Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Whatever the polls are saying the memory of GE1992 will giv
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Whatever the polls are saying the memory of GE1992 will give hope to the Tories right to the end
It’s being reported that David Cameron is using John Major’s successful and surprise victory at GE1992 as a model for his party in seventeen months time.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Labour 'approved' Unite's Falkirk skulduggery, says report. So much for Miliband's 'new politics'
Contrast these two statements. Ed Miliband: “I am here to talk about a different politics, a politics that is open. transparent. And trusted. Exactly the opposite of the politics we’ve recently seen in Falkirk. A politics that was closed. A politics of the machine. A politics that is rightly hated. What we saw in Falkirk is part of the death throes of the old politics”. The Unite internal report: “the Labour leadership was well aware of Unite’s political strategy activities in Falkirk, and approved it”.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100246330/labour-approved-unites-falkirk-skulduggery-says-report-so-much-for-milibands-new-politics
Falkirk will have as much resonance with voters as when before GE2010 the "Turnip Taleban" tried to overturn the selection of Liz Truss for Norfolk SW. Both fed pre-conceptions of what the parties were like yet the anti-Truss move got forgotten quickly.
I'd argue that in party image terms the Norfolk message of the Tories being sexist and misogynist was worse than the UNITE influence in Falkirk
Truss won with a better than average 7.4% LAB-CON swing.
Who said this 'storm in a tea cup' would be over by Friday ?
Lol - twice more thanks to you.
Falkirk is not game-changing stuff - it's had no impact yet on VI - and even if it does eventually, it won't amount to much.
But what the scandal HAS done is place Ed personally and Labour squarely on the defensive when they should be extending their effective attacks, and it has given the Tories time to re-group a little. And the longer it drags on as background noise, the more distracting it will be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7enLKrxLrI
Thatcher was actually doing ok until 1989 when broadly neutral ratings rapidly turned sour and government approval went with it (-60 for the Govt & -54 for Thatcher by April 90) - Kinnock benefiting to an extent. Kinnock (-) was not hurt by Major's honeymoon (peak +46 Jan 91, govt -8) and tho govt ratings headed south again (-43 by Feb 92), Major stayed positive, bottoming out at +4 and up to +12 by the GE. Kinnock on the other hand went from neutral 18 months out to -33 by election day.....about where Ed is now......
So, what should we conclude from that? The past is another country?
"The pbTories love cocktails. Someday tim will learn. Possibly"
But not last week, eh?
One does not wish to awake Junior: That said you need to cull your over-use of your Latvain-helpers (or which-ever Mother-fruckahs you use). I am watching (and I am not part of the family-business).
Dundee
01 Letheren
02 Irvine
03 Lockwood
10 Rae
06 Davidson
18 Gallagher Booked
07 Riley (Monti - 92' )
20 McAlister Booked
33 Wighton (McBride - 70' )
09 MacDonald Booked
11 Conroy
Falkirk
01 McClusky
02 McClusky (Len Smate - 72' )
03 McClusky
35 McClusky Booked
06 McClusky Booked
34 McClusky (Lenin - 53' )
07 McClusky
10 McClusky (Len somebody - 59' )
09 McClusky Booked
33 McClusky
11 McGrandles
Despite Labour calls for a boycott, the majority of the public – and many Labour voters – say David Cameron is right to attend the Commonwealth meeting in Sri Lanka
Despite the calls for a boycott coming mainly from Labour, more of their voters (47%) think the Prime Minister is right to attend and use the visit to voice concerns than say he should have boycotted it (28%).
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/17/voters-right-behind-cameron-sri-lanka-visit/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24978728
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24978709
Son, even by your eccentric and emotional outpourings, that was a post all over the shop! A heart-rending crie de coeur. Now breathe deeply and explain to your ever solicitous Uncle John how you are attempting - not terribly successfully - not to answer any of his points.
As for yours, I don't see any problem for the Tories to go for the jugular on Len McCluskley and the grim intimidation of Unite 'leverage'. Or did you confuse that with levitation where you may conceivably have a point.
Dave seems to be heeding Halfon in not bracketing all trade unions, or their members, for attack and he is wise to do so.
As for Lynton Crosby, he's doing a good job for the party. I'm a Tory, you are not. We'll have to differ.
Now, you need calm and tranquility and something to ease the stresses of being an Ed fan. I am here to help. So just for you, enjoy the latest edition of the Hersham Bugle:
http://www.esherwalton.com/sites/www.esherwalton.com/files/hershamnews-nov13.pdf
We couldn't include your copy this time for reasons of taste, but we'll see what we can do for spring 2014.
That could be the least of his worries:
The Co-operative Bank's former chairman Paul Flowers could face criminal charges after police said they are investigating claims that he bought drugs including cocaine and crystal meth.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/17/co-operative-bank-chairman-drugs-paul-flowers?CMP=twt_fd
Who would have thought that this was the last Tory majority for more than 20 years?
But as the ditty goes: - Anything the Canucks can do, we can do better.
Edited to add: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abDFdnknGYs
:mellow-retro:
If anything your appeal is deliberately narrower than it was 2008-2010. Feels like retreat and consolidate rather than advance. The sort of thing you do, if you already have a majority and can afford to lose a few seats.
Like watching Chelsea vs Rhyl, you know who always wins but enjoy both sides own styles...
They just want to win at all costs - even if nefarious means are used.
Enlightening. ..
I believe that the polls will narrow - and then show a Tory lead - in 2014 and into 2015 as the economic recovery gathers strength. If I am right, and I think I am, those extra votes will appear from Labour, Lib Dems, UKIP and non voters in 2010.
We'll see who will be vindicated. That time will come, but it is not November 2013.
Danny '5 million unemployed' Blanchflower:
It was a bit of a surprise to me, I have to say, that the unemployment rate fell this month.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/david-cameron-has-shown-his-hand--austerity--is-really-all-about-shrinking-the-size-of-the-state-8945387.html
Just a reminder the American Grand Prix starts at 7pm. The pre-race piece, with some interesting comments, is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/america-pre-race.html
The Tories have to be still worried about UKIP. Probably hoping to kill them off in 2014 (a big ask during the Euros) and then swing massively to the left at the last minute.
As Richard Tyndall tries to explain - and, obviously, it is over your [bald *] pate - there is a mountain of WWC voters who have switched-off! **
None; no not one; squiddly-dick will vote for your Dhimmie party. You obsess on polls; you ignore local responses and distant observations. Not very bright!
:young-turks:
* © PtP
** "Little-English" will be the retort!
2015 is unlikely to be 97 all over gain (unless Cameron manages to break the [British] Union or something) but unless Tories do an awful lot more than they did in 2010 and are doing now then its likely to be a pretty painful experience for them.
It is an exceptional generous stream of funding from central government. For some local authorities it covers a lot of the costs of the reductions in base grant introduced by the DCLG.
It doesnt cost anything per house. There is a set budget and is distributed accordingly.
Many councils are actually fairly quiet about it. It is accumulative (for a rolling six year period) and can be used on anything a local council does.
Interesting last year you were claiming the low levels of new housing starts was government failure.
Despite polling 22% at the 2005 election, at the comparable stage of the last Parliament the LDs polled an average of just 15% in November 2008. Come 2010 they actually polled 23% gaining 1 and not losing 7. The polls were wrong by 8%. That wasn't caused by changing leaders either, Clegg had been leader nearly a full year by that stage and his party had recovered back to around 22% well before the Leaders Debates too.
The idea that polling mistakes were consigned to history after 1992 or that any swing is a guaranteed lock in is absurd.
Most Councils, Districts and Counties, are mightily miffed by the Government's proposals out of the blue in the summer to top slice upto 40% of the NBH to fund the unaccountable and so far not very effective Local Enterprise Agencies.
(But you misunderstand the purpose of the Bonus in a critical aspect: it is not designed per se for Councils to build housing .... er, a majority of them no longer have their own housing stock having got rid of them through Large Scale Voluntary Transfer as encouraged by Blair and Brown... but as a reward for housing completions in their localities inboth private and public sectors).
Now back to the point. Many Councils, though not prudent, careful and compassionate Elmbridge, have used NHB, sometimes well over a £1 million, to help their base revenue budgets and these Authorities are going to have big big problems posy 2015. We have used the NHB for one-off infrastructure projects, including support for the voluntary sector (no cuts there!) and ones that produce a useful income stream. Now we are being clobbered for doing precisely what the Government wanted us to do.
Think again, Uncle Eric, think again.
One observation: although there is a lot of disillusionment around, I'm not encountering much really intense dislike of anyone compared with the venom at times in the past. I'm not sure that "Vote for us because we aren't the evil other guys" is going to work for anyone. Neither Cameron nor Miliband engender the strong feelings (pro and con) that Brown, Blair, Hague, Howard, Kinnock and Thatcher all generated.
Same goes for a fair section of the LAB vote in CON-LD battlegrounds. Here the Ashcroft polling found that one in 4 were ready to vote yellow to stop blue. By election day LAB voters in those seats will be faced with the choice of either voting yellow or staying red with the increased risk that the dreaded blues will get in.
Many CON posters on PB have no appreciation of the depth of anti-CON feeling.
In first past the post national vote shares don't matter - as UKIP will find.
Also, the post-race piece will be tomorrow, as I've just realised the race will probably end about 15-30 minutes before Homeland comes on.
https://northeasthantsconservatives-admin.conservativewebsites.org.uk/node/43
Will he be the first MP of Sinhalese origin ?
Heck, Blair supposedly took Labour to the centre ground to make them electable, I am continually told, so he didn't take the public to where he wanted to be, he followed them in order to become PM, which lends itself to a claim of not knowing why he wanted it - that might well be unfair, and I'd say it is of Cameron as well.
Cameron's real flaws are enough without the quoted argument.
Are you that down on the Lib-Dems that you're so convinced there's no chance that they'll recover the missing votes? That seems similar Martin of olde calling for a Yellow Taxi.
Despite polling 22% at the 2005 election, at the comparable stage of the last Parliament the LDs polled an average of just 15% in November 2008. Come 2010 they actually polled 23% gaining 1 and not losing 7. The polls were wrong by 8%. That wasn't caused by changing leaders either, Clegg had been leader nearly a full year by that stage and his party had recovered back to around 22% well before the Leaders Debates too.
The idea that polling mistakes were consigned to history after 1992 or that any swing is a guaranteed lock in is absurd.
It is possible there are errors in the polling, and I for one do believe the LDs will recover a fair amount of their former voters come crunch time (and what I suspect will be a different leader in 2015, regardless of the fact Clegg did not force his party down this path without their consent), but I think the point is valid that the large number of 2010 LDs who immediately jumped ship because of the Coalition, prior to most of the cock ups that have since occurred, and the sheer resilience and consistency of that figure for more than 3 years now, suggests that while they may recover more voters than some fear, it won't eliminate it as an issue.
Add to that Labour needing less votes for a majority, requiring only a small boost from the 2010 figure - which could be easily attainable simply from the party being somewhat rejuvenated by opposition (if not enough for my taste) - and the Tories having trouble motivating their base with attacks from UKIP and the right, then I think the point that Cameron having been leader for so long could mean he won't find it easy to bring on board those who are not already with him, or tempt back those who have left, which the relative freshness of Major in 1992 had more potential for.
'Many CON posters on PB have no appreciation of the depth of anti-CON feeling.'
Or the anti-Lib Dem feeling after the student fees fiasco,thousands of grateful students & parents.
In 1992, Major had been leader of the Conservative Party for less than 2 years and was a fresh face at least. Cameron has been leader for over 8 years and is no fresh face.
In 1992, Major had a majority of greater than 80 (100 if you went back to the election). Cameron doesn't even have a majority.
1n 1992, the opposition was divided (still), the Conservatives temporarily united. Now, the opposition is more united than since the 1930's, the right is now thoroughly split thanks to Cameron's brilliant political management.
But I agree, a 1997 wipeout isn't on the cards.
Yes, the situation is still messed up and that's very bad and no doubt there's more that could have been done by us (or just not getting involved at all), but it genuinely is not directly comparable to Afghanistan or Iraq in terms of our national culpability re postwar planning.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/08/27/ipsos-mori-party-like-dislike-ratings-raise-doubts-about-the-partys-future-progress/
As the recent polling showed.....
Words fail me. You won't hear from me again.
- Mosson, a former Clyde shipyard worker, said the recent announcement by BAE Systems to cut more than 800 jobs in Scotland had strengthened his belief in independence. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/former-glasgow-lord-provost-labour-2801772
Is he ashamed to call himself a banker ?
"In that role I was also able to give the Treasury’s support for a new Private Members Bill that led to the creation of the first ever ‘super-mutual’ bringing Britannia Building Society and the Co-op Bank together in the interests of customers, rather than the banking elite."
http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=1066
If they had lost in 1992 to a largely unreconstructed Kinnochite party they may well have been back in 1997. Blair and Brown may not have had power at all.
He's more than just a former Lord Provost of Glasgow ;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/346224.stm
http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=1066