labour - 18884
    Liberal Democrat (Nick Clegg) - 16668
    Conservative - 12040

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    Labour's GOTV in Sheffield Hallam will be crucial.

    The last ICM poll did NOT show 39% of LD 2010 voters moving to Labour . The actual figure was 29% . The 39% figure came after ignoring those who currently say don't know .
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Another PB Tory:

    many Labour insiders, left and right, do say “you can’t trust Ed” and that his office is “a nest of vipers” or something similar. And Ed does need to put that right.

    http://www.leftfutures.org/2013/11/tom-watson-on-falkirk-and-a-lesson-for-ed/
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    R0berts said:

    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    eh?
    Yes.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    You're talking utter bollocks.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    David Cameron has played a blinder on the Scottish referendum

    There will now follow a short interval during which I will blog (with only one caveat) enthusiastically in defence of David Cameron. I am aware that this is a somewhat rare event. Accordingly, I will keep it brief and normal service will be resumed in the morning. Sensitive souls and Ukip supporters (always keen to dish out the personal abuse to opponents but not very good at taking the mildest criticism) might care to look away now or go straight to the comments at the bottom of this post.

    Hardly anyone has said it, or if they have said it I missed it, but faced with one of the most important challenges of his premiership, Cameron has played a blinder.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100245974/david-cameron-has-played-a-blinder-on-the-scottish-referendum/
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    MarkSenior said:

    FrankBooth said:



    The last ICM poll did NOT show 39% of LD 2010 voters moving to Labour . The actual figure was 30% . The 39% figure came after ignoring those who currently say don't know .

    So what about 30%:

    Nick Clegg - 19127
    Labour - 16425

    They'd still be a gap but not insurmountable.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    You're talking utter bollocks.
    No, I'm not.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    @Next

    Bollocks. The clue is in the wording - holding up. Hence not drifting off to Labour.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    @Roberts

    What have you heard?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Next said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    You're talking utter bollocks.
    No, I'm not.
    Yes.. yes you are.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Kevin Maguire tweets: All policy work in Miliband's office is suspended. He's on Desert Island Discs a week Sunday. Got to get right those records.

    There was policy work? I guess it depends on what you call 'policy'....
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Bobajob said:

    @Next

    Bollocks. The clue is in the wording - holding up. Hence not drifting off to Labour.

    The phrase was "holding up best". I presume that means some movement, but not as bad as the full 30/39%.

    Hence my earlier comment.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    edited November 2013
    R0berts said:

    Falkirk.

    Top marks. On PB, Falkirk is the new fop.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Max said: "It's because leftism is like a religion to some people. ..... People on the left are the least open minded I have ever come across"

    And rules are different for them than for others - Enoch Powell does a "Blood in the streets" speech and is vilified for decades. David Blunkett does a "Blood in streets (Sheffield)" speech and gets support from Nick Clegg.

    Hmm.....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    General Election 2015 tweets: 477 leases between Mps and their political parties netting their respective parties 3.6 million pounds

    Maybe that's why they are keeping Falkirk in the news.....
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    edited November 2013
    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    You're talking utter bollocks.
    No, I'm not.
    Yes.. yes you are.
    Any explanation why you think I was wrong?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Indeed, Miss C (and welcome back/post more).
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    R0berts said:

    Falkirk.

    Top marks. On PB, Falkirk is the new fop.
    Those bloody PB Tories just can't stop banging on about it, eh?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    On topic - I'm sure St Margaret would have the odd hater - yet she was the best PM since WW2.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    FrankBooth said:

    The recent ICM poll showed that 39% of 2010 Lib Dem voters now intend to vote Labour at the next election. So let's look at the 2010 GE result from, I don't know, Sheffield Hallam

    Before backing a Lab gain in Sheffield Hallam with hard cash I would (a) listen to Mark Senior on how to interpret the poll and (b) look at local election results in the constituency since 2010.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    edited November 2013
    Next said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    You're talking utter bollocks.
    No, I'm not.
    Yes.. yes you are.
    Any explanation why you think I was wrong?
    Take a typical LD/CON marginal - Torbay for instance. The Lib Dem vote holds up, Adrian Sanders remains in place. The Lib Dems switch to the Labour candidate, Kevin Foster gets in. Your example of the Lib Dem vote holding up rather than heading to Labour would probably only help the Conservatives in say hmm... Argyle and Bute, but that is a 4 way marginal and very atypical. In most CON/LD battlegrounds, Labour are pretty much nowhere and the Conservative's best chance is for the Lib Dem vote to head over to Labour.

    Solihull, Hallam, Eastleigh, Torbay, Wells, Westmorland and Lonsdale, Taunton Deane - the list is not a short one...
    Your argument may hold for Argyll and Bute but can't think of anywhere else...
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Beverley_C said:


    And rules are different for them than for others - Enoch Powell does a "Blood in the streets" speech and is vilified for decades. David Blunkett does a "Blood in streets (Sheffield)" speech and gets support from Nick Clegg.

    Hmm.....

    The jury is out on whether Blunkett is to the left or right of Powell.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Pulpstar said:


    I think Miliband demands CLegg's head in any deal though...

    As a potential small Labour piece of the jigsaw, I don't care who leads the LibDems in a potential coalition - if we need them as partners and they agree reasonable terms on policies, they can have anyone they like to help implement them.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Flashman (deceased), Caesar and (I think) Cao Cao both have strong supporters and opponents. Being hated doesn't make one wrong or incompetent.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    NickPalmer said:

    Pulpstar said:


    I think Miliband demands CLegg's head in any deal though...

    As a potential small Labour piece of the jigsaw, I don't care who leads the LibDems in a potential coalition - if we need them as partners and they agree reasonable terms on policies, they can have anyone they like to help implement them.

    You've just won a place on LAbour's team negotiating the next coalition agreement.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    NickPalmer said:

    Pulpstar said:


    I think Miliband demands CLegg's head in any deal though...

    As a potential small Labour piece of the jigsaw, I don't care who leads the LibDems in a potential coalition - if we need them as partners and they agree reasonable terms on policies, they can have anyone they like to help implement them.

    Yes - but will Ed Balls work with David Laws in the treasury ;) ?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Pulpstar said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Pulpstar said:


    I think Miliband demands CLegg's head in any deal though...

    As a potential small Labour piece of the jigsaw, I don't care who leads the LibDems in a potential coalition - if we need them as partners and they agree reasonable terms on policies, they can have anyone they like to help implement them.

    Yes - but will Ed Balls work with David Laws in the treasury ;) ?
    Ed Balls & Danny Alexander.....

  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    Pulpstar said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Lib Dems are centrist at the moment, but I can see a mahoosive lurch to the left once they are out of coailition.

    Not necessarily, after all Ed Miliband will be cornering the market in populist irresponsibility. If he is in Number 10, there will therefore be an excellent opening for a fiscally sane party of the centre-left, which is a position the LibDems have (somewhat inconsistently) espoused for a while. As the two Eds lead the country back into crisis, the message 'now you see why we joined the coalition to save the economy' could be quite a strong one for the LibDems.
    Hmm good point - If the Lib Dems go to Farron as the leader and attack Miliband from... the left, I can see the conservatives cleaning up in 2020 !
    UKIP, or some incarnation thereof, will clean up in 2020
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    FrankBooth said:

    ...

    Impossible? The key is surely for Labour to convince their voters that they CAN win. No doubt they wouldn't have been very enthusiastic to go to the polls in 2010 (and they had no chance of winning). Of course Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories. But could Sheffield Hallam be a special case? Would Labour people risk getting a Tory MP to stop Clegg? Given his comments about Miliband it may be worth it.

    "Lord Ashcroft believes the Lib Dem vote is holding up best where they are incumbents and fighting Tories."

    This benefits the Tories. A smaller transfer from LibDem to Labour in these constituencies would maximise the chance of a Conservative win - as the opposition vote is split between the other two.
    You're talking utter bollocks.
    No, I'm not.
    Yes.. yes you are.
    Any explanation why you think I was wrong?
    Take a typical LD/CON marginal - Torbay for instance. The Lib Dem vote holds up, Adrian Sanders remains in place. The Lib Dems switch to the Labour candidate, Kevin Foster gets in. Your example of the Lib Dem vote holding up rather than heading to Labour would probably only help the Conservatives in say hmm... Argyle and Bute, but that is a 4 way marginal and very atypical. In most CON/LD battlegrounds, Labour are pretty much nowhere and the Conservative's best chance is for the Lib Dem vote to head over to Labour.

    Solihull, Hallam, Eastleigh, Torbay, Wells, Westmorland and Lonsdale, Taunton Deane - the list is not a short one...
    Your argument may hold for Argyll and Bute but can't think of anywhere else...
    OK, thanks.

This discussion has been closed.