Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds Conservative voters very much divided on Micha
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds Conservative voters very much divided on Michael Gove
By comparison the same YouGov sample found current CON voters splitting 93% to 6% when the same question was asked about Mr. Cameron.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
(I should state for the record, I'm a rabid one.)
Mr. Quincel, I'd agree with that prediction.
FPT: Miss DiCanio, it's true that the Italians have recently been pretty good against the French. I read the Azurri[sp] have beaten the French in Italy in both the most recent matches, but have never beaten them away from home (Scotland has the dubious honour of being the only one they've beaten away from home).
Clegg and Cammie are the coalition so what's to stop Clegg drawing a red line and telling Cammie to dump Gove? Aside from the obvious.
Differentiation posturing has been tried before the other May elections and it's always failed.
Delighted to agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Pork - there's 7 words I never expected to type!
Gove good or bad and I'm a fan will not be a game changer in an election campaign.
Spurs = big game bottlers. Huge game in battle for 4th / 5th / 6th, currently at H/T, no shots on target.
No more all-male panel shows, the BBC has decreed:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26107011
For reference, panel shows (as most will know) have a host and two teams usually of 2 or 3 each. So, 5-7 people in total. Women (anecdotal, so open to dispute) make up about 10% of stand-ups and the like... so you'd probably expect, by numbers, 1 every 2 shows, or about 2 every 3.
One eagerly awaits the quotas for non-whites, homosexuals, left-handed people etc etc. Just have guests on that are worthy. If that means a disproportionate number of women, fine. If it means a disproportionate number of men, fine.
Quotas are despicable. If you have a quota-mandated one-woman minimum per show then people will think she's there because she possesses ovaries, not because she possesses wit. It diminishes women amusing enough to be on.
Edited extra bit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I3qREbKqLw
Lib Dems 'preparing spring offensive' against Tory coalition colleagues
Liberal Democrats will call time on coalition unity this spring, David Laws has revealed, with a 'differentiation' offensive set to make internal strains greater than ever before.
The schools minister is in the midst of a public row with education secretary Michael Gove over the sacking of Ofsted chief Sally Morgan.
Now Laws, who wants Nick Clegg to be given an effective veto over the appointment of Morgan's successor, has announced his party will mount a major attempt to distance itself from the Tories between April and September.
The differentiation campaign would begin in April, during the European elections campaign, and continue until September and the Lib Dems' final autumn conference before next year's general election.
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/02/06/lib-dems-preparing-spring-offensive-against-tory-coalition-c
Unfortunately they just tend not to vote at all. Hence you get strike actions approved by a small minority of members.
"Hence you get strike actions approved by a small minority of members. "
And governments elected by a small minority of voters?
Yet another reason to privatise the out of touch lefty biased BBC.
Gove didn't just pop up overnight so that's years of coalition Education policy Clegg and lib dem activists are going to somehow have to explain away. Gove posturing plays well with lib dems but so do plenty of other things that Clegg won't be so keen to differentiate against.
Gove is just not enough by himself to do anything meaningful for them. He's an easy target but you know who else is? Clegg. His polling is still even more laughable than Gove's.
You're right that Gove will be of limited help on its own, but they'll try to differentiate on a whole bunch of issues, including the NHS, which left-wing voters will have observed is still there despite five years of Tory-led government.
I'm not denying they'll lose seats, but they'll lose fewer than if they hadn't done the differentiation stuff. I think the way the Labour vote stayed low in Eastleigh shows that left-wing voters are ready to vote for them to keep the Tories out, at least in seats they already hold.
Shots on goal by Spurs?
0
TSE bet on Ade to score first I believe?
This autumn's pisas should be interesting. I wonder if it will show clear blue water between England and Wales.
I won't spoil the thread by mentioning Wales yet. I'll let the left have a huge rant at Gove before talking about their own far direr performance.
If Clegg truly wanted to be seen as differentiated against the tories then the time to do it was on day 1 of the coalition. Not desperately before elections and during an election campaign five years afterward.
Differentiation would have a far better chance of working if it came from someone other than the toxic Clegg but his ostrich faction of spinners actually seem to think Clegg is somehow not a problem as well. They will find out the hard way that he is if he's still there come 2015.
The voter could hardly miss Clegg and the lib dems opposing Cammie on AV and Lords reform. So there's actual real differences that weren't synthetic posturing but did the lib dems and Clegg no good at all.
This leads me onto another point which baffles me about the Lib Dems over the past few years. I've often seen them rationalise their decision to go into coalition with the Tories with something along the lines of "imagine if we hadn't gone into government, then people would think we'd NEVER be prepared to go into government!" Why exactly would that be a problem? I would say most people vote for them because they didn't want them to go into government and become part of the hated Establishment. If they had not gone into Coalition, and instead just supported a minority Tory govt on an issue-by-issue basis, they would've been able to say "we turned down the chance of power in order to achieve real results on big issues for you", and they would've been in a much stronger position imo. But the fact the Lib Dem leadership seemed to view getting into government in and of itself as more important than achieving specific goals is very revealing.
Even in Eastleigh, the Lib Dem vote dropped by 13%, which in most LD/Tory marginals would be more than enough for them to be toppled.
Which is a bit disappointing considering I had a 40/1 first goal scorer winner yesterday.
Their vote share dropped but the beneficiaries seem to have been UKIP not Con. Since UKIP pulled from Con as well as Lib, their vote share margin over Con hardly dropped at all.
Anyhow the question relevant to this discussion is whether they'll still be able to squeeze the Lab vote in seats they're defending against Con, or whether left-wing voters will decide they're just the same as the Tories and vote Lab or stay at home. The point of differentiation is to make that happen, and the evidence from Eastleigh is that it works.
To what extent do you agree or disagree that (Better Together/Yes Scotland) clearly outlined the benefits of Scotland (staying in the UK/becoming independent)
Agree: 32 / 34
Neither: 25 / 21
Disagree: 33 / 37
Don't know: 10 / 8
To what extent do you agree or disagree that the (Better Together/Yes Scotland) campaign needs to be seen and heard more in the debate:
Agree: 64 / 56
Neither: 18 / 19
Disagree: 10 / 19
Don't Know: 8 / 6
Not much to choose in terms of getting their case across, though more think they don't need to hear more from Yes Scotland......
The PB tories are always wrong. The PB tories never learn.
If anything LAB will play the Gove card harder than the Lib Dems. Remember their main content objective is to keep the 2010 LDs on board and being Anti-Gove is probably quite good positioning
Con: +21
SNP: +65
Why would SNP supporters be three times as anxious for the debate to take place as Con supporters? :Innocent Face:
It was Osbrowne and his omnishambles.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
Even if Osbrowne does nothing else but hide during 2015, like he did in the 2010 election campaign, then that's going to be on him. Obrowne helped persuade soft tory kipper waverers to jump ship over to Farage. Which they then did and have kept right on doing.
Same reason for this.
And this. Fop Chicken.
LOL
The government is formed by the person who can command the votes of a majority of the House.
Voters don't elect governments.
It's called democracy, if you dont like it you have to come up with a better alternative.
http://labourlist.org/2014/02/8-ways-in-which-the-government-have-botched-their-response-to-the-floods/
I've got Balls for next chancellor backed at both 3-1 and 7-2 amongst my basket of bets.
A year ago Osborne going was the biggest worry for that, now it is Balls himself - although I think both will stay till next GE. Balls is certainly more vulnerable than Osborne though I think he stays - to let him go would be a massive capitulation by Miliband, so he can't.
Ladbrokes mobile are 4/1 Rvp FGS, that's a good bet that I cant get on!
I would conclude that they didn't really give a monkey's.
Does that Greg person have a different meaning of the word "hypocrisy" than everyone else?
Hypocrisy would be brazening it out. As it was he resigned quickly and cleanly.
You can't conclude, as you argued, that they supported the strike action because they didn't vote against. All you can conclude is that they didn't vote against.
I would argue that the number of people who positively voted *for* strike action is a better indication of the number of people who, y'know, positively support strike action
Hypocrisy would be brazening it out. As it was he resigned quickly and cleanly.Unlike Labour's Baroness Scotland....who didn't resign at all......
The First Minister of Scotland is not, currently, the constitutional equal of the Prime Minister of the UK.
If 'Yes' wins the referendum then he will be. Until then he's not. Carmichael is probably the most appropriate peer. Darling would be suitable although he only has a political rather than a government role, so it would just be two senior politicos debating rather than anything else.
"I will but I don't think he'll do it. Because he's very status-conscious. He regards himself as a head of state. As we say in Scotland, he's got a very good conceit of himself. He's very full of himself."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/07/alistair-darling-accuses-alex-salmond-head-of-state-scottish-independence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1YZik1k40o
So hilariously bad he ended up greetin for the moderator Rhona tae save him.
Awww.. the poor wee thing.
LOL
The lib dems have a taxi full of MSPs are behind the kippers (in scotland!) in some polling and by-election results and are fast heading for complete irrelevance in scotland thanks to calamity Clegg and his ostrich faction of spinners.
Cammie and his out of touch twits at CCHQ are utterly terrified of Farage and the kippers laughing their heads off at an immigration shambles so soon after Cammie's own backbench MPs humiliated him over immigration. When he isn't running scared of his own MPs he's running scared of the kippers, Farage, Salmond, press conferences, water. Fop Chicken.
Carmichael? A representative of a party that's in danger of being pushed into fifth place in Scotland, and third choice for a post the Libdems themselves said should be abolished? There's the organ grinder's monkey, then there's a flea on that monkey.
Rene M = Gove
If CCHQ manufacture a 'row' before the EU elections then Cammie had best be 100% certain where it may lead and just how far his backbenchers may take things if they decide to step in
http://www.realradio-scotland.co.uk/my-real/news/indy-poll-most-think-taxes-w/6244f
electionista @electionista 26m
Switzerland - vote on introducing immigration quotas Yes 50.3%(1,463,954 votes) No 49.7%(1,444,438) Turnout: 56.5% pic.twitter.com/SCxa7z2hgB
How will the Lib Dems actually do?
It is always troublesome to translate Liberal Democrat votes into seats. The party can have elections where it gains seats despite losing votes (as in 1997) and vice versa (as in 2010). But, even if the party struggles back up to 15-17 per cent, there is no way it will not result in a loss of seats. Local election results suggest that it will be near-impossible for the party to hold a number of metropolitan seats against Labour (Manchester Withington being the most drastic example).
Scotland is also a huge problem. Although their polling support is down by the same 12 points or so there as in England, they were already at rock bottom in half of Scotland in 2010 (losing 12 points would give them negative votes in 30 Scottish seats). The drop must be concentrated in the seats where they polled reasonably well in 2010. They are in serious danger of losing up to 10 of their 11 Scottish seats.
http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2014/01/31/how-will-the-lib-dems-actually-do/
Calamity Clegg's ostrich faction of spinners are going to have a spot of bother spinning their way out of the May election results. We will at least be treated to the same comedy gold from Senior like all the other times he's been pitifully hinting at that oft delayed lib dem surge.
Here's his surge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
The lib dems flatlining at 10% since late 2010 and showing no sign whatsoever of changing.
You saw right through me!
Here's some Ashcroft polling on the same theme since that is so popular on here. You just keep right on thinking everything is going wonderfully despite being proved wrong every May. Calamity Clegg is also toxic. His polling is laughable. But if you stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes it might look and sound better I suppose.
Tell us about the 'success' of Labour education in Wales.....
I thought Sturgeon's response to Cameron's speech showed how barren the SNP was when it came to ideas and policy argument. All she could do is try to put shite over Dave and accuse him of cowardice.
It reminded me of Slamond's classic moment when a said the Economist would "rue the day" it dared ro make a bit of fun of the SNP.
Your party doesn't hack it and that is being slowly revealed.
An "analysis" by long time Labour supporter Lewis Baston posted on a Labour blog . Yep , let us put lots of weight into its impartiality . Alternatively we could look at the last Survation poll on Scottish VI which had LD support back up to 10% in Holyrood VI .
Was quite entertained by the rugby today, but stopped watching early in the second half when the French stretched their lead substantially. What happened to warrant the red cards?
Touchy touchy. Rather a sad sight. 2012 showed what political pygmies the SNP were. They set up winning Glasgow as their top target. What happened - Labour returned to power there with a majority.
The abiity to manage expectations is a clear political skill that your shower lacks.
You really are rather pathetic.
BTW - are you Nicola Sturgeon?
The abiity to manage expectations is a clear political skill that your shower lacks.
You really are rather pathetic.
BTW - are you Nicola Sturgeon?
more likely Eddie Grundy
A referendum is not going to be won through endless spinning on this website about all the other nasty parties although you seem to spend very little effort in knocking your main rival in Scotland, Labour. Odd that. So sorry to break that bad news to you old chap, but some one has to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_local_elections,_2012
"The 2012 Scottish local elections, were held on 3 May, in all 32 local authorities. The Scottish National Party (SNP) overtook Labour to win the highest share of the vote, and retained and strengthened its position as the party with most councillors. Labour also made gains, while the Liberal Democrats experienced meltdown, falling behind the Conservatives.
LOL Are you Nick Clegg?
Touchy touchy.