Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Vote UKIP get a LAB government might not have the potency t

SystemSystem Posts: 12,677
edited July 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Vote UKIP get a LAB government might not have the potency that many Tories think it has

You hear it all the time from the Blue teams when talking about the Ukip threat – that when faced with the prospect of a LAB government a large proportion will “come back home” and vote Tory.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Why do half of them (or, to be more precise, one of the two thirds who express a preference) say they would prefer a Labour government? Because they want to scare the Conservative Party. They still think it's mid-term (which it is) and they want to do a bit of "protest". When it comes to the crunch in May 2010, they will realise that a victory by Ed Miliband would be the approximate equivalent of an Albanian-style Maoist revolution, and will decide to vote Conservative at the last minute.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Another way of thinking about it is that the second-preference party of UKIP voters/supporters is approximately neutral between the two main parties, so therefore it is not "splitting the Conservative vote". In other words, the total for UKIP is part of the ordinary residue of votes for "others", except that it is likely to be a greater percentage than usual. The normal process of the mid-term protest diminishing as the general election approaches will happen in the usual way - with the Conservative Party regaining he lead and overtaking Labour (and then hopefully winning the election) as a result of a normal Lab-Con swingback.

    Thuslywise, it doesn't matter how many people vote UKIP (5%, 15%, whatever) because they are in the middle of the electoral see-saw anyway.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Oo ay too ler mond? Esk eel dorm?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JohnLoony said:

    Why do half of them (or, to be more precise, one of the two thirds who express a preference) say they would prefer a Labour government? Because they want to scare the Conservative Party. They still think it's mid-term (which it is) and they want to do a bit of "protest". When it comes to the crunch in May 2010, they will realise that a victory by Ed Miliband would be the approximate equivalent of an Albanian-style Maoist revolution, and will decide to vote Conservative at the last minute.

    While Labour are hardly a government in waiting, they are not Enver Hoxha either. They have left their blank sheet of paper too blank, for too long. I think that Ed and Ed will be as muddled in power as they have been in opposition as the sheet is blank for the very good reason that their is a real disagreement at the heart of Labour as to what to put on it.

    There are a number of reasons kippers may prefer a Miliband govt.

    1) They may want the Tories to restructure out of power as a completely BOO party.

    2) They may believe that Ed will be forced to offer a referendum in the campaign.

    3) They may not care much who is in government, but just want to kick the current government out.

    4) They are not instinctively right wing in the first place, as many formerly were voting Labour, LD or BNP, but rather inclined towards a sort of mishmash populism.

    I disagree with kippers on nearly everything, so find a lot of their thought processes hard to follow. Nonetheless I think that Mike is right. When the kipper vote fades it will go in different directions.

    Summer polls often give strange results. Most sensible people have their minds on other things, not least enjoying their holidays.

  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Vote UKIP, get Labour is a daft campaign slogan that only Osbourne could think would work. Just focus on negatively campaigning against Labour in of itself. Frankly the government has done a lame job so far, should be hearing non stop about Labour's record on immigration and the economy. Despite their proffessed love of Blair the Cameroons seem to have learnt no campaigning tips.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest McARSE Scottish Referendum Projection Countdown :

    155 minutes
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Interesting review on Spiked of the religious side of the Great War:

    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/the-great-war-the-first-global-jihad/15474#.U9cwWclwaBY

    My own readings do give a similar conclusion. Several of the protagonist countries seemed to see the war as an opportunity for spiritual renewal, often in a quasi religious way when not overtly religious. I think that spiritual renewal via slaughter and martyrdom is doomed to fail 100 years on from the original events.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Interesting fact of the day: Commonwealth Games silver medallist Adam Gemili is only 5 feet 5 inches tall (the same height as Daniel Radcliffe and Iván García, who are the 1st and 3rd most gorgeous men in the world) and he won his medal on his 7,600th birthday.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Mike - may be a stupid question: Does this pie chart mean that the % of UKIP voters whose preferred outcome in 2015 of having a UKIP government is 0%?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    JohnLoony said:

    Interesting fact of the day: Commonwealth Games silver medallist Adam Gemili is only 5 feet 5 inches tall (the same height as Daniel Radcliffe and Iván García, who are the 1st and 3rd most gorgeous men in the world) and he won his medal on his 7,600th birthday.

    What is Mr Gemili's ranking and is this just your short arse sub sample ?

  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,275
    The message "Vote UKIP get Lab" doesn't need to have potency with all who presently declare for UKIP in polls. Its salience is for those who prefer Con or Con/Lib Dem coalition as a forced preference - 42% of all the UKIP support according to the pie chart. It is these voters that are just as important as the famous red Liberals about whom we hear so much. Expect the Tory message to target these blue Kippers relentlessly as the election approaches. As for the red Kippers, they are Labour's problem and EdM is an improbable solution to that problem. From a Tory perspective Farage is welcome to them.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Patrick said:

    Mike - may be a stupid question: Does this pie chart mean that the % of UKIP voters whose preferred outcome in 2015 of having a UKIP government is 0%?

    Oh yes. If they actually thought that voting UKIP would result in a UKIP government, 90% of them would run a mile in the opposite direction. The footsoldiers and armchair warriors of the Kipper Army will only be able to maintain the sense of frenzied resentment and frustration which they are happy with if they can remain fulminating in the secure knowledge that they won't get either a UKIP government, or, indeed, any UKIP MPs.

    It's a bit like the Lib Dem voters who voted Liberal and SDP and Lib Dem for election after election for generations and then instantaneously felt an existentially huge sense of betrayal as soon as the Lib Dems actually got into government and started implementing some of the policies they had promised.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    PeterC said:

    The message "Vote UKIP get Lab" doesn't need to have potency with all who presently declare for UKIP in polls. Its salience is for those who prefer Con or Con/Lib Dem coalition as a forced preference - 42% of all the UKIP support according to the pie chart. It is these voters that are just as important as the famous red Liberals about whom we hear so much. Expect the Tory message to target these blue Kippers relentlessly as the election approaches. As for the red Kippers, they are Labour's problem and EdM is an improbable solution to that problem. From a Tory perspective Farage is welcome to them.

    I agree that is this is likely to be the approach taken. The Blues would be doubly happy for the red kippers to vote Farage. Not only does this reduce the Labour vote, it also confuses the Kippers by adding an incoherence to the purples. Left wing populism does not easily square with Faragism.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    The most recent history of a Conservative "Vote Jelly Get Sprouts" strategy doesn't inspire confidence.

    I'm sure we all recall the "Vote Yellow Get Brown" attacks in the 2010 general election. Clearly it was an excellent double bluff from Cameron.

    Hhhmmm ....
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    JackW said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Interesting fact of the day: Commonwealth Games silver medallist Adam Gemili is only 5 feet 5 inches tall (the same height as Daniel Radcliffe and Iván García, who are the 1st and 3rd most gorgeous men in the world) and he won his medal on his 7,600th birthday.

    What is Mr Gemili's ranking and is this just your short arse sub sample ?
    I have never voted for Adam Gemili, and he has never been in the WAAAAGH League Table, but both of those facts are very likely to be changed within the next hour. #OffToBed
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Loony - You're right. In this country we have only two kinds of political party: serious Parties of Power and Parties of Wank.

    LibDems and UKIP very much in PoW corner (even though UKIP do have some very potent points on the nature of the EU and betrayal of WWC). Greens PoW too. And, if we're brutally honest, Labour. Oh - and the MRLP - sorry!

    PoP includes the blues and SNP (despite their utter wankiness on the neverendum).
  • MetatronMetatron Posts: 193
    Michelle Obama 500/1 to be democratic candidate in 2016.If she stood her chances must be under 5/1.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited July 2014
    JohnLoony said:

    JackW said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Interesting fact of the day: Commonwealth Games silver medallist Adam Gemili is only 5 feet 5 inches tall (the same height as Daniel Radcliffe and Iván García, who are the 1st and 3rd most gorgeous men in the world) and he won his medal on his 7,600th birthday.

    What is Mr Gemili's ranking and is this just your short arse sub sample ?
    I have never voted for Adam Gemili, and he has never been in the WAAAAGH League Table, but both of those facts are very likely to be changed within the next hour. #OffToBed
    Mrs JackW has advised me that the cyclist Jason Kenny is well worth a motherly cuddle ..... I suspect there's more to it than that !!

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    With friends like these...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2708908/His-memoirs-serialised-Mail-convulsed-Westminster-Now-Gordon-Brown-s-spin-doctor-gives-withering-verdict-two-Eds-Paranoid-confused-policies-great-steaming-pile-fudge.html
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited July 2014
    I am back from the holiday...I know you already know that Melanie Onn won Great Grimsby Labour selection after a close race with Katie Ghose

    Next interesting selection is Salford and Eccles. Ashton under Lyme is also moving forward (hustings on September 6th). The applicants according to the Manchester Evening News:

    Angela Rayner (Unison official from Stockport, previously shortlisted in Manchester Withington)
    www.angelarayner.com/about_angela

    Julie Reid (Manchester Gorton Cllr, Works at Ashton 6th Form college)
    juliereid4ashton.blogspot.co.uk

    Ann Courtney (Middleton activist, worked for Andy Burnham during his leadership campaign, shortlisted in Blackburn)

    Jean Stretton (Oldham Cllr, ward within the constituency)

    Victoria Desmond (immigration caseworker for Brent North MP, just graduated from London School of Economics)


  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Morning all.

    BBC reporting Scotland’s best ever ‘Gold’ tally at a commonwealth games so far. – I wonder if it was Salmond’s rousing speech at the opening ceremony that has inspired them to such heights, or the rewards of a supportive ‘home’ crowd?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,366
    Even allowing for this curious Monday effect there was some pretty poor polling for the tories again yesterday. These polls were completed in the days after the economy finally went past its previous peak. Yet more evidence that this sort of economic data does not butter many parsnips.

    Tory election policy at the moment still seems to be largely based on this ignored data and a slightly perverse assumption that Ed will somehow implode during a GE campaign. I have real doubts about this.

    Our election campaigns in the last few cycles have been incredibly sterile affairs made up of speeches and contrived "events" in front of their own supporters with very few risks or awkward interviews. I fear that even the debates (if they happen at all) will proceed rapidly to American style blandness with generalities and clichés being trundled out to broad questions.

    With Paxo retired the main object of the party organisers will be to keep their candidates away from Andrew Neill. Other than that it will be fairly plain sailing. The tories are running out of time and the probabilities of a Labour government are increasing week by week. I expect Professor Fisher to show this is the most likely outcome within the next fortnight.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    SquareRoot said:

    With friends like these...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2708908/His-memoirs-serialised-Mail-convulsed-Westminster-Now-Gordon-Brown-s-spin-doctor-gives-withering-verdict-two-Eds-Paranoid-confused-policies-great-steaming-pile-fudge.html

    That's Mcvile flogging his book.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    AndreaParma_82 said:

    I am back from the holiday...

    Rumour has it that you've been on a working holiday in the Rutland constituency of "Hunky Dinky Dunky" collecting essential political intelligence such as his inside leg measurement and the nature of his large majority.

    I gave these reports little credence until news started to filter through of a fine, upstanding Italian gentleman asking about gay miniature Conservative politicians in the villages south of Uppingham.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    DavidL said:

    Even allowing for this curious Monday effect there was some pretty poor polling for the tories again yesterday. These polls were completed in the days after the economy finally went past its previous peak. Yet more evidence that this sort of economic data does not butter many parsnips.

    Tory election policy at the moment still seems to be largely based on this ignored data and a slightly perverse assumption that Ed will somehow implode during a GE campaign. I have real doubts about this.

    Our election campaigns in the last few cycles have been incredibly sterile affairs made up of speeches and contrived "events" in front of their own supporters with very few risks or awkward interviews. I fear that even the debates (if they happen at all) will proceed rapidly to American style blandness with generalities and clichés being trundled out to broad questions.

    With Paxo retired the main object of the party organisers will be to keep their candidates away from Andrew Neill. Other than that it will be fairly plain sailing. The tories are running out of time and the probabilities of a Labour government are increasing week by week. I expect Professor Fisher to show this is the most likely outcome within the next fortnight.

    The Ashcroft marginal poll will be interesting, the sample size is much bigger so the overall swing should - if you believe the marginals are behaving like the rest of the country by more "accurate" than his recent swing polls.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,366
    SquareRoot said:

    With friends like these...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2708908/His-memoirs-serialised-Mail-convulsed-Westminster-Now-Gordon-Brown-s-spin-doctor-gives-withering-verdict-two-Eds-Paranoid-confused-policies-great-steaming-pile-fudge.html

    Actually I think that is a seriously smart article by someone who knows what he is doing and the Eds would be well advised to think about it.

    His description of how Brown built his budgets seems very similar to a description of how Clinton used to build his Speech of the Union addresses. A focus on the key messages, subliminal and express, the key groups and the clarity that comes with that process seems to me exactly what Ed needs.

    I hope he continues to be ignored.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,366
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Even allowing for this curious Monday effect there was some pretty poor polling for the tories again yesterday. These polls were completed in the days after the economy finally went past its previous peak. Yet more evidence that this sort of economic data does not butter many parsnips.

    Tory election policy at the moment still seems to be largely based on this ignored data and a slightly perverse assumption that Ed will somehow implode during a GE campaign. I have real doubts about this.

    Our election campaigns in the last few cycles have been incredibly sterile affairs made up of speeches and contrived "events" in front of their own supporters with very few risks or awkward interviews. I fear that even the debates (if they happen at all) will proceed rapidly to American style blandness with generalities and clichés being trundled out to broad questions.

    With Paxo retired the main object of the party organisers will be to keep their candidates away from Andrew Neill. Other than that it will be fairly plain sailing. The tories are running out of time and the probabilities of a Labour government are increasing week by week. I expect Professor Fisher to show this is the most likely outcome within the next fortnight.

    The Ashcroft marginal poll will be interesting, the sample size is much bigger so the overall swing should - if you believe the marginals are behaving like the rest of the country by more "accurate" than his recent swing polls.
    I have real doubts about the utility or accuracy of marginal polling. Admittedly Lord Ashcroft is doing this on a different scale from what we have seen before and that might improve things but it will be as untested as his weekly poll which sadly has become a joke.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited July 2014
    DavidL said:

    SquareRoot said:

    With friends like these...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2708908/His-memoirs-serialised-Mail-convulsed-Westminster-Now-Gordon-Brown-s-spin-doctor-gives-withering-verdict-two-Eds-Paranoid-confused-policies-great-steaming-pile-fudge.html

    Actually I think that is a seriously smart article by someone who knows what he is doing and the Eds would be well advised to think about it. [snip]
    Well he got this bit right: "Miliband is surrounded by many of the same advisers who formed the ‘Image Problem’ insurgency around my former boss, continually urging Gordon to counter the negative perceptions of his character by acting like something he was not. Ed has retained none of the advisers who were in the opposite camp, urging Gordon just to be himself.

    The result? One day, Ed’s advisers tell him to be pictured doing the everyday things that normal people do to show he’s not ‘weird’ - like eating a bacon sandwich."
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest McARSE Scottish Referendum Projection Countdown

    1 hour 1 minute 1 second
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,781
    Patrick said:

    Mike - may be a stupid question: Does this pie chart mean that the % of UKIP voters whose preferred outcome in 2015 of having a UKIP government is 0%?

    They weren't given that option, only the more plausible ones. If the question had included every theoretical option it would have gone on forever ("How about a LibDem-Green-UKIP coaliiton?").

    This finding seems a direct consequence of the Lab->UKIP swing that we saw in the same Ashcroft marginal poll, and I met it on the doorstep too in a WWC ward. Typical conversation: "We need to shake things up, think I might vote...differently...this time." "In practice the result will probably be a Conservative or Labour win here, which would you prefer of those?" "Oh, Labour, can't have the Tories staying on".

    Will we get them back in 2015? About half, I'd guess, which is probably the same as the Tories with their defectors. So no, a potential UKIP decline probably won't make a lot of difference.

    We oscillate here between gloats and muttering as the polls oscillate, but really they're stuck at Lab +3/4. As David L says, it's difficult to see a reason why that would magically change to restoring the 2010 Tory lead of 7. It won't go the other way either (Lab lead of 10 or whatever), but the shortage of "Don't knows" on the doorstep does suggest that a lot of people have basically decided. Yesterday's Ashcroft poll on "Might you change your mind?" had IIRC "no" over 60 for Lab, Con and UKIP around 60, LDs down at 30ish.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    This looks like the work of McBrides evil twin: http://justnotuptoit.com/

    Its hard to know who actually reads or writes these things, but they do all add to the theme.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Motto of the day:
    Vote UKIP; Get UKIP.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    MikeK said:

    Motto of the day:
    Vote UKIP; Get UKIP.

    More likely: Vote UKIP and make very little difference to anything!

    Perhaps not a pithy enough slogan though.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    foxinsoxuk said:

    MikeK said:

    Motto of the day:
    Vote UKIP; Get UKIP.

    More likely: Vote UKIP and make very little difference to anything!

    Perhaps not a pithy enough slogan though.
    Vote UKIP Get Nowt

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,297
    foxinsoxuk said:

    MikeK said:

    Motto of the day:
    Vote UKIP; Get UKIP.

    More likely: Vote UKIP and make very little difference to anything!

    Perhaps not a pithy enough slogan though.
    Vote UKIP, c*ck things up for this and perhaps next election, but it doesn't matter because we don't think Cam is a man of his word and won't deliver on a referendum but of course we can't prove a negative so you will just have to go with us on this one.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,781
    Morales goes for the Political Betting vote:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/feedarticle/11464157
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    NPXMP

    Sounds as if you're quietly confident of ousting La Soubry in May. If you do please heed SeanT's advice and this time round don't eat your own feet to please the whips. Vote for what's right not what your idiot bucktooth dweeb fuhrer thinks is good. The money's gone and the country is literally not able to afford another bout of Gordonomics. Do your duty.

    (and don't forget - overnight sleeper from Beijing to Shanghai is the way to go).
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Surely the point is Cam wants the Miliband fearers back and the Miliband lovers to stay UKIP. From the polling there is about 6 points worth of Kipper to work on. Enough, on average polling of late, to keep him neck and neck on seats. The message will still be potent, but to a smaller audience.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,297
    NickPalmer said:

    Morales goes for the Political Betting vote:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/feedarticle/11464157

    Nick while you're on and because I think we didn't clear things up yesterday...you said yesterday that the Lab party wasn't offering an in/out referendum in the case of greater powers being transferred to Brussels.

    Have you found the bit of Lab policy which shows that this is not the case and can you clarify that you are fighting Broxtowe on the policy of giving voters an in/out referendum under those circumstances?

    Let me help:

    labour.org.uk/our-position-on-europe-in-five-bullet-points
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    NickPalmer said:

    Patrick said:

    Mike - may be a stupid question: Does this pie chart mean that the % of UKIP voters whose preferred outcome in 2015 of having a UKIP government is 0%?

    They weren't given that option, only the more plausible ones. If the question had included every theoretical option it would have gone on forever ("How about a LibDem-Green-UKIP coaliiton?").

    This finding seems a direct consequence of the Lab->UKIP swing that we saw in the same Ashcroft marginal poll, and I met it on the doorstep too in a WWC ward. Typical conversation: "We need to shake things up, think I might vote...differently...this time." "In practice the result will probably be a Conservative or Labour win here, which would you prefer of those?" "Oh, Labour, can't have the Tories staying on".

    Will we get them back in 2015? About half, I'd guess, which is probably the same as the Tories with their defectors. So no, a potential UKIP decline probably won't make a lot of difference.

    We oscillate here between gloats and muttering as the polls oscillate, but really they're stuck at Lab +3/4. As David L says, it's difficult to see a reason why that would magically change to restoring the 2010 Tory lead of 7. It won't go the other way either (Lab lead of 10 or whatever), but the shortage of "Don't knows" on the doorstep does suggest that a lot of people have basically decided. Yesterday's Ashcroft poll on "Might you change your mind?" had IIRC "no" over 60 for Lab, Con and UKIP around 60, LDs down at 30ish.

    So over 40% of voters might change their minds then.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,980
    LATEST BJESUS

    29.7.14 LAB 332 (331) CON 260(261) LD 34(34) UKIP 0(0) Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
    BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
    Using current polling adj for 281 days left to go factor and using UKPR swingometer
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,781
    dyedwoolie said:



    So over 40% of voters might change their minds then.

    Yes (well, 30-odd of Labour), but these polls are a bit like the "Might you emigrate?" polls we were discussing the other day - they measure the absolute minimum willingness to even think about it. The figure used to be 50% and it's steadily hardening down.

    Topping - I'll talk about my Broxtowe pitch in Broxtowe...

    Patrick: yes, the feet-eating was always a bit exaggerated by Letts in the Mail (I voted against the party majority 35 times) but I do think I got too much in the habit of looking for any "benefit of the doubt" argument. If I do get back I'd expect to be constructively critical of whoever wins overall. In the end you don't do friends a favour by reassuring them too often. And yes, failing black swans I'm fairly hopeful of getting back.

    I looked closely at that sleeper option, thanks - it did sound good and I have happy memories of sleepers when younger. But there were practical issues (apart from sharing with 1-3 strangers - can we guarantee that they'd be as serious as Mr Morales suggests?) - the visa application requires me to specify where I'll be every night and I'm not sure that "on a train" cuts it without time-consuming delays while they ask wtf I mean by that. But I've taken the advice to go by train rather than fly.
  • macisbackmacisback Posts: 382
    NickPalmer said:

    Patrick said:

    Mike - may be a stupid question: Does this pie chart mean that the % of UKIP voters whose preferred outcome in 2015 of having a UKIP government is 0%?

    They weren't given that option, only the more plausible ones. If the question had included every theoretical option it would have gone on forever ("How about a LibDem-Green-UKIP coaliiton?").

    This finding seems a direct consequence of the Lab->UKIP swing that we saw in the same Ashcroft marginal poll, and I met it on the doorstep too in a WWC ward. Typical conversation: "We need to shake things up, think I might vote...differently...this time." "In practice the result will probably be a Conservative or Labour win here, which would you prefer of those?" "Oh, Labour, can't have the Tories staying on".

    Will we get them back in 2015? About half, I'd guess, which is probably the same as the Tories with their defectors. So no, a potential UKIP decline probably won't make a lot of difference.

    We oscillate here between gloats and muttering as the polls oscillate, but really they're stuck at Lab +3/4. As David L says, it's difficult to see a reason why that would magically change to restoring the 2010 Tory lead of 7. It won't go the other way either (Lab lead of 10 or whatever), but the shortage of "Don't knows" on the doorstep does suggest that a lot of people have basically decided. Yesterday's Ashcroft poll on "Might you change your mind?" had IIRC "no" over 60 for Lab, Con and UKIP around 60, LDs down at 30ish.

    You won't get half of your lost vote to UKIP back, you really don't know the mindset of the WWC person if you think that. You have lost the vast majority of those and if you acknowledge the reasons why you would know they are not coming back.

    Most would never vote Conservative it is in the DNA not to but UKIP is an option that appeals to many WWC people now and we all know the reasons.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    NickPalmer said:

    dyedwoolie said:





    Topping - I'll talk about my Broxtowe pitch in Broxtowe...

    .


    I am glad to hear this, sso it wont be like 2010.. on here
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,297
    NickPalmer said:

    dyedwoolie said:



    So over 40% of voters might change their minds then.



    Topping - I'll talk about my Broxtowe pitch in Broxtowe...

    Wriggly Nick.

    You got it wrong yesterday and I thought you might be one of those who had the integrity to admit it.

    For reference, here is the Labour "bullet point" which you seemed to be unaware of.

    "4. The law will guarantee that no power can be transferred from Britain to the EU without an in/out referendum"
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,980
    7th BJESUS shows amazing consistency with first six, All show small overall LAB Maj. This is due to the consistency overall of the polls and the fact that there are now 56 days less to go than first BJESUS..

    Full list of BJESUS
    17.6.14 LAB 330 CON 263 LD 33 UKIP 0 Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    24.6.14 LAB 330 CON 263 LD 33 UKIP 0 Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    1.7.14 LAB 329(330) CON 268 (263) LD 29(33) UKIP 0(0) Others 24(24) (Ed is crap is PM)
    8.7.14 LAB 330 (329) CON 264(268) LD 32(29) UKIP 0(0) Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    15.7.14 LAB 329 (330) CON 264(264) LD 33(32) UKIP 0(0) Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    22.7.14 LAB 331 (329) CON 261(264) LD 34(33) UKIP 0(0) Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    29.7.14 LAB 332 (331) CON 260(261) LD 34(34) UKIP 0(0) Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)

    Actually on one of these I mistakenly had other on 26( total that week was 652 oops) so corrected
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Good morning, everyone.

    The line could cut two ways:
    frighten blue kippers back to the Conservatives
    make red kippers feel more comfortable

    Either works for the Conservatives, and both would be very helpful.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    NickPalmer said:

    dyedwoolie said:



    So over 40% of voters might change their minds then.

    Yes (well, 30-odd of Labour), but these polls are a bit like the "Might you emigrate?" polls we were discussing the other day - they measure the absolute minimum willingness to even think about it. The figure used to be 50% and it's steadily hardening down.

    Topping - I'll talk about my Broxtowe pitch in Broxtowe...

    Patrick: yes, the feet-eating was always a bit exaggerated by Letts in the Mail (I voted against the party majority 35 times) but I do think I got too much in the habit of looking for any "benefit of the doubt" argument. If I do get back I'd expect to be constructively critical of whoever wins overall. In the end you don't do friends a favour by reassuring them too often. And yes, failing black swans I'm fairly hopeful of getting back.

    I looked closely at that sleeper option, thanks - it did sound good and I have happy memories of sleepers when younger. But there were practical issues (apart from sharing with 1-3 strangers - can we guarantee that they'd be as serious as Mr Morales suggests?) - the visa application requires me to specify where I'll be every night and I'm not sure that "on a train" cuts it without time-consuming delays while they ask wtf I mean by that. But I've taken the advice to go by train rather than fly.
    So Labour have a hard 25 and a soft 12, the Tories a hard 20 and a soft 13 (or thereabouts) with the the Lib Dems on a hard 4! Soft 6 and UKIP hard 9 soft 6.
    Looks to me like a rerun of the 2005 result with much lower Lib/Higher UKIP and probably a harder to shift Tory incumbency. Very small Lab majority or Minority government, black swans notwithstanding
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest McARSE Scottish Referendum Projection Countdown

    10 minutes
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,980
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    The line could cut two ways:
    frighten blue kippers back to the Conservatives
    make red kippers feel more comfortable

    Either works for the Conservatives, and both would be very helpful.

    Mr Dancer Which camp are you in and what policy change or frightening occurrence would be required to change your vote?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Beginning to look like the only way Dave is good is PM is for George to find a way to put money in people's pockets and spread the feel good about the economy. VAT cut incoming.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,216
    edited July 2014
    More than half of UKIP voters voted Tory in 2010 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/24/more-than-half-ukip-voters-disenchanted-tories-ashcroft-poll.

    Add together Tory preferences and Don't Knows in this poll and you get a majority. It is up to Cameron to get these voters voting for him again on a blunt choice with him and a referendum or Miliband and no referendum
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    The elderly are fleeing the Tory party. We all know the damage that happens with the blue and the grey
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Mr. Owls, in terms of planned voting?

    Ed Balls is my MP and the closest challenger by miles is the Conservative. It'd take something monumental, on that basis, for me to vote other than Conservative at the General Election.

    If Yes won and Osborne reneged on the currency union promise (ie he let one go ahead) I'd vote for another party, spoil my ballot or perhaps not turn out. Hard to think of anything else that *might* happen (I think the above scenario very unlikely).
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    A very interesting pie chart, and I can see why it's changed OGH's thinking.

    A couple of questions occur to me: are Kippers the same (demographically) in marginal and in Tory safe seats? The pie chart (IIUI) implies that UKIP will poll as well (or almost as well) in safe Labour seats as in safe Tory ones. Does anyone - of whatever political views - believe this?
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    dyedwoolie said:

    Beginning to look like the only way Dave is good is PM is for George to find a way to put money in people's pockets and spread the feel good about the economy. VAT cut incoming.

    You will never see VAT below 20% again. From a tory point of view the cut will come from the direction of income tax.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of the latest McARSE Scottish Referendum Projection (Changes Since 15st July)

    Should Scotland Be An Independent Country ?

    YES 37% (NC) .. No 63% (NC)

    Turnout Projection 81.5% (+1%)

    ......................................................................

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    McARSE - My Caledonian Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    The line could cut two ways:
    frighten blue kippers back to the Conservatives
    make red kippers feel more comfortable

    Either works for the Conservatives, and both would be very helpful.

    But how do red and blue 'kippers' live together? What kind of party is UKIP? How much traction is there for a Party of the Prejudiced?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Good for you Nick
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Mr. Flightpath, I suspect a Party of the Pissed Off would be a more apt way of putting it.

    The WWC has been ignored/taken for granted/misunderstood by Labour for years. Similarly, Cameron's been so keen to seize the centre (with some success) and get soft leftists (with little success) on side he's ignored and alienated what should've been the bedrock of his support: traditional, rightwing Conservatives.

    The two major parties left a wide open space for a socially conservative party to grow.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,688
    Labour was, traditionally a mix of Methodist and Marxists. I suspect that while Ed etc can’t really be described as Marxists, they sure as hell can’t be described as Methodists!
    Labours problem is that the Methodists have been marginalised and some at least would like to return to what they fondly recall as “better days”.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,212
    OT: I think they are missing an option - "Don't care".
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MattChorley: While Labour talk about public question time and private sector mandates, the Tories hit them with this. http://t.co/qRzWZWBntJ
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    HYUFD said:

    More than half of UKIP voters voted Tory in 2010 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/24/more-than-half-ukip-voters-disenchanted-tories-ashcroft-poll.

    Add together Tory preferences and Don't Knows in this poll and you get a majority. It is up to Cameron to get these voters voting for him again on a blunt choice with him and a referendum or Miliband and no referendum

    You need to knock off the 20% that sy they will vote Conservative anyway as those will show up as current Con VI in Westminster polls - And then factor for Euro turnout

    By my calculations that is 1312989 ((0.5 - 0.2)*4,376,635) voters.

    29678114 voters showed up at the last GE calculating from wiki hence that is 4.4%.

    A prize well worth having but getting them all back will be... tricky.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Scott_P said:

    @MattChorley: While Labour talk about public question time and private sector mandates, the Tories hit them with this. http://t.co/qRzWZWBntJ

    Ed will like that. Tories getting really desperate.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Flightpath, I suspect a Party of the Pissed Off would be a more apt way of putting it.

    The WWC has been ignored/taken for granted/misunderstood by Labour for years. Similarly, Cameron's been so keen to seize the centre (with some success) and get soft leftists (with little success) on side he's ignored and alienated what should've been the bedrock of his support: traditional, rightwing Conservatives.

    The two major parties left a wide open space for a socially conservative party to grow.

    Well, some people may grumble into their mild-and-bitters about gay marriages and women in mitres but I doubt that such issues really have that much traction...

    No, "socially conservative" is a pleasing euphemism for racism. As I said to my mother nearly fifty years ago now, you can't both believe in market forces and moan when an upwardly-mobile Asian couple buy the plot of land next to yours in your idealised Lincolnshire village. Well, you can, of course, but you have to take the consequences to your reputation....

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Mr. Abroad, writing off a significant chunk of the electorate by slapping a negative label on them is why there's been so much room for UKIP to grow.

    Remind me again which party's former Immigration Minister wanted to make the whites angry?

    Still, if you label someone 'racist' or 'doubleplusungood' it does save you the trouble of trying to understand them, or their concerns.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    Innocent_Abroad said:


    No, "socially conservative" is a pleasing euphemism for racism.

    It's precisely that sort of insinuation that turns people towards "socially conservative" political parties. Actually when I think of 'social conservatives' my mind immediately springs to devout Christians, Jews and Muslims, "old Labour" and the right of the conservative party - as well as a fair chunk of the WWC. Quite a broad population segment apparently...
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,781
    OldKingCole said:

    Labour was, traditionally a mix of Methodist and Marxists. I suspect that while Ed etc can’t really be described as Marxists, they sure as hell can’t be described as Methodists!
    Labours problem is that the Methodists have been marginalised and some at least would like to return to what they fondly recall as “better days”.

    In the literal sense, the Methodist influence and presence is still pretty strong - it's a very important strand of the Labour and LibDem parties in my patch, where the combination of intellectualism, Methodism and general social idealism makes the prosperous middle-class Labour vote so robust - it's our equivalent of the Islington vote.

    If you meant the broader issue of social conservatism, yes, it's a factor in UKIP's rise, just not from Methodists!

  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    It's still vote ukip and get Miliband. At the last election it was calculated by some that the Tories lost 20 seats owing to kipper voting. 2015 will be worse for the Tories. Farage has claimed he wants to destroy the Conservative Party. Be careful what you wish for. Just imagine, Miliband as PM forever!
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    edited July 2014
    Pulpstar said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:


    No, "socially conservative" is a pleasing euphemism for racism.

    It's precisely that sort of insinuation that turns people towards "socially conservative" political parties. Actually when I think of 'social conservatives' my mind immediately springs to devout Christians, Jews and Muslims, "old Labour" and the right of the conservative party - as well as a fair chunk of the WWC. Quite a broad population segment apparently...
    FWIW I have no doubt that perhaps two thirds - or even more - of the population is "socially conservative" in the broad sense you have of the term. However, I am not trying to win an election (or even stand for election, thank God). It is, without exception, the product of fear. So it appears that you (and others here, of course) want to be afraid. I wonder why!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Mr. Perdix, Farage has lost focus. How many decades does he think it would take for the blues to die and UKIP to usurp them?

    And the blues are now offering an in/out referendum.

    Farage is too busy admiring the view in the mirror to focus on the raison d'etre of UKIP.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    perdix said:

    It's still vote ukip and get Miliband. At the last election it was calculated by some that the Tories lost 20 seats owing to kipper voting. 2015 will be worse for the Tories. Farage has claimed he wants to destroy the Conservative Party. Be careful what you wish for. Just imagine, Miliband as PM forever!

    Oh my dear @perdix, scare mongering is alive and well, as the fear of UKIP increases.
    And why that fear? Because it is a new and fresh force in British politics and all the established parties fear something new and fresh that can and will damage their own prospects of power.

    Later today I will publish my bi monthly forecast of how many likely UKIP candidates are likely to capture seats in the 2015 GE.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:


    No, "socially conservative" is a pleasing euphemism for racism.

    It's precisely that sort of insinuation that turns people towards "socially conservative" political parties. Actually when I think of 'social conservatives' my mind immediately springs to devout Christians, Jews and Muslims, "old Labour" and the right of the conservative party - as well as a fair chunk of the WWC. Quite a broad population segment apparently...
    FWIW I have no doubt that perhaps two thirds - or even more - of the population is "socially conservative" in the broad sense you have of the term. However, I am not trying to win an election (or even stand for election, thank God). It is, without exception, the product of fear. So it appears that you (and others here, of course) want to be afraid. I wonder why!
    Me ? I'm socially liberal and tend to vote Conservative. The only thing that worries me is a Conservative majority Government but that's only because I've got a betting position set out against it.
    But I can see why others worry about stuff that I don't.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Mr. K, scare-mongering?

    Didn't UKIP have a poster campaign about Johnny Foreigner coming over and trying to take YOUR job?

    Scare-mongering isn't the nicest political tactic but it's not new and it's not confined to the established parties.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    And as for that "colossal mistake" AKA last Friday's speech? To the extent that it's changed the conversation at all, it seems to have had the effect that every critique of him now begins with some variation on "Ed Miliband thinks his problem is that he's a weirdo. Actually his problem is…" (Hugo Rifkind, Steve Richards and Janan Ganesh all have good entries in that emerging genre this morning)

    A traitor? Possibly. Desperately unhelpful? Most definitely. But the trouble for Labour is that there's a distinct possibility that Damian McBride is right.
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephenkb/100281705/ignore-the-messenger-and-look-at-the-message-what-if-damian-mcbride-is-right/
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    Scott_P said:

    And as for that "colossal mistake" AKA last Friday's speech? To the extent that it's changed the conversation at all, it seems to have had the effect that every critique of him now begins with some variation on "Ed Miliband thinks his problem is that he's a weirdo. Actually his problem is…" (Hugo Rifkind, Steve Richards and Janan Ganesh all have good entries in that emerging genre this morning)

    A traitor? Possibly. Desperately unhelpful? Most definitely. But the trouble for Labour is that there's a distinct possibility that Damian McBride is right.
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephenkb/100281705/ignore-the-messenger-and-look-at-the-message-what-if-damian-mcbride-is-right/


    Those comments are even worse than here.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    radsatser said:

    I wonder why we bother having elections when the BTL commentators seem to have all the answers to all the questions regarding UKIP.

    Just a quick question why aren't most of you millionaires by now, after all there have been some cracking betting odds over recent years for laying the house on UKIP, which should have been seen as money for old rope to such apparent fonts of all knowledge on the thought processes of the UKIP voter.

    Let me answer the question for most of you, it didn't happen because few of you came anywhere close to seeing the rise of UKIP or its consolidation, in fact most of you have been making betting decisions influenced by sentiment, continuing to bet on the old donkeys well past their best, but they made a lot of money for you as 2yr olds. Mug punting at its finest!!

    There is no compelling evidence that UKIP will drop back by the GE, or that the 'silly chuffers' who vote for them will abandon their committment of the last few years, simply to vote in Ed or Dave. Unlike John Looney who abandoned the Monster Raving Loony Party to become a booted and suited Conservative, presumably because he was fed up being an ineffective silly bu**er, most kippers in my experience take their politics very seriously .

    BTL ?
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    Surely the reason kippers are relaxed about a Labour government is because it will give them the thing they want most in the world: no referendum.

    'Out' would lose a referendum vote as badly as, or more likely worse than, the SNP is going to lose its IndyRef. So UKIPpers don't actually want one at all, despite their protestations. They are desperate to avoid one and are utterly dismayed by Cameron's pledge of one. The online kipper hate for him has ratcheted up sharply ever since he shot their fox.

    I actually think this applies every bit as much to UKIP's "leadership" as to their members. Farage trousers millions from the taxpayer, has achieved exactly nothing for his constituents and would be out of a job if he got his wish. Why would he want that? He's in it to line his pockets and loaf around.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    On topic: I think this simply reinforces a point I've made before: if we assume that at least some of the current 13% or so of voters who are currently saying they'll vote UKIP return to their former parties, will they do so in proportion to where they came from, or will ex-Labour voters behave differently in this respect from ex-Conservative voters? The answer to that question is, frankly, anyone's guess, but it will largely decide the outcome of the next election. So the Tories will certainly be running the 'Vote UKIP Get Miliband' line, which, as others have pointed out, may be doubly helpful in peeling off the Blue Kippers whilst encouraging the Red Kippers to stay in place.

    Labour's response to UKIP has been more confused; there is clearly a disagreement within the party as to whether they should be encouraging UKIP because it damages the Tories more, or worrying about the effect on their own vote. So far the former view seems to be predominating, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some panic on the subject later in the year.

    The other key point, of course, is that the degree of swing back from UKIP is likely to vary significantly from constituency to constituency. That's going to be one of the most difficult factors to assess in this election. I'd recommend keeping an eye on Ian Warren's work at:

    http://election-data.blogspot.co.uk/
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    radsatser said:

    ....Just a quick question why aren't most of you millionaires by now, after all there have been some cracking betting odds over recent years for laying the house on UKIP, which should have been seen as money for old rope to such apparent fonts of all knowledge on the thought processes of the UKIP voter.
    Let me answer the question for most of you, it didn't happen because few of you came anywhere close to seeing the rise of UKIP or its consolidation, in fact most of you have been making betting decisions influenced by sentiment, continuing to bet on the old donkeys well past their best, but they made a lot of money for you as 2yr olds. Mug punting at its finest!!
    ....

    My best political bet winner this year is the UKIP bet I made almost 2 years ago which won £800+ on 9/1 odds, for UKIP winning the Euros. The stake was the max that the betting site would allow. I also think that UKIP at GE2015 are the biggest danger to us not having a referendum on Europe within the next 5 years.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    @ 17:00 hrs I will publish my bi-monthly forecast of the number of seats likely to be won by UKIP.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Flightpath, I suspect a Party of the Pissed Off would be a more apt way of putting it.

    The WWC has been ignored/taken for granted/misunderstood by Labour for years. Similarly, Cameron's been so keen to seize the centre (with some success) and get soft leftists (with little success) on side he's ignored and alienated what should've been the bedrock of his support: traditional, rightwing Conservatives.

    The two major parties left a wide open space for a socially conservative party to grow.

    I don't know that i agree with that. I have no time for Labour or socialists but I think they are forever pandering to what you call the WWC. They also pander to anyone white or coloured with any kind of sense of entitlement in whatever takes their prejudice.
    I think that the conservative party has always (certainly in modern times) been firmly rooted in the centre - and all the better for that. The point about the current conservative party is that it is in the centre of the modern world not the one of Empire and Festival of Britain.

    And you do need to define what you mean by socially conservative.
    In respect of the comment below about racism I am happy in the view that Farage and UKIP have been giving a very loud dog whistle to the racist tendency out there. Anyone who denies that is taking the rest of us for fools. Far too many of UKIP's activists and candidates have been exposed as nasty pieces of work. All the 'we are not racists' protests do not wash with me. It does not matter if Farage is a racist or not - its the casual language the hints the nudge nudge. UKIP are pandering to the basest tendencies in society.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Morris_Dancer

    'Farage is too busy admiring the view in the mirror to focus on the raison d'etre of UKIP.'

    Why would he want to get off the Brussels gravy train?
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Perdix, Farage has lost focus. How many decades does he think it would take for the blues to die and UKIP to usurp them?
    And the blues are now offering an in/out referendum.
    Farage is too busy admiring the view in the mirror to focus on the raison d'etre of UKIP.

    The main purpose of UKIP was to have an in/out referendum on Europe. Farage once said that he would "do a deal with the devil to get one". Now, the problem is who loses if we have a referendum? Irregardless of the result, one party's leadership suffers. UKIP. Becuase having a referendum kills off the main founding principle for UKIP. Or should do, but the Leadership want to keep their jobs so they have moved away from their founding principle and are also actively working to avoid a referendum by "helping" Labour/LD chances at the GE.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited July 2014
    radsatser said:



    There is no compelling evidence that UKIP will drop back by the GE, or that the 'silly chuffers' who vote for them will abandon their committment of the last few years, simply to vote in Ed or Dave. Unlike John Looney who abandoned the Monster Raving Loony Party to become a booted and suited Conservative, presumably because he was fed up being an ineffective silly bu**er, most kippers in my experience take their politics very seriously .

    UKIP result in 2004 - 16.1%
    UKIP result in 2005 - 2.2%


    UKIP result in 2009 - 16.5%
    UKIP result in 2010 - 3.1%

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Pulpstar said:

    Scott_P said:

    And as for that "colossal mistake" AKA last Friday's speech? To the extent that it's changed the conversation at all, it seems to have had the effect that every critique of him now begins with some variation on "Ed Miliband thinks his problem is that he's a weirdo. Actually his problem is…" (Hugo Rifkind, Steve Richards and Janan Ganesh all have good entries in that emerging genre this morning)

    A traitor? Possibly. Desperately unhelpful? Most definitely. But the trouble for Labour is that there's a distinct possibility that Damian McBride is right.
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephenkb/100281705/ignore-the-messenger-and-look-at-the-message-what-if-damian-mcbride-is-right/

    Those comments are even worse than here.

    Ed has no policies of note - a total waster.

    Labour types are clinging to the polls - but for what end ? Peoples question time ? Do me a favour.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Scott_P said:

    And as for that "colossal mistake" AKA last Friday's speech? To the extent that it's changed the conversation at all, it seems to have had the effect that every critique of him now begins with some variation on "Ed Miliband thinks his problem is that he's a weirdo. Actually his problem is…" (Hugo Rifkind, Steve Richards and Janan Ganesh all have good entries in that emerging genre this morning)

    A traitor? Possibly. Desperately unhelpful? Most definitely. But the trouble for Labour is that there's a distinct possibility that Damian McBride is right.
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/stephenkb/100281705/ignore-the-messenger-and-look-at-the-message-what-if-damian-mcbride-is-right/

    Those comments are even worse than here.
    Ed has no policies of note - a total waster.

    Labour types are clinging to the polls - but for what end ? Peoples question time ? Do me a favour.

    Shall we put you down as a maybe?

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    radsatser said:

    ....Just a quick question why aren't most of you millionaires by now, after all there have been some cracking betting odds over recent years for laying the house on UKIP, which should have been seen as money for old rope to such apparent fonts of all knowledge on the thought processes of the UKIP voter.
    Let me answer the question for most of you, it didn't happen because few of you came anywhere close to seeing the rise of UKIP or its consolidation, in fact most of you have been making betting decisions influenced by sentiment, continuing to bet on the old donkeys well past their best, but they made a lot of money for you as 2yr olds. Mug punting at its finest!!
    ....

    My best political bet winner this year is the UKIP bet I made almost 2 years ago which won £800+ on 9/1 odds, for UKIP winning the Euros. The stake was the max that the betting site would allow. I also think that UKIP at GE2015 are the biggest danger to us not having a referendum on Europe within the next 5 years.
    No, the biggest danger to a referendum on Europe is cameron himself, who will renege on his promise - forced by UKIP in the first place - of a referendum, as he has reneged and lied about almost every specific promise he has ever made.

    Only UKIP MP's in parliament will bring about referendum on the EU, whoever is made PM in 2015.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,060
    Flightpath said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    The line could cut two ways:
    frighten blue kippers back to the Conservatives
    make red kippers feel more comfortable

    Either works for the Conservatives, and both would be very helpful.

    But how do red and blue 'kippers' live together? What kind of party is UKIP? How much traction is there for a Party of the Prejudiced?
    Lib Dems managed it for years, light blue in the south and rural areas, lefties in the cities. It was only once they finally had to do something that they got rumbled, fortunately for Labour they turned out to be be pale blue.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MikeK said:



    Only UKIP MP's in parliament will bring about referendum on the EU, whoever is made PM in 2015.

    Even you cant be expecting a UKIP majority next year...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,884
    Mr. K, disagree. Let's assume you're right about Cameron. Can you really see the Conservative backbenchers letting him get away with that? He'll either have to provide a referendum or be axed and replaced with someone who will.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Neil said:

    MikeK said:



    Only UKIP MP's in parliament will bring about referendum on the EU, whoever is made PM in 2015.

    Even you cant be expecting a UKIP majority next year...
    Don't be silly and obtuse. I mean the UKIP MP's in parliament will keep a referendum before the public eye.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited July 2014
    Louth and Horncastle Conservatives selected Victoria Atkins last night.

    The outcome will free a slot in future shortlists. Louth was her 4th shortlist in this Parliament after Tonbridge and Malling, Mid Worcestershire and North East Hampshire. And she also stood in Gloucestershire PCC elections.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MikeK said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:



    Only UKIP MP's in parliament will bring about referendum on the EU, whoever is made PM in 2015.

    Even you cant be expecting a UKIP majority next year...
    Don't be silly and obtuse. I mean the UKIP MP's in parliament will keep a referendum before the public eye.
    As opposed to Tory MPs who could actually get one through Parliament.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,096
    Neil said:

    radsatser said:



    There is no compelling evidence that UKIP will drop back by the GE, or that the 'silly chuffers' who vote for them will abandon their committment of the last few years, simply to vote in Ed or Dave. Unlike John Looney who abandoned the Monster Raving Loony Party to become a booted and suited Conservative, presumably because he was fed up being an ineffective silly bu**er, most kippers in my experience take their politics very seriously .

    UKIP result in 2004 - 16.1%
    UKIP result in 2005 - 2.2%


    UKIP result in 2009 - 16.5%
    UKIP result in 2010 - 3.1%

    IPSOS Mori Westminster VI at this point in both those cycles: 4%

    ___________________________________________________________

    UKIP result in 2014 - 27.5%

    IPSOS Mori Westminster VI at this point right now: 12%

    Certainly stronger than in 2009 or 2004 - heading for 11% at Westminster next year ?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    MikeK said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    radsatser said:

    ....Just a quick question why aren't most of you millionaires by now, after all there have been some cracking betting odds over recent years for laying the house on UKIP, which should have been seen as money for old rope to such apparent fonts of all knowledge on the thought processes of the UKIP voter.
    Let me answer the question for most of you, it didn't happen because few of you came anywhere close to seeing the rise of UKIP or its consolidation, in fact most of you have been making betting decisions influenced by sentiment, continuing to bet on the old donkeys well past their best, but they made a lot of money for you as 2yr olds. Mug punting at its finest!!
    ....

    My best political bet winner this year is the UKIP bet I made almost 2 years ago which won £800+ on 9/1 odds, for UKIP winning the Euros. The stake was the max that the betting site would allow. I also think that UKIP at GE2015 are the biggest danger to us not having a referendum on Europe within the next 5 years.
    No, the biggest danger to a referendum on Europe is cameron himself, who will renege on his promise
    What are this week's lottery numbers ?


  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    OldKingCole said:

    Labour was, traditionally a mix of Methodist and Marxists. I suspect that while Ed etc can’t really be described as Marxists, they sure as hell can’t be described as Methodists!
    Labours problem is that the Methodists have been marginalised and some at least would like to return to what they fondly recall as “better days”.

    Thats a traditionally glib way to describe Labour. And whilst its unlikely Ed Miliband is a' Karl Marxist' I think his leaning is to the public central control side of socialism.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited July 2014
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Perdix, Farage has lost focus. How many decades does he think it would take for the blues to die and UKIP to usurp them?
    And the blues are now offering an in/out referendum.
    Farage is too busy admiring the view in the mirror to focus on the raison d'etre of UKIP.

    The main purpose of UKIP was to have an in/out referendum on Europe. Farage once said that he would "do a deal with the devil to get one". Now, the problem is who loses if we have a referendum? Irregardless of the result, one party's leadership suffers. UKIP. Becuase having a referendum kills off the main founding principle for UKIP. Or should do, but the Leadership want to keep their jobs so they have moved away from their founding principle and are also actively working to avoid a referendum by "helping" Labour/LD chances at the GE.
    Do you always write such crap.
    If you did your homework, you'll have found that UKIP is no longer a one man band and has never been a one policy party, and has changed beyond recognition in the last 2 years.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    My offer of up to £1000 at Evens to any credit-worthy punter who thinks Cameron would renege on his referendum pledge remains open. The terms are: Assuming a Conservative majority in 2015, I win if there is a referendum by the end of 2017, I lose if there isn't. Bet void if no Conservative majority. I'm even prepared to take the risk that there could be a tiny majority in 2015 but the the government could collapse before being able to bring in the referendum.

    Oddly, despite the fact that the Kippers keep saying that Cameron will break his pledge, not a single one has taken up my generous offer.

    You may, I think, draw the obvious conclusion.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025