Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories get to within 3 percent in tonight’s YouGov poll
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories get to within 3 percent in tonight’s YouGov poll
These figures are bound to cheer the Tories though the CON rise is not at the expense of LAB or the LDs but from UKIP – which is seeing a decline.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Last week we say Peter Kellner critique ICM, and tonight Damian Lyons of Survation critiquing YouGov.
Still not quite up there with Seth O Logue's inept spin when he predicted that Lansley would be PM, but pretty amusing all the same.
Netanyahu planning referendum law for any peace deal with Palestinians
Under pressure from right-wing members of his government, Netanyahu plans to introduce a law which will make ratification of any agreement dependent on a public referendum.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.537094
http://www.politicshome.com/timthumb.php?w=578&src=/images/1.1.Front_Pages/the_sun_220713.jpg
Perhaps the penny has finally dropped for CCHQ?
Cameron retreats in war on internet porn
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/82450/the_independent_tuesday_23rd_july_2013.html
But maybe The Prince of Wales will live the same age as his Mother/Grandmother, and if that happens, The Duke of Cambridge will be in his 50/60s when he becomes King, and lustre of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge ain't that strong.
I'm just being overly harsh against the Prince of Wales
My name for the royal baby: Richard.
FPT
It is perfectly possible to believe that man is warming the climate (the argument you give above), whilst also believing that the effect is minuscule compared to the natural climatic variations. And that is something that is far from being proven scientifically.
There is also the other heretical point of view that it may be cheaper, easier and safer to perform mitigation for the effects of climate change, rather than try to stop AGW.
Well yes, it's a free country, it's possible to believe what the heck you want, moon is made of cheese, the sky is green and the grass is blue.
That aside, your first point is wholly incorrect. All the theories for "natural variations" explaining the observed trends are undermined by the evidence, in contrast to the theory that they are primarily driven by human activity, which is strongly supported by the evidence. This is why the theory is so "popular".
If we trust in the scientific process (and beyond the usual caveats you highlighted earlier there's no reason not to, it's been hugely successful and produced the modern world we see around us) then we have to accept the theory is likely to be right.
As for your second point, that's my view entirely. I think we're too far gone, it's so serious now and progress in stopping it has been too slow for political reasons, so we're better focusing on mitigation. Unfortunately, we probably won't do that either, for political reasons.
*titters* ;^ )
The Tories are making progress on getting UKIP down to 5% - there's some genuine swingback there since the UKIP vote was partly a classic protest. The Labour vote looks as stable as usual.
Labour poll mid 30's, as looks likely, and Ed is PM.
Labour poll in the mid-high 30s, as looks very possible, and Ed is PM with a majority,
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5027022/Michael-Gove-outed-as-a-gentleman-rapper.html
*titters* ;^ )
UKIP 10 %
Nationalist parties ( BNP , SNP , PC ,SF ) 2.26 %
The electoral facts of life are stacked against the Conservatives, and the Prime Minister and his team know it
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10195412/David-Cameron-cant-say-it-but-the-PM-isset-on-another-coalition.html
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2013/07/brian-binley-mp-to-leave-the-commons-at-the-next-election.html
Rand Paul 19% (15%)
Chris Christie 17.5% (12%)
Marco Rubio 13% (17%)
Paul Ryan 9.5% (12%)
Kelly Ayotte 8.6%
Rick Santorum 5.5% (4%)
Bobby Jindal 2.5% (2%)
Rick Perry 2.1%
Scott Walker 1.8%
Unsure 20% (17%)
I see Santorum is surging in New Hampshire.
Forgive me but it may be one of the last times we get to say that.
Mike Enzi 55%
Liz Cheney 21%
Chris Christie (R) 41%
Hillary Clinton (D) 41%
Chris Christie (R) 49%
Joe Biden (D) 32%
Hillary Clinton (D) 46%
Scott Walker (R) 39%
Scott Walker (R) 42%
Joe Biden (D) 39%
No nightmare whatsoever. UKIP will continue to ignore the EDL and the growth of UKIP will continue.
Micky Pork riding the coattails of a not very interesting history geek. Must be the weather, but I could have sworn I just heard thunder outside my window.
FPTP will destroy NF and the kippers and everyone knows it was always going to do so. Simple as that.
So the idea is to go into the election vowing to undo five years' hard slog in getting the economy and public finances back towards some semblance of sanity, at great political cost.
Anyone see a teeny-weeny downside with this strategy?
Tactically vote lib dem to keep the tories out? Nah, after the coalition who could argue with that?
The Labour selection for Broxtowe! The biggest PBC electoral event of 2013!
Disgusting from Conservative ministers in Government. A go home or face arrest van. http://news.uk.msn.com/illegal-immigrants-urged-to-go-home … pic.twitter.com/aLaRYAkigG
Illegal immigrants urged to go home
http://news.uk.msn.com/illegal-immigrants-urged-to-go-home
MSN seems to have stolen today's Daily Mash story.
http://www.nickmcdonald.info/
They could have a new Blair on their hands.
The current record is 23.9 degrees in Brighton on 4th August 1990:
http://www.currentresults.com/Weather-Extremes/UK/highest-temperature-in-uk.php
It is surely now just a matter of time before we get a poll with the tories in the lead. There is so much random noise in these polls it just seems inevitable to me that this will happen in the next couple of months or so. It will of course not mean that the tories actually are in the lead but there must be a good chance of Labour panicking nonetheless.
It would be great if it arrived for the Conference.
Finally, congratulations to the Royal couple. It felt distinctly odd to be driving in Orlando, Florida today when the news came on a local channel and there was only 1 item on it. The reach of the UK royal family is incredible and an underrated asset.
I awake to discover i'm £1.2k richer. Well, unless Will & Kate go all new age & name the boy 'Alexandra'
I wonder whether having an EU referendum agreed in the coalition plan would open up the Foreign Secretary role for the LibDems? Tories would still need to have Europe minister though.
Just looking at the tweets from the various leaders in response to the royal news.
Ed Miliband's stuck out for me:
Many congratulations to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. I wish them and their son all happiness and good health.
All the others (Cameron, Clegg, Farage, Salmond) mentioned something about the country.
To me, Miliband's came across as the sort of bland message you might right in a co-worker's leaving card, especially if you weren't close to them. I suppose, though, people might view it as a 'sincere, from the heart, natural' comment.
Views?
http://www.nickmcdonald.info
In my view, the actual details of the Coalition agreement have turned out to be relatively meaningless. What's much more important (obvious with hindsight, really) is the Quad and the Cabinet representation. Seems tough to push much beyond the 5 they have at the moment, although they can look to upgrade.
I'm still of the view that CofE is out of reach, so they need Business, but could probably get Foreign or Home secretary instead of the the DPM non-role that Clegg has.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/07/len-is-right-unite-members-are-not-queuing-up-to-join-labour/#more-2389
"Just under half (49%) of Unite members said they would vote Labour in an election tomorrow; 23% would vote Tory. Four in ten thought David Cameron would make the best Prime Minister of the three leaders, putting him just 6 points behind Ed Miliband. Only 42% said the Labour Party was doing a good job of representing the interests of ordinary working people in Britain, while 47% said it was not."
Incidentally, there must be some marketing person who knows the stats precisely, but I would assume that if 12% of people reply they they have an intent to purchase membership, substantially less (say half) will actually follow through with it.
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/vu1qujpx35/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-220713.pdf
Internally the number of 2010 Con saying they would vote UKIP is 15, down from ~19 - which will have played its part in the OA Con 35 VI.
Some drift in the "leave EU mood" in favour of "in":
Better/worse off if we left - net "better": -2 (-3)
Good/bad for jobs - net "good": -4 (-6)
The "cuts" still belong to "the last Labour government":
Whose to blame:
Coalition: 25 (-1)
Labour: 36 (-1)
100%?
50%?
10%?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ed-miliband-raises-stakes-in-battle-to-dilute-unions-power-inside-labour-with-special-conference-8726908.html
It is a shame that News International did not choose a top notch pollster to commission weekly polls from instead of daily polls from a middling one.
But I am rather unsure about your other claims. If you want to see an area where the scientific process is routinely abused, then just look at biomedicine and the drugs companies. What goes on there is often anything but science, yet is dressed up as such. That is remarkably common and dangerous. CERN-style 'real' science is hard to do, and corners get cut. I'm far from sure that is correct on many levels. But I am not a climate scientist, and as I have been told in the past, my opinion does not count as I am not a climate scientist.
I will repeat what I said earlier: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It also requires honesty and openness.
Anyway, this is probably not the place for this discussion ...
That's why I'm so impressed by the latest Tesco scheme - the Price Match or whatever it's called. Giving you your money back, but in the form of a discount against the next purchase (subject to T&Cs) is a very smart idea. I'd be interested to see the data on how the economics pan out, but I suspect they are very attractive indeed.
Con: 23 (-5)
Lab: 49 (+9)
LibD: 7 (-13)
UKIP: 12 (+9)
Green: 4 (+2)
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Unite-members-poll-full-tables.pdf
Firstly, this report doesn't cover all the EU's activities. It's just the first of 36 reports, each into the EU's impact on different policy areas. Drawing sweeping conclusions is therefore premature.
Secondly, the article does say "But the reports did find some areas of EU legislation which had a negative effect on Britain. The report on health admitted “a large number of concerns were raised about specific pieces of legislation, including the Working Time Directive”, which restricts the hours that doctors can work."
Whether the gains from the EU outweigh these admitted costs is a political question. However, even if they do, there's still scope for the UK to try and reduce these negative effects, and a duty for the UK government to do so - or do you really want to argue that the UK shouldn't try to minimise the negative effects of its policies?
If you compare that to a mailshot return rate - which is usually more like 1ish% - its quite a lot better. So if we assume that say 12% of Unite members say they'd join Labour directly - we can guesstimate that it'll be more like 7ish% that do if the price is perceived as VFM.
That 7% of the total is a very high % of those who voted Labour in 2010 - so I'm sceptical about that bit unless Unite members are peculiarly more committed to Labour per se than say the Tories - perhaps an interesting question would be to ask this instead!
It also opens up the possibility of a Labour party freed of dependency on union block funding being able to go out into the big wide world to get funding from other sources and to attract people of a centre-left disposition to sign up to a party in which what the members think and say actually counts.
If Ed can see this through it would be a remarkable achievement and one that will, in the end, change the face of British politics. Full transparency in funding and a membership measured in the hundreds of thousands - what's not to like?