politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The devastating detail from the Survation Clacton by-electi
In all the time I have been following and analysing polls there has never been anything as sensational as the Survation Clacton poll for the Mail on Sunday published overnight. The figures are extraordinary and point to an overwhelming victory for Douglas Carswell in his new colours.
Comments
-
That's quite a decent chunk from Labour voters too, when you allow for the fact that the UKIP candidate they're saying they'll vote for now is the same bloke they voted against in 2010.0
-
If this comment from the Daily Mail is true then the authorities have behaved disgracefully and are abusing the purpose of the EAW in a horrific manner
Mr King told how they had wanted to leave the hospital because the NHS could not fund the proton beam treatment that they wanted for their son.
Proton beam therapy is well established theoretically, although given the capital cost of installing the dedicated facilities it remains relatively rare. That said, there's probably been 100,000 patients treated with it, mainly in the US and Japan - a good friend of mine was looking at ways to bring Mevion's (www.mevion.com) technology to the UK precisely because he saw the benefits from the therapy approach.
It also has 501K approval in the US; Mevion states that their product complies with CE requirements in Europe - which looks to me odd wording suggesting they haven't got a CE mark.
But whatever. This *isn't* a case of no treatment or some kookie homepathic theory. This is serious medical therapy - and the parents should be entitled to treat their child using it even if the NHS doesn't want to pay for it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738742/BREAKING-NEWS-Terminally-ill-boy-Ashya-5-alive-police-Spain-Jehovahs-Witness-father-explains-parents-snatched-hospital-went-run.html0 -
From FPT:Charles said:If this comment from the Daily Mail is true then the authorities have behaved disgracefully and are abusing the purpose of the EAW in a horrific manner
Mr King told how they had wanted to leave the hospital because the NHS could not fund the proton beam treatment that they wanted for their son.
Proton beam therapy is well established theoretically, although given the capital cost of installing the dedicated facilities it remains relatively rare. That said, there's probably been 100,000 patients treated with it, mainly in the US and Japan - a good friend of mine was looking at ways to bring Mevion's (www.mevion.com) technology to the UK precisely because he saw the benefits from the therapy approach.
It also has 501K approval in the US; Mevion states that their product complies with CE requirements in Europe - which looks to me odd wording suggesting they haven't got a CE mark.
But whatever. This *isn't* a case of no treatment or some kookie homepathic theory. This is serious medical therapy - and the parents should be entitled to treat their child using it even if the NHS doesn't want to pay for it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738742/BREAKING-NEWS-Terminally-ill-boy-Ashya-5-alive-police-Spain-Jehovahs-Witness-father-explains-parents-snatched-hospital-went-run.html
It's the fact they apparently took the kid out of hospital without telling them that's the problem for me. If the hospital were not told, then I cannot see what else they should have done aside from tell the police, and what the police could have done other than investigate.
It's also interesting that the father claims the hospital were wanting to get an emergency protection order. We've only got one side of the story here. Perhaps the hospital were utterly out of order, but on the evidence we have so far, I doubt it.
And the police are, for once, blameless. What could they do once the hospital had reported a child missing?0 -
Quite, unlike homeopathy there is actually an "active ingredient" (i.e. protons).Charles said:
But whatever. This *isn't* a case of no treatment or some kookie homepathic theory. This is serious medical therapy - and the parents should be entitled to treat their child using it even if the NHS doesn't want to pay for it.0 -
Latest YouGov / Sunday Times results 29th August - Con 32%, Lab 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%0
-
Mike Smithson, I have been posting for ages on here about where ukip support comes, I am very close to the ground and know exactly what the target market is.
If you'd like to message me I'm very happy to discuss my position and views.0 -
That's why I blamed "the authorities" - I noted the threat of the emergency protective order, so I suspect we have an understandably distraught parent getting increasingly upset and frustrated with the NHS (the "fine I'll sell my house") sounds like he tried hard to get the NHS to pay/JosiasJessop said:
It's the fact they apparently took the kid out of hospital without telling them that's the problem for me. If the hospital were not told, then I cannot see what else they should have done aside from tell the police, and what the police could have done other than investigate.
It's also interesting that the father claims the hospital were wanting to get an emergency protection order. We've only got one side of the story here. Perhaps the hospital were utterly out of order, but on the evidence we have so far, I doubt it.
And the police are, for once, blameless. What could they do once the hospital had reported a child missing?
Threatening an EPO in the first place is a ridiculous over-reaction on the hospital's part.
But you're right: we've only one side of the story0 -
Insomnia wakes me early so I may not be firing on all cylinders yet, but the above table does look rather odd.
The 2010 Clacton result was:
Con 53%
Labour 25%
LD 13%
BNP 5%
Others 4%
Yet the table above has unweighted figures of four times as many 2010 Con voters than Labour and 12 times as many 2010 con than LD. The weighting doesn't change the proportions much.
Also the table has a sample where the vast majority of those surveyed were over 55. Clacton is bungalow heaven of course, but is that really correct?
I need to get up and make some coffee, but that looks a very odd sample to me (disproportionally made up of elderly former Con voters).0 -
If Dave and the conservatives want to know their parties future, then they should ask David Trimble. When Ian Paisley overturned a near 23,000 UUP majority in North Antrim in 1970, that constituency, though, was a one off.......but not for long.
PS - Nadine, if you want me to vote for you again, Follow Douglas.0 -
30+ years and a peace settlement is quite a long timePaul_Mid_Beds said:If Dave and the conservatives want to know their parties future, then they should ask David Trimble. When Ian Paisley overturned a near 23,000 UUP majority in North Antrim in 1970, that constituency, though, was a one off.......but not for long.
0 -
Soaraway Ed:peter_from_putney said:Latest YouGov / Sunday Times results 29th August - Con 32%, Lab 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%
Doing Well (net)
Cameron -8 (-1)
Miliband -46 (-6)
0 -
I agree that the samples look a bit weird, but I don't feel it's worthwhile nitpicking the methodology of a poll which shows such a decisive lead.0
-
The other factor which may make a small difference is UKIP is the only party with effectively a named candidate (or two!) - tho nothing to make more than the slightest of dents in this apparent landslide.Oliver_PB said:I agree that the samples look a bit weird, but I don't feel it's worthwhile nitpicking the methodology of a poll which shows such a decisive lead.
0 -
Can anyone do a reweighting to give an approximate figure of what the lead "should" be?Oliver_PB said:I agree that the samples look a bit weird, but I don't feel it's worthwhile nitpicking the methodology of a poll which shows such a decisive lead.
The 44% is setting the political dynamic (although I am sure parties are looking at their private polling).
It also suggests that the Tories are likely to be even more value if Betfair or others shift their prices based on this poll.0 -
The size of the shift from Lab looks very promising for UKIP's ability to take South Thanet and other targets held by Con but with a fair-sized Lab vote.0
-
From the Daily Mail article, we see that the child has posterior fossa syndrome from meduloblastoma that has caused him to be unable to walk or eat. In other words this is a tumour that is at the base of the brain that is compressing all the structures linking the brain to the rest of the body. Yet the father describes the child as perfectly well.Charles said:
That's why I blamed "the authorities" - I noted the threat of the emergency protective order, so I suspect we have an understandably distraught parent getting increasingly upset and frustrated with the NHS (the "fine I'll sell my house") sounds like he tried hard to get the NHS to pay/JosiasJessop said:
It's the fact they apparently took the kid out of hospital without telling them that's the problem for me. If the hospital were not told, then I cannot see what else they should have done aside from tell the police, and what the police could have done other than investigate.
It's also interesting that the father claims the hospital were wanting to get an emergency protection order. We've only got one side of the story here. Perhaps the hospital were utterly out of order, but on the evidence we have so far, I doubt it.
And the police are, for once, blameless. What could they do once the hospital had reported a child missing?
Threatening an EPO in the first place is a ridiculous over-reaction on the hospital's part.
But you're right: we've only one side of the story
There is proton beam therapy on the NHS including a recent £250 million pound investment at Clatterbridge: http://www.clatterbridgecc.nhs.uk/news/newsitem.aspx?storyID=5525
It sounds to me that we are not getting the whole story, and that a distraught parent(s) having received some extremely bad news is probably not thinking clearly. If the paediatricians caring for the child do not believe the parents are capable of making an informed consent decision, then the obligation is a temporary protection order by a judicial process. Parents do not have absolute control over the medical care of their children, and rightly so. This is the law of consent in the UK (EU law is not applicable).
Whether proton beam therapy is better than external beam gamma radiotherapy for this particular tumour, I cannot say, but it does sound as if delay in treatment may have severe adverse effects, far worse than the side effects of radiotherapy. Just because a tumour is inoperable does not make it untreatable.
0 -
I do not understand the medical issues but I do feel that the actions of the parents, however much sympathy one has for their terrible plight, have left no option for the authorities but to act as they did. I doubt very much if any charges will follow and hope and pray that they can now find a way forward to treat their son.foxinsoxuk said:
From the Daily Mail article, we see that the child has posterior fossa syndrome from meduloblastoma that has caused him to be unable to walk or eat. In other words this is a tumour that is at the base of the brain that is compressing all the structures linking the brain to the rest of the body. Yet the father describes the child as perfectly well.Charles said:
That's why I blamed "the authorities" - I noted the threat of the emergency protective order, so I suspect we have an understandably distraught parent getting increasingly upset and frustrated with the NHS (the "fine I'll sell my house") sounds like he tried hard to get the NHS to pay/JosiasJessop said:
It's the fact they apparently took the kid out of hospital without telling them that's the problem for me. If the hospital were not told, then I cannot see what else they should have done aside from tell the police, and what the police could have done other than investigate.
It's also interesting that the father claims the hospital were wanting to get an emergency protection order. We've only got one side of the story here. Perhaps the hospital were utterly out of order, but on the evidence we have so far, I doubt it.
And the police are, for once, blameless. What could they do once the hospital had reported a child missing?
Threatening an EPO in the first place is a ridiculous over-reaction on the hospital's part.
But you're right: we've only one side of the story
There is proton beam therapy on the NHS including a recent £250 million pound investment at Clatterbridge: http://www.clatterbridgecc.nhs.uk/news/newsitem.aspx?storyID=5525
It sounds to me that we are not getting the whole story, and that a distraught parent(s) having received some extremely bad news is probably not thinking clearly. If the paediatricians caring for the child do not believe the parents are capable of making an informed consent decision, then the obligation is a temporary protection order by a judicial process. Parents do not have absolute control over the medical care of their children, and rightly so. This is the law of consent in the UK (EU law is not applicable).
Whether proton beam therapy is better than external beam gamma radiotherapy for this particular tumour, I cannot say, but it does sound as if delay in treatment may have severe adverse effects, far worse than the side effects of radiotherapy. Just because a tumour is inoperable does not make it untreatable.0 -
- "The SNP were the prime movers and the prime advocates."david_herdson said:
The SNP were the prime movers and the prime advocates...Stuart_Dickson said:David Herdson - "The effect of a No would be less significant though the last time the SNP failed in a referendum, they parliamentary party took a hammering at the next election."
Point of information: the Labour Party and the Liberal Party were also on the "losing" side in that 1979 referendum (despite Yes gaining more votes than No), and they did not "take a hammering at the next election".
In fact, the Scottish Labour vote rose 5.8 points (+3 MPs) at the 1979 GE and the Scottish Liberals' vote rose 0.7 points (n/c MPs). On the back of their referendum "failure" (sic).
So, how does that uncomfortable fact square David?
I'd also disagree with your analysis about the 1979 election, where (not for the first time), you're only viewing politics through the Pro/Anti devolution/independence prism. There are and were other, more significant, divisions that mattered. For that matter, Labour was itself divided in the campaign and the 40% rule was introduced by a Labour MP, so to describe an SNP-Lab swing as a movement within a bloc is pushing it a bit. No such blocs existed by the time of the General Election, when Labour had withdrawn support for devolution, and to the extent that they had done so earlier, Labour wasn't firmly in either camp.
I'm sorry David, but that is quite simply total and utter nonsense.
The Scotland Act 1978 was an act of the Labour UK government, with support from the Liberals. How on earth does that make the teensy weensy SNP "the prime movers"? That is like trying to claim that the teensy weensy DUP (8 MPs) were "the prime movers" in passing the Defence Reform Act 2014. It is utterly preposterous.
Further, the Scottish Assembly was not even SNP policy. We supported independence, not the half-baked crud that Whitehall cooked up in the mid 70s. So, we can hardly be accused of being the "prime advocates" either. We thought that the Scottish Assembly proposal was pretty dire, but it was less dire than the status quo, so we reluctantly backed a Yes vote.
The 1979 referendum failure was entirely the responsibility of the Lib-Labs, and they both went on to increase their Scottish vote share at the subsequent GE.
The 1979 referendum failure was a failure for the UK govt. A 2014 referendum failure would be a victory for the UK govt.
Your original statement in yesterday morning's piece ("The effect of a No would be less significant though the last time the SNP failed in a referendum, they parliamentary party took a hammering at the next election") is just so full of holes that is is even more revealing than a string vest. It says more about the psychology of English Tory analysts than it enlightens readers about Scottish voting patterns.0 -
My expectation is that this poll will turn out to be tosh but it almost doesn't matter because it is setting an agenda that will make it very difficult for the Tories to come back.
I expect it to be a lot closer than this. Results like this make me worry that the same company is responsible for the only post debate poll in Scotland.0 -
I don't think this poll is as sensational as the poll that showed the Lib Dems in second place and close to leading very shortly before the last general election, but it is dramatic.
This has been building for some time, but we do need to be clear about the reasons. For over 25 years voters disillusioned with the government have had two viable alternatives; they could switch to the other main party, or they could move to the Lib Dems. Governing generally has a corrosive effect on popularity, as failures are remembered long after successes, scandals taint irrevocably and resentment festers. Occasionally a traditional party of government can renew themselves in opposition, as Blair did Labour and Cameron, to a lesser extent, did the Conservatives. But over time we saw the rise in apparent Lib Dem support, as voters tired of choosing between the devil and the deep blue sea and opted for something else.
But the apparent Lib Dem support was an illusion. Much of it was based on opposition to something, rather than support for something. So, when the Lib Dems formed a government, and despite doing rather well, much of it melted away. Much of it initially went to Labour, but that is not the full story.
We now have a unique situation in which voters disillusioned with the current Government have lost their safety valve option. They cannot vote Lib Dem. Labour remains severely tainted by their inept governance from 2002 - 2010 and today offer a seriously underwhelming electoral prospect. This is not a party fit for government and the electorate knows it. So the votes go elsewhere.
There is also, separately, a splintering of the conservative right. This was initially the main source of Ukip support and until recently lazy commentators assumed that was still the case.
Ukip are the beneficiaries of the loss of one viable alternative and the weakness of the other. Nature abhors a vacuum, so Ukip fills it. In doing so its new supporters project all kinds of virtues onto it, as many red liberal democrats did to the Lib Dems. They are the party of eveyman; liberal and authoritarian, state slashing and on the side of the working man, right and left. They will hound everyone else living on benefits, but protect yours. They will take us out of the EU and be the party of business. They will increase spending on defence and fight no wars. Above all, they will govern competently.
Part 2 to follow0 -
Part 2
But these projections are fantasies. We don't know what Ukip would do with power, because we know precious little about what Ukip is, and indeed Ukip doesn't know either. It is evolving, developing, but still nascent. Its leading figures have more often been the source of amusement than political inspiration. They are a safe option precisely because they are so far from being a credible party of government.
Ukip deserve some credit for recognising how significant the issue of immigration would become, and for positioning themselves to benefit from it. Their current support reflects that positioning as well as the factors I mentioned above. But in power they would be equally helpless to prevent most of the issues that drive people's concerns; the social segregation, the rising religious extremism, the predatory gangs of second and third generations. They have not demonstrated any insight into how those problems may be tackled; a desire to turn back the clock will not suffice. Leaving the EU and stopping Romanian fruitpickers from taking the jobs couch potatoes from grim towns fight so desperately to get will no doubt win applause from the gallery, but governing is hard. And if Ukip ever get to try it, we'll see whether the good people of Clacton remain purple.0 -
This does not seem credible to me'
Firstly the number of young people, libdem to UKIP switchers Labour to UKIP switchers and female UKIP voters seems compleatly at odds with national trends.
Secondly it has UKIP outperforming its Euro polling in a Westminster election albeit a by election, it may be that factors like UKIP actually appearing to have a candidate and the initial publicity have given UKIP a boost but I think a 40% swing from a the low of 2010 for Labour is an alarm bell, as is a similar swing from Libdem to UKIP, can these figures be trusted?0 -
Having had coffee, I still come to the same conclusion.foxinsoxuk said:Insomnia wakes me early so I may not be firing on all cylinders yet, but the above table does look rather odd.
The 2010 Clacton result was:
Con 53%
Labour 25%
LD 13%
BNP 5%
Others 4%
Yet the table above has unweighted figures of four times as many 2010 Con voters than Labour and 12 times as many 2010 con than LD. The weighting doesn't change the proportions much.
Also the table has a sample where the vast majority of those surveyed were over 55. Clacton is bungalow heaven of course, but is that really correct?
I need to get up and make some coffee, but that looks a very odd sample to me (disproportionally made up of elderly former Con voters).
Has anyone with more experience of these spreadsheets got some comments to make? If this is a voodoo poll then there is money to be made!
@flockers_pb
An excellent analysis. In other words, I agree!0 -
Nice piece, Flockers.
I agree, though I would add that it is both healthy and right that the voters should give the main Parties a kicking from time to time. Be grateful that in this country we do so by turning to UKIP (and formerly the LDs.)
In France they turn to Le Front National, a horse of a rather different colour.0 -
@Flockers_pb I agree with quite a lot of that. There is enormous frustration with conventional politics which comes down to absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so. So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration, no doubt because he is just lazy and criticism of Miliband because, well that might be fair enough actually.
This determined refusal to acknowledge or engage with the complexities of the modern world is augmented by a press and media who are almost wilfully ignorant of most issues. Add in some genuine horrors like Rotherham and you have fertile soil for UKIP and a few simplistic soundbites and a lot of projection.0 -
I think that your analysis is very perceptive. I'm not convinced that UKIP will win seats (much of their support comes from people who feel disenfranchised and have therefore got out of the habit of voting). But fundamentally, the level of support for them is a clear demonstration of the sense of alienation among a very significant proportion of the population.Flockers_pb said:Part 2
But these projections are fantasies. We don't know what Ukip would do with power, because we know precious little about what Ukip is, and indeed Ukip doesn't know either. It is evolving, developing, but still nascent.
From an electoral perspective, people lazily assume it will damage the Tories most. It seems to me that the effect will be largely random and very difficult to predict - depending to a great extent on the local factors, demographics, party structures and candidates (both incumbents and insurgents) in each seat.
But even if they don't win any seats, Cameron and Miliband need to wake up and realise that the political compact that governs this country is broken.0 -
The weightings do look odd. But, even among 18-34 year olds, 55% support UKIP, making this an unusual constituency.foxinsoxuk said:
Having had coffee, I still come to the same conclusion.foxinsoxuk said:Insomnia wakes me early so I may not be firing on all cylinders yet, but the above table does look rather odd.
The 2010 Clacton result was:
Con 53%
Labour 25%
LD 13%
BNP 5%
Others 4%
Yet the table above has unweighted figures of four times as many 2010 Con voters than Labour and 12 times as many 2010 con than LD. The weighting doesn't change the proportions much.
Also the table has a sample where the vast majority of those surveyed were over 55. Clacton is bungalow heaven of course, but is that really correct?
I need to get up and make some coffee, but that looks a very odd sample to me (disproportionally made up of elderly former Con voters).
Has anyone with more experience of these spreadsheets got some comments to make? If this is a voodoo poll then there is money to be made!
@flockers_pb
An excellent analysis. In other words, I agree!
0 -
redcat said:
This does not seem credible to me'
Firstly the number of young people, libdem to UKIP switchers Labour to UKIP switchers and female UKIP voters seems compleatly at odds with national trends.
Secondly it has UKIP outperforming its Euro polling in a Westminster election albeit a by election, it may be that factors like UKIP actually appearing to have a candidate and the initial publicity have given UKIP a boost but I think a 40% swing from a the low of 2010 for Labour is an alarm bell, as is a similar swing from Libdem to UKIP, can these figures be trusted?
Clacton is unusual. UKIP wouldn't be getting these figures in Islington or Glasgow.
0 -
Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.0 -
Welcome redcat. I agree it is a very odd poll. If you have been lurking you will be aware that the conventional definition of a rogue poll on PB is one you don't like and I really don't like this one.redcat said:This does not seem credible to me'
Firstly the number of young people, libdem to UKIP switchers Labour to UKIP switchers and female UKIP voters seems compleatly at odds with national trends.
Secondly it has UKIP outperforming its Euro polling in a Westminster election albeit a by election, it may be that factors like UKIP actually appearing to have a candidate and the initial publicity have given UKIP a boost but I think a 40% swing from a the low of 2010 for Labour is an alarm bell, as is a similar swing from Libdem to UKIP, can these figures be trusted?0 -
LIKE!!!!!DavidL said:@Flockers_pb I agree with quite a lot of that. There is enormous frustration with conventional politics which comes down to absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so. So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration, no doubt because he is just lazy and criticism of Miliband because, well that might be fair enough actually.
This determined refusal to acknowledge or engage with the complexities of the modern world is augmented by a press and media who are almost wilfully ignorant of most issues. Add in some genuine horrors like Rotherham and you have fertile soil for UKIP and a few simplistic soundbites and a lot of projection.0 -
Anyone think a scenario where more Tory MPs resign their seats and fight local by elections, followed by a few Labour MPs doing the same in the lead up to the GE might be a game changer?
I've chucked a couple of quid on UKIP to win, if I don't make a bit on the odds coming in if the above plays out I'll be surprised.0 -
All fair points. However, if UKIP did sufficiently well to become a party of government, FPTP would ensure they remained a permanent fixture. Labour performed poorly in their first government, but still crushed the Liberals in 1924.Flockers_pb said:Part 2
But these projections are fantasies. We don't know what Ukip would do with power, because we know precious little about what Ukip is, and indeed Ukip doesn't know either. It is evolving, developing, but still nascent. Its leading figures have more often been the source of amusement than political inspiration. They are a safe option precisely because they are so far from being a credible party of government.
Ukip deserve some credit for recognising how significant the issue of immigration would become, and for positioning themselves to benefit from it. Their current support reflects that positioning as well as the factors I mentioned above. But in power they would be equally helpless to prevent most of the issues that drive people's concerns; the social segregation, the rising religious extremism, the predatory gangs of second and third generations. They have not demonstrated any insight into how those problems may be tackled; a desire to turn back the clock will not suffice. Leaving the EU and stopping Romanian fruitpickers from taking the jobs couch potatoes from grim towns fight so desperately to get will no doubt win applause from the gallery, but governing is hard. And if Ukip ever get to try it, we'll see whether the good people of Clacton remain purple.
0 -
As someone who regularly criticises Osborne, I'd simply point out that it is HMG that has the "absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so". And indeed that's one of the reasons I've stopped voting blue.DavidL said:@Flockers_pb I agree with quite a lot of that. There is enormous frustration with conventional politics which comes down to absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so. So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration, no doubt because he is just lazy and criticism of Miliband because, well that might be fair enough actually.
This determined refusal to acknowledge or engage with the complexities of the modern world is augmented by a press and media who are almost wilfully ignorant of most issues. Add in some genuine horrors like Rotherham and you have fertile soil for UKIP and a few simplistic soundbites and a lot of projection.
Cameron has done zilch to hand back citizens the chance and responsibility to run their own lives. The state is as big as ever, he keeps passing laws, the latest fiasco on HMRC robbing citizens being a case in point and does all this because he is accepting the New Labour settlement, rather than rolling it back.
Since my basic politics is Anyone but Labour, I don't see the point in voting for Labour's policies just because the party implementing them is calling itself the Conservatives.
0 -
Some thoughts on political betting doubles from Shadsy..
First, the Indy ref:
The overround on the straight winner market is 5.6%
The overround on the winner/turnout double market is 13%
The odds implied for No by the double market are 1/7.82 (compared to 1/5)
The odds implied for Yes by the double market are 3.12/1 (compared to 7/2)
Second, next GE betting:
The overround on Most Votes market is 7.5%
The overround on Most Seats market is 5.5%
The overround on Seats/Votes double market is 17%
The odds implied for Con Most Votes by the double market are 1/2.09 (compared to 4/6)
The odds implied for Lab Most Votes by the double market are 1/1.03 (compared to 11/10)
The odds implied for Con Most Seats by the double market are 1/1.03 (compared to 11/10)
The odds implied for Lab Most Seats by the double market are 1/2.09 (compared to 8/11)
I can't see how there can be any value in the doubles.0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Cracking poll for the purples. I thought constituency polling was notoriously unreliable, however?
Worth also mentioning all the news is of UKIP and the defection. No Conservative candidate or campaigning, as yet.
However, it'd still be hard to see UKIP lose this unless the poll is the mother of all rogues.0 -
Flockers
The best 'UKIP Are Crap and So Are the Electorate' i've ever read.
......and I agree with nearly every word0 -
Only if you assume everyone is as thick as pigsh..Flockers_pb said:I don't think this poll is as sensational as the poll that showed the Lib Dems in second place and close to leading very shortly before the last general election, but it is dramatic.
This has been building for some time, but we do need to be clear about the reasons. For over 25 years voters disillusioned with the government have had two viable alternatives; they could switch to the other main party, or they could move to the Lib Dems. Governing generally has a corrosive effect on popularity, as failures are remembered long after successes, scandals taint irrevocably and resentment festers. Occasionally a traditional party of government can renew themselves in opposition, as Blair did Labour and Cameron, to a lesser extent, did the Conservatives. But over time we saw the rise in apparent Lib Dem support, as voters tired of choosing between the devil and the deep blue sea and opted for something else.
But the apparent Lib Dem support was an illusion. Much of it was based on opposition to something, rather than support for something. So, when the Lib Dems formed a government, and despite doing rather well, much of it melted away. Much of it initially went to Labour, but that is not the full story.
We now have a unique situation in which voters disillusioned with the current Government have lost their safety valve option. They cannot vote Lib Dem. Labour remains severely tainted by their inept governance from 2002 - 2010 and today offer a seriously underwhelming electoral prospect. This is not a party fit for government and the electorate knows it. So the votes go elsewhere.
There is also, separately, a splintering of the conservative right. This was initially the main source of Ukip support and until recently lazy commentators assumed that was still the case.
Ukip are the beneficiaries of the loss of one viable alternative and the weakness of the other. Nature abhors a vacuum, so Ukip fills it. In doing so its new supporters project all kinds of virtues onto it, as many red liberal democrats did to the Lib Dems. They are the party of eveyman; liberal and authoritarian, state slashing and on the side of the working man, right and left. They will hound everyone else living on benefits, but protect yours. They will take us out of the EU and be the party of business. They will increase spending on defence and fight no wars. Above all, they will govern competently.
Part 2 to follow0 -
Flawed or not, hard to replicate elsewhere or not, this poll is a 'Wow!'.
I said I thought Carswell would walk it in Clacton and he clearly will.
As Flocker so ably outlines, people are getting pretty tired of the stale bien-pensant westminster bubble of tweedledem/tweedledave/tweedleband politics. For all its immaturity UKIP appears to be a party that actually, shock horror, listens to what people worry about and, double shock horror, appears willing to do something about those concerns. How very dare they!
Personally I'm horrified this will mean we get Redward in No.10 - but a big part of me is cheering the kippers on. Go Douglas!0 -
DavidL and Charles - thanks for your comments. I agree with both of your points in reply, and would just note the interesting interplay between them: politicians grapple with complex problems to which there are no easy solutions; the electorate and media demand solutions; politicians generally do not provide the solution demanded, because they appreciate the consequences in another area, or in fact lack the power to do so; the media calls the politicians spineless; the electorate feels the politicians aren't listening. The electorate has no appetite for politicians explaining why you can't just eliminate immigration, or imprison all criminals, or treat every patient with every procedure.
That's not to let politicians off the hook; there are plenty of examples of the political class treating people with contempt or having an exaggerated view of their own competence.0 -
The problem is (as Rotherham shows) is that a significant proportion of people in authority are incompetent and self-serving (if one is being charitable) or thoroughly corrupt (if one isn't).DavidL said:@Flockers_pb I agree with quite a lot of that. There is enormous frustration with conventional politics which comes down to absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so. So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration, no doubt because he is just lazy and criticism of Miliband because, well that might be fair enough actually.
This determined refusal to acknowledge or engage with the complexities of the modern world is augmented by a press and media who are almost wilfully ignorant of most issues. Add in some genuine horrors like Rotherham and you have fertile soil for UKIP and a few simplistic soundbites and a lot of projection.
Whether a political establishment that was led by UKIP would be any better is a moot point, but one can see why people want to throw out the current establishment.
0 -
Too late to edit but just remembered I didn't include UKIP or LD in the overround figure for single Most Votes or Most Seats markets. They add around 1.5% and 2% respectively.0
-
How long till there are calls for a Strong Man? We no longer appreciate our system of government, or feel any attachment to it. Representative democracy collapses when race hatred replaces class conflict as the principal engine of social division.Flockers_pb said:DavidL and Charles - thanks for your comments. I agree with both of your points in reply, and would just note the interesting interplay between them: politicians grapple with complex problems to which there are no easy solutions; the electorate and media demand solutions; politicians generally do not provide the solution demanded, because they appreciate the consequences in another area, or in fact lack the power to do so; the media calls the politicians spineless; the electorate feels the politicians aren't listening. The electorate has no appetite for politicians explaining why you can't just eliminate immigration, or imprison all criminals, or treat every patient with every procedure.
That's not to let politicians off the hook; there are plenty of examples of the political class treating people with contempt or having an exaggerated view of their own competence.
0 -
UKIP continues to prosper, principally at the expense of the Tories, because no one believes that Cameron will seriously take on the EU .... and that he is simply going through the motions and ultimately will settle for minor, window-dressing concessions.
The only way he can overcome this perception is to come up with a "shopping list" of measures to tackle voters' discontent with Europe and to promise that these will be tabled immediately after the Tories win next May's General Election, setting a reasonable 18 months time frame for reaching agreement, thereby enabling a referendum thereon to be held in November 2017.
If he's not prepared to do this then it's best that he resigns now and passes the mantle to someone who is. This issue simply cannot be ducked any longer.0 -
You've clearly never had to work with the public at large.Swiss_Bob said:
Only if you assume everyone is as thick as pigsh..Flockers_pb said:I don't think this poll is as sensational as the poll that showed the Lib Dems in second place and close to leading very shortly before the last general election, but it is dramatic.
This has been building for some time, but we do need to be clear about the reasons. For over 25 years voters disillusioned with the government have had two viable alternatives; they could switch to the other main party, or they could move to the Lib Dems. Governing generally has a corrosive effect on popularity, as failures are remembered long after successes, scandals taint irrevocably and resentment festers. Occasionally a traditional party of government can renew themselves in opposition, as Blair did Labour and Cameron, to a lesser extent, did the Conservatives. But over time we saw the rise in apparent Lib Dem support, as voters tired of choosing between the devil and the deep blue sea and opted for something else.
But the apparent Lib Dem support was an illusion. Much of it was based on opposition to something, rather than support for something. So, when the Lib Dems formed a government, and despite doing rather well, much of it melted away. Much of it initially went to Labour, but that is not the full story.
We now have a unique situation in which voters disillusioned with the current Government have lost their safety valve option. They cannot vote Lib Dem. Labour remains severely tainted by their inept governance from 2002 - 2010 and today offer a seriously underwhelming electoral prospect. This is not a party fit for government and the electorate knows it. So the votes go elsewhere.
There is also, separately, a splintering of the conservative right. This was initially the main source of Ukip support and until recently lazy commentators assumed that was still the case.
Ukip are the beneficiaries of the loss of one viable alternative and the weakness of the other. Nature abhors a vacuum, so Ukip fills it. In doing so its new supporters project all kinds of virtues onto it, as many red liberal democrats did to the Lib Dems. They are the party of eveyman; liberal and authoritarian, state slashing and on the side of the working man, right and left. They will hound everyone else living on benefits, but protect yours. They will take us out of the EU and be the party of business. They will increase spending on defence and fight no wars. Above all, they will govern competently.
Part 2 to follow0 -
55% of 41 people aged 18-34 is not a reliable sample, and if the sample is odd in other ways then likely to be poorly chosen in other ways too.Sean_F said:
The weightings do look odd. But, even among 18-34 year olds, 55% support UKIP, making this an unusual constituency.foxinsoxuk said:
Having had coffee, I still come to the same conclusion.foxinsoxuk said:Insomnia wakes me early so I may not be firing on all cylinders yet, but the above table does look rather odd.
The 2010 Clacton result was:
Con 53%
Labour 25%
LD 13%
BNP 5%
Others 4%
Yet the table above has unweighted figures of four times as many 2010 Con voters than Labour and 12 times as many 2010 con than LD. The weighting doesn't change the proportions much.
Also the table has a sample where the vast majority of those surveyed were over 55. Clacton is bungalow heaven of course, but is that really correct?
I need to get up and make some coffee, but that looks a very odd sample to me (disproportionally made up of elderly former Con voters).
Has anyone with more experience of these spreadsheets got some comments to make? If this is a voodoo poll then there is money to be made!
@flockers_pb
An excellent analysis. In other words, I agree!
How was this sample chosen? Was it on street, phone or internet panel?
It looks as if it was taken outside the British Legion hosting a tea dance!0 -
Innocent Abroad, that's a question I have pondered too. Ultimately I think we are still a long way off that outcome, and you could cite Ukip's slow evolution as an example of that. But I think the stage is set, and will be for some time, for a strong and charismatic leader to emerge offering a new, populist kind of politics. I don't think Farage quite fills the role, but we will see. The candidate could emerge from the left or the right , within existing party structures or outside.
So in essence I believe we are heading (hurtling?) towards a dramatic realignment in domestic politics, but within the existing democratic framework. I think the Uk is temperamentally and constitutionally equipped to resist the emergence of a real "strong man", and will be for as long as memories of the Second World War remain vivid .
Which gives us about 30 years...0 -
The Sunday Times:
"Rona Fairhead has been announced as the future chairwoman of the BBC Trust - and the first woman to lead the corporation."
Rona who?0 -
Another problem is that a significant proportion of the electorate appear to be incompetent and self-serving.Sean_F said:
The problem is (as Rotherham shows) is that a significant proportion of people in authority are incompetent and self-servingDavidL said:@Flockers_pb I agree with quite a lot of that. There is enormous frustration with conventional politics which comes down to absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so. So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration, no doubt because he is just lazy and criticism of Miliband because, well that might be fair enough actually.
This determined refusal to acknowledge or engage with the complexities of the modern world is augmented by a press and media who are almost wilfully ignorant of most issues. Add in some genuine horrors like Rotherham and you have fertile soil for UKIP and a few simplistic soundbites and a lot of projection.
I often wonder whether our brief experiment with universal suffrage is coming to an end.0 -
If 64% of older voters back UKIP in a seat, then UKIP will still win easily.foxinsoxuk said:
55% of 41 people aged 18-34 is not a reliable sample, and if the sample is odd in other ways then likely to be poorly chosen in other ways too.Sean_F said:
The weightings do look odd. But, even among 18-34 year olds, 55% support UKIP, making this an unusual constituency.foxinsoxuk said:
Having had coffee, I still come to the same conclusion.foxinsoxuk said:Insomnia wakes me early so I may not be firing on all cylinders yet, but the above table does look rather odd.
The 2010 Clacton result was:
Con 53%
Labour 25%
LD 13%
BNP 5%
Others 4%
Yet the table above has unweighted figures of four times as many 2010 Con voters than Labour and 12 times as many 2010 con than LD. The weighting doesn't change the proportions much.
Also the table has a sample where the vast majority of those surveyed were over 55. Clacton is bungalow heaven of course, but is that really correct?
I need to get up and make some coffee, but that looks a very odd sample to me (disproportionally made up of elderly former Con voters).
Has anyone with more experience of these spreadsheets got some comments to make? If this is a voodoo poll then there is money to be made!
@flockers_pb
An excellent analysis. In other words, I agree!
How was this sample chosen? Was it on street, phone or internet panel?
It looks as if it was taken outside the British Legion hosting a tea dance!
One can argue about the weightings, but it's still clear that UKIP are well ahead in this seat. Media interviews with Clacton voters have been overwhelmingly supportive of Carswell, over the past few days.
0 -
It was a telephone poll (link to the tables - it's a zipped PDF)foxinsoxuk said:
How was this sample chosen? Was it on street, phone or internet panel?
0 -
If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.0
-
I wouldn't expect any new EU announcements until after the IndyRef.hucks67 said:If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.
0 -
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
0 -
Newark showed that there might be anti-UKIP tactical voting among those sections of the middle class who dislike the working class.Sean_F said:redcat said:This does not seem credible to me'
Firstly the number of young people, libdem to UKIP switchers Labour to UKIP switchers and female UKIP voters seems compleatly at odds with national trends.
Secondly it has UKIP outperforming its Euro polling in a Westminster election albeit a by election, it may be that factors like UKIP actually appearing to have a candidate and the initial publicity have given UKIP a boost but I think a 40% swing from a the low of 2010 for Labour is an alarm bell, as is a similar swing from Libdem to UKIP, can these figures be trusted?
Clacton is unusual. UKIP wouldn't be getting these figures in Islington or Glasgow.
This got the UKIP haters here excited.
I did point out though that we might very well see pro-UKIP tactical voting in wwc constituencies.
This poll suggests it is likely.
0 -
I don't doubt that they believe this, and from the polling the people who want a referendum generally don't believe Cameron would really give them one, but what's the evidence that this is what's motivating the switchers?peter_from_putney said:UKIP continues to prosper, principally at the expense of the Tories, because no one believes that Cameron will seriously take on the EU .... and that he is simply going through the motions and ultimately will settle for minor, window-dressing concessions.
There's some Europe in Carswell's resignation statement, but not much:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-289677900 -
PfP - I think your post is an example of the problem DavidL identified. The EU renegotiation will be very complex. No doubt our partners will concede ground in order to keep us in the EU, but they will demand concessions too. There is no point the UK government developing a list in isolation that has no prospect of success, or publishing a list that foreign governments reject out of hand (playing to their own galleries), which then allows the BOO wing within the party to declare the negotiations a failure and demand a referendum next week. Cameron has to play a game of three dimensional chess, with the odds somewhat stacked against him. He must be given time to play that game, and we must not pretend that the simple option is a perfect solution.peter_from_putney said:UKIP continues to prosper, principally at the expense of the Tories, because no one believes that Cameron will seriously take on the EU .... and that he is simply going through the motions and ultimately will settle for minor, window-dressing concessions.
The only way he can overcome this perception is to come up with a "shopping list" of measures to tackle voters' discontent with Europe and to promise that these will be tabled immediately after the Tories win next May's General Election, setting a reasonable 18 months time frame for reaching agreement, thereby enabling a referendum thereon to be held in November 2017.
If he's not prepared to do this then it's best that he resigns now and passes the mantle to someone who is. This issue simply cannot be ducked any longer.-1 -
Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
Or la meme chose even ...... but virtually the same thing I supposePeter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.0 -
Are NO trying to lose the Scottish referendum? Nigel Farage will be in Glasgow on the Friday before the vote. On the Saturday, there will be a sizeable Orange Order march in Edinburgh, with a theme of "British Together".
The Sunday papers immediately before the vote could be full of stories saying Unionism is nasty, scary and unwanted.
The Orange march will surely increase support for YES among working class Catholic Glaswegians.
UKIP also plan a "special impact" media event for 17 Sep.
YES are on their front foot, organising flash mobs to scupper NO events and placing stories about what people (from Alistair Carmichael to Andy Murray) will do after independence.
Many of their supporters are naive and well-intentioned, if brainwashed. They don't realise they are being used, and they genuinely believe that the feelings and camaraderie they have experienced during the YES campaign will continue after a YES win as features of a 'people's movement'. They aren't half going to be disappointed if they lose.0 -
How terrible of people that they compare what Osborne and Cameron promised to do with what they have actually achieved.DavidL said:So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration
The facts are that Osborne HAS failed to eliminate the deficit and Cameron HAS failed to reduce immigration.
0 -
Swiss_Bob said:
Anyone think a scenario where more Tory MPs resign their seats and fight local by elections, followed by a few Labour MPs doing the same in the lead up to the GE might be a game changer?
I've chucked a couple of quid on UKIP to win, if I don't make a bit on the odds coming in if the above plays out I'll be surprised.
Swiss Bob, I take it you are referring to the Most Seats/Overall Majority markets that are the mainstay of us GE punters on here?
Normally you would just ignore the Others category, usually available at stupendous odds, but I took the precaution this morning of having a small bet, just in case.
I also had a fiver on Farage as next PM some time back. Ok, laugh if you want to but he was 200/1. He's currently 80/1 and I don't think that will be available much longer.
0 -
Cameron is Continuity Blair.Alanbrooke said:
As someone who regularly criticises Osborne, I'd simply point out that it is HMG that has the "absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so". And indeed that's one of the reasons I've stopped voting blue.DavidL said:@Flockers_pb I agree with quite a lot of that. There is enormous frustration with conventional politics which comes down to absurd belief in the power of government to change things simply because they wish something to be so. So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration, no doubt because he is just lazy and criticism of Miliband because, well that might be fair enough actually.
This determined refusal to acknowledge or engage with the complexities of the modern world is augmented by a press and media who are almost wilfully ignorant of most issues. Add in some genuine horrors like Rotherham and you have fertile soil for UKIP and a few simplistic soundbites and a lot of projection.
Cameron has done zilch to hand back citizens the chance and responsibility to run their own lives. The state is as big as ever, he keeps passing laws, the latest fiasco on HMRC robbing citizens being a case in point and does all this because he is accepting the New Labour settlement, rather than rolling it back.
Since my basic politics is Anyone but Labour, I don't see the point in voting for Labour's policies just because the party implementing them is calling itself the Conservatives.
And its hardly a surprise that he is - he did after all claim to be the true 'Heir to Blair'.0 -
Of course all the posters here are definitely not 'the public at large'.matt said:
You've clearly never had to work with the public at large.Swiss_Bob said:
Only if you assume everyone is as thick as pigsh..Flockers_pb said:I don't think this poll is as sensational as the poll that showed the Lib Dems in second place and close to leading very shortly before the last general election, but it is dramatic.
This has been building for some time, but we do need to be clear about the reasons. For over 25 years voters disillusioned with the government have had two viable alternatives; they could switch to the other main party, or they could move to the Lib Dems. Governing generally has a corrosive effect on popularity, as failures are remembered long after successes, scandals taint irrevocably and resentment festers. Occasionally a traditional party of government can renew themselves in opposition, as Blair did Labour and Cameron, to a lesser extent, did the Conservatives. But over time we saw the rise in apparent Lib Dem support, as voters tired of choosing between the devil and the deep blue sea and opted for something else.
But the apparent Lib Dem support was an illusion. Much of it was based on opposition to something, rather than support for something. So, when the Lib Dems formed a government, and despite doing rather well, much of it melted away. Much of it initially went to Labour, but that is not the full story.
We now have a unique situation in which voters disillusioned with the current Government have lost their safety valve option. They cannot vote Lib Dem. Labour remains severely tainted by their inept governance from 2002 - 2010 and today offer a seriously underwhelming electoral prospect. This is not a party fit for government and the electorate knows it. So the votes go elsewhere.
There is also, separately, a splintering of the conservative right. This was initially the main source of Ukip support and until recently lazy commentators assumed that was still the case.
Ukip are the beneficiaries of the loss of one viable alternative and the weakness of the other. Nature abhors a vacuum, so Ukip fills it. In doing so its new supporters project all kinds of virtues onto it, as many red liberal democrats did to the Lib Dems. They are the party of eveyman; liberal and authoritarian, state slashing and on the side of the working man, right and left. They will hound everyone else living on benefits, but protect yours. They will take us out of the EU and be the party of business. They will increase spending on defence and fight no wars. Above all, they will govern competently.
Part 2 to follow
Everyone here is intelligent and insightful and can distil with certainty the views of the whole population, or at the very least all those dim UKIP voters eh?
0 -
My friends who live in France (admittedly they are so establishment English that their family participated in the burning of Joan of Arc) are desperately worried about MLP. The UMP is tearing itself apart and is unlikely to put up a credible candidate. The Socialists are no better. Their view is that there is a real risk that MLP will come through the middle - she has a surprising left wing economic programme which, combined with nationalism and racism/anti-semitism may well be enough to win her a majority given the lack of alternatives.Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.0 -
BBC website having problems showing front page of today's Independent. Will it be on Marr's paper review.
Re Under-age carnal relations, the contents of 'The Worm in The Bud' might raise a few eyebrows about Victorian Values.0 -
Yes Cameron probably would not talk about the UK leaving the EU until after the IndyRef. But people in Scotland have a confusing choice anyway. A YES vote means that Scotland would have to leave the EU for a period and negotiate re-joining. A NO vote and Tories/UKIP winning a general election could mean that the UK votes to leave the EU.RobD said:
I wouldn't expect any new EU announcements until after the IndyRef.hucks67 said:If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.
0 -
Thank you Flockers. I doubt it will be as long as 30 years - next year it'll be 70 years to VE and VJ days!Flockers_pb said:Innocent Abroad, that's a question I have pondered too. Ultimately I think we are still a long way off that outcome, and you could cite Ukip's slow evolution as an example of that. But I think the stage is set, and will be for some time, for a strong and charismatic leader to emerge offering a new, populist kind of politics. I don't think Farage quite fills the role, but we will see. The candidate could emerge from the left or the right , within existing party structures or outside.
So in essence I believe we are heading (hurtling?) towards a dramatic realignment in domestic politics, but within the existing democratic framework. I think the Uk is temperamentally and constitutionally equipped to resist the emergence of a real "strong man", and will be for as long as memories of the Second World War remain vivid .
Which gives us about 30 years...
I'm reminded of a conversation I had a fair while ago now.
White South African girl: Will my family and I be safe under majority rule?
IA: Just as long as most of the voters can remember apartheid, you'll all be just fine.
So she hasn't got too long, either...
0 -
Well, you gotta keep Shadsy in funds, I suppose...Peter_the_Punter said:Swiss_Bob said:Anyone think a scenario where more Tory MPs resign their seats and fight local by elections, followed by a few Labour MPs doing the same in the lead up to the GE might be a game changer?
I've chucked a couple of quid on UKIP to win, if I don't make a bit on the odds coming in if the above plays out I'll be surprised.
Swiss Bob, I take it you are referring to the Most Seats/Overall Majority markets that are the mainstay of us GE punters on here?
Normally you would just ignore the Others category, usually available at stupendous odds, but I took the precaution this morning of having a small bet, just in case.
I also had a fiver on Farage as next PM some time back. Ok, laugh if you want to but he was 200/1. He's currently 80/1 and I don't think that will be available much longer.
0 -
If Scotland want in the EU and England want out, the obvious solution is for England to leave the UK while Scotland stays in.hucks67 said:
Yes Cameron probably would not talk about the UK leaving the EU until after the IndyRef. But people in Scotland have a confusing choice anyway. A YES vote means that Scotland would have to leave the EU for a period and negotiate re-joining. A NO vote and Tories/UKIP winning a general election could mean that the UK votes to leave the EU.RobD said:
I wouldn't expect any new EU announcements until after the IndyRef.hucks67 said:If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.
0 -
Your last para sums up my thoughts, you could cash out now at a profit. I don't think my scenario is completely off the wall. That more Tories will defect if Carswell wins is not really in doubt, the punt is more on, say a couple of (relatively popular) Northern Labour MPs seeing the writing on the wall and jumping ship to UKIP. That would change the perception of UKIP among many Labour voters and provide serious momentum to them.Peter_the_Punter said:Swiss_Bob said:Anyone think a scenario where more Tory MPs resign their seats and fight local by elections, followed by a few Labour MPs doing the same in the lead up to the GE might be a game changer?
I've chucked a couple of quid on UKIP to win, if I don't make a bit on the odds coming in if the above plays out I'll be surprised.
Swiss Bob, I take it you are referring to the Most Seats/Overall Majority markets that are the mainstay of us GE punters on here?
Normally you would just ignore the Others category, usually available at stupendous odds, but I took the precaution this morning of having a small bet, just in case.
I also had a fiver on Farage as next PM some time back. Ok, laugh if you want to but he was 200/1. He's currently 80/1 and I don't think that will be available much longer.0 -
Bit muzzy-headed this morning, JJ, so couldn't work through the detail you provided but I suspect the answer to your little conundrum is that the doubles (or some of them) are effectively related contingencies.JonnyJimmy said:Too late to edit but just remembered I didn't include UKIP or LD in the overround figure for single Most Votes or Most Seats markets. They add around 1.5% and 2% respectively.
0 -
Yes, for all his expensive education, I don't find that Cameron is that intelligent. Does not always think things through and not very good at dealing with details of policies. This is why I am always surprised at why people see him as a better PM than the other candidates. Sad that people are so convinced by the image, rather than the substance.Gadfly said:
That cast iron guarantee is a major mill stone around Cameron's neck when it comes to his promised referendum.hucks67 said:The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc.
0 -
A very reasonable answer.Flockers_pb said:
PfP - I think your post is an example of the problem DavidL identified. The EU renegotiation will be very complex. No doubt our partners will concede ground in order to keep us in the EU, but they will demand concessions too. There is no point the UK government developing a list in isolation that has no prospect of success, or publishing a list that foreign governments reject out of hand (playing to their own galleries), which then allows the BOO wing within the party to declare the negotiations a failure and demand a referendum next week. Cameron has to play a game of three dimensional chess, with the odds somewhat stacked against him. He must be given time to play that game, and we must not pretend that the simple option is a perfect solution.peter_from_putney said:UKIP continues to prosper, principally at the expense of the Tories, because no one believes that Cameron will seriously take on the EU .... and that he is simply going through the motions and ultimately will settle for minor, window-dressing concessions.
The only way he can overcome this perception is to come up with a "shopping list" of measures to tackle voters' discontent with Europe and to promise that these will be tabled immediately after the Tories win next May's General Election, setting a reasonable 18 months time frame for reaching agreement, thereby enabling a referendum thereon to be held in November 2017.
If he's not prepared to do this then it's best that he resigns now and passes the mantle to someone who is. This issue simply cannot be ducked any longer.
But when trust is lost people don't believe reasonable answers.
As Cameron's EU record is a trail of failure and surrender vague promises of future 'great undertaking nobody to know what it is' aren't going to work.
After all does anyone really believe that Cameron would ever advocate an OUT vote in a EU referendum ?
0 -
Try here... http://www.thepaperboy.com/uk/front-pages.cfmdr_spyn said:BBC website having problems showing front page of today's Independent. Will it be on Marr's paper review.
0 -
Contrast how the media report in Scotland. Stranger throws egg at Murphy , BT want riot police out and all YES supporters classed as brownshirts.
BT supporter kicks pregnant woman who ends up unconscious and this is how they report it, not a mention that it is NO supporting BNP unionist ally
A MAN has been detained by police after a confrontation between Yes and No campaign supporters in Glasgow today.
Officers said they were aware of claims that a woman had been assaulted during a “heated debate” between the two sides on Argyle Street but were still to establish the facts.
On Saturday night a spokesman for Police Scotland said: “Around 40 Yes and No campaigners were involved in a heated debate on Argyle Street at approximately 4pm on Saturday. An allegation was made that during the demonstration a woman was assaulted, this has not yet been confirmed.
“Investigations are ongoing and a male has been detained.”0 -
A classic indictment of Labour, and printed in the Independent too:
Rotherham child sex abuse scandal: Labour Home Office to be probed over what Tony Blair's government knew - and when
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rotherham-child-sex-abuse-scandal-labour-home-office-to-be-probed-over-what-tony-blairs-government-knew--and-when-9701861.html
Politicians are getting scared how this is shaping up to be the biggest political scandal since WW20 -
Is this the same FN that supported bans on demonstrations against the Israeli attack on Gaza? They are deeply anti-Arab and anti-Muslim and like the BNP and EDL they are pro-Israeli.Charles said:
Their view is that there is a real risk that MLP will come through the middle - she has a surprising left wing economic programme which, combined with nationalism and racism/anti-semitism may well be enough to win her a majority given the lack of alternatives.Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
0 -
Oh,forgot to say good morning.
.........and Cammo now hoping that the coattails of Polands new EU President will give him succor:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28997123
Also playing the old game of you scratch my back I'll scratch yours. Very sad really
Flag Quote · Off Topic0 -
There's a perfect storm for FN in France. I'd say there's about a 30% chance that MLP will be the next President.Charles said:
My friends who live in France (admittedly they are so establishment English that their family participated in the burning of Joan of Arc) are desperately worried about MLP. The UMP is tearing itself apart and is unlikely to put up a credible candidate. The Socialists are no better. Their view is that there is a real risk that MLP will come through the middle - she has a surprising left wing economic programme which, combined with nationalism and racism/anti-semitism may well be enough to win her a majority given the lack of alternatives.Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
0 -
That would be logical. I have not heard anyone suggest that England votes to leave the UKedmundintokyo said:
If Scotland want in the EU and England want out, the obvious solution is for England to leave the UK while Scotland stays in.hucks67 said:
Yes Cameron probably would not talk about the UK leaving the EU until after the IndyRef. But people in Scotland have a confusing choice anyway. A YES vote means that Scotland would have to leave the EU for a period and negotiate re-joining. A NO vote and Tories/UKIP winning a general election could mean that the UK votes to leave the EU.RobD said:
I wouldn't expect any new EU announcements until after the IndyRef.hucks67 said:If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.
0 -
Sorry, this 'Government and economics is so difficult, leave it to the experts; don't expect 'miracles'' is utter ______'s. At every opportunity, our political class shows us what a bunch of third rate, posturing, supine, student politicians they are. It isn't hard not to sell off all your Harriers at a knock down price to the yanks to rot in a field, so you've nothing to put on your shiny new aircraft carrier. It isn't hard not to decimate your armed forces yet ludicrously and wastefully spend on overseas aid. It's not hard to save money by shutting down quangos like The Arts Council (still in rude health the last time I checked) -you just stop signing the cheques. It's not hard to have a foreign policy where you don't go around insulting everyone (like Russia and China), and following the US into ever disastrous conflict. It's not difficult to have a procurement policy that helps the UK economy (we have never done this), and for Government to step in to stop takeovers and mergers when they fundamentally threaten UK interests -these things are done elsewhere. It's not difficult to take action when you see gross perversions in our justice system and sort them out rather than covering them up. It's not difficult to stand up to calls to operate mass surveillance of innocent citizens. None of these things are *technically* difficult, they are *politically* difficult. Competence would be nice, but what is missing is simply will. Will to use the levers of power to improve the prosperity, security and well being of the nation. Will to stand up to the US, and the EU to do this. It's obvious our senior politicians and civil servants don't have this will.0
-
Or very happy when they winJohn_N said:Are NO trying to lose the Scottish referendum? Nigel Farage will be in Glasgow on the Friday before the vote. On the Saturday, there will be a sizeable Orange Order march in Edinburgh, with a theme of "British Together".
The Sunday papers immediately before the vote could be full of stories saying Unionism is nasty, scary and unwanted.
The Orange march will surely increase support for YES among working class Catholic Glaswegians.
UKIP also plan a "special impact" media event for 17 Sep.
YES are on their front foot, organising flash mobs to scupper NO events and placing stories about what people (from Alistair Carmichael to Andy Murray) will do after independence.
Many of their supporters are naive and well-intentioned, if brainwashed. They don't realise they are being used, and they genuinely believe that the feelings and camaraderie they have experienced during the YES campaign will continue after a YES win as features of a 'people's movement'. They aren't half going to be disappointed if they lose.0 -
What does it say about Labour that they are apparently doing so badly in a seat which includes one of the most deprived areas of England?0
-
OK, I concede I may have over-simplified the procedure and truncated the timetable somewhat but it was Cameron himself who set the date for the referendum as being 2017 and I've pushed it on until November of that year! The essential point I was trying to make is that the PM somehow has to convince the electorate that he means business and will not simply rat on his promises as many believe he has already by not previously holding an EU referendum.Flockers_pb said:
PfP - I think your post is an example of the problem DavidL identified. The EU renegotiation will be very complex. No doubt our partners will concede ground in order to keep us in the EU, but they will demand concessions too. There is no point the UK government developing a list in isolation that has no prospect of success, or publishing a list that foreign governments reject out of hand (playing to their own galleries), which then allows the BOO wing within the party to declare the negotiations a failure and demand a referendum next week. Cameron has to play a game of three dimensional chess, with the odds somewhat stacked against him. He must be given time to play that game, and we must not pretend that the simple option is a perfect solution.peter_from_putney said:UKIP continues to prosper, principally at the expense of the Tories, because no one believes that Cameron will seriously take on the EU .... and that he is simply going through the motions and ultimately will settle for minor, window-dressing concessions.
The only way he can overcome this perception is to come up with a "shopping list" of measures to tackle voters' discontent with Europe and to promise that these will be tabled immediately after the Tories win next May's General Election, setting a reasonable 18 months time frame for reaching agreement, thereby enabling a referendum thereon to be held in November 2017.
If he's not prepared to do this then it's best that he resigns now and passes the mantle to someone who is. This issue simply cannot be ducked any longer.0 -
WRT the Middle East, they probably take the view my enemy's enemy is my friend, while still not being very fond of French Jews.John_N said:
Is this the same FN that supported bans on demonstrations against the Israeli attack on Gaza? They are deeply anti-Arab and anti-Muslim and like the BNP and EDL they are pro-Israeli.Charles said:
Their view is that there is a real risk that MLP will come through the middle - she has a surprising left wing economic programme which, combined with nationalism and racism/anti-semitism may well be enough to win her a majority given the lack of alternatives.Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
The Pieds Noirs were massively pro-Israel in the Sixties.
0 -
What an incredible reaction on here from the ukip haters! One of plain and simple denial it seems
Why be surprised? ever since Carswells defection I have banged on and on about ukip winning the euros in clacton by a street and that plus a very popular incumbent meant they should be huge odds on.. And everyone was "oh the euros don't count" or " the Tories will think that Carswell is a traitor"
Now a poll comes out that makes it look as though I was guilty of underestimation, and everyone says "the weightings of the poll look wrong"
Such shameless desperation would be hard to find elsewhere0 -
Not really tactical voting in the proper sense, though. More just voting for what they believe in.another_richard said:
Newark showed that there might be anti-UKIP tactical voting among those sections of the middle class who dislike the working class.Sean_F said:redcat said:This does not seem credible to me'
Firstly the number of young people, libdem to UKIP switchers Labour to UKIP switchers and female UKIP voters seems compleatly at odds with national trends.
Secondly it has UKIP outperforming its Euro polling in a Westminster election albeit a by election, it may be that factors like UKIP actually appearing to have a candidate and the initial publicity have given UKIP a boost but I think a 40% swing from a the low of 2010 for Labour is an alarm bell, as is a similar swing from Libdem to UKIP, can these figures be trusted?
Clacton is unusual. UKIP wouldn't be getting these figures in Islington or Glasgow.
This got the UKIP haters here excited.
I did point out though that we might very well see pro-UKIP tactical voting in wwc constituencies.
This poll suggests it is likely.
Tactical voting would be Lab/LD voters voting Tory to stop UKIP. Admittedly there might be some who would vote UKIP to give the Tories a bloody nose, but I don't think many "tactical voters" think like that - in my mind it's more of case of voting for a compromise candidate because their preferred choice won't win0 -
More to the point he's tended to optimize for the short-term, then worry about later later. Strategically this was probably the right thing to do, because he needed to defend himself first from the risk of Gordon Brown calling an early election, then from 15% of his parliamentary party calling a leadership election.hucks67 said:
Yes, for all his expensive education, I don't find that Cameron is that intelligent. Does not always think things through and not very good at dealing with details of policies. This is why I am always surprised at why people see him as a better PM than the other candidates. Sad that people are so convinced by the image, rather than the substance.Gadfly said:
That cast iron guarantee is a major mill stone around Cameron's neck when it comes to his promised referendum.hucks67 said:The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc.
If he'd told the sceptics what he probably thought - that once Lisbon is signed it's signed and that's that, or that the UK is either in the EU mostly as is or out, and in is the less bad of the two - he probably wouldn't have made it this far.0 -
A year or two into an EdM government that might well happen.Swiss_Bob said:
Your last para sums up my thoughts, you could cash out now at a profit. I don't think my scenario is completely off the wall. That more Tories will defect if Carswell wins is not really in doubt, the punt is more on, say a couple of (relatively popular) Northern Labour MPs seeing the writing on the wall and jumping ship to UKIP. That would change the perception of UKIP among many Labour voters and provide serious momentum to them.Peter_the_Punter said:Swiss_Bob said:Anyone think a scenario where more Tory MPs resign their seats and fight local by elections, followed by a few Labour MPs doing the same in the lead up to the GE might be a game changer?
I've chucked a couple of quid on UKIP to win, if I don't make a bit on the odds coming in if the above plays out I'll be surprised.
Swiss Bob, I take it you are referring to the Most Seats/Overall Majority markets that are the mainstay of us GE punters on here?
Normally you would just ignore the Others category, usually available at stupendous odds, but I took the precaution this morning of having a small bet, just in case.
I also had a fiver on Farage as next PM some time back. Ok, laugh if you want to but he was 200/1. He's currently 80/1 and I don't think that will be available much longer.
0 -
0
-
Hard for Scotland at present when England have all the powers and Scotland are unable to make any decisions without their permission.edmundintokyo said:
If Scotland want in the EU and England want out, the obvious solution is for England to leave the UK while Scotland stays in.hucks67 said:
Yes Cameron probably would not talk about the UK leaving the EU until after the IndyRef. But people in Scotland have a confusing choice anyway. A YES vote means that Scotland would have to leave the EU for a period and negotiate re-joining. A NO vote and Tories/UKIP winning a general election could mean that the UK votes to leave the EU.RobD said:
I wouldn't expect any new EU announcements until after the IndyRef.hucks67 said:If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.
0 -
Of course they have. Both are very difficult and steps in the right direction are all that we can legitimately hope for.another_richard said:
How terrible of people that they compare what Osborne and Cameron promised to do with what they have actually achieved.DavidL said:So we see on here, in a group a lot more politically aware than most, criticism of Osborne for failing to eliminate the deficit almost as if the only problem was that he cannot be bothered, criticism of Cameron because he has not eliminated net immigration
The facts are that Osborne HAS failed to eliminate the deficit and Cameron HAS failed to reduce immigration.
Let's take the example of immigration. The biggest problem the government have is that the success of their economic policies has turned the UK into employment Central creating more jobs than the entire EZ and acting as a magnet to the unemployed and ambitious of the EU.
The second problem is that we accept that the government has no right to say who UK citizens can and can't marry and that we have a right to bring our spouse here to live with us. Given the size of our existing immigrant communities this creates an enormous pressure for immigration which can only be mitigated by authoritarian challenges and diminution of basic rights.
The third problem is that education is a major export industry for us bringing many foreign students here. They then get involved in UK life and with UK citizens and want to stay.
Cameron can be criticised for promising to reduce immigration to the tens of thousands because unless we had an economic disaster of Brownian proportions it was never going to happen but when did we last elect a politician whose response to every problem is that it is all terribly difficult?0 -
Scotland would be much more influential in a UK consisting only of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, or maybe just Scotland.malcolmg said:
Hard for Scotland at present when England have all the powers and Scotland are unable to make any decisions without their permission.edmundintokyo said:
If Scotland want in the EU and England want out, the obvious solution is for England to leave the UK while Scotland stays in.hucks67 said:
Yes Cameron probably would not talk about the UK leaving the EU until after the IndyRef. But people in Scotland have a confusing choice anyway. A YES vote means that Scotland would have to leave the EU for a period and negotiate re-joining. A NO vote and Tories/UKIP winning a general election could mean that the UK votes to leave the EU.RobD said:
I wouldn't expect any new EU announcements until after the IndyRef.hucks67 said:If UKIP did start to have a good run of polls in the Autumn regularly achieving15%+ with the Tories back down near 30%, what would the Tories do about this ? Would Cameron decide to talk much more about the UK leaving the EU soon after a referendum in 2017, if the EU does not accept major changes to UK membership terms ? I think this could well happen, that Cameron decides that his party is more EU-sceptic that he is and that he would need to move closer to where most Tory support is. The problem is that some don't trust Cameron and they will go on about cast iron guarantees etc. Then there are the lost votes of pro-EU supporters, who won't like the talk of leaving the EU. This latter should not be under estimated, as many companies promote being in the EU, as a factor in their trade and people will fear loss of jobs.
0 -
Of course UKIP are the favourite here, but I think this poll is more than a little bit odd.Sean_F said:
If 64% of older voters back UKIP in a seat, then UKIP will still win easily.foxinsoxuk said:
55% of 41 people aged 18-34 is not a reliable sample, and if the sample is odd in other ways then likely to be poorly chosen in other ways too.Sean_F said:
The weightings do look odd. But, even among 18-34 year olds, 55% support UKIP, making this an unusual constituency.foxinsoxuk said:
Having had coffee, I still come to the same conclusion.foxinsoxuk said:Insomnia wakes me early so I may not be firing on all cylinders yet, but the above table does look rather odd.
The 2010 Clacton result was:
Con 53%
Labour 25%
LD 13%
BNP 5%
Others 4%
Yet the table above has unweighted figures of four times as many 2010 Con voters than Labour and 12 times as many 2010 con than LD. The weighting doesn't change the proportions much.
I need to get up and make some coffee, but that looks a very odd sample to me (disproportionally made up of elderly former Con voters).
Has anyone with more experience of these spreadsheets got some comments to make? If this is a voodoo poll then there is money to be made!
@flockers_pb
An excellent analysis. In other words, I agree!
How was this sample chosen? Was it on street, phone or internet panel?
It looks as if it was taken outside the British Legion hosting a tea dance!
One can argue about the weightings, but it's still clear that UKIP are well ahead in this seat. Media interviews with Clacton voters have been overwhelmingly supportive of Carswell, over the past few days.
The next poll will surely show something more realistic (perhaps a 15-20% lead, which is what I would guess from this sample reweighted) and the UKIP lead "collapsing".
I have never hidden my dislike of UKIP, but I have never accused them of being a racist party (though I think xenophobic is a fair description) and understand the disenchantment with the major parties. I just think them an incoherent party with the wrong solutions to the wrong problems that face the country.
If Carswell wins, and other similar eurosceptic right wingers join him in defection, then we will have a parliamentary kipper block that will be putting Farage and Nuttall in the shade. They will inevitably produce a manifesto along the lines of Carswells book "the plan" which I have on the shelf. I cannot see that appealing to WWC ex Labour voters. Privatisation of health care and the welfare state for example. Incidentally immigration is hardly mentioned.
Farage has as much to fear from Carswell as Cameron.0 -
CharlesCharles said:
Did you see my speculation yesturday on the influence SamCam has politically on Cameron ?
I'd be interested in your thoughts if you're willing to give them.
0 -
They are certainly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim, but this comment (from June this year) doesn't seem very friendly to the Jews.John_N said:
Is this the same FN that supported bans on demonstrations against the Israeli attack on Gaza? They are deeply anti-Arab and anti-Muslim and like the BNP and EDL they are pro-Israeli.Charles said:
Their view is that there is a real risk that MLP will come through the middle - she has a surprising left wing economic programme which, combined with nationalism and racism/anti-semitism may well be enough to win her a majority given the lack of alternatives.Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
Mr Le Pen, who will be 86 later this month, reeled off a string of insults against celebrities who had criticised the FN’s success in the European elections last month. When he came to the French Jewish actor and pop singer Patrick Bruel, Mr Le Pen, said: “We will organise an oven for him next time”.
Mr Le Pen used the word fournée, attempting to make a word-play on tournée, which means concert tour. Fournée can mean “baker’s oven” or “batch” – but oven is the only word the makes sense in the context.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-sins-of-the-father-jeanmarie-le-pen-embarrasses-daughter-marine-with-antisemitic-jibe-on-fn-website-9509696.html0 -
Thanks for that, Charles.Charles said:
My friends who live in France (admittedly they are so establishment English that their family participated in the burning of Joan of Arc) are desperately worried about MLP. The UMP is tearing itself apart and is unlikely to put up a credible candidate. The Socialists are no better. Their view is that there is a real risk that MLP will come through the middle - she has a surprising left wing economic programme which, combined with nationalism and racism/anti-semitism may well be enough to win her a majority given the lack of alternatives.Peter_the_Punter said:
Fair point, Flock.Flockers_pb said:Indeed Peter (and thanks). It may have been a close run thing though - a few years ago the BNP were getting traction in various parts of the country. Fortunately the abject incompetence of your average racist moron meant that most of their elected officials served a single term, if that, and the party collapsed under the weight of the unpleasantness it attracted. Ukip is a very different animal and the mainstream parties and media were slow to recognise the full implications of that.
I understand (although may be wrong) that the FN has softened its countenance in recent years. Even if so, I guess the suspicion lingers that any conversion to enlightenment is for electoral gain and the rotten core remains.
I visit France fairly regularly these days and watch the FN closer than most. Please accept my assurance that any 'softening' is purely cosmetic and precisely for the purpose you indicate. I have a Marine le Pen anecdote which will illustrate.
A good friend was at a party in France and was astonished to find herself being introduced to MLP. All she could think to blurt out was 'Mais je suis Juive', to which Marine responded with a smile 'Tant pis.'
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose.
I think they are right to be worried.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
