politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In first post-debate poll Survation finds LAB 2% ahead and
Comments
-
Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money0 -
Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Projection Countdown :
777 minutes0 -
More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.0 -
It's just with an image problem like that, they have no realistic hope of winning a majority.Speedy said:
Well what did you expect?anotherDave said:"The Conservative Party is more on the side of wealthy people" +65.8% !!!!!
p.41, table 38.
Con 34%, Lab 91%, LD 72%, UKIP 76%0 -
Now that is interesting.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of Tory voters and 54.8% of UKIP voters.
No Way Tories can win if that view prevails0 -
Loosing your job is a benefit for the poor?Speedy said:
Since the clampdown on zero hours is politically for the benefit of the poor it would certainly be more popular with UKIP than with the Tories.RobD said:
Fits the idea that UKIP are not just exTory.Carola said:Interesting...
Jack Blanchard @Jack_Blanchard_ · 25m 25 minutes ago
Almost half of all Tory voters (47%) and two-thirds of UKIP voters (64%) support Miliband's clampdown on zero hours contracts
0 -
The leader approval rating in this poll has to be read carefully. Many will answer "approve" for people that they generally think useless.0
-
Unsurprising. I guess despite being criticised for it by the Tories, Labour are to be praised for not taking the easy route and going anti-austerity. Mind you, they are still trying to gain the votes of the anti-austerity crowd while still planning large amounts of austerity, which is a bit rich, but it's something at least.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.0 -
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want that number to be true.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut
0 -
No I don't in this instance, if Labour had a decent leader they would be miles ahead.bigjohnowls said:
Yet 3 out OF 4 polls had him winner.nigel4england said:
He certainly wasn't prepared for Clegg to demand an apology on how Labour trashed the economy, nor was he prepared for Cameron's mention of mid-Staffs, because he didn't answer either point.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
He is a joke.
Do you ever think it might be you?
As it stands I think the Tories will win a minority and we will have another Tory/LD coalition.0 -
Yes, its a stupid question. Plenty of Tories will approve of Milliband as LOTO.antifrank said:The leader approval rating in this poll has to be read carefully. Many will answer "approve" for people that they generally think useless.
0 -
Survation was joint top pollster at the IndyRefchestnut said:With Survation's track record we can safely conclude that the Tories are well clear if Labour are only two in front.
0 -
A tax cut for millionaires?Speedy said:
Well what did you expect?anotherDave said:"The Conservative Party is more on the side of wealthy people" +65.8% !!!!!
p.41, table 38.
Con 34%, Lab 91%, LD 72%, UKIP 76%0 -
People don't understand the debt or the deficit. Or 10yr borrowing rates or the difference between an Aa1 and Aa2 rating. And why should they? They want someone to make it all ok. They want someone to turn the clock back and turn the machines back on.Danny565 said:
Yet more proof Miliband is to the right of centre on the big economic issue.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
That is a pretty tight set of parameters to work within as a politician.
It is a credit to Ed that he won't bow to such popularism.0 -
Try to explain that to the poor in a single line.Flightpath said:
Loosing your job is a benefit for the poor?Speedy said:
Since the clampdown on zero hours is politically for the benefit of the poor it would certainly be more popular with UKIP than with the Tories.RobD said:
Fits the idea that UKIP are not just exTory.Carola said:Interesting...
Jack Blanchard @Jack_Blanchard_ · 25m 25 minutes ago
Almost half of all Tory voters (47%) and two-thirds of UKIP voters (64%) support Miliband's clampdown on zero hours contracts
Same goes with raising the minimum wage.
That's why I said politically.0 -
Who do you think the fiscal conservative vote was going to go for before last night?MaxPB said:As I said, last night the biggest winners last night were Nicola and Lynton Crosby. Ed has had Labour's left flank opened up and Dave will have united a lot of the fiscally conservative vote last night, especially since Farage played a core vote strategy.
Whatever the Tories are paying Crosby they should double it today.
0 -
I think the BES use a ComRes 'favourable/unfavourable' type question.Eastwinger said:
Yes, its a stupid question. Plenty of Tories will approve of Milliband as LOTO.antifrank said:The leader approval rating in this poll has to be read carefully. Many will answer "approve" for people that they generally think useless.
0 -
I have said in lots of posts he is a drag on the LAB vote.nigel4england said:
No I don't in this instance, if Labour had a decent leader they would be miles ahead.bigjohnowls said:
Yet 3 out OF 4 polls had him winner.nigel4england said:
He certainly wasn't prepared for Clegg to demand an apology on how Labour trashed the economy, nor was he prepared for Cameron's mention of mid-Staffs, because he didn't answer either point.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
He is a joke.
Do you ever think it might be you?
As it stands I think the Tories will win a minority and we will have another Tory/LD coalition.
However if he is a joke why did respondents in 3 of 4 polls have him as winner?
Presumably you had him as last?0 -
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
0 -
By an invisible margin. "Snap polls taken after the poll suggested there was no clear winner" - BBC. What happened last night was that nothing happened, as the tories wanted. The problem is that last night was part of a deal for ed: he bought the opportunity for a hell, yes demolition of Cameron at the expense of the forthcoming 5 way debate. He is at a net standstill now, with the risks very much to the downside on 16 April. He may give Nicola a shellacking of course, and he may get a free and effective sneerfest at the absent Cam. But I wouldn't bet on it.bigjohnowls said:
Yet 3 out OF 4 polls had him winner.nigel4england said:
He certainly wasn't prepared for Clegg to demand an apology on how Labour trashed the economy, nor was he prepared for Cameron's mention of mid-Staffs, because he didn't answer either point.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
He is a joke.
Do you ever think it might be you?0 -
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 420 -
The post-debate polls really should have asked who won excluding the nationalist parties, because it's pretty clear Sturgeon winning would have little direct impact on England's VI.0
-
Completely wrong though. There are not many businesses that are employing more people and paying those that they employed 5 years ago less. Companies that employ more people are likely to be growing, and growing businesses tend to increase their employees wages. Businesses don't grow by cutting wages they grow by becoming better at what they do.tyson said:"I would remind everyone the Coalition Economic record is decidedly pitiful over the last 5 years based on mathematical analysis.
In 1996, in last recession under John Major Conservative government the unemployment rate was 8.5%. When the Labour government came into government in 1997 it was 7.5%.
During the height of Credit Crunch, under Gordon Brown leadership is only reached 8%. Therefore, the Credit Crunch can be viewed as typical UK recession, in terms of employment. (O:cut a section here)
Over the last 5 years, the Trade Union negotiated pay cuts to salaries, below the rate of RPI (inflation) of about 6%. These pay cuts allowed more people to be employed, simply by the variables of businesses hiring more stuff at the same expenditure on salaries as they did at the height of recession in 2008.
As an example, 29.4 million people are in employment, whose wages are lowered by 6.% via deflation of salaries compared to Retail Price Index (inflation). This allows more people to be employed, this allows business or the government to employ an extra 1.764 million people for the same total expenditure on salaries as the did in compared to 2008 or 2010. This largely explains why the tax income today is remaining as bad as it is in most recessions during the post war era.
1,764,000 divide by 5 (years) divided by 365 (days) equals 966 jobs created each day over the Coalition governments term in public office. Everyone is poorer, and it pays considerably less to be employment then when the Labour Party was in government.
Any idiot can cut wages and hire extra staff, but this is not why people elect political parties to govern a country - they elect a government to be paid more wages from their current employment. This is not governance, it meaningless governance, which delivers nothing (a bit like diet drinks, zero calories, yet has the aesthetic aspects of being nice to taste), it massive con-job on the UK electorate. "
Posted by victimfromsomethingorother in the last thread
Great post victim from the last thread. Excellent to read something so intelligent from the site.
The economic gains from five years of coalition government are limited, but that'd precisely what you'd expect when the state is contracting (or probably more accurately trying to contract). To nick the "any idiot" phrase - Any idiot can expand the state, but contracting the public sector and still create a positive economic background requires talent.0 -
Well yes, but if anything asking people to prioritise makes the results more accurate.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
If you ask people abstractly: "do you want to cut the deficit?" Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would want it to be cut if there's no consequences to it.
But when you spell out the consequences, people say they're not willing to sacrifice good public services just to cut the deficit.0 -
I am doing the opposite. One of us will be disappointed.bigjohnowls said:Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money
0 -
Ed has been deemed so useless that just putting on an impressable suit & tie combination and not jumping around like the Easter Bunny was a huge positive for him.Ishmael_X said:
By an invisible margin. "Snap polls taken after the poll suggested there was no clear winner" - BBC. What happened last night was that nothing happened, as the tories wanted. The problem is that last night was part of a deal for ed: he bought the opportunity for a hell, yes demolition of Cameron at the expense of the forthcoming 5 way debate. He is at a net standstill now, with the risks very much to the downside on 16 April. He may give Nicola a shellacking of course, and he may get a free and effective sneerfest at the absent Cam. But I wouldn't bet on it.bigjohnowls said:
Yet 3 out OF 4 polls had him winner.nigel4england said:
He certainly wasn't prepared for Clegg to demand an apology on how Labour trashed the economy, nor was he prepared for Cameron's mention of mid-Staffs, because he didn't answer either point.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
He is a joke.
Do you ever think it might be you?0 -
Comrades - five weeks to go until the dawn of a new Red - Green era. We can flush the last vestiges of Blairism down the pan along with Cam and Clegg. Hell yes!0
-
I fear you may be right. What also strikes me is just how hungry Miliband looks for it.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
Cameron looks like he's doing what he has to, and no more. Almost like he couldn't care less whether he wins or loses.0 -
Topping
anyone might think the Tories would have been better setting out a positive message.0 -
If the alternatives are cutting government spending, or increasing taxation, voters have a track record of choosing to cut spending.Danny565 said:
Well yes, but if anything asking people to prioritise makes the results more accurate.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
If you ask people abstractly: "do you want to cut the deficit?" Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would want it to be cut if there's no consequences to it.
But when you spell out the consequences, people say they're not willing to sacrifice good public services just to cut the deficit.0 -
But they choose running a deficit over either cutting spending or raising taxes.anotherDave said:
If the alternatives are cutting government spending, or increasing taxation, voters have a track record of choosing to cut spending.Danny565 said:
Well yes, but if anything asking people to prioritise makes the results more accurate.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
If you ask people abstractly: "do you want to cut the deficit?" Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would want it to be cut if there's no consequences to it.
But when you spell out the consequences, people say they're not willing to sacrifice good public services just to cut the deficit.
0 -
Those polls are ridiculous and you know it.bigjohnowls said:
I have said in lots of posts he is a drag on the LAB vote.nigel4england said:
No I don't in this instance, if Labour had a decent leader they would be miles ahead.bigjohnowls said:
Yet 3 out OF 4 polls had him winner.nigel4england said:
He certainly wasn't prepared for Clegg to demand an apology on how Labour trashed the economy, nor was he prepared for Cameron's mention of mid-Staffs, because he didn't answer either point.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
He is a joke.
Do you ever think it might be you?
As it stands I think the Tories will win a minority and we will have another Tory/LD coalition.
However if he is a joke why did respondents in 3 of 4 polls have him as winner?
Presumably you had him as last?
I saw it much different to others, for a start I thought Clegg did well and floored Ed by demanding an apology. Ed was OK apart from that rehearsed stare into the cameras Hughie Green style, Cam was OK, Sturgeon was best by a mile, Farage went way OTT with the HIV thing but did well later, the other two ladies were OK as well.0 -
Cam was doing the "squabble ye little children" thing.Casino_Royale said:
I fear you may be right. What also strikes me is just how hungry Miliband looks for it.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
Cameron looks like he's doing what he has to, and no more. Almost like he couldn't care less whether he wins or loses.
It didn't work but it didn't not work.0 -
Negative campaigning alone isn't enough, throw in a few bribes and make extensive use of blackmail tactics and you are on a sure fire winner. There is a long way to go in this election campaign yet.FrancisUrquhart said:
People always say negative campaigning, its bad, it doesn't work...then you look at Scottish Indy Referendum and even last GE (Labour went very negative and managed well in some areas with the fear factor, and it certainly dented Cameron). I don't like it as a tactic, I want to hear positive visions from all parties, but it appears to work.IOS said:Francis
I don't mean the public don't like Crosby - therefore = toxic for the Tories. Just that his negativity doesn't work in the UK.
Pick a fight with Tim Montgomery on this as he points this out.
Positive campaigning clearly doesn't work as the Referendum proved. The SNP might have run a positive campaign for Holyrood in 2011 but it had help from an incompetent Labour Party and a Lib Dem Party that was sleeping with the Tories in London.
0 -
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"0 -
It isn't in their DNA.IOS said:Topping
anyone might think the Tories would have been better setting out a positive message.
0 -
The national debt has doubled during this parliament. The debt servicing costs are now £52 billion a year. That is not a sustainable policy.Danny565 said:
But they choose running a deficit over either cutting spending or raising taxes.anotherDave said:
If the alternatives are cutting government spending, or increasing taxation, voters have a track record of choosing to cut spending.Danny565 said:
Well yes, but if anything asking people to prioritise makes the results more accurate.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
If you ask people abstractly: "do you want to cut the deficit?" Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would want it to be cut if there's no consequences to it.
But when you spell out the consequences, people say they're not willing to sacrifice good public services just to cut the deficit.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11187727/Its-time-to-come-clean-about-our-national-debt.html0 -
Including Sky News and the BBC News channel, the debate averaged 7.7m.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-321728710 -
It's a leading question. You don't measure the quality of public services by how much money is spent.Danny565 said:
Well yes, but if anything asking people to prioritise makes the results more accurate.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
If you ask people abstractly: "do you want to cut the deficit?" Sure, in an ideal world, everyone would want it to be cut if there's no consequences to it.
But when you spell out the consequences, people say they're not willing to sacrifice good public services just to cut the deficit.
0 -
It's tricky. By several economic aggregates measures the positive message is: "look at what we have done" which EdM effectively castigated as looking to the past not the future.IOS said:Topping
anyone might think the Tories would have been better setting out a positive message.
People want a hook but there isn't one here. We were in a jam and we are getting out of it. Now, of course there are plenty of interesting counter-factuals around eg. infrastructure spending on May 8th 2010 but we are where we are. Good economic growth, less unemployment, challenges being met on schools and hospitals and so forth. It isn't particularly dramatic.
2010 was always categorised as the wrong election to win. Perhaps it will turn out to be but everyone thought it was the wrong election to win because the economy was unrecoverable, not because the govt did too well to the point whereby everyone is now able to say: "what was all the fuss about we want more."
0 -
Interesting that BBC News has been leading with a strapline of "more than 7 million " rather than "fewer than 8 million" which would seem more appropriate.NeilVW said:Including Sky News and the BBC News channel, the debate averaged 7.7m.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32172871
0 -
If Ed's image has so improved will more Labour candidates feel more comfortable to use photographs with him?
https://electionleaflets.org/parties/PP53/labour-party-30 -
That's a fair observation. I think the greatest effect that will arise from these sessions is Miliband shoring up his core vote, in England.TOPPING said:
Cam was doing the "squabble ye little children" thing.Casino_Royale said:
I fear you may be right. What also strikes me is just how hungry Miliband looks for it.MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
Cameron looks like he's doing what he has to, and no more. Almost like he couldn't care less whether he wins or loses.
It didn't work but it didn't not work.
The era of him risking shedding a big part of his base to the Greens is probably over. That, and increased Labour turnout, may help him swipe a few more marginals.
0 -
And didn't The Sun have something about the day Labour lost the election?peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
What's a girl to make of it all?0 -
Do you think they will actually start using the name of the Labour Party on their leaflets as well. I understand Jim Macmurphy isn't even doing that.dr_spyn said:If Ed's image has so improved will more Labour candidates feel more comfortable to use photographs with him?
https://electionleaflets.org/parties/PP53/labour-party-3
0 -
But that headline was written by the same people who published the rich peoples dont want to be taxed letter... General consensus and a range of polling suggest it was largely uneventful.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
Do people really believe these pre prepared tabloid page sellers? Not convinced.
0 -
I'd be curious about what the result might be if a pollster asked something like.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
"Government spending should be reduced until the national debt is cleared?"
or
"Public services should be improved irrespective of the cost?"
Seeing results to other economic questions filtered by these questions might be more instructive.
0 -
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
Its the art of asking a loaded question. This poll is full of them.Omnium said:
I'd be curious about what the result might be if a pollster asked something like.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
"Government spending should be reduced until the national debt is cleared?"
or
"Public services should be improved irrespective of the cost?"
Seeing results to other economic questions filtered by these questions might be more instructive.
0 -
Lab majority on Betfair....
400 -
SeanT has been saying this since Ed was made leader. You don't take on your big brother and win, without having a bit if the killer instinct.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
The problem with these questions is that they don't reflect the debate as it is had. For instance, no party frames anti-austerity as "government spending" for its own sake, as if an entry in a ledger turns them on, while no party supports improving public services irrespective of cost. However, there is an actual debate about improving public services (what Labour says) versus cutting the deficit (what the coalition says). Perhaps this is "uncomfort polling"!Omnium said:
I'd be curious about what the result might be if a pollster asked something like.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
"Government spending should be reduced until the national debt is cleared?"
or
"Public services should be improved irrespective of the cost?"
Seeing results to other economic questions filtered by these questions might be more instructive.0 -
Todays Sun will be a keeper as EICIPM does his No.10 walk0
-
I don't agree with that at all. Personally I have never underestimated him, anyone prepared to knife his own brother has serious ambition.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!
But the events you mentioned are mostly farcical, a price freeze that is unworkable and keeps prices higher, attacking Murdoch but not a word on the Mirror Group.
As for bursting into tears, when he was properly attacked I thought his bottom lip was going to go. Have a look on Guido at the clips when Clegg attacked him and Cameron mentioned mid-Staffs0 -
Yep. I'm not sure if this represents a sequence of re-asking the same question, although I imagine it does. I'm not sure it's in any pollsters interest to ask meaningless stuff.Eastwinger said:
Its the art of asking a loaded question. This poll is full of them.Omnium said:
I'd be curious about what the result might be if a pollster asked something like.anotherDave said:
Looking at Survation, the question was not that clear. It's about public services vs the deficit, not just the deficit.Danny565 said:
It's been consistently put by a variety of pollsters.anotherDave said:
I'd like to see the same question put by a range of pollsters. I don't want to believe those numbers.Speedy said:More interestingly is the response on the deficit question.
52.6% do not want the deficit to be cut, including 25.8% of current Tory voters and 54.8% of current UKIP voters.
From ComRes, 16 December 2014:
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
"It is more important to cut the deficit, even if it means public services are not improved over the next five years" +33.9%
"It is more important that public services are improved, even if it means the deficit is not cut over the next five years" +52.6%
p.45, table 42
"Government spending should be reduced until the national debt is cleared?"
or
"Public services should be improved irrespective of the cost?"
Seeing results to other economic questions filtered by these questions might be more instructive.
0 -
Possibly the rating has surprised on the upside, given that (a) debates are no longer such a novelty, and (b) the seven-way format sounded like a bit of a mess that wouldn't hold people's interest. Apparently the audience grew during transmission so that doesn't appear to have been the case.JohnLilburne said:
Interesting that BBC News has been leading with a strapline of "more than 7 million " rather than "fewer than 8 million" which would seem more appropriate.NeilVW said:Including Sky News and the BBC News channel, the debate averaged 7.7m.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-321728710 -
0
-
Just not true that that is what tories thought. On the contrary, the strong consensus here has been that Cameron was prudent to limit his exposure to ed in the debates. And I don't understand the time-shifted edgasm we seem to be witnessing this evening. The "surprise" he sprung last night was that he avoided soiling himself.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
44...0
-
My book is fairly balanced on this - Labour feels like a good value loserCasino_Royale said:
I am doing the opposite. One of us will be disappointed.bigjohnowls said:Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money0 -
Is Ed's No 9 walk a silly one or off the plank ?bigjohnowls said:Todays Sun will be a keeper as EICIPM does his No.10 walk
0 -
Source Wikepedia opinion polls.MikeSmithson said:
Survation tend to show changes based on the un-rounded numbers.rogerh said:Changes on previous weeks Survation Mirror poll Con -1,Lab NC,LD +1, UKIP NC ,Green NC,
0 -
I actually wonder if Millibland wouldn't be better off just cutting SLAB loose in terms of any kind of support physical or financial and focusing entirely on the English marginals that he really needs to win. It seems that supporting the doomed SLABers is a waste of human and material resources.0
-
You make my point for me.nigel4england said:
I don't agree with that at all. Personally I have never underestimated him, anyone prepared to knife his own brother has serious ambition.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!
But the events you mentioned are mostly farcical, a price freeze that is unworkable and keeps prices higher, attacking Murdoch but not a word on the Mirror Group.
As for bursting into tears, when he was properly attacked I thought his bottom lip was going to go. Have a look on Guido at the clips when Clegg attacked him and Cameron mentioned mid-Staffs0 -
There are none as blind as those who will not see.Ishmael_X said:
Just not true that that is what tories thought. On the contrary, the strong consensus here has been that Cameron was prudent to limit his exposure to ed in the debates. And I don't understand the time-shifted edgasm we seem to be witnessing this evening. The "surprise" he sprung last night was that he avoided soiling himself.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
Perhaps. I am now shifting my betting to what I think the result will be.Pulpstar said:
My book is fairly balanced on this - Labour feels like a good value loserCasino_Royale said:
I am doing the opposite. One of us will be disappointed.bigjohnowls said:Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money0 -
Given relying on the Ed factor to pretty much single handedly lead to a Lab decline (and that is what is needed, not just for Tories to do well) seems to be a requirement of the Tory victory scenario, if they thought that was inevitable, and even accounting for bravado many seem to, then that does seem complacent.nigel4england said:
I don't agree with that at all. Personally I have never underestimated him, anyone prepared to knife his own brother has serious ambition.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
Q1, Survation:
"Q1. The next Westminster general election is now about 4 months away. On a scale of 0-10, where 10 is very certain, how certain are you to vote in the general election?"
Pollsters going through the motions?0 -
If you ask me whether 'Hotspur United' will win the cup I may choose to say yes or no. However you'd be wise to at least probe my knowledge of their squad before betting on the results.EPG said:
The problem with these questions is that they don't reflect the debate as it is had. For instance, no party frames anti-austerity as "government spending" for its own sake, as if an entry in a ledger turns them on, while no party supports improving public services irrespective of cost. However, there is an actual debate about improving public services (what Labour says) versus cutting the deficit (what the coalition says). Perhaps this is "uncomfort polling"!
0 -
Which is?Casino_Royale said:
Perhaps. I am now shifting my betting to what I think the result will be.Pulpstar said:
My book is fairly balanced on this - Labour feels like a good value loserCasino_Royale said:
I am doing the opposite. One of us will be disappointed.bigjohnowls said:Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money0 -
I think Cons will have most seats. Whether DC remains as PM or not remains to be seen.nigel4england said:
Which is?Casino_Royale said:
Perhaps. I am now shifting my betting to what I think the result will be.Pulpstar said:
My book is fairly balanced on this - Labour feels like a good value loserCasino_Royale said:
I am doing the opposite. One of us will be disappointed.bigjohnowls said:Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money0 -
I think that too.Casino_Royale said:
I think Cons will have most seats. Whether DC remains as PM or not remains to be seen.nigel4england said:
Which is?Casino_Royale said:
Perhaps. I am now shifting my betting to what I think the result will be.Pulpstar said:
My book is fairly balanced on this - Labour feels like a good value loserCasino_Royale said:
I am doing the opposite. One of us will be disappointed.bigjohnowls said:Backed most seats LAB 3.1 and layed CON most seats 1.5
Free money0 -
0
-
What I am seeing is pure hindsight about last night based on a less-than-explosive poll result,, plus false recall as to what the tory position has been up to now. Point me to the PB tories who have been clamouring for Cameron to insist on 1 to 1 debates with ed, and plenty of 'em.Casino_Royale said:
There are none as blind as those who will not see.Ishmael_X said:
Just not true that that is what tories thought. On the contrary, the strong consensus here has been that Cameron was prudent to limit his exposure to ed in the debates. And I don't understand the time-shifted edgasm we seem to be witnessing this evening. The "surprise" he sprung last night was that he avoided soiling himself.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
The electorate is not economics PhDs or PB readers. A survey of those people on the deficit would be... comfort polling!Omnium said:
If you ask me whether 'Hotspur United' will win the cup I may choose to say yes or no. However you'd be wise to at least probe my knowledge of their squad before betting on the results.EPG said:
The problem with these questions is that they don't reflect the debate as it is had. For instance, no party frames anti-austerity as "government spending" for its own sake, as if an entry in a ledger turns them on, while no party supports improving public services irrespective of cost. However, there is an actual debate about improving public services (what Labour says) versus cutting the deficit (what the coalition says). Perhaps this is "uncomfort polling"!0 -
Ishmael_X said:
I agree with you there. Most debates end up with a draw as it would be amazing for leading politicians to to anything else.Casino_Royale said:
Just not true that that is what tories thought. On the contrary, the strong consensus here has been that Cameron was prudent to limit his exposure to ed in the debates. And I don't understand the time-shifted edgasm we seem to be witnessing this evening. The "surprise" he sprung last night was that he avoided soiling himself.peter_from_putney said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.MikeSmithson said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:RobD said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.kle4 said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!Speedy said:
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!
Its easy for anyone who is not connected with power to be all sweetness and light. Last time it was Clegg and this time it is Sturgeon. Was Miliband effective in defending the potential loss of 40 seats to her party?
No - what we have are a load of far left activist wetting themselves over being able to push for a loony agenda that even Michael Foot never dreamed of. But hey Miliband was brilliant.0 -
Its the Ed Miliband - Nicola Sturgeon/Alex Salmond question that will be one of the biggest factors in this electionkle4 said:
Given relying on the Ed factor to pretty much single handedly lead to a Lab decline (and that is what is needed, not just for Tories to do well) seems to be a requirement of the Tory victory scenario, if they thought that was inevitable, and even accounting for bravado many seem to, then that does seem complacent.nigel4england said:
I don't agree with that at all. Personally I have never underestimated him, anyone prepared to knife his own brother has serious ambition.Casino_Royale said:
What really pisses me off is how complacent Tories* are about Miliband. For months I've been saying, 'watch out for Miliband', 'Miliband will perform better than you think', only for those comments to be dismissed.peter_from_putney said:
But the front page headline in today's Daily Telegraph| was:MikeSmithson said:
That is spot on. The debates have given EdM a level of exposure that have been a godsend to the red team. Cameron should not have agreed to even this limited programme.RobD said:
Unless you are able to enter alternate dimensions, there is no way to tell what this Survation would have been had there not been a debate!kle4 said:
But...but the debates are bad because they will have too much of an impact. We were told.Speedy said:
Not many changes either in Scotland or Wales in the VI subsamples, so that's no impact even on a regional level.chestnut said:http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Full-Mirror-IV-Tables.pdf
Survation data tables. Nothing much to see. The usual high number of Con-UKIP switchers we see in their online polls. Small amount of tactical switching to the Tories at constituency level.
I look forward to that sarcasm biting me in the behind when the next poll shows Lab and Con on 29 each.
What struck me about last night was just how well prepared he was. He knew what was at stake and put the graft in.
"Miliband flops as outsiders shine"
There was plenty of evidence he could spring a surprise from his ambushes over the last four years: energy prices freeze, Syria, Murdoch.. But, still, every Tory thought he'd burst into tears when he took the stage next to Cameron.
Well, that hasn't happened. In fact, his preparation and composure was as obvious as Cameron's complacency. It remains to be seen how that plays out but, once again, the Tories have been caught out.
You'd think they'd have learnt by now.
*Not you, Peter!0 -
Care to elaborate?MikeSmithson said:
I've found myself going somewhat the other way (although in a strongly correlated, but different market). There's something of the 'hunch' in my decision though.
0 -
Think they already have. No organiser appointed in Dundee. All resources pulled back to defending Glasgow.Itwasrigged said:I actually wonder if Millibland wouldn't be better off just cutting SLAB loose in terms of any kind of support physical or financial and focusing entirely on the English marginals that he really needs to win. It seems that supporting the doomed SLABers is a waste of human and material resources.
It's all a bit Steiner.0 -
Shouldn't 31.5% Con in Survation be rounded up to 32?
Part-ELBOW inc. Survation still puts the Tories 0.5% ahead, with just two days left till Sunday!0 -
Maybe they use Excel, it seems to round 0.5 down.Sunil_Prasannan said:Shouldn't 31.5% Con in Survation be rounded up to 32?
Part-ELBOW inc. Survation still puts the Tories 0.5% ahead, with just two days left till Sunday!
0 -
Andrew Neil @afneil 25s26 seconds ago
Told there's an interesting story about Ms Sturgeon coming up on @Telegraph website 21.30. @Spectator_CH on standby to follow up.
Not sure what this might be - but just noticed it.0 -
Surely Indyref proved positive campaigning does work. Yes almost overcame a 20-point deficit and won against No's "too poor, too wee, too stupid". It was only turned round by the last-minute intervention of Gordon Brown making the positive case for the union.Itwasrigged said:
Negative campaigning alone isn't enough, throw in a few bribes and make extensive use of blackmail tactics and you are on a sure fire winner. There is a long way to go in this election campaign yet.FrancisUrquhart said:
People always say negative campaigning, its bad, it doesn't work...then you look at Scottish Indy Referendum and even last GE (Labour went very negative and managed well in some areas with the fear factor, and it certainly dented Cameron). I don't like it as a tactic, I want to hear positive visions from all parties, but it appears to work.IOS said:Francis
I don't mean the public don't like Crosby - therefore = toxic for the Tories. Just that his negativity doesn't work in the UK.
Pick a fight with Tim Montgomery on this as he points this out.
Positive campaigning clearly doesn't work as the Referendum proved. The SNP might have run a positive campaign for Holyrood in 2011 but it had help from an incompetent Labour Party and a Lib Dem Party that was sleeping with the Tories in London.0 -
EICIPM- someone please tell me what these letters stand for. I would be extremely grateful because it is doing my nut in trying to figure it out.0
-
Has she and Dougie Alexander ever been seen in the same room?dr_spyn said:Andrew Neil @afneil 25s26 seconds ago
Told there's an interesting story about Ms Sturgeon coming up on @Telegraph website 21.30. @Spectator_CH on standby to follow up.
Not sure what this might be - but just noticed it.0 -
She doesn't really strike me as the sort of politician likely to create a sensation.dr_spyn said:Andrew Neil @afneil 25s26 seconds ago
Told there's an interesting story about Ms Sturgeon coming up on @Telegraph website 21.30. @Spectator_CH on standby to follow up.
Not sure what this might be - but just noticed it.0 -
Could someone good at maths or betting (or preferably both) tell me how I should approach the Sporting Index market on 300-up seats? Surely the Conservatives are a clear sell at 6 - or am I missing something very obvious?
I see the SNP are now up to 42-44. I'm starting to contemplate closing my buy on this, but not yet I think.0 -
And while we are at it Sunil Prasannan, my vegetarian comrade. What does ELBOW stand for?0
-
Doesn't Excel use bankers' rounding -- ie round up or down to the nearest even number?JohnLilburne said:
Maybe they use Excel, it seems to round 0.5 down.Sunil_Prasannan said:Shouldn't 31.5% Con in Survation be rounded up to 32?
Part-ELBOW inc. Survation still puts the Tories 0.5% ahead, with just two days left till Sunday!0 -
Apart from abolishing the nuclear deterrentFrankBooth said:
She doesn't really strike me as the sort of politician likely to create a sensation.dr_spyn said:Andrew Neil @afneil 25s26 seconds ago
Told there's an interesting story about Ms Sturgeon coming up on @Telegraph website 21.30. @Spectator_CH on standby to follow up.
Not sure what this might be - but just noticed it.0 -
Per Curtice (BBC):
Polls say 4 did well - Cam, Mil, Far, Stur
3 did much less well - Cleg, Ben, Wood
However, people are inclined to say their own party won. And Cam and Mil both had FAR fewer saying they won than support their parties.
Thus the winners were Far and Stur. Both Cam and Mil have cause for concern:
- Cam that Far will have turned the UKIP decline and may start rising again
- Mil that Stur seen as clear winner in Scotland which will help SNP retain big lead
However, wait and see polls in 3 to 4 days time. Paxman interviews made no difference - this debate may not either.
As ever a high quality verdict from Curtice.0 -
Ed is crap is Prime Ministertyson said:EICIPM- someone please tell me what these letters stand for. I would be extremely grateful because it is doing my nut in trying to figure it out.
0 -
Anecdotally I think that's right. We had two rain-soaked canvasses today, one in a posh ward, where virtually nobody was changing their previous stance, and one in a WWC ward, where there was a trickle of previous ex-Labour doubtfuls firming up, mostly from UKIP's previous limited inroads (typical comment: "I think they've been useful in shaking things up but they're a one-trick pony"). The Greens have never been a problem in this marginal - I thought they might be, but it's not turned out that way so far. One voter said she was definitely not voting, and it struck me that it's the first time I've heard that explicitly for a couple of weeks. High turnout after all?Casino_Royale said:
I think the greatest effect that will arise from these sessions is Miliband shoring up his core vote, in England.
The era of him risking shedding a big part of his base to the Greens is probably over. That, and increased Labour turnout, may help him swipe a few more marginals.
FPT GeoffM: I agree with you that assisted dying should be legal, with safeguards to avoid it being done in a fleeting bad moment.0 -
Does it mean that?nigel4england said:
Ed is crap is Prime Ministertyson said:EICIPM- someone please tell me what these letters stand for. I would be extremely grateful because it is doing my nut in trying to figure it out.
0 -
Sorry to butt in, but it's Electoral Leader Board of the Week, and EICIPM means Ed Is Crap is PM.tyson said:And while we are at it Sunil Prasannan, my vegetarian comrade. What does ELBOW stand for?
Can someone explain Basil the squirrel to me, I don't get that one!0 -
Yes, it's a back-formation from Ed Is Crap Will Never Be PM, which was an extension of Ed is crap.tyson said:
Does it mean that?nigel4england said:
Ed is crap is Prime Ministertyson said:EICIPM- someone please tell me what these letters stand for. I would be extremely grateful because it is doing my nut in trying to figure it out.
And Sunil's elbow (electronic leader board of the week) was named to contrast with Jack W's arse.0 -
Thanks Ishmael and Nige then for clarifying the...? (I've spent too long in Italy to remember the word for letter abbreviations)0
