Well this poll was in November, this week's Ashcroft poll has them on 16%.
Yes, I know. Peak Kipper was in November too :-) Soon they will be polling less than the Greens.
The most interesting thing re UKIP polling in the last few months, ComRes and YouGov have started prompting for UKIP and UKIP's share is trending down with those two.
But what about all those Shy UKIP voters we weren't seeing because UKIP wasn't prompted in the first round?
UKIP support (like the Lib Dems') spikes after a by-election win, or a good performance in the Euros, but in general, I think it's wishful thinking to say it's on a downward trend. A simple average of this week's polls gives UKIP 15.6%, which is a high figure.
Depending on the time frame, UKIP are either up or down where they were x months ago.
The point I was trying to make, for a time Survation were the first/only pollsters that prompted for UKIP.
They had the highest score for UKIP of any pollster.
So some of us were curious about this, would this make Survation the most or least accurate pollsters. (I've discussed this at length with Damian Lyons Lowe of Survation)
So when ComRes and YouGov followed Survation's lead, I've been paying a lot of attention to see what happens, it would appear at best it makes no difference to UKIP's score, at worst it lowers UKIP's share from where it was say in November/December.
Lord Ashcroft has started prompting for UKIP this week, and saw them fall 3% from their last poll share, we need a few more results from him to say definitively.
My prediction for this election, the pollster with the most accurate share for UKIP will be the top pollster in PB's General election league table for accuracy.
But we'll only know that after we know the result of the GE. In your opinion is ICM still likely to be the gold standard, if not then what's your best guess?
I think we will see a real split between the phone polls and the online polls.
Even more pronounced than in 2010.
So I think ICM will be towards the top of the table, although I expect Populus might be the surprise
That is not at public expense , unlike Labour and Tories , SNP pay their own way. You do not see SNP getting chucked out/resigning for fiddling. Taxi for Scott he needs to pay his office rent
5 star suites for the Ryder Cup - why the battle to hide the truth?
Bit of green cheese there, go get a job with perks and you can go as well. That is what happens when you work hard you get a job with perks. Did not realise Tory policy was to make executives give up all perks and stay in hostels and walk to work
Perks = 5 star hotels on taxpayer expenses.
And it seems like only 5 minutes ago, that you were telling us that SNP pols paid their own way.
Been listening to BBC News24 this morning, and they have been running with the joint letter from Miliband, Clegg & Farage demanding that Cameron turn up to the debates. Lots of interviews etc, and lots of free media coverage advertising the exclusion of the Greens without a Green politician even having to appear to protest about the issue of their exclusion from the debates. I think that they should send Cameron a thank you note.
Snap PMQs verdict: Given that Cameron’s stance on the debates is implausible (and the polls seem to back that up), he did rather a good job at resisting Miliband’s withering onslaught, and it wasn’t quite the walk-over Miliband was perhaps expecting. A reminder how slick a communicator Cameron can be - even when he’s talking nonsense.
Been listening to BBC News24 this morning, and they have been running with the joint letter from Miliband, Clegg & Farage demanding that Cameron turn up to the debates. Lots of interviews etc, and lots of free media coverage advertising the exclusion of the Greens without a Green politician even having to appear to in a bid to raise the issue of their exclusion. I think that they should send Cameron a thank you note.
@rowenamason: Green leader Natalie Bennett has now written to Miliband, Clegg, Farage urging change of heart, as ITV not made final decision on line-up
I doubt the brave souls who hide behind avatars and false names would be quite so brave if they were in a face to face situation.. so who are the cowards..
Snap PMQs verdict: Given that Cameron’s stance on the debates is implausible (and the polls seem to back that up), he did rather a good job at resisting Miliband’s withering onslaught, and it wasn’t quite the walk-over Miliband was perhaps expecting. A reminder how slick a communicator Cameron can be - even when he’s talking nonsense.
"A reminder how slick a communicator Cameron can be - even when he’s talking nonsense."... hmm, currently I think I may well vote Lib Dem, Nick's defence of free speech on the LBC radio show was very good.
@MrHarryCole: DC to EM: You're a chicken. EM to DC: Well you're frit. Not sure Ed won the soundbite war there.
Beginning to wonder whether Ed doesn't really want the debates either. Why not reply to Cameron's repeated question about whether he is scared of the Greens by saying 'No, I'm not and you are right they should be in the debate." This would expose Cameron's excuse. At the moment it looks like Ed is the one blocking the debate.
That is not at public expense , unlike Labour and Tories , SNP pay their own way. You do not see SNP getting chucked out/resigning for fiddling. Taxi for Scott he needs to pay his office rent
5 star suites for the Ryder Cup - why the battle to hide the truth?
Bit of green cheese there, go get a job with perks and you can go as well. That is what happens when you work hard you get a job with perks. Did not realise Tory policy was to make executives give up all perks and stay in hostels and walk to work
Perks = 5 star hotels on taxpayer expenses.
And it seems like only 5 minutes ago, that you were telling us that SNP pols paid their own way.
When on official business does Cameron or any of his chums stay in a travellodge perchance. At least try to get a realistic argument that is not childish and pathetic.
That is not at public expense , unlike Labour and Tories , SNP pay their own way. You do not see SNP getting chucked out/resigning for fiddling. Taxi for Scott he needs to pay his office rent
5 star suites for the Ryder Cup - why the battle to hide the truth?
Bit of green cheese there, go get a job with perks and you can go as well. That is what happens when you work hard you get a job with perks. Did not realise Tory policy was to make executives give up all perks and stay in hostels and walk to work
Perks = 5 star hotels on taxpayer expenses.
And it seems like only 5 minutes ago, that you were telling us that SNP pols paid their own way.
In reference to Scott's sneer I reminded him that it was not the taxpayer that was paying for Salmond to perform his SNP role. I very much doubt you will be able to show the same for Westminster troughers.
*slaps Mr. W about the head and neck with a large haddock*
That's the point!
It's a focus group, which are wide open to mob effect and [perhaps not in the worm's case] experimenter effects, rampantly over-used by the media and presented to the public as an objective and reliable measure of when politicians were performing well or badly, when it isn't.
Higher engagement - what was the impact on voter turnout? I forget if it was negligible or minimal. And engaging voters matters less than objectivity and fairness, which the worm and (on rare occasions) the moderators prevent.
And because the debates dominate so much coverage, if you want to follow the election you have to follow the debates.
Slaps "Morris Dancer" around the head and neck with a wiffle stick.
In the end it's about choice. I prefer the choice, you do not - rather an odd position for you to hold as a Conservative.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 1m1 minute ago William Hill offering odds of 8/11 that David Cameron takes part in TV debates, Evens he doesn't. Bookies (as often) are right.
I doubt the brave souls who hide behind avatars and false names would be quite so brave if they were in a face to face situation.. so who are the cowards..
Poor doddery has to talk to himself , too cowardly to say who he is posting to.
Mr. W, keep your hands off of my wiffle stick, you bounder and rogue!
Also, not, I fear, for the last time - I'm not a Conservative.
You aren't arguing for choice, but imposition of a massively flawed and anti-democratic worm, which has been shown (last time) to have a significant impact upon voter perceptions.
If UKIP poll 9%, poll less than the lib Dems and only win Clacton I am in a mess.. so you know what to cheer for!
You look pretty safe on all three.
The last opinion poll to put UKIP on less than 10% was the September 2014 ICM - which was also the last time the Lib Dems polled ahead of UKIP. It was ICM, though...
Mr. W, keep your hands off of my wiffle stick, you bounder and rogue!
Also, not, I fear, for the last time - I'm not a Conservative.
You aren't arguing for choice, but imposition of a massively flawed and anti-democratic worm, which has been shown (last time) to have a significant impact upon voter perceptions.
No one imposes the debates on the voters. They have to actively choose to watch. You may choose to watch "Strictly Come Morris Dancing" instead.
Latest Populus was National Poll (Populus) 09 - 11 Jan: LAB - 37% (+3) CON - 32% (-1) UKIP - 13% (-1) LDEM - 10% (+2) GRN - 4% (-2) and we should be due an ICM soon? Last was 19th Dec.
Yes, I know. Peak Kipper was in November too :-) Soon they will be polling less than the Greens.
The most interesting thing re UKIP polling in the last few months, ComRes and YouGov have started prompting for UKIP and UKIP's share is trending down with those two.
But what about all those Shy UKIP voters we weren't seeing because UKIP wasn't prompted in the first round?
UKIP support (like the Lib Dems') spikes after a by-election win, or a good performance in the Euros, but in general, I think it's wishful thinking to say it's on a downward trend. A simple average of this week's polls gives UKIP 15.6%, which is a high figure.
Depending on the time frame, UKIP are either up or down where they were x months ago.
The point I was trying to make, for a time Survation were the first/only pollsters that prompted for UKIP.
They had the highest score for UKIP of any pollster.
So some of us were curious about this, would this make Survation the most or least accurate pollsters. (I've discussed this at length with Damian Lyons Lowe of Survation)
So when ComRes and YouGov followed Survation's lead, I've been paying a lot of attention to see what happens, it would appear at best it makes no difference to UKIP's score, at worst it lowers UKIP's share from where it was say in November/December.
Lord Ashcroft has started prompting for UKIP this week, and saw them fall 3% from their last poll share, we need a few more results from him to say definitively.
My prediction for this election, the pollster with the most accurate share for UKIP will be the top pollster in PB's General election league table for accuracy.
But we'll only know that after we know the result of the GE. In your opinion is ICM still likely to be the gold standard, if not then what's your best guess?
I think we will see a real split between the phone polls and the online polls.
Even more pronounced than in 2010.
So I think ICM will be towards the top of the table, although I expect Populus might be the surprise
@MrHarryCole: DC to EM: You're a chicken. EM to DC: Well you're frit. Not sure Ed won the soundbite war there.
Beginning to wonder whether Ed doesn't really want the debates either. Why not reply to Cameron's repeated question about whether he is scared of the Greens by saying 'No, I'm not and you are right they should be in the debate." This would expose Cameron's excuse. At the moment it looks like Ed is the one blocking the debate.
He did reply.. he said he would debate whoever they put in the debates, and that it wasn't for him or Cameron to choose
Ofcom made their decision.. do you think Dave would have refused to debate if they had included the Greens and not UKIP?
Mr. W, it exacerbates the increasing problem of superficial sloganising and soundbite politics. Politicians seek the killer one-liner, rather than the best idea which might take three sentences rather than eight words to sum up.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 1m1 minute ago William Hill offering odds of 8/11 that David Cameron takes part in TV debates, Evens he doesn't. Bookies (as often) are right.
What does this mean? That the bookies are right that whether he participates or not is finely balanced?
Snap PMQs verdict: Given that Cameron’s stance on the debates is implausible (and the polls seem to back that up), he did rather a good job at resisting Miliband’s withering onslaught, and it wasn’t quite the walk-over Miliband was perhaps expecting. A reminder how slick a communicator Cameron can be - even when he’s talking nonsense.
"A reminder how slick a communicator Cameron can be - even when he’s talking nonsense."... hmm, currently I think I may well vote Lib Dem, Nick's defence of free speech on the LBC radio show was very good.
The lib dems are not tha liberal or democratic when it come's to newspapers.
Latest Populus was National Poll (Populus) 09 - 11 Jan: LAB - 37% (+3) CON - 32% (-1) UKIP - 13% (-1) LDEM - 10% (+2) GRN - 4% (-2) and we should be due an ICM soon? Last was 19th Dec.
Yes, I know. Peak Kipper was in November too :-) Soon they will be polling less than the Greens.
The most interesting thing re UKIP polling in the last few months, ComRes and YouGov have started prompting for UKIP and UKIP's share is trending down with those two.
But what about all those Shy UKIP voters we weren't seeing because UKIP wasn't prompted in the first round?
UKIP support (like the Lib Dems') spikes after a by-election win, or a good performance in the Euros, but in general, I think it's wishful thinking to say it's on a downward trend. A simple average of this week's polls gives UKIP 15.6%, which is a high figure.
Depending on the time frame, UKIP are either up or down where they were x months ago.
The point I was trying to make, for a time Survation were the first/only pollsters that prompted for UKIP.
They had the highest score for UKIP of any pollster.
So some of us were curious about this, would this make Survation the most or least accurate pollsters. (I've discussed this at length with Damian Lyons Lowe of Survation)
So when ComRes and YouGov followed Survation's lead, I've been paying a lot of attention to see what happens, it would appear at best it makes no difference to UKIP's score, at worst it lowers UKIP's share from where it was say in November/December.
Lord Ashcroft has started prompting for UKIP this week, and saw them fall 3% from their last poll share, we need a few more results from him to say definitively.
My prediction for this election, the pollster with the most accurate share for UKIP will be the top pollster in PB's General election league table for accuracy.
But we'll only know that after we know the result of the GE. In your opinion is ICM still likely to be the gold standard, if not then what's your best guess?
I think we will see a real split between the phone polls and the online polls.
Even more pronounced than in 2010.
So I think ICM will be towards the top of the table, although I expect Populus might be the surprise
@MrHarryCole: DC to EM: You're a chicken. EM to DC: Well you're frit. Not sure Ed won the soundbite war there.
Beginning to wonder whether Ed doesn't really want the debates either. Why not reply to Cameron's repeated question about whether he is scared of the Greens by saying 'No, I'm not and you are right they should be in the debate." This would expose Cameron's excuse. At the moment it looks like Ed is the one blocking the debate.
He did reply.. he said he would debate whoever they put in the debates, and that it wasn't for him or Cameron to choose
Ofcom made their decision.. do you think Dave would have refused to debate if they had included the Greens and not UKIP?
All the better for UKIP if Cameron is left out,can you imagine Farage against milliband/clegg = walkover.
I am beginning to think it might be a good move for Farage to make an offer to withdraw from the debate and let Bennett in to see what Cameron says
Cameron's position from what I can gather is all minor parties (Lib Dem's, UKIP and Green) or none. So Farage saying he wont do it, doesn't alter things.
As I understand it, it is only going to be 1 debate with all these parties, so I don't get the big deal. Is Cameron that afraid he can't best Miliband, like he has done most of the time at PMQ's?
Been listening to BBC News24 this morning, and they have been running with the joint letter from Miliband, Clegg & Farage demanding that Cameron turn up to the debates. Lots of interviews etc, and lots of free media coverage advertising the exclusion of the Greens without a Green politician even having to appear to protest about the issue of their exclusion from the debates. I think that they should send Cameron a thank you note.
Indeed. But then given votes for the Greens will generally come from Labour and the LibDems and, thus, under FPTP, get more Tories elected, perhaps it is Cameron who should send a thank you note to the Greens.
On the debates: According to the Beeb, the proposal from the broadcasters is this:
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
Really interesting piece. I have commented on herding on here a few times but it has been an impression rather than a statistical analysis such as this. I do think our pollsters are very reluctant to be too far away from their competitors in their final polls, just in case. This of course distorts the facts and this in turn can distort the results.
There is sound commercial logic behind such an approach but it is a problem when the consensus does not reflect what is actually happening, not least for those betting on the outcome!
The article is also good at showing the margin of error is somewhat larger than is commonly thought in that polling really ought to produce more random results than it does. I have always found the stability of our polling (other than Lord A of course) frankly suspicious. Each sample really ought to show more variation than it does which means that the polling companies are moderating that unpredictability somewhat. Whether they are doing this well or badly we never know in the vast majority of cases.
On the debates: According to the Beeb, the proposal from the broadcasters is this:
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves as opposition parties doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
No10 making clear Cameron now sees two formats for debates, one multi party, one Lab-Con. Ie no room for 3-way with Clegg
Which I would interpret as a sign that they are winning [behind the scenes] the underlying argument over a 5-way, and are cheekily pushing for even more.
If the Greens are not a major party, then any debate including them would need to potentially include other minor parties to be fair. Where and how do you draw the line? Number of constituencies fought?
The debate is no longer a primeministerial debate but rather a party leader debate.
Been listening to BBC News24 this morning, and they have been running with the joint letter from Miliband, Clegg & Farage demanding that Cameron turn up to the debates. Lots of interviews etc, and lots of free media coverage advertising the exclusion of the Greens without a Green politician even having to appear to protest about the issue of their exclusion from the debates. I think that they should send Cameron a thank you note.
Indeed. But then given votes for the Greens will generally come from Labour and the LibDems and, thus, under FPTP, get more Tories elected, perhaps it is Cameron who should send a thank you note to the Greens.
Yes. This is all very simple:
(1) Labour and the Liberal Democrats don't want the Greens there, as they feel they'll steal their votes. (2) Conseratives don't want UKIP their as they feel they'll steal their votes.
The Conservatives now know they can't get away with (2) due to the Ofcom ruling and the success of UKIP, so they're relying on (1) to even it up. Labour and the Liberal Democrats are equally keen to stop (1) and all "chicken" talk is noise - they're just hoping to scare Downing Street into a u-turn before the broadcasters make one.
They're just as self-interested. Pope leads a Christian religion, Bears relief themselves in woods etc.
Don't think I have seen quite so many ad populum statements in one article for a long time.
Marine's approach to immigration is divisive rather than France's immigration policy being divisive.
Even a cynic like me has been impressed by the media-political establishment's response. Absolutely very little discussion or criticism of immigration, foreign policy or indeed that the West regularly jails, fines or harasses individuals for far less offensive speech than the bile Charlie Hebdo came out with.
It would be disastrous for the Tories to allow UKIP in without balancing it on the left.
There is no chance of him being empty chaired but there must be a decent chance now of a different format (SNP, Greens and Plaid?).
Sensible voters aren't stupid. They know Miliband and Clegg relish the thought of UKIP-only, and are shatting themselves at the thought of another left-wing party being brought in.
On the debates: According to the Beeb, the proposal from the broadcasters is this:
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves as opposition parties doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
No10 making clear Cameron now sees two formats for debates, one multi party, one Lab-Con. Ie no room for 3-way with Clegg
Which I would interpret as a sign that they are winning [behind the scenes] the underlying argument over a 5-way, and are cheekily pushing for even more.
And Clegg v Farage as a compensatory debate for the other major parties?
On the debates: According to the Beeb, the proposal from the broadcasters is this:
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
Have I missed something?
In GE2010 the Cleggasm fell off the back of the 1st debate, where Nick Clegg outperformed and surprised. But Cameron had a chance to claw back in the 2nd and 3rd debates.
This time, in the current broadcaster proposals, Farage is only appearing once - in the final debate.
I think Cameron's fear is that if there's a fairly sterile and banal 1st debate (with him and Miliband) followed by a bit more of the same in the 2nd one, and the voters are left relatively unimpressed, it gives Farage alone a chance to steal the mantle off all three of them in the final debate. Mainly to the Conservatives expense.
Don't think I have seen quite so many ad populum statements in one article for a long time.
Marine's approach to immigration is divisive rather than France's immigration policy being divisive.
Even a cynic like me has been impressed by the media-political establishment's response. Absolutely very little discussion or criticism of immigration, foreign policy or indeed that the West regularly jails, fines or harasses individuals for far less offensive speech than the bile Charlie Hebdo came out with.
Orwellian.
Not just that, even a President Marine isnt France, she would still have to get law's though the National Assembly, and her party polls quite a lot lower than she does.
But my real annoyance with the article was the unsubstantiated use of "many people think that" in every other sentence, said in a way which really means "all right thinking people think that" and is hugely dismissive of the third of the French voters that support her.
TSE, you are easily impressed, I assume you have led a sheltered life.
I'm a middle class English Tory, of course I've led a sheltered life.
Not like you Scots, who drink buckfast for breakfast, and the pubs in Scotland are so rough and scary, even the arms of the chairs have tattoos.
You appear to have been in some strange establishments in Scotland. Buckfast is also a Glasgow beverage of choice , and not of the middle classes. I have never tasted it personally , but probably tried similar as a callow youth. I much prefer a good malt.
Last time there were 3 leaders, 3 channels, 3 debates. Hard for anyone involved to cry foul.
This time are are 5 (or more) leaders, 3 (or more) channels, 3 (or fewer) debates. Impossible to avoid the opportunity for 1 or more parties to cry foul.
Latest Populus was National Poll (Populus) 09 - 11 Jan: LAB - 37% (+3) CON - 32% (-1) UKIP - 13% (-1) LDEM - 10% (+2) GRN - 4% (-2) and we should be due an ICM soon? Last was 19th Dec.
Yes, I know. Peak Kipper was in November too :-) Soon they will be polling less than the Greens.
T.
But what about all those Shy UKIP voters we weren't seeing because UKIP wasn't prompted in the first round?
UKIP support (like the Lib Dems') spikes after a by-election win, or a good performance in the Euros, but in general, I think it's wishful thinking to say it's on a downward trend. A simple average of this week's polls gives UKIP 15.6%, which is a high figure.
D.
?
e
ICM hopefully next week.
Why I said Populus, despite Monday's poll being a clear outlier, was in recent months they've had the highest Con + Lab Shares combined figure.
Now if you believe come election day, the other parties are going to get squeezed like a male stripper's bum on a hen's night in Blackpool, then Populus could be the most accurate.
If the Greens are not a major party, then any debate including them would need to potentially include other minor parties to be fair. Where and how do you draw the line? Number of constituencies fought?
The debate is no longer a primeministerial debate but rather a party leader debate.
Equally, though, why include UKIP/Lib Dems and not the Greens?
In 2010 there was a clear distinction between the "Big Three" parties and the rest. That doesn't exist now.
Having said that, if you do want to draw a distinction between the Greens and parties smaller than the Greens, then I think there is no other party that is standing more than a hundred candidates in England with a realistic prospect of winning at least one of those seats, and polling at least 5% in the polls
The English Democrats and the BNP may well stand lots of candidates, but they don't have much chance of winning a seat. Respect have a chance of holding Bradford West, but I don't think they will stand many candidates - they only put up 11 last time. And the rag-tag bands of Socialists? Oh dear. No sign of anything like Syriza or Podemos stirring there.
What the f...? I mean why the... Why did it take nearly two months for this to be released!
And I just calculated the Super-ELBOW for the whole of November last night!
Now I have to re-calculate that and the week-ending 30th November weekly ELBOW to boot!!!
I told him to do it, just to annoy you.
He once sat on an immigration poll for three months, and some PBers had the gall to accuse me of not covering it straight away because I didn't like the findings.
Latest Populus was National Poll (Populus) 09 - 11 Jan: LAB - 37% (+3) CON - 32% (-1) UKIP - 13% (-1) LDEM - 10% (+2) GRN - 4% (-2) and we should be due an ICM soon? Last was 19th Dec.
Yes, I know. Peak Kipper was in November too :-) Soon they will be polling less than the Greens.
T.
But what about all those Shy UKIP voters we weren't seeing because UKIP wasn't prompted in the first round?
UKIP support (like the Lib Dems') spikes after a by-election win, or a good performance in the Euros, but in general, I think it's wishful thinking to say it's on a downward trend. A simple average of this week's polls gives UKIP 15.6%, which is a high figure.
D.
?
e
ICM hopefully next week.
Why I said Populus, despite Monday's poll being a clear outlier, was in recent months they've had the highest Con + Lab Shares combined figure.
Now if you believe come election day, the other parties are going to get squeezed like a male stripper's bum on a hen's night in Blackpool, then Populus could be the most accurate.
I'm trying to square that analogy in my head with opening a can of electoral whoop-ass.
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
Latest Populus was National Poll (Populus) 09 - 11 Jan: LAB - 37% (+3) CON - 32% (-1) UKIP - 13% (-1) LDEM - 10% (+2) GRN - 4% (-2) and we should be due an ICM soon? Last was 19th Dec.
Yes, I know. Peak Kipper was in November too :-) Soon they will be polling less than the Greens.
T.
But what about all those Shy UKIP voters we weren't seeing because UKIP wasn't prompted in the first round?
UKIP support (like the Lib Dems') spikes after a by-election win, or a good performance in the Euros, but in general, I think it's wishful thinking to say it's on a downward trend. A simple average of this week's polls gives UKIP 15.6%, which is a high figure.
D.
?
e
ICM hopefully next week.
Why I said Populus, despite Monday's poll being a clear outlier, was in recent months they've had the highest Con + Lab Shares combined figure.
Now if you believe come election day, the other parties are going to get squeezed like a male stripper's bum on a hen's night in Blackpool, then Populus could be the most accurate.
I'm trying to square that analogy in my head with opening a can of electoral whoop-ass.
It's generating some fairly unpleasant images.
I once drafted a thread comparing UKIP to a bad case of the clap.
From Cleggasm to "one of the minor parties" in four and a half years. Politics can be so cruel.
As he is being so nice to Ms Bennett, is David Cameron the new Mr Darcy?
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Prime Minister losing support to UKIP is in need of the Green Party to even things up a bit"
I am unconvinced that the Greens will be as damaging as all that to Labour, I mean yes, EdM isn't the worlds best debater, the Bennett is a boring as a wet weekend in Wigan, and might end up telling people some of her parties policies
Host: Ms Bennett so how do you see the future of the country in Europe
Bennett: To achieve the Green vision, Europe will need very different structures from those currently in existence. Europe should be made up of overlapping, co-operative, democratic, decentralised groupings of nations and regions. (http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/eu.html#EU110)
Once the public has stopped laughing... Cameron can't even change our rebate and the Green Party think they can change the whole structure of Europe!)
Do Labour people not know the difference between fixed rate mortgages and capped mortgages too I wonder? Let's not even try and explain cap and collar
The Labour Party@UKLabour·12 mins12 minutes ago What rises like a rocket and sinks like a feather? Energy prices under this government. Help us freeze energy bills 0 replies17 retweets2 favorites
Lib Dem Press Office@LibDemPress·1 min1 minute ago .@UKLabour Is it a freeze or a cap? Ah, who cares, it's only the entire energy market you're talking about. It probably doesn't even matter.
From Cleggasm to "one of the minor parties" in four and a half years. Politics can be so cruel.
As he is being so nice to Ms Bennett, is David Cameron the new Mr Darcy?
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Prime Minister losing support to UKIP is in need of the Green Party to even things up a bit"
I am unconvinced that the Greens will be as damaging as all that to Labour, I mean yes, EdM isn't the worlds best debater, the Bennett is a boring as a wet weekend in Wigan, and might end up telling people some of her parties policies
Host: Ms Bennett so how do you see the future of the country in Europe
Bennett: To achieve the Green vision, Europe will need very different structures from those currently in existence. Europe should be made up of overlapping, co-operative, democratic, decentralised groupings of nations and regions. (http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/eu.html#EU110)
One the public has stopped laughing... Cameron can't even change our rebate and the Green Party think they can't change the whole structure of Europe!)
It really depends on how she answers the question though. I imagine she'd probably focus on the Green party's support for the people having a say on EU membership in a referendum and the Labour party's opposition to that.
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
He's someone who's fought against far right racists of Apartheid South Africa so he knows what he's talking about.
I had to smile at the title of a Cathy Newman article in the Telegraph - Will Marine le Pen destroy France.
As if things are so great at the moment.
Rampant unemployment. Zero Growth. An impending deflationary spiral. An explosion in terrorism. Rising anti semitism. Ghettoes where the rule of secular law has broken down.
I am beginning to think it might be a good move for Farage to make an offer to withdraw from the debate and let Bennett in to see what Cameron says
Cameron's position from what I can gather is all minor parties (Lib Dem's, UKIP and Green) or none. So Farage saying he wont do it, doesn't alter things.
As I understand it, it is only going to be 1 debate with all these parties, so I don't get the big deal. Is Cameron that afraid he can't best Miliband, like he has done most of the time at PMQ's?
If Farage said he would not do the debates I would be 1/10 that Cameron would debate Miliband, Clegg and Bennett
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
He's someone who's fought against far right racists of Apartheid South Africa so he knows what he's talking about.
From Cleggasm to "one of the minor parties" in four and a half years. Politics can be so cruel.
As he is being so nice to Ms Bennett, is David Cameron the new Mr Darcy?
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Prime Minister losing support to UKIP is in need of the Green Party to even things up a bit"
I am unconvinced that the Greens will be as damaging as all that to Labour, I mean yes, EdM isn't the worlds best debater, the Bennett is a boring as a wet weekend in Wigan, and might end up telling people some of her parties policies
Host: Ms Bennett so how do you see the future of the country in Europe
Bennett: To achieve the Green vision, Europe will need very different structures from those currently in existence. Europe should be made up of overlapping, co-operative, democratic, decentralised groupings of nations and regions. (http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/eu.html#EU110)
One the public has stopped laughing... Cameron can't even change our rebate and the Green Party think they can't change the whole structure of Europe!)
It really depends on how she answers the question though. I imagine she'd probably focus on the Green party's support for the people having a say on EU membership in a referendum and the Labour party's opposition to that.
Yes I know, but through an hour long debate there is going to be so much room for putting a foot wrong somewhere.
Host: Ms Bennett, what is your policy for getting Britain back to work ?
Bennett The scale of industrial production worldwide must reduce if we are to live in the UK and globally within environmental limits. However, we do not support de-industrialisation as a result of globalisation, which is in effect just offshoring existing industries to lower wage and often lower environmental standards elsewhere.
Ah, so you are going to get people back to work by closing factories and lowering our industrial output, and putting quotas on our imports otherwise people will just buy the stuff we dont make from factories abroad.
* ... for those PBers old enough to remember Spitting Image and their portrayal of the Greens as a small collection of vegetables.
Was that not Thatcher's cabinet?
From memory:
Thatcher "I'll have steak, rare" Waiter "What about the vegetables?" Thatcher "They'll have the same"
Yep, that's the one. Spitting Image was truly brilliant in those days. They could make or destroy politicians overnight.
Tom King never recovered from the Invisible Man sketch and Norman Tebbit became a much larger figure than he might have done otherwise. It is sad there is nothing of similar quality today given the ample opportunities our politicians give.
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
He's someone who's fought against far right racists of Apartheid South Africa so he knows what he's talking about.
Or perhaps he came to political maturity in one dynamic, so now he sees it everywhere.
If genuinely wants to break down racism, he'd oppose the Labour and Tory "White Europe" immigration policy.
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
He's someone who's fought against far right racists of Apartheid South Africa so he knows what he's talking about.
Is a party responsible for those that lend it their vote ?
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
He's someone who's fought against far right racists of Apartheid South Africa so he knows what he's talking about.
On the debates: According to the Beeb, the proposal from the broadcasters is this:
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves as opposition parties doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
No10 making clear Cameron now sees two formats for debates, one multi party, one Lab-Con. Ie no room for 3-way with Clegg
Which I would interpret as a sign that they are winning [behind the scenes] the underlying argument over a 5-way, and are cheekily pushing for even more.
And Clegg v Farage as a compensatory debate for the other major parties?
The response of some on the left, or in the Muslim community, to the Paris murders seems to be the magazine was wrong to publish the cartoons because Muslims were especially annoyed by it.
Yes, they were, but I'm sure that anyone who sees their opinions or views ridiculed will feel annoyed. The Christian community is used to it but the Muslim community is not, therefore they argue, they should be a special case. After all, they are a minority.
A Muslim friend of mine asked me some years ago why Christianity put up with it. To him, it was incomprehensible.
Because we live in a free and open society is the answer. Some people don't deliberately offend others - they think it's wrong; some people don't see the issue.
But claiming a special "sensitivity" means preferential treatment. And that annoys even more people.
On the debates: According to the Beeb, the proposal from the broadcasters is this:
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves as opposition parties doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
No10 making clear Cameron now sees two formats for debates, one multi party, one Lab-Con. Ie no room for 3-way with Clegg
Which I would interpret as a sign that they are winning [behind the scenes] the underlying argument over a 5-way, and are cheekily pushing for even more.
Comments
Voters may agree with labour that it is crap, but some won;t like the labour solution.
Judging from newspaper threads, some people think the NHS is crap because its chock full of free loading foreigners.
Even more pronounced than in 2010.
So I think ICM will be towards the top of the table, although I expect Populus might be the surprise
And it seems like only 5 minutes ago, that you were telling us that SNP pols paid their own way.
Snap PMQs verdict: Given that Cameron’s stance on the debates is implausible (and the polls seem to back that up), he did rather a good job at resisting Miliband’s withering onslaught, and it wasn’t quite the walk-over Miliband was perhaps expecting. A reminder how slick a communicator Cameron can be - even when he’s talking nonsense.
In the end it's about choice. I prefer the choice, you do not - rather an odd position for you to hold as a Conservative.
William Hill offering odds of 8/11 that David Cameron takes part in TV debates, Evens he doesn't. Bookies (as often) are right.
* ... for those PBers old enough to remember Spitting Image and their portrayal of the Greens as a small collection of vegetables.
Also, not, I fear, for the last time - I'm not a Conservative.
You aren't arguing for choice, but imposition of a massively flawed and anti-democratic worm, which has been shown (last time) to have a significant impact upon voter perceptions.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7TUuBACIAEax1-.png:large
Not like you Scots, who drink buckfast for breakfast, and the pubs in Scotland are so rough and scary, even the arms of the chairs have tattoos.
The data tables are only 845 (eight hundred and forty-five) pages long
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/NHS-poll-Full-data-tables.pdf
The last opinion poll to put UKIP on less than 10% was the September 2014 ICM - which was also the last time the Lib Dems polled ahead of UKIP. It was ICM, though...
National Poll (Populus) 09 - 11 Jan:
LAB - 37% (+3)
CON - 32% (-1)
UKIP - 13% (-1)
LDEM - 10% (+2)
GRN - 4% (-2)
and we should be due an ICM soon? Last was 19th Dec.
Ofcom made their decision.. do you think Dave would have refused to debate if they had included the Greens and not UKIP?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/11343571/Charlie-Hebdo-Will-Marine-Le-Pen-destroy-fragile-France.html
Don't think I have seen quite so many ad populum statements in one article for a long time.
As I understand it, it is only going to be 1 debate with all these parties, so I don't get the big deal. Is Cameron that afraid he can't best Miliband, like he has done most of the time at PMQ's?
And I just calculated the Super-ELBOW for the whole of November last night!
Now I have to re-calculate that and the week-ending 30th November weekly ELBOW to boot!!!
Adam Boulton @adamboultonSKY
Broadcasters are working together to make the debates happen. BTW OfCom major party ruling does not govern debates.
1. Ed M's lashed himself to taking part if the Greens are invited - job done by Cameron.
2. Only Ed M could weaponise the NHS against himself and so has to leave his backbenchers to bring it up....
3. Where's Ed Balls gone?
Mr Cameron would take on Labour leader Mr Miliband head-to-head in one debate, another would feature Mr Cameron, Mr Miliband and Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, and a third would also include UKIP's Mr Farage.
The suggested schedule is for debates on 2 April, 16 April and 30 April, ahead of the general election on 7 May
I'm struggling to see much downside to Cameron declining to appear in the 4-way one, on the grounds that the Greens should have been included, but appearing in the other two. What he really wants is the one-to-one debate with Miliband; leaving Clegg, Miliband and Farage to argue amongst themselves doesn't look too bad, and the Green excuse is not a bad one (on democratic grounds, I think they should be included).
Have I missed something?
I think Dave can afford to be stubborn here. The media is desperate for these debates.
There is sound commercial logic behind such an approach but it is a problem when the consensus does not reflect what is actually happening, not least for those betting on the outcome!
The article is also good at showing the margin of error is somewhat larger than is commonly thought in that polling really ought to produce more random results than it does. I have always found the stability of our polling (other than Lord A of course) frankly suspicious. Each sample really ought to show more variation than it does which means that the polling companies are moderating that unpredictability somewhat. Whether they are doing this well or badly we never know in the vast majority of cases.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh
No10 making clear Cameron now sees two formats for debates, one multi party, one Lab-Con. Ie no room for 3-way with Clegg
Which I would interpret as a sign that they are winning [behind the scenes] the underlying argument over a 5-way, and are cheekily pushing for even more.
The debate is no longer a primeministerial debate but rather a party leader debate.
Dave sits back. Job done...
(1) Labour and the Liberal Democrats don't want the Greens there, as they feel they'll steal their votes.
(2) Conseratives don't want UKIP their as they feel they'll steal their votes.
The Conservatives now know they can't get away with (2) due to the Ofcom ruling and the success of UKIP, so they're relying on (1) to even it up. Labour and the Liberal Democrats are equally keen to stop (1) and all "chicken" talk is noise - they're just hoping to scare Downing Street into a u-turn before the broadcasters make one.
They're just as self-interested. Pope leads a Christian religion, Bears relief themselves in woods etc.
Con 30%
Lab 33%
LD 7%
UKIP 19%
Green 6%
Even a cynic like me has been impressed by the media-political establishment's response. Absolutely very little discussion or criticism of immigration, foreign policy or indeed that the West regularly jails, fines or harasses individuals for far less offensive speech than the bile Charlie Hebdo came out with.
Orwellian.
It would be disastrous for the Tories to allow UKIP in without balancing it on the left.
There is no chance of him being empty chaired but there must be a decent chance now of a different format (SNP, Greens and Plaid?).
Sensible voters aren't stupid. They know Miliband and Clegg relish the thought of UKIP-only, and are shatting themselves at the thought of another left-wing party being brought in.
This time, in the current broadcaster proposals, Farage is only appearing once - in the final debate.
I think Cameron's fear is that if there's a fairly sterile and banal 1st debate (with him and Miliband) followed by a bit more of the same in the 2nd one, and the voters are left relatively unimpressed, it gives Farage alone a chance to steal the mantle off all three of them in the final debate. Mainly to the Conservatives expense.
And then there'd be no comeback.
But my real annoyance with the article was the unsubstantiated use of "many people think that" in every other sentence, said in a way which really means "all right thinking people think that" and is hugely dismissive of the third of the French voters that support her.
This time are are 5 (or more) leaders, 3 (or more) channels, 3 (or fewer) debates. Impossible to avoid the opportunity for 1 or more parties to cry foul.
As he is being so nice to Ms Bennett, is David Cameron the new Mr Darcy?
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Prime Minister losing support to UKIP is in need of the Green Party to even things up a bit"
Why I said Populus, despite Monday's poll being a clear outlier, was in recent months they've had the highest Con + Lab Shares combined figure.
Now if you believe come election day, the other parties are going to get squeezed like a male stripper's bum on a hen's night in Blackpool, then Populus could be the most accurate.
In 2010 there was a clear distinction between the "Big Three" parties and the rest. That doesn't exist now.
Having said that, if you do want to draw a distinction between the Greens and parties smaller than the Greens, then I think there is no other party that is standing more than a hundred candidates in England with a realistic prospect of winning at least one of those seats, and polling at least 5% in the polls
The English Democrats and the BNP may well stand lots of candidates, but they don't have much chance of winning a seat. Respect have a chance of holding Bradford West, but I don't think they will stand many candidates - they only put up 11 last time. And the rag-tag bands of Socialists? Oh dear. No sign of anything like Syriza or Podemos stirring there.
He once sat on an immigration poll for three months, and some PBers had the gall to accuse me of not covering it straight away because I didn't like the findings.
It's generating some fairly unpleasant images.
PoliticsHome@politicshome·5 mins5 minutes ago
Labour's Peter Hain says need to stand against far-right and "the vile prejudices of far too many members of Ukip" after Paris attacks.
Thatcher "I'll have steak, rare"
Waiter "What about the vegetables?"
Thatcher "They'll have the same"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPzzgE34YQY
Host: Ms Bennett so how do you see the future of the country in Europe
Bennett: To achieve the Green vision, Europe will need very different structures from those currently in existence. Europe should be made up of overlapping, co-operative, democratic, decentralised groupings of nations and regions.
(http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/eu.html#EU110)
Once the public has stopped laughing... Cameron can't even change our rebate and the Green Party think they can change the whole structure of Europe!)
The Labour Party@UKLabour·12 mins12 minutes ago
What rises like a rocket and sinks like a feather? Energy prices under this government. Help us freeze energy bills
0 replies17 retweets2 favorites
Lib Dem Press Office@LibDemPress·1 min1 minute ago
.@UKLabour Is it a freeze or a cap? Ah, who cares, it's only the entire energy market you're talking about. It probably doesn't even matter.
buzzfeed.com/scottybryan/delightful-guardian-corrections?bftw&utm_term=4ldqpgm#.wv3GMrbrY
As if things are so great at the moment.
Rampant unemployment. Zero Growth. An impending deflationary spiral. An explosion in terrorism. Rising anti semitism. Ghettoes where the rule of secular law has broken down.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/pmqs-review-camerons-green-shield-protects-him-milibands-tv-debates-attack
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/angry-white-and-proud
Host: Ms Bennett, what is your policy for getting Britain back to work ?
Bennett The scale of industrial production worldwide must reduce if we are to live in the UK and globally within environmental limits. However, we do not support de-industrialisation as a result of globalisation, which is in effect just offshoring existing industries to lower wage and often lower environmental standards elsewhere.
Ah, so you are going to get people back to work by closing factories and lowering our industrial output, and putting quotas on our imports otherwise people will just buy the stuff we dont make from factories abroad.
Tom King never recovered from the Invisible Man sketch and Norman Tebbit became a much larger figure than he might have done otherwise. It is sad there is nothing of similar quality today given the ample opportunities our politicians give.
Edit, it is on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoTFvRMiNUc
If genuinely wants to break down racism, he'd oppose the Labour and Tory "White Europe" immigration policy.
Yes, they were, but I'm sure that anyone who sees their opinions or views ridiculed will feel annoyed. The Christian community is used to it but the Muslim community is not, therefore they argue, they should be a special case. After all, they are a minority.
A Muslim friend of mine asked me some years ago why Christianity put up with it. To him, it was incomprehensible.
Because we live in a free and open society is the answer. Some people don't deliberately offend others - they think it's wrong; some people don't see the issue.
But claiming a special "sensitivity" means preferential treatment. And that annoys even more people.