Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If this Ipsos-MORI polling is right then party leaders are
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If this Ipsos-MORI polling is right then party leaders are becoming less important
“The average combined satisfaction rating of the leaders of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties is lower today than Ipsos MORI has ever seen in recent history, at an equivalent time before a general election.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
How long does a leader need to "establish himself" ? The trend isn't his friend.
http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/fa-cup/man-city-v-blackburn/total-home-goals
As for the German banking sector, it is one of the very few in Europe and elsewhere where I haven't worked directly on structural issues.
It has always seemed to me to be the kind of system that a committee of Liberal Democrats would design if given a day's management retreat, a pencil and a blank sheet of paper. At the core is a key role for Councillor Jobsworth.
As your German is better than mine, I am sure you can better translate Mr. Jobsworth's name to the local patois. Herr Doktor Doktor Fuch Suppe is the best I can manage.
I think it's important to consider whether low approval is due to hatred, profound dislike, or disappointment/disinterest. Loathing can motivate, but a vague sense of dissatisfaction probably won't make much difference.
I suspect this may be worst for Clegg/Lib Dems, as I suspect those who really dislike Cameron/Miliband were unlikely to ever vote for them anyway, whereas the tuition fees 'betrayal' [NB PR lovers, coalition means never having to stick to your promises] appears to have caused former Lib Dem supporters to despise Clegg (more than seems warranted to me, but then, I'm not exactly a Lib Dem).
Edited extra bit:
betting postLast thread I tipped SImon to beat Cilic at 4. He's now 3.75, but I'd still back him (down to 3, actually). He has a 3:0 record. Both struggled to a 3:2 first round win. Probably 50/50 or in Simon's favour, so longer than evens is a bit silly.
Support for stricter border controls was stronger among the lower income groups (C2DE), with 36% placing the policy among their top two priorities, against 26% of the higher income groups (ABC1).
Among Conservative supporters, 38% ranked the policy in their top two, compared with 19% of Labour voters, 24% of Liberal Democrat supporters and 56% of those backing UKIP. More than a third (35%) of Labour supporters ranked the issue in their bottom two priorities, along with 28% of Liberal Democrat voters, against just 13% of Conservatives and 8% of those backing UKIP.
“The data shows clearly that immigration is a polarising issue,” said Dr Michelle Harrison, CEO of TNS BMRB.
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/news-and-events/survey-reveals-split-of-british-opinion-on-immigration
In 2013 the figure was just 30 years...
We are ruled by political pygmies.
I am a lifelong fan of Michael Porter, Mr. Brooke and spurn any criticism of the 'Boston Box'.
Mr Pole you are a lost cause, beholden to the mirage of matrices from HBS and their confederates. You must learn to think outside your Boston Box and see the world in different ways.
On the other hand I can confidently predict I will no longer need to drone on incessently about import substitiution. When US consultants decide this is the next big thing and its saving America it will be packaged for UK consumption and you'll be on like a disciple because some 24 yr old with an MBA now says so. You owe me £2million for strategic consultancy advice.
'Justice was eventually done'.......wonder how the complainants feel about that.....I suspect Ch4 news will tell us......
Lord Rennard has been cleared of sexually harassing Liberal Democrat party workers despite an independent review finding “broadly credible” evidence he “violated” the personal space of women.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/10574127/Lord-Rennard-cleared-of-sexually-harassing-Liberal-Democrat-women-and-says-he-wants-his-job-back.html
I would have thought his first comment should have been to apologise to the women concerned. (Maybe it was.)
http://www.libdemvoice.org/statement-by-lord-rennard-37846.html
Keep the sexual harassment complaint forms in the bottom drawer. That way, when she goes to get one you'll get a great view of her arse.
IIRC at the time he resigned after some of the allegations had made their way into the hierarchy, but well before they became public.....
Lord Rennard did not resign purely on health grounds, Nick Clegg admits
Lib Dem leader denies cover-up over ex-chief executive but admits claims of 'inappropriate behaviour were in background'
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/feb/27/lord-rennard-health-nick-clegg
If I were the Mods I'd be watching closely the comments posted here....
http://www.libdemvoice.org/internal-investigation-into-allegations-against-lord-rennard-37847.html
Tim Farron, the president of the Liberal Democrats said that he was not “content” with the decision but has “no choice” but to accept Mr Webster’s conclusions. He added that Lord Rennard should apologise to the women concerned.
As to why he should apologise - do you take the view that you should only ever apologise for behaviour that can be proven to be criminal?
It came back half baked.
It is my view that Lord Rennard ought to reflect upon the effect that his behaviour has had and the distress which it caused and that an apology would be appropriate, as would a commitment to change his behaviour in future.
No apology, no commitment to change his behaviour.....
Expect Ed not to announce it after all...
Thanks for your good wishes on my behalf, AveryLP. I hope the outcome for me will be as good as your mother's was. Carry on fishing.
Farron "It is my view that Lord Rennard ought to reflect upon the effect that his behaviour has had and the distress which it caused and that an apology would be appropriate, as would a commitment to change his behaviour in future."
"... it is clear that he did not behave in the way that a Chief Executive should behave. Lord Rennard must reflect on his actions and apologise to the women involved."
http://www.libdemvoice.org/internal-investigation-into-allegations-against-lord-rennard-37847.html
It would seem that the only response that the Lib Dem "Leadership" can now do is uninvite Rennard from any party event until he apologises. Maybe our Lib Dem members on pb can advise on this?
@JohnRentoul: "Are we either stuck in lower paid jobs or earning less in the middle?" EdM asks another #QTWTAIN @FullFact http://t.co/66fP6w240U
Another one bites the dust...
Faced with the opportunity to take strong action, the Liberal Democrats have once more opted for cowardice. They have failed to say Lord Rennard's behaviour is unacceptable, they have failed to discipline him and therefore have failed to give victims the justice they deserve
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rvroj0
http://www.banyantree.com/en/samui/
Do you think the behaviour described in the report warrants an apology?
They just seem to choose to dissappear whenever the antics of Rennard and Hancock etc happen or are complained about.
How did that turn out ?
Of course, that might be because voters don't like Tories talking about (still less doing) cuts. But as Sean Fear has pointed out before, politicians wouldn't lie if telling the truth got them votes.
And then there is always the silent Shirley Williams.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/statement-from-liberal-democrat-women-37850.html
Wow that's er... real punishment! From the Votes for prisoners school of penal justice.
Patrick O'Flynn @oflynnexpress 38m
Not a lot of people know this (ahem) but @DPJHodges has pledged to streak up Whitehall if UKIP gets more than 6.0% vote share at GE15.
Alistair Webster QC said very clearly that Lord Rennard should apologise and reflect on his behaviour and that is what I hope he will do because that is the unambiguous conclusion from this independent report by a QC,” Mr Clegg said.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/39702/no_rennard_action.html
http://fullfact.org/factchecks/miliband_middle_class_problems_stuck_low_paid_jobs_earning_less-29321
I guess we are all in it together...
Why nothing from Rennard?
How many people were used to create the worm in 2010, and how were they chosen?
Has it been tried in any system of elections (local or national) anywhere in the world, do you know? Also, what feedback was given by the electoral commission on it? I understand an early form of the idea was put forward to them in 1998.
I have specifically discounted suggestions made during the investigation that the incidents had been invented as part of a political campaign against Lord Rennard.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/internal-investigation-into-allegations-against-lord-rennard-37847.html
Rennard owes the apology....not the Daily Mail.......
Do you think a) The QC is wrong, b) there shouldn't be evidential standards for disciplinary action, or c) the party should ignore the evidential standards?
Grow up. The Mail would have undoubtedly been sued if they had printed anything libelous.
Lord Rennard is not a current employee of the party and therefore the threshold that must be met for disciplinary action is higher than if this was a company HR procedure.
Lucky Rennard resigned for health reason eh?
What, in particular, do you think the Daily Mail has to apologise for?
Alison Goldsworthy, one of the alleged victims, said: "Faced with the opportunity to take strong actnio (sic), the Liberal Democrats have once more opted for cowardice.
"They have failed to say Lord Rennard's behaviour is unacceptable, they have failed to discipline him and therefore failed to give victims the justice they deserve.
"Since this news became public, people from across the political spectrum have approached me to say that they too had been a victim of someone abusing a position of power. Today's verdict, and failure to take action, sends the message that this behaviour can go unpunished."
Alison Smith, an Oxford University academic and former party worker who was also allegedly harassed by Lord Rennard, said that the Liberal Democrats have "orchestrated a cover-up".
She said: "I am disappointed but not surprised. The [disciplinary] rules were designed to deal with cases like a Parish Councillor who embarrasses the party by making 'off colour' remarks."
Damn those 'smearers in chief' and former party activists...?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/10574316/Nick-Clegg-accused-of-cover-up-and-cowardice-as-Lord-Rennard-is-cleared.html
Nick Clegg has been accused of "cowardice" by alleged victims of Lord Rennard after the peer was cleared of sexually harassing female party activists.
The former chief executive of the party claimed that he will resume his “old roles” despite senior Liberal Democrats saying they are “not content” with the findings.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/10574316/Nick-Clegg-accused-of-cover-up-and-cowardice-as-Lord-Rennard-is-cleared.html
It would be interesting to see if they now have clear and publicised (within the organisation) procedures to handle this sort of thing, whether the accused is at the top or very bottom of the organisation. And the same goes for the other parties as well.
Sadly, any organisation with thousands of members or activists (*) will contain a handful of bullies, predators and ner-do-wells. You will not be able to weed them out at interview; you need to be able to react when they act, and prevent such behaviour from escalating.
If the Lib Dems had had such processes in place a few yeas ago, most of this unpleasantness could have been avoided. Which would have been of advantage to the party, the women, and Rennard himself.
It is a totally self-inflicted wound.
(*) Well, that may soon discount the Conservatives.... ;-)
In terms of today, if a QC says there isn't enough evidence then I'm not sure what you expect Clegg/Farron/etc to do?
I agree it's a crude measure. However, it did give some indication of how difficult messages were going down during the leaders debates, although I seem to recall that even then both Brown and Cameron tip-toe'd around the really big issue of cutting the deficit. For this very reason.
Voters do like honesty, as long as its about politicians talking about their own failings and not about hard unavoidable political choices that will affect them.
Its Rennard and his apologists who are keeping the story going...
As Tim Shipman observes: "The Lib Dem tendency to perch on the fence has reached its painful apotheosis today with Rennard ruling. A proper shambles."
People are asking for an apology to the 'victims' but according to you, there weren't any 'victims'. Is that correct?
Should Rennard apologise, yes.
But people are also criticising Clegg/Farron/etc, which given the investigating QC has said there's insufficient evidence to act on seems unfair.
A senior Liberal Democrat accused of sexually harassing women has ignored requests to apologise and says he plans to begin working for the party once again.
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/01/15/no-apology-from-lib-dem-accused-of-sexual-harassment
http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/live-worm-during-political-tv-debates.html
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0018154
You can assume nothing from it. It can all too easily lead opinion, rather than show it.