It's quite another for Farage to keep the bandwagon rolling in a dogfight GE campaign that will be dominated by the economy. The kippers have the advantage that neither Osbrowne or Balls are covering themselves in glory on that. Turning that advantage into solid GE votes instead of a disposable protest vote won't be so easy. Farage will also find himself in Crosby's crosshairs just like little Ed.
Energy prices alone might give Mr Farage all the 'better off with UKIP' economic ammunition he needs.
We often discuss dead ducks on PB - this morning I discovered a very large and very dead mallard behind my front door. It had clearly been abducted as it went for an early morning constitutional. If someone hadn't tucked in - I'd have plucked it and had it for dinner myself.
In 15yrs here - that's the first one to literally fall fowl of my cats who can barely be bothered with a sparrow - and now are too lazy to even attempt to catch a bluebottle bashing its brains out on a window - they just lie in the sunshine and glance over occasionally as if saying Shhh. This even applies to the kittens. If they were humans, I'd be calling them dole scroungers...
My previous kitties would be pressed against the glass and knocking over delicate objects as they flung themselves around.
Mr. Dave, that's a fair point. The cosy consensus of climate change believers in the leadership of the three major parties gives UKIP an obvious opening which would save people a signifcant sum per year on energy bills.
"Doesn't think just mean either a continuation of the coalition or, more likely, a Conservative minority government for 6-12 months and then a new election?"
Oh, I doubt it. You seem to be ignoring two things:
1. Cameron has worked so hard on pissing off "natural" Conservative voters that the swing-back effect might well be much smaller than normal
2. UKIP, maybe, just maybe, this party is actually the 21st century version of Labour. I am sure that in the early 20th century people in the Liberal, and indeed Conservative Parties, were dismissing Labour as a party of fruitcakes, loonies and luddites and a vote for them was a wasted vote. I dunno, but there are a lot of not very wealthy working voters looking for a party that will represent their interests. As someone said the other day the main parties have become fixated with the swing voters in marginal seats they are actually forgetting everyone else who are outside their special interest groups.
Labour looks very vulnerable to swingback to me. The fact they have never consistently broken the 45% share and 10% lead barriers offeres fundamental questions about whats going to happen when the public inevitably start to swing back to the government in the next year (it may already have started) particularly as Labour is the only show in town in terms of Opposition to the government in Parliament.
At the very best I reakon Labour is looking at being the largest party in a hung parliament, but in such a tight election it only takes a few marginals to buck the trend and suddenly Cameron is back with a continuation of the Coalition and Labour is out of power for a decade - You certainly can't rule this out on the numbers we're looking at in the mid term period when the Tories should be in its biggest hole and Labour should be streets ahead.
Re. the 2010 election. We've been over this a lot in recent years, but IMO the number one problem was that they just didn't sucessfully pin the blame for our econimic plight on Gordon Brown and the Labour government.
They should have hammered Brown day in and day out on his economic record. The election should have been a referendum on Browns government virtually to the exclusion of everything else.
Instead the Tories got caught up in the "Big Society" clap trap and most damagingly they allowed the election once again to become a referendum on Tory policies (this is something Labour also did in 2001 and 2005)
Of course, the TV debates were an added complication - Though I can't criticise the Conservatives for agreeing to them, because it was the right thing to do and hopefully we'll have them as part of out election campaigns forever now.
If nothing else, the 2015 election will be the first general election since 1997 that won't be faught almost exclusively on Tory spending plans and fear of what a Tory government might do, so if only for that reason alone we should probably expect 2015 campaign to have a very different feel.
If Cameron is smart (no laughing at the back Tim) the Tories might just turn the election campaign into fear of what a Labour government might do, especially if Ed Miliband really does think this is the time to end the Thatcherite consensus and that Britain is ready to move left...
Paddy Power have an interesting bet (for small stakes): will the Lib Dems poll 14% or more with YouGov this year? 1/4 for yes and 5/2 for no.
This is the graph of Lib Dem polling with YouGov since 2010. So far as I can see, the Lib Dems never got to 14% in either 2011 or 2012. There are signs that they are creeping up marginally in the polls, and it only takes one outlier...
I have put a bet on no, but recognise this is a very risky bet.
Energy prices alone might give Mr Farage all the 'better off with UKIP' economic ammunition he needs.
It's a good protest vote issue and should prove effective at the locals for a start. What it isn't is the answer to the problem Farage will have when the voters ask who will be the UKIP Chancellor or indeed any of the other big policy area jobs.
Good local election results are a vital step for any serious party but they are very far from being an automatic path to power or guaranteed big GE voteshare. Same with EU elections.
Ashcroft had a poll with a focus on BME voters. 57% of them can't name a BME senior politicians. Fair enough...but 3% of them replied to that question with "Ed Miliband"
Re swingback - I'm intrigued as to Labour's declining poll ratings across the firms - that 14 lead from YouGov of only a couple of weeks ago seems an outlier by some way.
Is it the nostalgia re Thatcher vs Labour of old for those of us over 40+ who actually experienced it, nostalgia for those who wish the more rosy myths were true, that her strength of character seems largely missing from the stage today and we'd like more of it? The very vocal but small band of Mrs T haters clearly don't reflect what most of the public believe or think.
I can't think of anything other than this event that could be affecting polling right now - we haven't had a significant political story in weeks.
Energy prices alone might give Mr Farage all the 'better off with UKIP' economic ammunition he needs.
It's a good protest vote issue and should prove effective at the locals for a start.
Given that UKIP seem to be the only party opposing HS2, I hope someone produces a map after the May 2nd elections showing the HS2 route & UKIP support density.
What it isn't is the answer to the problem Farage will have when the voters ask who will be the UKIP Chancellor or indeed any of the other big policy area jobs.
I'm not sure that's such a biggie. It helps for UKIP to have more than one persuasive talking head for media appearances, but I don't think it much matters what their job title is.
Or which can convince them that its principal opponents can’t.
Is this the new left-wing way to spend principle? - presumably based on the 13 years of Labour government with no or few principles. Certainly, the principal and average quality of human capital resident in the UK was very much damaged.
Ashcroft had a poll with a focus on BME voters. 57% of them can't name a BME senior politicians. Fair enough...but 3% of them replied to that question with "Ed Miliband"
Not even Diane Abbott? She'll be crushed. TBH, if I wasn't interested in politics to such an anorakish level - I'd be hard pushed to name any either.
David Lammy - but only for the riots, and ermmm... that Indian bloke who's always on the telly but don't know what he does [Keith Vaz]
Re swingback - I'm intrigued as to Labour's declining poll ratings across the firms - that 14 lead from YouGov of only a couple of weeks ago seems an outlier by some way.
Is it the nostalgia re Thatcher vs Labour of old for those of us over 40+ who actually experienced it, nostalgia for those who wish the more rosy myths were true, that her strength of character seems largely missing from the stage today and we'd like more of it? The very vocal but small band of Mrs T haters clearly don't reflect what most of the public believe or think.
I can't think of anything other than this event that could be affecting polling right now - we haven't had a significant political story in weeks.
Labour's poll ratings have been pretty steady. What seems to be fluctuating quite a bit is the Tory vote.
Not for locals or the Euro elections. I guarantee you that if UKIP are still polling as high come the GE campaign it's going to be an issue. The other parties will make sure of it.
@GIN1138 There's nothing inevitable about swingback. It may well happen, but it doesn't have to.
Disagree. There hasn't been an election yet where the governing party has polled worse at the subsequant election than they did in the mid term of the Parliament.
Look at any Parliament going back to 1970 and theres always an element of singback to the government from the middle year of that Parliament (the exception maybe the 1997-2001 Parliament if you remove the fuel strikes in September 2000 which was very anomalous, Blairs lead was pretty consistent from start to finish)
Ashcroft had a poll with a focus on BME voters. 57% of them can't name a BME senior politicians. Fair enough...but 3% of them replied to that question with "Ed Miliband"
Maybe they think the fact that Ed is Jewish makes him a BME.
@MikeSmithson The whole psychology of the bet is disorienting - betting on something not happening that clearly very well might, and might happen even if nothing particular has happened to change the underlying position. I accept it's an odds against bet, but YouGov polling has consistently for two years rated the Lib Dems below 14%, and some regard has to be had to that consistent rating with this pollster. I don't think it's a 5/2 shot, but something more like 7/4.
I was very sorry not to be able to come last night. I had originally planned to, but had to change my plans to deal with the aftermath of a flood in my basement in Hungary. I have the compensation that the weather here is good and I'm going out for a bike ride in a bit. It sounds as though it was a good night and I missed out.
@GIN1138 There's nothing inevitable about swingback. It may well happen, but it doesn't have to.
Disagree. There hasn't been an election yet where the governing party has polled worse at the subsequant election than they did in the mid term of the Parliament.
Look at any Parliament going back to 1970 and theres always an element of singback to the government from the middle year of that Parliament (the exception maybe the 1997-2001 Parliament if you remove the fuel strikes in September 2000 which was very anomalous, Blairs lead was pretty consistent from start to finish)
When was the last time a governing party got a higher percentage of the vote than it received in the previous election?
Ashcroft had a poll with a focus on BME voters. 57% of them can't name a BME senior politicians. Fair enough...but 3% of them replied to that question with "Ed Miliband"
Not even Diane Abbott? She'll be crushed. TBH, if I wasn't interested in politics to such an anorakish level - I'd be hard pushed to name any either.
David Lammy - but only for the riots, and ermmm... that Indian bloke who's always on the telly but don't know what he does [Keith Vaz]
10% named Keith Vaz. 4% Warsi 3% Diane and Ed, 2% Galloway
Not for locals or the Euro elections. I guarantee you that if UKIP are still polling as high come the GE campaign it's going to be an issue. The other parties will make sure of it.
Other parties will try to make it an issue, the voters won't give a fig.
Any UKIP spokesbod can give the highlights of their policy on xyz. No-one in the audience will really expect UKIP to win majority, and fill the cabinet posts, so the terror of Mr X as Chancellor of the Exchequer will be a hard sell.
Re Shadsy's odds re UKIP seats - hmm. I think KIppers could gain 100+ but it all depends on how many councillors who have already defected to UKIP retain their seats on a personal vote under the UKIP banner instead - its easy to swap sides mid-term, and then get squished when the Big Three vote gets out.
I've tripped across numerous reports on Twitter of LCs swapping sides from the Tories but no idea of numbers. Anyone have the stats?
Other parties will try to make it an issue, the voters won't give a fig.
Any UKIP spokesbod can give the highlights of their policy on xyz. No-one in the audience will really expect UKIP to win majority, and fill the cabinet posts, so the terror of Mr X as Chancellor of the Exchequer will be a hard sell.
We'll see. If you think it doesn't matter to the voter that UKIP are selling them supposedly serious policies but can't answer such basic questions as "who will be your Chancellor?" in a GE campaign, that will be dominated by the economy, then I fear you are very much mistaken.
If you are selling UKIP as 'nobody expects them to win' then don't be surprised if the voter thinks UKIP are little more than a disposable protest vote come the GE. There's a huge difference between an expectation of a victory and looking like a serious party. Nobody expects the lib dems to win but they sure aren't dumb enough not to have somebody as shadow chancellor at a GE. Having one like Vince meant more coverage and participation in the shadow chancellor debates etc. in the elections in 2010 and because they have a shadow cabinet it might explain why they can win seats while Farage as a one man band still can't.
It's only a "terror" if Farage either can't or won't find somebody credible to be in that post.
Apart from the proven anomalies of FPTP one other area to factor in, is what I suspect, will be the very significant differential swing in the marginals.
I expect the swing to be hugely smaller in the marginals - akin and indeed smaller than in 1992.
Other parties will try to make it an issue, the voters won't give a fig.
Any UKIP spokesbod can give the highlights of their policy on xyz. No-one in the audience will really expect UKIP to win majority, and fill the cabinet posts, so the terror of Mr X as Chancellor of the Exchequer will be a hard sell.
We'll see. If you think it doesn't matter to the voter that UKIP are selling them wonder policies but can't answer such basic questions as "who will be your Chancellor?", in a GE campaign that will be dominated by the economy, then I fear you are very much mistaken.
If you are selling UKIP as 'nobody expects them to win' then don't be surprised if not that many vote for them come the GE. THere's a difference between an expectation of a voctory and looking liek a serious party. Nobody expects the lib dems to win but they sure aren't dumb enough not to have somebody as shadow chancellor at a GE. Having one like Vince meant more coverage and participation in the shadow chancellor debates etc. in the elections in 2010 and because they have a shadow cabinet it might explain why they can win seats while Farage as a one man band still can't.
It's only a "terror" if Farage either can't or won't find somebody credible to be in that post.
When they launched their current local election campaign, the Conservatives didn't mention UKIP at all. All the other parties dismiss them as a protest vote. I'm not at all convinced that strategy will change.
I believe research says people vote for a party on perceived values rather than policies. How many voters could name the current Chancellor of the Exchequer? The Labour Shadow Chancellor?
A fluent talking head is an asset. I do not think it matters what their job title is.
RT @amandacarpenter: Tamerlan's best friend and two other men found dead with their throats slit 2 years ago--murders went unsolved http://t.co/toCkep34W9
That's the second time I've seen that PEB and it gets better - slick but not glossy, exactly the demographics I'd expect to see, the messaging is clear and plain speaking. Absolutely no aspirational bollox - it made me think of the Thatcher campaign way back when she started out.
If Kippers keep that up - I can see it convincing a lot of NOTA voters across the spectrum that its worth trotting down to the polling station.
To be clear, the Kippers don't need to have every single undersecretary or obscure shadow cabinet post. But not to have anybody in mind for the Chancellor? Come on, it matters.
The big three of Foreign Secretary Home Secretary and Chancellor should at least be given serious thought or why should the voter bother to think of UKIP other than a one man band disposable protest vote? All those new members won't matter if there can't be found among them any credible candidates for serious posts.
I think it was Carlotta or Carolah on here that said the people in the video look more like normal people than in most PPBs... It turns out that a lot are UKIP members, the cabbie is a real cabbie, the young bloke talkling about Grammar schools is Michael Heaver who writes the Ukipian
I think thats a good thingfor them, that the people runnung the show have the common touch
I believe research says people vote for a party on perceived values rather than policies.
You can't have one without the other and having policies mean looking like you take them seriously enough to have someone in mind to be in charge of and enact them.
"I believe research says people vote for a party on perceived values rather than policies."
Gosh, Mr. Dave, if that is true Cameron is doubly screwed. What values (aka principles) does he have? He has never convinced me he believes in anything other than he would make a jolly good PM.
From the Telegraph, I see they have a debate between Janet Daley and Benedict Brogan as to whether Cameron believes anything.and from the same source there is the article, which explains why Cameron cannot, bar some unforeseeable event, cannot win a majority (ignore the headline,as so often these days its doesn't match the text):
I think it was Carlotta or Carolah on here that said the people in the video look more like normal people than in most PPBs... It turns out that a lot are UKIP members, the cabbie is a real cabbie, the young bloke talkling about Grammar schools is Michael Heaver who writes the Ukipian
I think thats a good thingfor them, that the people running the show have the common touch
Ah, not just me then - and the first thing I noticed about Michael Heaver who is great value on Twitter - were his blue socks. I couldn't help feeling that was quite a subtle little appeal... :^ )
I wonder if the reason the PEB feels so authentic is because Kippers haven't yet fallen into the trap of being lead by PR gurus and hence over-packaged. They'll get there eventually - but its good to see them moving on from amateurish. That logo has go - it is so wrong on so many levels...
Youre probably right, that was a bit of a hasty post by me.
Amazing how the word racist has become flexible enough to encompass people of the same colour & race isnt it? I have never thought of Bulgarians or Romanians as a different race to me (I am white with English/Irish background), but UKIP is deemed racist for not wanting uncontrolled immigration from those countries.
If fans sing that horrible bonfire song about Berbatov or Petrov is it disgusting abuse or disgusting racist abuse?
I believe research says people vote for a party on perceived values rather than policies.
You can't have one without the other and having policies mean looking like you take them seriously enough to have someone in mind to be in charge of and enact them.
OK.
If we assume that approaching the 2015 election UKIP are polling >20%, and the other parties have decided to address them seriously, rather than just calling them names.
In that case, UKIP will name their most convincing spokesbods, to what they consider the most important job titles.
The other parties will then have to establish in the minds of the voters that the shadow-shadow chancellor is Mr/Ms X, and that Mr/Ms X is a Danger-To-The-Nation. It's a hard sell. I don't think it will happen.
I think it was Carlotta or Carolah on here that said the people in the video look more like normal people than in most PPBs... It turns out that a lot are UKIP members, the cabbie is a real cabbie, the young bloke talkling about Grammar schools is Michael Heaver who writes the Ukipian
I think thats a good thingfor them, that the people running the show have the common touch
Ah, not just me then - and the first thing I noticed about Michael Heaver who is great value on Twitter - were his blue socks. I couldn't help feeling that was quite a subtle little appeal... :^ )
I wonder if the reason the PEB feels so authentic is because Kippers haven't yet fallen into the trap of being lead by PR gurus and hence over-packaged. They'll get there eventually - but its good to see them moving on from amateurish. That logo has go - it is so wrong on so many levels...
The other parties will then have to establish in the minds of the voters that the shadow-shadow chancellor is Mr/Ms X, and that Mr/Ms X is a Danger-To-The-Nation. It's a hard sell. I don't think it will happen.
It happens at every single general election. All the big parties do it to each other. That's politics. It's also the price of being taken seriously. You either overcome it, get credible figures and beat them at it or it's back to Farage flying about in a plane on GE day.
@GIN1138 There's nothing inevitable about swingback. It may well happen, but it doesn't have to.
Disagree. There hasn't been an election yet where the governing party has polled worse at the subsequant election than they did in the mid term of the Parliament.
Look at any Parliament going back to 1970 and theres always an element of singback to the government from the middle year of that Parliament (the exception maybe the 1997-2001 Parliament if you remove the fuel strikes in September 2000 which was very anomalous, Blairs lead was pretty consistent from start to finish)
When was the last time a governing party got a higher percentage of the vote than it received in the previous election?
1955 I think. The Conservatives will certainly struggle to improve their share of the vote on 2010, but then they don't have to deprive Labour of a majority - And "swingback" doesn't say that either. It just says the Conservatives will do better than they are currently polling and Labour will do worse.
I think we can all agree on the current numbers we're almost certainly looking at another hung parliament?
In which case the issue is which party becomes the largest party. That hinges, literally on a few 100,000 votes and a few seats.
Re swingback - I'm intrigued as to Labour's declining poll ratings across the firms - that 14 lead from YouGov of only a couple of weeks ago seems an outlier by some way.
Is it the nostalgia re Thatcher vs Labour of old for those of us over 40+ who actually experienced it, nostalgia for those who wish the more rosy myths were true, that her strength of character seems largely missing from the stage today and we'd like more of it? The very vocal but small band of Mrs T haters clearly don't reflect what most of the public believe or think.
I can't think of anything other than this event that could be affecting polling right now - we haven't had a significant political story in weeks.
Labour's poll ratings have been pretty steady. What seems to be fluctuating quite a bit is the Tory vote.
I'm genuinely puzzled how one can look at the polling trend chart below and describe the Labour share as "steady"; unless it's the decline that started last autumn that is the "steady" feature being commented on.
The other parties will then have to establish in the minds of the voters that the shadow-shadow chancellor is Mr/Ms X, and that Mr/Ms X is a Danger-To-The-Nation. It's a hard sell. I don't think it will happen.
It happens at every single general election. All the big parties do it to each other. That's politics. It's also the price of being taken seriously. You either overcome it, get credible figures and beat them at it or it's back to Farage flying about in a plane on GE day.
If the UKIP wave carries them into contender status in 2015, they will have produced competent spokesbods. That's all they need.
However well UKIP poll, the Conservatives main opponent at the 2015 election will be Labour. Labour's main opponent will be the Conservatives. The LDs main opponent will be the Conservatives.
MikeK came with a fistful of envelopes and settled a number of outstanding bets and there were the usual regulars.
He did indeed, and being a thoroughly virtuous little pbTory, the winnings, all £50 of them, were handed over to the Poster In Chief towards the upkeep of this hallowed site. The alternative would have been still more cocktails with Neil!
It is of course in Cameron's interest to brand UKIP as racist, that's why he does it. If the party to the right of the Tories is an openly racist party such as the BNP then it puts a cap on their appeal, Daves branding of UKIP is simply an attempt to put that cap on UKIP
To be fair Michael Howard also branded UKIP "cranks, gadflies and extremists". Not quite as harsh as Cammie's "loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists" but then Cammie also tried to arrogantly dismiss Clegg as his "favourite joke".
Don't think many tories were laughing too hard when Clegg killed the boundary changes. ;^)
"That hinges, literally on a few 100,000 votes and a few seats."
That is certainly the traditional view, Mr. Gin, and the reason for the main parties' obsession with this 4% of voters. What the surge in UKIP support in the polls, and membership, might be telling us is that the traditional view may no longer hold good.
The bedrock of the 4% obsession, if you'll forgive the term, is that the parties' core vote will turn out for them anyway and so can safely be ignored. Is it not possible that view, on which Cameron, at least, seems to have based his leadership of his party, no longer holds true.
"I believe research says people vote for a party on perceived values rather than policies."
Gosh, Mr. Dave, if that is true Cameron is doubly screwed. What values (aka principles) does he have? He has never convinced me he believes in anything other than he would make a jolly good PM.
From the Telegraph, I see they have a debate between Janet Daley and Benedict Brogan as to whether Cameron believes anything.and from the same source there is the article, which explains why Cameron cannot, bar some unforeseeable event, cannot win a majority (ignore the headline,as so often these days its doesn't match the text):
If the UKIP wave carries them into contender status in 2015, they will have produced competent spokesbods. That's all they need.
It 's not all they need but it's another big step in being a serious party in contention if that is Farage's aim for UKIP.
As for who is contending with who I wouldn't disagree but that's hardly going to stop any of the parties attacking each other when it suits them. The lib dems will want to go hard at the tories in the tory marginals but they won't be praising little Ed and labour even after being in coalition with the tories. Nor will the tories feel much regret when they go after the lib dems in those marginals while still attacking labour and indeed Farage and UKIP.
I think it was Carlotta or Carolah on here that said the people in the video look more like normal people than in most PPBs... It turns out that a lot are UKIP members, the cabbie is a real cabbie, the young bloke talkling about Grammar schools is Michael Heaver who writes the Ukipian
I think thats a good thingfor them, that the people running the show have the common touch
Ah, not just me then - and the first thing I noticed about Michael Heaver who is great value on Twitter - were his blue socks. I couldn't help feeling that was quite a subtle little appeal... :^ )
I wonder if the reason the PEB feels so authentic is because Kippers haven't yet fallen into the trap of being lead by PR gurus and hence over-packaged. They'll get there eventually - but its good to see them moving on from amateurish. That logo has go - it is so wrong on so many levels...
Regarding the logo, Farage said on last weeks Sunday Politics SE that it was going. He was also asked whether the name was going to change and he ruled it out although said it was now UKIP not the UK Independence Party
If the UKIP wave carries them into contender status in 2015, they will have produced competent spokesbods. That's all they need.
It 's not all they need but it's another big step in being a serious party in contention if that is Farage's aim for UKIP.
As for who is contending with who I wouldn't disagree but that's hardly going to stop any of the parties attacking each other when it suits them. The lib dems will want to go hard at the tories in the tory marginals but they won't be praising little Ed and labour even after being in coalition with the tories. Nor will the tories feel much regret when they go after the lib dems in those marginals while still attacking labour and indeed Farage and UKIP.
While we're playing what if.
If UKIP are contenders in 2015, then the run-up to the election may well be dominated by the in/out EU referendum to be held on the same date. :-)
If UKIP are contenders in 2015, then the run-up to the election may well be dominated by the in/out EU referendum to be held on the same date. :-)
About as much chance of Cammie's Cast Iron Referendum being held in 2015 as there is of it being held at any other time in the future. Which would be very little indeed.
Another TV question - did anyone see Luther - a crime detective series with black bloke playing lead a la Columbo? Apparently its now on S3.
I've never heard of it but its got great reviews - was on BBC/US telly.
Someone mentioned Southland the other day - @Peter_2? I had a looksee and it seemed a bit *gritty* even more me, but will give it a shot. Will report back...
If UKIP are contenders in 2015, then the run-up to the election may well be dominated by the in/out EU referendum to be held on the same date. :-)
About as much chance of Cammie's Cast Iron Referendum being held in 2015 as there is of it being held at any other time in the future. Which would be very little indeed.
Not so!
We have agreed in this 2015 scenario that all the other parties; Conservative, Labour and LDs, perceive UKIP as a threat. The obvious response is to call the in/out referendum before/with the general election.
Another TV question - did anyone see Luther - a crime detective series with black bloke playing lead a la Columbo? Apparently its now on S3.
I've never heard of it but its got great reviews - was on BBC/US telly.
Someone mentioned Southland the other day - @Peter_2? I had a looksee and it seemed a bit *gritty* even more me, but will give it a shot. Will report back...
There's also a new Sci-Fi series "Defiance". The pilot was OK.
We have agreed in this 2015 scenario that all the other parties; Conservative, Labour and LDs, perceive UKIP as a threat. The obvious response is to call the in/out referendum before/with the general election.
Labour and the lib dems might do a little posturing to appease some Kipper waverers but the fact of the matter is if the UKIP vote remains high enough and they don't implode before 2015 then Cammie won't be able to ignore them and he will no choice but to take them on. That runs the danger of giving UKIP more publicity but it just won't be credible to blithely dismiss them again as fruitcakes and closet racists if they are polling highly. Unless UKIP give him that ammo and that is far from certain.
Cammie has been stupid enough to focus on Europe and immigration to somehow try and outkip the kippers, (with all too predictable and amusing results) yet even he likely won't be mad enough to want the GE campaign to be dominated by Europe if UKIP are doing well. He absolutely won't want too much attention on his Cast Iron pledge for a referendum considering how flimsy it is so he's not about to poke about in that Eurosceptic wasps nest at the election unless he has a death wish.
It's going to be dominated by the economy anyway, like it or not.
We have agreed in this 2015 scenario that all the other parties; Conservative, Labour and LDs, perceive UKIP as a threat. The obvious response is to call the in/out referendum before/with the general election.
Cammie has been stupid enough to focus on Europe and immigration to somehow try and outkip the kippers, (with all too predictable and amusing results) yet even he likely won't be mad enough to want the GE campaign to be dominated by Europe if UKIP are doing well.
The only time this parliament that the Conservatives have taken significant support from Labour was the 'vetogasm'.
Calling an in/out referendum would actually be a popular move. And we have agreed in this 2015 the Conservatives are desperate.
Another TV question - did anyone see Luther - a crime detective series with black bloke playing lead a la Columbo? Apparently its now on S3.
I've never heard of it but its got great reviews - was on BBC/US telly.
Someone mentioned Southland the other day - @Peter_2? I had a looksee and it seemed a bit *gritty* even more me, but will give it a shot. Will report back...
There's also a new Sci-Fi series "Defiance". The pilot was OK.
I've got that teed up to watch after I've caught up with Grimm and Once Upon A Time special. I rather liked DaVinci's Demons as a mix of Shakespeare in Love meets Game of Thrones...
Revolution is quite watchable on a wet afternoon. I remain unconvinced by Hannibal - its just trying far too hard and can't work out what its trying to be a) Criminal Minds b) Mystery/Thriller c) Psycho d) All Three and flaying about
Another TV question - did anyone see Luther - a crime detective series with black bloke playing lead a la Columbo? Apparently its now on S3.
I've never heard of it but its got great reviews - was on BBC/US telly.
Someone mentioned Southland the other day - @Peter_2? I had a looksee and it seemed a bit *gritty* even more me, but will give it a shot. Will report back...
There's also a new Sci-Fi series "Defiance". The pilot was OK.
I've got that teed up to watch after I've caught up with Grimm and Once Upon A Time special. I rather liked DaVinci's Demons as a mix of Shakespeare in Love meets Game of Thrones...
Revolution is quite watchable on a wet afternoon. I remain unconvinced by Hannibal - its just trying far too hard and can't work out what its trying to be a) Criminal Minds b) Mystery/Thriller c) Psycho d) All Three and flaying about
I watched some of Grimm after you mentioned it before. I like it! Also watched some 'Haven' episodes, which looks good so far.
The only time this parliament that the Conservatives have taken significant support from Labour was the 'vetogasm'.
It was the flounce bounce and it was a bounce for a reason. It also wasn't even a proper flounce as his gullible eurosceptic MPs later found out to their anger.
The biggest lasting shift in the conservative polling is crystal clear in that graph below for you to see. It was Osbrowne's omnishambles budget. Nothing to do with Europe.
As gratifying as UKIP no doubt find it that Cammie keeps idiotically posturing on their core issues it's not going to last. Crosby is there to attack little Ed and make the next election all about not trusting labour on the economy again. He might also have to go after Farage but he's hardly going to do so nicely or on a subject Farage loves talking about like Europe.
The only time this parliament that the Conservatives have taken significant support from Labour was the 'vetogasm'.
It was the flounce bounce and it was a bounce for a reason. It also wasn't even a proper flounce as his gullible eurosceptic MPs later found out to their anger.
The biggest lasting shift in the conservative polling is crystal clear in that graph below for you to see. It was Osbrowne's omnishambles budget. Nothing to do with Europe.
As gratifying as UKIP no doubt find it that Cammie keeps idiotically posturing on their core issues it's not going to last. Crosby is there to attack little Ed and make the next election all about not trusting labour on the economy again. He might also have to go after Farage but he's hardly going to do so nicely or on a subject Farage loves talking about like Europe.
No. The 'bounce-bubble-vetogasm' is the only change in the Conservatives polling trend I see. A positive uplift, that deflated and returned to trend once it became clear that HMG were not in fact going to stand up for the UK.
No. The 'bounce-bubble-vetogasm' is the only change in the Conservatives polling trend I see.
Then you aren't looking very hard. The tories polling falls off sharply at the time of the omnishambles budget and that gap has stayed there pretty much as is ever since.
The flounce bounce evaporated and if Europe really was a winner then why did Cammie's EU speech of a lifetime where he announced a referendum also have a small uptick and then fall off again very quickly?
That UKIP tend see everything through a Europe lens is not news. The polling however is clear and there is also very little prospect of Europe being the defining issue of the 2015 general election. No matter how much that would please Farage. It's going to be the economy.
No. The 'bounce-bubble-vetogasm' is the only change in the Conservatives polling trend I see.
Then you aren't looking very hard. The tories polling falls off sharply at the time of the omnishambles budget and that gap has stayed there pretty much as is ever since.
The flounce bounce evaporated and if Europe really was a winner then why did Cammie's EU speech of a lifetime where he announced a referendum also have a small uptick and then fall off again very quickly?
Because it was words rather than action.
If, maybe, then, perhaps. Is a different offer than "here and now".
Comments
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2
is the graph of Lib Dem polling with YouGov (omitted by accident from the last post).
In 15yrs here - that's the first one to literally fall fowl of my cats who can barely be bothered with a sparrow - and now are too lazy to even attempt to catch a bluebottle bashing its brains out on a window - they just lie in the sunshine and glance over occasionally as if saying Shhh. This even applies to the kittens. If they were humans, I'd be calling them dole scroungers...
My previous kitties would be pressed against the glass and knocking over delicate objects as they flung themselves around.
Others with penalties (from China) are Gutierrez (5 places) and Webber (3 places).
Oh, I doubt it. You seem to be ignoring two things:
1. Cameron has worked so hard on pissing off "natural" Conservative voters that the swing-back effect might well be much smaller than normal
2. UKIP, maybe, just maybe, this party is actually the 21st century version of Labour. I am sure that in the early 20th century people in the Liberal, and indeed Conservative Parties, were dismissing Labour as a party of fruitcakes, loonies and luddites and a vote for them was a wasted vote. I dunno, but there are a lot of not very wealthy working voters looking for a party that will represent their interests. As someone said the other day the main parties have become fixated with the swing voters in marginal seats they are actually forgetting everyone else who are outside their special interest groups.
Labour looks very vulnerable to swingback to me. The fact they have never consistently broken the 45% share and 10% lead barriers offeres fundamental questions about whats going to happen when the public inevitably start to swing back to the government in the next year (it may already have started) particularly as Labour is the only show in town in terms of Opposition to the government in Parliament.
At the very best I reakon Labour is looking at being the largest party in a hung parliament, but in such a tight election it only takes a few marginals to buck the trend and suddenly Cameron is back with a continuation of the Coalition and Labour is out of power for a decade - You certainly can't rule this out on the numbers we're looking at in the mid term period when the Tories should be in its biggest hole and Labour should be streets ahead.
Re. the 2010 election. We've been over this a lot in recent years, but IMO the number one problem was that they just didn't sucessfully pin the blame for our econimic plight on Gordon Brown and the Labour government.
They should have hammered Brown day in and day out on his economic record. The election should have been a referendum on Browns government virtually to the exclusion of everything else.
Instead the Tories got caught up in the "Big Society" clap trap and most damagingly they allowed the election once again to become a referendum on Tory policies (this is something Labour also did in 2001 and 2005)
Of course, the TV debates were an added complication - Though I can't criticise the Conservatives for agreeing to them, because it was the right thing to do and hopefully we'll have them as part of out election campaigns forever now.
If nothing else, the 2015 election will be the first general election since 1997 that won't be faught almost exclusively on Tory spending plans and fear of what a Tory government might do, so if only for that reason alone we should probably expect 2015 campaign to have a very different feel.
If Cameron is smart (no laughing at the back Tim) the Tories might just turn the election campaign into fear of what a Labour government might do, especially if Ed Miliband really does think this is the time to end the Thatcherite consensus and that Britain is ready to move left...
The price on the LD share being 14%± with YouGov is just too tight. Yet with five daily polls a week there are lots of opportunities for an outlier.
Incidentally we missed you at Dirty Dicks last night.
It was one of the best gatherings and it was great to see a lot of new faces.
Pulpstar and Blue Rog came down from Yorkshire while TSE travelled from Manchester.
MikeK came with a fistful of envelopes and settled a number of outstanding bets and there were the usual regulars.
What it isn't is the answer to the problem Farage will have when the voters ask who will be the UKIP Chancellor or indeed any of the other big policy area jobs.
Good local election results are a vital step for any serious party but they are very far from being an automatic path to power or guaranteed big GE voteshare. Same with EU elections.
Is it the nostalgia re Thatcher vs Labour of old for those of us over 40+ who actually experienced it, nostalgia for those who wish the more rosy myths were true, that her strength of character seems largely missing from the stage today and we'd like more of it? The very vocal but small band of Mrs T haters clearly don't reflect what most of the public believe or think.
I can't think of anything other than this event that could be affecting polling right now - we haven't had a significant political story in weeks.
Is this the new left-wing way to spend principle? - presumably based on the 13 years of Labour government with no or few principles. Certainly, the principal and average quality of human capital resident in the UK was very much damaged.
David Lammy - but only for the riots, and ermmm... that Indian bloke who's always on the telly but don't know what he does [Keith Vaz]
Look at any Parliament going back to 1970 and theres always an element of singback to the government from the middle year of that Parliament (the exception maybe the 1997-2001 Parliament if you remove the fuel strikes in September 2000 which was very anomalous, Blairs lead was pretty consistent from start to finish)
I was very sorry not to be able to come last night. I had originally planned to, but had to change my plans to deal with the aftermath of a flood in my basement in Hungary. I have the compensation that the weather here is good and I'm going out for a bike ride in a bit. It sounds as though it was a good night and I missed out.
Any UKIP spokesbod can give the highlights of their policy on xyz. No-one in the audience will really expect UKIP to win majority, and fill the cabinet posts, so the terror of Mr X as Chancellor of the Exchequer will be a hard sell.
I've tripped across numerous reports on Twitter of LCs swapping sides from the Tories but no idea of numbers. Anyone have the stats?
If you are selling UKIP as 'nobody expects them to win' then don't be surprised if the voter thinks UKIP are little more than a disposable protest vote come the GE. There's a huge difference between an expectation of a victory and looking like a serious party. Nobody expects the lib dems to win but they sure aren't dumb enough not to have somebody as shadow chancellor at a GE. Having one like Vince meant more coverage and participation in the shadow chancellor debates etc. in the elections in 2010 and because they have a shadow cabinet it might explain why they can win seats while Farage as a one man band still can't.
It's only a "terror" if Farage either can't or won't find somebody credible to be in that post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw0ejfjX2yA
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/04/tories-look-to-exploit-labours-southern-discomfort/
I believe research says people vote for a party on perceived values rather than policies. How many voters could name the current Chancellor of the Exchequer? The Labour Shadow Chancellor?
A fluent talking head is an asset. I do not think it matters what their job title is.
RT @amandacarpenter: Tamerlan's best friend and two other men found dead with their throats slit 2 years ago--murders went unsolved http://t.co/toCkep34W9
If Kippers keep that up - I can see it convincing a lot of NOTA voters across the spectrum that its worth trotting down to the polling station.
We live in interesting times.
I would have thought this might have been a more obvious choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hy2PrK4w8g
To be clear, the Kippers don't need to have every single undersecretary or obscure shadow cabinet post. But not to have anybody in mind for the Chancellor? Come on, it matters.
The big three of Foreign Secretary Home Secretary and Chancellor should at least be given serious thought or why should the voter bother to think of UKIP other than a one man band disposable protest vote? All those new members won't matter if there can't be found among them any credible candidates for serious posts.
I think it was Carlotta or Carolah on here that said the people in the video look more like normal people than in most PPBs... It turns out that a lot are UKIP members, the cabbie is a real cabbie, the young bloke talkling about Grammar schools is Michael Heaver who writes the Ukipian
I think thats a good thingfor them, that the people runnung the show have the common touch
You can't have one without the other and having policies mean looking like you take them seriously enough to have someone in mind to be in charge of and enact them.
Gosh, Mr. Dave, if that is true Cameron is doubly screwed. What values (aka principles) does he have? He has never convinced me he believes in anything other than he would make a jolly good PM.
From the Telegraph, I see they have a debate between Janet Daley and Benedict Brogan as to whether Cameron believes anything.and from the same source there is the article, which explains why Cameron cannot, bar some unforeseeable event, cannot win a majority (ignore the headline,as so often these days its doesn't match the text):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10005897/Does-David-Cameron-have-the-stomach-for-a-fight-like-Lady-Thatcher-did.html
I wonder if the reason the PEB feels so authentic is because Kippers haven't yet fallen into the trap of being lead by PR gurus and hence over-packaged. They'll get there eventually - but its good to see them moving on from amateurish. That logo has go - it is so wrong on so many levels...
Youre probably right, that was a bit of a hasty post by me.
Amazing how the word racist has become flexible enough to encompass people of the same colour & race isnt it? I have never thought of Bulgarians or Romanians as a different race to me (I am white with English/Irish background), but UKIP is deemed racist for not wanting uncontrolled immigration from those countries.
If fans sing that horrible bonfire song about Berbatov or Petrov is it disgusting abuse or disgusting racist abuse?
If we assume that approaching the 2015 election UKIP are polling >20%, and the other parties have decided to address them seriously, rather than just calling them names.
In that case, UKIP will name their most convincing spokesbods, to what they consider the most important job titles.
The other parties will then have to establish in the minds of the voters that the shadow-shadow chancellor is Mr/Ms X, and that Mr/Ms X is a Danger-To-The-Nation. It's a hard sell. I don't think it will happen.
1955 I think. The Conservatives will certainly struggle to improve their share of the vote on 2010, but then they don't have to deprive Labour of a majority - And "swingback" doesn't say that either. It just says the Conservatives will do better than they are currently polling and Labour will do worse.
I think we can all agree on the current numbers we're almost certainly looking at another hung parliament?
In which case the issue is which party becomes the largest party. That hinges, literally on a few 100,000 votes and a few seats.
I'm genuinely puzzled how one can look at the polling trend chart below and describe the Labour share as "steady"; unless it's the decline that started last autumn that is the "steady" feature being commented on.
However well UKIP poll, the Conservatives main opponent at the 2015 election will be Labour. Labour's main opponent will be the Conservatives. The LDs main opponent will be the Conservatives.
Not quite as harsh as Cammie's "loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists" but then Cammie also tried to arrogantly dismiss Clegg as his "favourite joke".
Don't think many tories were laughing too hard when Clegg killed the boundary changes. ;^)
That is certainly the traditional view, Mr. Gin, and the reason for the main parties' obsession with this 4% of voters. What the surge in UKIP support in the polls, and membership, might be telling us is that the traditional view may no longer hold good.
The bedrock of the 4% obsession, if you'll forgive the term, is that the parties' core vote will turn out for them anyway and so can safely be ignored. Is it not possible that view, on which Cameron, at least, seems to have based his leadership of his party, no longer holds true.
As for who is contending with who I wouldn't disagree but that's hardly going to stop any of the parties attacking each other when it suits them. The lib dems will want to go hard at the tories in the tory marginals but they won't be praising little Ed and labour even after being in coalition with the tories. Nor will the tories feel much regret when they go after the lib dems in those marginals while still attacking labour and indeed Farage and UKIP.
Little John and Big Eric - together we are beautiful
New vote at 3 PM CET.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
Current UKPR Polling average
Con 29 Lab 40 Lib Dem 14
Latest UNS projection
Labour majority 110
As imperfect as uniform swing is it's laughable to pretend that current polling numbers point to a hung parliament.
If the polling changes in a big enough way it might, but it's certainly not changing anywhere near enough yet.
If UKIP are contenders in 2015, then the run-up to the election may well be dominated by the in/out EU referendum to be held on the same date. :-)
October 1974
I've never heard of it but its got great reviews - was on BBC/US telly.
Someone mentioned Southland the other day - @Peter_2? I had a looksee and it seemed a bit *gritty* even more me, but will give it a shot. Will report back...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BISuAPXCUAAIkGT.jpg:large
We have agreed in this 2015 scenario that all the other parties; Conservative, Labour and LDs, perceive UKIP as a threat. The obvious response is to call the in/out referendum before/with the general election.
http://www.syfy.co.uk/defiance
Cammie has been stupid enough to focus on Europe and immigration to somehow try and outkip the kippers, (with all too predictable and amusing results) yet even he likely won't be mad enough to want the GE campaign to be dominated by Europe if UKIP are doing well. He absolutely won't want too much attention on his Cast Iron pledge for a referendum considering how flimsy it is so he's not about to poke about in that Eurosceptic wasps nest at the election unless he has a death wish.
It's going to be dominated by the economy anyway, like it or not.
Calling an in/out referendum would actually be a popular move. And we have agreed in this 2015 the Conservatives are desperate.
Revolution is quite watchable on a wet afternoon. I remain unconvinced by Hannibal - its just trying far too hard and can't work out what its trying to be a) Criminal Minds b) Mystery/Thriller c) Psycho d) All Three and flaying about
The biggest lasting shift in the conservative polling is crystal clear in that graph below for you to see. It was Osbrowne's omnishambles budget. Nothing to do with Europe.
As gratifying as UKIP no doubt find it that Cammie keeps idiotically posturing on their core issues it's not going to last. Crosby is there to attack little Ed and make the next election all about not trusting labour on the economy again. He might also have to go after Farage but he's hardly going to do so nicely or on a subject Farage loves talking about like Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
The flounce bounce evaporated and if Europe really was a winner then why did Cammie's EU speech of a lifetime where he announced a referendum also have a small uptick and then fall off again very quickly?
That UKIP tend see everything through a Europe lens is not news. The polling however is clear and there is also very little prospect of Europe being the defining issue of the 2015 general election. No matter how much that would please Farage. It's going to be the economy.
If, maybe, then, perhaps. Is a different offer than "here and now".