Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » While Labour continues to have problems with leader rating
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » While Labour continues to have problems with leader ratings Dave should be worried about how his party is perceived
There were, as it turned out only two polls overnight, and the findings that I am highlighting are the party and leader favourability figures from Survation for the Mail on Sunday.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/hoirf26dxl/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-020813.pdf
Net "well" OA : among VI
Cameron: -17 (-1) +85
Miliband: -41 (-4) +17
Opinion hardening on Assange:
Net Positive view: -24 (-13)
Should face trial in Sweden (net) :+44
Opinion on Shale Gas divided - on balance positive (net):
Should exploit +8
Safe +5
Good for economy: +54
Damaging for environment: +16
Nimby: +18
https://www.predictious.com/sports/2020-summer-olympics-host
The other markets seem to favour Tokyo quite strongly. Is this the kind of thing somebody has actual information on, or is everybody just agreeing with each other on the same wild guess?
Can't remember how or why the subject came up! Wish I'd put money on it now!
And last time I went to that beach the restaurant wasn't there any more.
Q16. If the next election fails to produce an overall majority for any party, of the two most likely combinations which party leaders would you prefer to see forming a Coalition?
DC&NC: 39.4 (12.75% of LAB VI and 60.1% of LD VI)
EdM&NC: 33.3
DK: 27.3
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/SurvationMOS-Summer-Recess-Poll.pdf
They will launch a major attack on the Coalition over the cost of living, claiming that people are more than £1,000 a year worse off because of its policies.
The Labour leadership believe they can still win the Election even if the economy continues to grow . . . as long as they make it about standards of living. They want people to ask: ‘Am I better off than I was five years ago?’
The Party’s polling tells it that voters aren’t feeling the recovery and are wondering why prices – gas bills, train tickets, petrol – are still going up faster than their wages.
Miliband wants to tap into this feeling. Much of his message at the Labour conference this autumn will be that only ‘the few’ are benefiting from the return of economic growth.
But the Coalition parties are confident they can convince us that we will feel the benefits and also that we’d be worse off under Labour.
One Tory Minister says: ‘If you’re worried about the cost of living, you vote for the party that instinctively wants to let you keep your money, not the party who wants to spend it for you.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2384277/JAMES-FORSYTH-The-moment-boss-goes-away-Labour-stops-working.html#ixzz2ayj4P4AX
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23565387
At PMQs today, Ed Miliband told the Prime Minister ‘In 2015, people will be asking “Am I better off now than I was five years ago?”’
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/02/why-ed-milibands-reagan-esque-attack-wont-work/
The Daily Fail: last with the news. Maybe James Forsyth read it in his dentist's waiting room. On his iPad.
Q10. In the last General Election 61% of people voted, while 39% of people did not vote Thinking back to the General Election in May 2010,
can you remember whether or not you voted in that specific election?
Voted 72.6%!!!!!
Not voted: 24.3%
Do not remember: 3%
Q15. Regardless of who you want to win the next general election, which party do you think WILL win?
Cons: 30.5% (12.4% of LAB VI & 48,4% of LD VI)
LAB: 35.5%
LD: 2%
UKIP: 2.9%
DK: 27.5%
I know what the Conservative Party stands for
Agree: 74.9
Disagree: 17.7
DK: 7.4
I know what the Labour Party stands for
Agree: 72.2
Disagree: 21.1
DK: 6.6
I know what the LIberalDemocrat Party stands for
Agree: 49.6
Disagree: 38
DK: 12.4
I know what the UKIP stands for
Agree: 64.5
Disagree: 22.3
DK: 13.3
A fishing question to see if the public was tired of police investigations into hacking and wanted more attention to other crimes got a resounding thumbs down - they still think it's very important. And people want Twitter to require real names to be published, though not to require payment.
The second paragraph is the vital factor that many, who only quote meaningless 1984 style statistics while ignoring the effect on English people, summarily dismiss
Those who pick and choose anecdotes to suit ther agenda may scoff... They probably don't live in an area or work in a job that has been transformed by immigration
"It is because he knows that you are rightly worried about immigration that David Cameron is engaged on his slippery and dishonest propaganda campaign. He personally couldn’t care less about the problem.
It doesn’t threaten his job or push his wages down. It doesn’t alter his neighbourhood beyond recognition, trapping him in a place where he no longer feels welcome or at ease."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2384272/PETER-HITCHENS-Dont-blame-immigrants--arent-ones-wrecking-Britain.html#ixzz2aysLq349
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Q33. I am clear what Labour's policies are
Agree: 53
Disagree: 39.4
DK: 7.6
Q33. I am clear what Conservative's policies are
Agree: 65.1
Disagree: 28.4
DK: 6.5
Q33. I am clear what Liberal Democrats policies are
Agree: 42.5
Disagree: 47.7
DK: 9.8
Q33. I am clear what UKIP's policies are
Agree: 55.4
Disagree: 32.1
DK: 12.5
I expect that totalitarian regimes would be pleased to ban anonymity (though anonymity is crackable, it does require some effort)
For anyone suffering dry mouths, the shakes and headaches due to F1 withdrawal symptoms, the opiate of BTCC from Snetterton is available on ITV 4 from 11.15.
The race schedule is at:
http://www.snetterton.co.uk/media/2138743/btcc.pdf
Why not watch some proper racing?
Sadly the complaints and the abuse feed off each other.
It is also worth looking at the full conversations - sometimes the side that complains in the strongest terms isn't exactly lily-white, either.
Mr. Foxinsox, that seems an unwelcome precedent. Imagine if everyone always had to publish their real name. We'd have a less obnoxious internet, but also one where Nightjack could never have existed, and where whistle-blowing could not be as easily facilitated.
Mr. Jessop, I may gave BTCC a look, though F1's the only (motor)sport I really watch [well, when I get to enjoy those fancy moving pictures]. I did happen upon some MotoGP a few weeks ago, and found it quite enjoyable (with the exception of Arse-Cam, which seemed quite unnecessary and not very useful from a racing perspective either).
Edited extra bit: now I come to think of it, would I be able to keep my anonymity as an author with a pen name and a Twitter account?
One reason I like PB is that it gets the moderation about right most of the time. Unmoderated forums do get very nasty, even on innocuous subjects.
Very much in fact like making Nuts magazine appear in a brown paper bag because its linked with child porn - errr...
Then last night there was more traffic at midnight than I can ever recall - first a rush of those demanding that the rest of us shut up and obey their boycott and generally being rather self-righteous/smug... and then a tsunami going back the other way of everyone else saying Bugger Off. At one point there were about 25 accounts all pretending to be 'Caitlin Moron' and mocking her own rude/laddish/sweary behaviour.
I really don't know where this Mary Whitehouse fit of moral panic has come from but the New Puritanism is trying very hard to get things banned or controlled to suit themselves 'I can say what I want because nice people like me should be able to do so, but not those people I disagree with'.
I'm sure being on the wrong end of the worst Twitter abuse is vile - but there's a block button or you always just step away from the keyboard for a day. And if you're genuinely scared by a threat - ring the police. I notice that there is also a lot of throwaway misandry from the female cheerleaders of this campaign - ironic.
I remember reading in an in flight magazine about the death penalty. Though it was favoured by a majority the politicians advocating it were viewed unfavourably because the public expected their representatives to have higher values than themselves.
By the same token because voters want fewer immigrants doesn't mean they approve of the government sending out vans telling them to 'Go Home'. Indeed the approval rates of the Tories in todays poll proves it. Those who thought the values of the Tory Party merely stank now believe they positively reek.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2306621.stm
It was actually quite a good speech.
Olympic city markets are rather like Papal election markets - a small, well-informed electorate that we have little or no access to so we're fooling ourselves if we think we have an inside edge on it. Who knew the lobbying Blair was doing in Singapore in the run-up to the 2012 vote? Who knows what forms of persuasion are being used now?
I reckon Tokyo is probably favourite because (a) it's bid was evaluated as the best (well, they werent formally ranked but the consensus was it did best) (b) Europe has hosted the Games more recently than Asia (c) Spain's financial troubles.
But Madrid was rated slightly technically behind Tokyo for 2016 and beat it in the voting then (and the difference in technical scores was small). Madrid has gone from 3rd in 2012 to 2nd in 2016 and the IOC hasnt had a problem with returning to Europe before going back to Asia before. Most of Madrid's venues are built so the financial risk should actually be pretty low (but will everyone understand / accept that?). People have speculated that Madrid has also been affected by the Operation Puerto scandal and Spain's decision to protect its drug cheats by destroying records, I really dont think IOC delegates are sentimental enough to care about that though.
Personally speaking I dont completely buy all the reasons why Tokyo is such a strong favourite. As such I think it's more open between them and therefore the value is probably with Madrid.
But at the end of the day this is a small group of people making a personal decision for any number of reasons, watch as Istanbul wins
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_Games_host_cities
Istanbul would be the brave choice. It's my personal favourite though (ie the one I want to see win rather than the one I would back with hard cash).
I dont think it matters hugely but Turkey is doing its best to rival Spain's Operation Puerto problems - major drug cheating going on there.
Yeah, the technical report made it clear (what was obvious anyway) that their bid had the greatest challenges. But then FIFA decided to give a (at the time, summer) World Cup to Qatar so what challenges cant be overcome if you give the delegates the right incentives?
Rule-of-law: Rational.
"... voters want fewer immigrants doesn't mean they approve of the government sending out vans...." : Emotive.
Without the first the second is irrelevant. As for "Indeed the approval rates of the Tories in todays poll proves it." in what way? There has always been a meme that the Tories are the "nasty" party, atleast on here; do you have evidence to show that, in the last week, this [mis-]perception has worsened* (or are you emoting)...?
* PB anecdotes are not permissible!
"I'm sure being on the wrong end of the worst Twitter abuse is vile - but there's a block button or you always just step away from the keyboard for a day. And if you're genuinely scared by a threat - ring the police. I notice that there is also a lot of throwaway misandry from the female cheerleaders of this campaign - ironic. "
From someone who spent more time whining about abuse on here from Tim and others even to the point of complaining to the moderators when you were merely referred to in the third person I think you should get your own house in order before you lecture others on what they should or shouldn't find acceptable
The tory rise seems to have taken a bit of a pause in the last few days. Given the good economic news they may be a little disappointed about that.
Those that claimed, not so long ago, that the tories needed to replace Cameron look a little silly. I suspect any reservations about leadership debates will have disappeared. It will be in the tory's interest to make the next election the most Presidential yet. If only they had someone experienced with Presidential politics on their team...
Offset against that is the bonus of the Olympics going to a Muslim country (although I fear it will be a secular country in anything but name by 2020...)
Extraordinary! If I was a Tory having UKIP attack me for being racist would worry the hell out of me. It's not that Farage isn't being completely hypocritical just that the British public will believe if anyone can spot a racist it's Farage and for many Tory waverers that's not how they like to be seen.
PS Smart politics from Farage trying to be seen as the 'acceptable face of racism'
@Nigel_Farage: The Tories have lost the arguments so have descended into gutter politics http://t.co/zgJbeGBzF7
"I have never called anyone racist. It is an often used and discredited cry. But this time, I believe the Conservative Party has shown it is racist. It will do anything, right or wrong, to bolster its poll ratings. Cameron's hard work around a modernity agenda ran into the sand. His party has never really embraced change, but he gave up the fight too soon. In short, he talks like a liberal but still allows his party to behave like "the same old Tories". Who would vote for that?"
http://t.co/1voB9AWIFm
I don't think anyone on the right is taking Nigel that seriously, he's still a bit miffed he didn't come up with the van wheeze himself.
So what do we make of the findings? Presumably that most people reckon they know roughly where the parties are. Tories=more austerity, lower tax, Euroscepticism Labour=NHS, public services, employment LibDems=middle of the road, freedom-loving UKIP=Britain first, stuff the establishment.
And that, I'd suggest, is all most people really want to know. They'll make a choice based on those general impressions and their view of what the country most needs in 2015. They MAY be influenced a bit by the detail, especially if someone has a policy that unwinds spectacularly. But on the whole, they can't be bothered, not least as they reckon that governments do something a bit different if they get in anyway.
This argument will be easily batted away and the British voter will see the exponents of it being on the wrong side,again. Particularly when Crosby and co begin to spell out what the illegals actually cost every family in the country, specifically the lower paid.
"Lets keep the Illegals and charge the Pensioners" ..that will go down well for Labour and UKIP
It's been used as a means of dismissing concerns over immigration in the past, and it tends to be a first response rather than last resort by those who don't want to discuss the matter and simply want to shut the debate down.
There may be some issues (not with the vans, but those stopped and searched), but that's far from certain. Hurling around terms like racist, xenophobe and bigot at the drop of a hat is not impressive.
I'd also repeat a question I posed yesterday: imagine the Government has heard of illegal immigrants from Pakistan in area X. The Home Office dispatches rozzers to try and find them. They stop and search a few hundred people, most or all of whom are of Asian ethnicity. Does that count as racist, racial profiling, or intelligence-led action?
Similarly, racial profiling would seem valid in other cases, notably terrorism. If the Holy Swords of Martyrdom Brigade has threatened to blow up a building then the chaps you're looking for are likely to be bearded, Asian, men, probably 30 or under. Stopping old white ladies or Chinese grandfathers is unlikely to lead to the culprit. It's not 100%, of course. White converts (but still likely bearded, men and 30 or under) have taken part, or sought to, in such acts.
I'm not entirely comfortable with the police stopping people asking "Wo sind deine Papieren, bitte?", however. We need to consider if it works. Hopefully we'll end up with some stats regarding those who have been stopped and searched, regarding criminality including illegal immigration.
Sorry, bit of a rambly post.
Your post reminded me of the state of the Roman Empire when the army became addicted to regicide.
UKIP are just being averagely two-faced, just like any other political party. UKIP, after all, claims simultaneously both to be a libertarian party, but is also opposed to gay marriage.
But when it comes to racism, we can all be tempted. I still remember your recent "gee, aren't the Japanese amusing" post http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/86371/#Comment_86371
But I think the Tories just have to tough it out on this one. What the left seems to be saying is that if a crime is mostly committed by people from ethnic minorities - as illegal immigration is, almost by definition - then it is racist to attempt to enforce the law. Whatever they do will be criticised for racism.
Farage is simply having a laugh.
Net Agree vans "racist":
OA: -30
UKIP: -81
He probably read one of tim's anecdotes, rather than the polls......
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384172/Voters-kick-sand-Eds-face--MPs-Poll-reveals-Cameron-far-ahead-Miliband-Labour-figure-dubs-leader-new-Kinnock.html
DrSpyn - Yes, Sept 7th is the date for Oz goes to the polls after Rudd saw the governor general today, should be a close battle. Here is the ABC report
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-04/live-kevin-rudd-federal-election/4806824
"I'd also repeat a question I posed yesterday: imagine the Government has heard of illegal immigrants from Pakistan in area X. The Home Office dispatches rozzers to try and find them. They stop and search a few hundred people, most or all of whom are of Asian ethnicity. Does that count as racist, racial profiling, or intelligence-led action?"
Nobody answered it because it was too puerile to deserve an answer. If a black albino had been seen committing a rape would it be racist just to take the DNA of black albinos?' It's called reductio ad absurdum
Any polling to show the vans are "racist"?
I know you're a fan of polling over anecdote......
Trying to add this up. The alert has extended to a number of US cities and to some countries where Al Qaeda hasn't strong history. It’s also effectively worldwide when apparently Al Qaeda is unable to co-ordinate worldwide. Reading between the lines the US is effectively stating a multiple attack scenario.
Stories say the NSA has picked up intercepts. The broad nature of the alert suggests an equally vague sense of exactly what is going on, yet the public statements contradict this. Vagueness in intelligence is not unusual but the nature of the alert, its extensiveness & high publicity actually suggest that
1) someone does have a decent idea of what is going on
2) they are keen to avoid another Benghazi with a caution first approach
3) the alert is a bit of a take. If nothing happens show how good the intelligence gathering operation is. Its a currently popular conspiracy theory that we’ll likely never know the answer to.
Bearing in mind US politicians say the intelligence is of a specific nature, then you'd guess at option 1 being the prime reason. What raises the attention is that the threat is reportedly not subject to active countermeasures. In short they are waiting for the hammer to fall & are trusting to the tactic of simply not being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
When something is described as not subject to countermeasures it’s usually because:
-Intelligence isn't good enough to say where or how the assailants will strike
-Its in countries where there is limited ability by the US or local authorities to act
-It is too widespread to be fully countered
One thing we can say with certainty is that the de-facto leader of the Al Qaeda, Al Zawahiri released an 'attack America;' statement recently. There is a reasonable correlation between his statements & attempted spectaculars. With Ramadan ending and anniversaries of the very successful US embassy attacks by Al Qaeda there is some cause for increased awareness.
There are inconsistencies though. The recent Al Qaeda jailbreaks being turned into a near worldwide alert is interesting. Most of the escapees are still in-country suggesting that something in particular regions looks likely. Other high profile Western nations have not made the statements or taken the public measures the US has (other than the Interpol alert). Furthermore it appears haven't there been notifications by many of the countries pinpointed in this alert.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10220838/Peter-Cruddas-I-was-stitched-up...-my-wife-says-dont-touch-the-Tory-party-with-a-barge-pole.html
Personally, I think Cruddas is too forgiving. Cammo's No 10 is a hotbed of snakes, and snakes invariably end up biting and killing themseves.
Why request strictures upon others when you palpably don't do the same yourself?
(a) can England get at least 34 runs this morning and avoid the follow on; and
(b) will the rain somewhat obligingly take some time out of the test this afternoon?
I fear England still need both to save this test. Reasonable chance of each but both?
Meanwhile the Labour posters on PB are smearing away with the baby eating party stuff. More stick rattling in the swill bucket Roger?
Back in the early 'Nineties I was stopped by the orificers of the Met whilst awalking around Sarf Luhndahn. Apparently a call had come in about some white geezer trying to break into some cars and I was stopped due to the misfortune of being a white male of about the same age as the alleged target.
I was informed that I had to answer the questions put to me and I was told that if I refused I would be taken to the station (and this despite pleading my innocence). As I had no personal identification upon myself I had to give my address for verification.
Now we move on to addressing Wee Timmy's ludicrious, nee ignorant, point: This was back in the days before the internet took off (and I mean early nineties). What the constable [sp?] did was radio my information to the station; the station called the local council; and an employee of the council had to check that I was on the electoral roll. The whole process took ten to fifteen minutes before they let my innocent mug go.
So there has always been a process whereby the State can verify an individual; even one that they suspect of having committed a crime. I am sure it still goes on today (albeit at a somewhat more expediant pace) so no papers are required.*
So frack-orf Funny Farmer and find a new meme....
* I always carry my passport around in The Netherlands. Failure to identify yourself results in a request to present yourself to the local station by 17:00 that same day. [No I don't know what happens after stated time regrding presentation....]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10220449/Fort-Hood-shooter-Nidal-Hasan-left-free-to-kill.html
"Happy Days. Even more voters think Ed M is cr*p and the article headline is how bad things are for the Conservatives...."
Not exactly.....More people think the Tories are crap than Labour and more people think Ed is crap than Dave......
It's easier to replace a leader than a party.....
The only way to tackle this kind of racial profiling is to take on the authorities full-on.
Disgusting vile politics courtesy of the Conservative party...
PS - I have no issues with the UKBA officials themselves but only with the xenophobic bigots who set-up such policy.
You do have form in blaming the Tories for policies that operated under Labour.
The irony being your political prejudices blind you to who is really causing the racial prejudices you are complaining about.
"Mr. Roger, that's a shade unfriendly of you."
Sorry it came out sounding more harsh than intended but it is rather dull the way people on here try to defend the indefensible (me included) because it's done in the name of the party they support. Coming on here one looks forward a higher standard of argument than from your average Stretford Ender
UKIP (OA) net
Support: +40 (+6)
"Stupid & Offensive": -52 (-8)
Poor taste but necessary: +7 (-11)
And yet another shout of xenophobia. Grow up, you lot.
Mr. Roger, not to worry, old bean. Apology entirely accepted
This reminds me a bit of several years ago, when Cameron (in Opposition, I think) made a speech about immigration. It was praised by Trevor Philips for deracialising the immigration debate. The BBC's Nick Robinson did a piece on the night which suggested that most immigration restrictions would affect non-whites (due to EU free movement), which was a rather unpleasant suggestion that any curbs on immigration would be inherently racist. Perhaps that's not what Toenails meant, but it's certainly how it came across. After Philips' response Robinson did nothing to amend his view of the previous night.
There's also the historical fact that Labour used rampant immigration as a means of baiting the Conservatives so that the lefties could play the race card.
There's no problem whatsoever with the vans, but it'll be interesting to see the stats around stop-and-search.
"While we're on the "racist" vans - no prizes for guessing their biggest fans net UKIP (OA)"
I think Alanbrooke had it right when he said Farage is pissed off that Cameron thought of it first!
I know you will be keen to correct the record on this and help people realise that Labour is just as nasty and probably more dangerous on this issue.
The scale of the spending appears to jar with comments by the First Minister in June. Asked about the "rigidly unshifting" polls which show the Yes campaign still lagging behind the Unionist cause, Salmond told the New Statesman magazine: "This is the phoney war. This is not the campaign … The real game hasn't even started. We are just clearing the ground."
However, a "review of political activities" in the SNP's accounts, which was also written in June, say the campaign is "well under way"."
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/snp-spends-500000-but-its-just-a-phoney-war.21774195
Epic fail with his own voters would appear to sum it up.
He's spooked and run the wrong way because he wants to be different from the Tories.
I think there's something in that. Plus it obliges Farage to explain what he would do.
So he can criticise the moron vans for being the waste of money that they are while saying he wouldnt need them because there would be far fewer immigrants if he was in charge.
When you make such a clearly ridiculous claim, or comparison as you've just done, it serves to diminish your own argument rather than that of your opponent.
I thought they'd learned their lesson here that trying to browbeat everyone concerned about immigration was very counterproductive - as is crying about the welfare cap. Clearly not.
Let them carry on in this vein. It's not what the public is largely in favour of. But if they want to call me rude names to make themselves feel better, marvellous. It wins no votes.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-worlds-racist-countries-answers-surprise-you.html
"I know you will be keen to correct the record on this and help people realise that Labour is just as nasty and probably more dangerous on this issue."
What Labour sent vans round with pictures of handcuffs saying immigrants go home? Are we talking mainland here or is this a Northern Ireland thing?
There are two issues here. immigrants who want to come to Britain, and illegal immigrants who are already here.
Farage would undoubtedly be tougher on letting in the former. What would he do about the latter?
Bet he'd be doing the same sort of thing as the government is doing now.
It's the same, but less horrid, in other areas of debate. Spending becomes investment. Not kowtowing to the chronically wrong prophets of doom becomes climate denial (a nasty term, and I'm not fond of the deficit denial version which has sprung up).