Populus marginals poll has the Tories just short
March 9th, 2010| Populus marginals poll (Times) | F/W Mar 7 | 2005 |
|---|---|---|
| CONSERVATIVES | 38% | 31.5 |
| LABOUR | 38% | 45.3 |
| LIB DEMS | ??% | ?? |
| LAB to CON swing | 6.7% | – |
Is a hung parliament now looking more likely?
We’ve now got details of the Times Populus poll for March which is not a national voting intention survey but one that is focussed entirely on Tory’s targets from Labour numbers 51 - 150. It’s assumed that the first 50 will go anyway. There’s no data in the overnight reports for the Lib Dems.
With all marginals polling you have to compare with what happened in the equivalent seats at the 2005 general election and compute the change in the form of a swing. That works out at 6.7% or enough for Cameron’s party to win 97 Labour seats.
On top of that they’d hope to pick up some Lib Dem seats but it’s hard on these figures to get to the winning threshold of 325.
What we don’t know is whether the party is performing disproportionately better in the key battle-grounds than elsewhere for there is no up-to-date Populus survey with which to compare. That is a great pity.
The Populus poll is very similar to last week’s YouGov marginals survey which had the swing at 6.5%
It’s been computed by Anthony Wells at UKPR that this is the equivalent of a 10 point Tory national lead.
All this is going to provide real heart for Labour supporters and add to the jitters at Cameron towers. It’s also going to make the coming campaign that bit more exciting.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
FPT 377. Why’d Labour use it as a reason not to organise in NI then?
Labour’s stance was straightforward at the time. If you are a socialist bent in Belfast you can’t join us but theres a party for you, its the SDLP….Of course it was patent nonsense but thats the position they took. In short they didn’t fancy the fact that this, as a part of the UK had some right to be involved in regular UK politics.
Anyway if Labour don’t fancy NI, why have they been courting Sylvia Hermon..of the Ulster Unionist Party? What was the plan for her….to take who’s whip?
They can’t have it both ways by complaining about Cameron, particularly because the Ulster Unionists have grown a set and will vote against the devolution of P&J and the farce of an Assembly. That proposed vote against is normal politics, and probably against Cameron’s wishes but at last, no more lemmings.
For all its faults someone has to break the mould and at least Cameron is trying it. Doomed to failure? Maybe but better than the bullshit from Labour by a long shot. They talk about normalisation of politics but have left us with some weird formula that entrenches sectarianism in the system after decades of UK government involvement to take sectarianism out of the system.
I await the b**lshit later today from people suggesting the peace process is at risk because exercised their democratic right to vote against something. No one will die because the UU’s maybe will have the gall to vote no, no one will die because P&J isn’t devolved, though it will be.
They will, though, die because stocks of apparently decommissioned Semtex has been accessed from IRA dumps by dissidents.
first
First!
wahoo! 2nd time in my life i got a 1st on here!
What I find remarkable, is that with all of the money the tories have spent on the marginals, with an incumbent government of 13 years, with a record recession and budget deficit, why is DC only level pegging with the ‘Scottish Idiot’?
As Mike says, there is little point in doing a marginal poll unless the pollster in question does a simultaneous national poll with which one can compare.
None of the marginal polls so far have come up to the usually accepted levels of statistical significance. In other words we can’t say “for certain” (at least 95% likely) that there is a difference in the marginals. However, all of them so far do lean in the pro-Tory direction, which is suggestive, to say the least.
Question - how on earth does an incoming government make macho swingeing cuts to public services (remember, we just can’t go on like this) while simultaneously ingratiating itself with the electorate in preparation for another election just six months or one year into its term of office?
Now remember, David and George, you have no lifelines remaining. But not to worry - I don’t think the audience would have had a clue what the answer is either.
Its all about turnout on the day, hung Parliament narrative will continue to dominant with these kind of polls. Nite all.
Not sure why you expect markets to move against the Conservatives today.
It looks like a good night of polling overall for them - looking at the National polls Opinium is positive and YouGov is par. This Populus marginals poll is fractionally better than the YouGov marginals poll last week.
As a Conservative supporter I am more optimistic than a week ago. Labour had been closing the gap steadily up to about 2 weeks ago but since then the positon has stabilised and that is despite all the Ashcroft stuff over the last 7 days.
I suspect the Piers Morgan interview was a bigger factor in Labour’s improvement than most people realise. The last week suggests the momentum may now be turning back - Morgan is now fading and if Ashcroft now fades the next few days could be better for the Conservatives.
Venables may also be adverse for Labour and Cameron could get a small boost from Trevor McDonald on Sunday (audience won’t be great but impact can only be positive).
Peter riddell the times said that the swing in the marginals is 1.5 to 2 percent higher than nationally, which would suggest a 5 percent nat swing, 7 pc tory lead. Given that this is spookily similar to yougov’s marginals poll, and in proportion to ARS’ swing differentials (marginals/nationals) perhaps some of the vociferous yougov critics may wish to reflect on this.
6. I agree on the latter point, and furthermore I expect the hung parliament reality to seamlessly replace the hung parliament narrative from May 7th onwards.
7. “Not sure why you expect markets to move against the Conservatives today.”
I expect it’s because there’s a kind of tipping-point or sufficiency of evidence - there comes a point when there’s so many polls pointing in the same direction that punters start to believe the evidence of their eyes, rather than cautiously thinking it might be just a blip, or it might all be down to the YouGov methodology, or whatever.
Agreed Mike, this should move the markets a little - i’m on! There’s still a fair chunk available on BF to lay Con Maj at 1.69 if anyone else is wanting to get on!
FPT:
Here are some examples of the kinds of seats within the 100 marginal seats covered by the marginals poll, two at each end and one in the middle:
Target number 50 from Labour:
GREAT YARMOUTH: Lab – 45.6%, Con – 38.2%
Target number 100 from Labour:
BATLEY & SPEN: Lab – 45.3%, Con – 31.7%
Target number 149 from Labour:
WALSALL SOUTh: Lab – 49.2%, Con – 28.4%
The shares in the media seat, Batley & Spen, are almost the same as the overall shares for these 100 seats, which are: Lab - 45.3%, Con - 31.4%.
These seats exclude the 301 seats which are not Labour seats and also the 50 most marginal Labour seats, so the poll excludes the 351 most non-Labour seats. That’s why the Labour share is 45.3% in these seats compared to 36.2% overall.
To continue from 10:
The 100 marginal seats go from a majority of 7.4% in Great Yarmouth to 20.8% in Walsall South with a median of 13.6% in Batley & Spen.
The swing given by the poll, at 6.7%, would take all targets up to Copeland at number 97 with majority 13.2% - not quite enough to win Batley & Spen.
If the Tories wanted to win all the seats they need just from Labour without any gains from the LD, they would have to go up to number 117, which is Ellesmere Port & Neston, where the majority is 16.0% and swing required is obviously 8.0%.
Ellesmere Port is number 153 on the Tories’ overall target list, (incl. targets from LD/SNP/KHHC).
Mike S says above that he’s just sold the Tories at 333 and bought Labour at 235.
Betfair’s Party Seats Line is currently:
Con: 337 to 339
Lab: 226 to 231
7. Why on earth would the crimes of a ten year old commited when the Tories were in power have any relevance to the current political debate - extraordinary .
13. Not extraordinary at all - nothing to do with what orginally happened back in 1993(?)
The issue for some people will be the fact that he was released.
13 - it isn’t the original crime that’s the issue but the handling of the current situation. To be honest I haven’t followed it that closely, turned off by the baying mob narrative I’m afraid. Not sure if it’s a vote changer myself. Stories in the press contradicting Brown’s Chilcot evidence would imo be more likley to have a effect.
Can anyone explain why the order in which they were phoned makes a difference? Does this mean they phone 15 people from each one, or did they stop before they reached number 50? Sorry if it’s obvious but it is late
Populus interviewed a random sample of 1,500 adults aged over 18 by telephone between March 5 and 7 in 100 Labour-held constituencies where the Tories are second, those ranked 50 to 149 in descending order of marginality. For more details go to http://www.populus.co.uk.
You guys still seem to think the debates will happen.
Assuming Ofcom gives a ruling and does not stall for time the ruling cannot do anything but allow the SNP and PC into the debate if coverage includes Scotland and Wales a sper their 2003 regulations.
Maybe the beeb can call it only guidelines and not legally binding so they can try to avoid them?
Perhaps the question should be, when the election is announced and dates for debates are attempted, will Ofcom claim there is insufficiuent time to make a ruling?
In which case, should they be planning ahead for the eventuality now and not making that contrived excuse in a couple of weeks?
As for this poll, having seats down to 149 clearly skews the result in labours way.
Having an average swing on the top 117 seats needed would have been the poll I personally wanted to see. If 6.7% across those seats then that would tell us whether they expect to get over the line.
Maybe something about whether the incumbent was still standing, or even more specifically if they had a reputation as a trougher. Too much to hope for. Even a regional breakdown would add value.
And so few from each constituency that despite the total being 1500 I feel the result loses accuracy when trying to extrapolate a link between seats in Newcastle and seats in Newquay.
Polls have rattled the forex markets, in oz the pound is at an all time low again and dropping like a stone last few hours.
Was over 3 oz dollars to the pound in 2001, now at 1.65.
Graphs all heading one way, down.
Flog a 200,000 pound house today and instead of getting 600,000 oz to resettle as you would have nine years ago, you will get only 330,000. The days of Brits being able to afford to come to Oz for a better lifestyle, other than climate, are GONE.
- “Populus marginals poll has the Tories just short”
Does it?
IMHO, a 6.7% swing in these 100 (Labour-held) seats is just enough to get FM Dave into Downing Street. And that is before the Tory turbo boosters (Knox Paradox + Brown Epiphany + Calamity Clegg) kick in.
Does anyone know which seats were polled north of the border? I am presuming that it must have been Dumfries & Galloway, Edinburgh South, Ochil & South Perthshire, Stirling, East Renfrewshire and Edinburgh North & Leith. I’ll have to work out what the party shares were in those seats, so we can all throw a few pies around when the sub-samples are available (Populus always show Scotland findings separately).
3. rik_v9 - “… with all of the money the tories have spent on the marginals, with an incumbent government of 13 years, with a record recession and budget deficit, why is DC only level pegging with the ‘Scottish Idiot’”
I know exactly why David McLetchie’s campaign is floundering in Scotland, but quite how FM Dave managed to throw away a momentous lead in England and Wales remains a bit of a mystery for me too.
Now I’m a bit confused. Mike writes that Populus surveyed the “Tory’s targets from Labour numbers 51 - 150″, but does that mean that they surveyed the 77 Labour-held seats from number 51 (Dumfries & Galloway) to number 150 (Coventry South) on this list at UK Polling Report (excluding the LibDem-held and Other-held seats) or did they in fact start listing their numbers 51 to 150 from a list of Labour-held seats only? Which would have been from Hendon (No.63) to ?? (100 seats in total, rather than just 77 seats).
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/conservative-target-seats
The Tories may need a tandem for their Scottish MP’s at the GE, one up from the current unicycle. Maybe even a whole taxi’s worth, which would make McLetchie happy as he could no doubt justify his expenses a bit better.
The seats may be the ones you said Stuart, but if just 15 people interviewed to a seat it is just asking for inaccuracy as any party getting 38% in scottish seats with other players also getting votes as well would love it.
Dunfries and Gall perhaps is possible. Other close seats in Scotland are not lab-con marginals so far harder to equate.
Joan McAlpine’s blog comments about a party last night and off the record stuff about Purcell that left Edinburgher’s “aghast” seems rather prescient.
Not that the beeb in Escocia even mention him on their website today…..
The big unknown in this now in the marginals is tactical voting.
Key questions would be:
1) Is tactical voting factored into the current polls? IIRC you have to work quite hard at the question wording to get people to give a tactical-voting-including answer, rather than telling you their national preference. This may not shift the national polls much, as the marginals where tactical voting is an issue get diluted by the non-marginals. But it could throw marginals polls off by quite a bit.
2) Are LibDems in Con/Lab marginals going to vote tactically for Labour? Previous polling suggested not (prompting Andy Cooke to turn Tactical Rewind up to 11 in his model), but that was before the anything-but-the-Tories beast started stirring and the Con/Lab position tightened.
21. I know that you don’t like sub-samples redcliffe, but I do. If only because they frequently send Mark Senior off to a darkened room with his teddy bear and lavender smelling salts. I will not describe their effect on La Christina, lest I incur the standard wild accusations of mysoginism.
Fitaloon will be along in a minute to duff me up.
The Unionist Mafia Broadcasting Corporation may be trying desperately to ignore the Smokers, the Jokers, and the Midnight Tokers, but I fear that the good citizens of the Dear Green Place will be hearing all about it anyway:
‘Former Labour colleagues distance themselves from Purcell’
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/former-labour-colleagues-distance-themselves-from-purcell-1.1012080
With friends like the Scottish Labour Mafia Party, who needs enemies.
Is Steven in Florida today? I thought he was in Australia? Funny how they never run away to places with no sunshine. Maybe he’s planning on sleeping under the stars?
“Why on earth would the crimes of a ten year old commited when the Tories were in power have any relevance to the current political debate - extraordinary .”
It reminds people of the ongoing war between the public who think victims and potential victims should come first and the political class who think the criminal should come first. Can’t see it doing much - might help Ukip/BNP a teeny bit maybe.
5.lower interest rates. lower taxes. or at least frozen taxes and no rises. will result from government spending being brought under control.
likewise business confidence. more investment. more jobs.
the currency will collapse if action isn’t taken. it may collapse anyway but the floor will not be quite as low.
the cuts in services have been taking place all the while Labour have been increasing spending. all the money has been absorbed by an increased and useless bureaucracy which can be resigned en masse.
these are not poor people, but well-off with connections and ability. they will not starve.
Brown has tried to create a dependent state who with loyalty to him will rig all elections in his favour.
the cheque book has got to be hidden for a while. revenues are about £450 billion this year down from £600 billion in 2008. spending including ‘interventions’ was over £800 billion in one year. the state could run quite well on $450 billion if the front line services are allowed to get on with it, and the bureaucracies that screw them around are retired.
Chris A said
“Crime against children in not recorded in the Crime Survey. Crime against businesses is not recorded. If previously you’d mugged someone for their mobile to sell and now you shoplift instead then that crime wouldn’t be recorded. The British Crime Survey is the biggest pile of crap ever invented.”
Also removed from statistics - crime against old people and crime committed by underage.
The easiest way to get the numbers down is by reducing the count.
As UNITE is funding Labour, particularly in the marginals…
can someone make a FOI request to find out how much UNITE receives in government ‘grants’?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article7054843.ece
“A shortage of space in overcrowded NHS hospitals means patients are routinely treated in television rooms, mop cupboards and corridors, a survey of nurses suggests today.
Kitchens and storage areas are also used while extra beds are put on wards, increasing the the risk of infections spreading.
The poll of more than 900 nurses for Nursing Times found that 63 per cent were aware of patients being placed in areas not designed for clinical care.
Almost eight in 10 respondents (79 per cent) said they believed this resulted in patient safety being put at risk, due to patients not having access to call bells or water, or fire exits being blocked.”
5 more years?
It’s starting to look like a Labour win isn’t out of the question. I’d go as far as to say that if Labour had changed to Milliband it would be in the bag.
People are blaming Cameron for a narrowing in the polls. I don’t think there was anymore he could have done. Thather toxified the brand and Cameron’s done all he can to clean it up but once a brand has that much damage it takes a lot of work and a long time. Look at John West or the beef industry.
With electorate-friendly policies like ID cards, workhouses for unfit mothers, the telephone tax and the reintroduction of the dog licence, how can Labour fail to win in 1952?
#29, by Roger March 9th, 2010 at 7:12 am
It’s starting to look like a Labour win isn’t out of the question. I’d go as far as to say that if Labour had changed to Milliband it would be in the bag.
Wodger, the fact that a) you can’t spell the edjits’ surname, and b) have not specified which edjit you see as the saviour of champagne-socialism undermines your argument. Who the feck are these spawn-of-quisling of which yee speaketh…?
10. Great Yarmouth as target 50.
On Saturday I posted about a canvassing adventure in Great Yarmouth. It was this experience that gave me an insight into how I think YouGov is mistaken in the way in which it weights Labour-disloyals [I'll call them Blair Conservatives] and Labour-loyals [I'll call them 'socialists' or 'tribal' labour supporters]. I think that YouGov is believing that a fair proportion of the Blair Conservatives will vote Labour. That’s not what I found on the ground, which is why I think there’s a systematic Labour boost to the YouGov polling.
In just over 2 hours canvassing in Yarmouth, eight people didn’t find a single Labour voter. And it wasn’t a posh area. Okay, there are other parts of the constituency where Labour voters would be more likely to live, but if Labour was to hold-on, their support should be more evenly distributed in all roads.
Now, the point of making my opening remarks is that we did come across a number of people who voted Labour in 2005 but were either not going to vote at all or would vote tactically for the Tories to spite Labour. These were the Blair-conservatives, whose 1997/2005 vote has now totally unwound.
So, what I found on the doorstep in this constituency, where the poll shows GREAT YARMOUTH: Lab – 45.6%, Con – 38.2% simply doesn’t accord with the Populus. With Labour defending a tight 3055 majority, I found no evidence whatsoever that Labour was 7 points ahead.
Back in August I wrote a profile of the Great Yarmouth seat on PB2.
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.com/2009/08/wish-you-were-here-are-they-all.html It’s worth another read.
But so much of the debate on the site is about opinions and the response to the polling modelling. But at some point it has to be zeroed-in to real-life on-the-ground validation.
My daytrip to Yarmouth indicates that, for this seat at least, the evidence on the ground gives reason to doubt the poll.
Bunnco - You Man on the Spot
Fluffy. Have you ever thought of changing your name to something more appropriate?
I was talking about David Miliband. ‘Bananaman’!
Bunco. How many more times are you going to post that same post? If CCO are paying you by the word no wonder they can’t sack Ashcroft.
If eight Tory canvassers can’t find a single Labour voter in a labour area in two hours no wonder they call you the ‘Stupid Party’!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rachel_sylvester/article7054580.ece
…Unite has set up a “virtual phone bank” to canvass people in marginal seats, urging them to vote Labour. Every Thursday thousands of members volunteer to contact other members as part of a campaign known as Unite4Labour. They log in to a computer database and are given names, phone numbers and a script to read asking how the person intends to vote…
I don’t quite understand Mikes logic here, in my mind nothing changed on these polls.
Unless of course he’s now turning down the Andy Cooke rewind buttons which would make sense as Labours vote seems to be as firm as the Tories now with the leaders ratings still pointing to possible further movement.
Saying this I hope Mike is right.
To me now the budget will define the election as the Tories lead on trust on the economy has seemingly evaporated.
32 bunnco - we believe you, we believe you, but the betting markets aren’t really treating Gt Yarmouth as a “marginal”, where the Tories are priced at 1/4. A nice juicy marginal is say Dewsbury, around 94th on the Tories’ hit list and priced at 4/7.
Can I really put you on the spot and ask you for your overall your current GE forecast? (You’re allowed to change this later).
By the way, all those announcing the death of the Lib Dems last night are premature.
If Labour are improving then tactical voting in Lib Dem/Tory marginals will do to, these people won’t vote Labour in Somerset and Westmoreland.
#33, by Roger March 9th, 2010 at 7:28 am
Fluffy. Have you ever thought of changing your name to something more appropriate?
Oh the parody. Your name is no doubt akin to what socialists envisage doing to the English working-class tax-payer (schmuck).
On-topic:
OGH will no doubt hunt for movements on the spreads, and good luck to him. My bets are with bookies and I have no reason to sweat as-of-yet. Happy hunting Mike.
“how much UNITE receives in government ‘grants’?”
IIRC the combined unions receive grants worth around £10 million or our taxes, in the form of the Union Modernisation Fund and the unions donate a similar amount of money to the Labour Party.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7054578.ece
…Labour’s big trade union backers have secured a series of prize seats for senior officials and favoured candidates in the coming general election.
Their selection has prompted concern among some ministers who say that it threatens to tilt the party towards the unions and the Left just as cuts in public services are looming…
In a lot of the Lib Dem /Tory marginal the Labour squueze has already taken place.
Those that are left are people with a visceral hatred of the LDs going back to the gang of four days.
Funnily enough the death of Michael Foot is likely to have reopened these scars a little more.
If an area is down to about a 10% share of the Labour vote do not expect that to budge much.
If the starting point for the Conservatives under the new boundaries is 208 then
Add 97 for Populus = 305
Add net 15 gains from Lib Dems = 320
Add 3 for UUP = 323.
Mike - I know you hate Betfair with a vengeance, but I feel I must point out that that they have >£100 worth of NOM currently available at 2.92, equivalent to 1.82/1 in real money, net of commission, plus of course you can trade this along the way.
As regards GE seat bands, Ladbrokes’ 300-324 Tory Seats looks like the current stand out value at 4.5/1, or even 10/1 should you think the Tories are likely to slip further to between 275-299 seats. Rod’s prophetic words that both Labour and the Tories will win between 275-299 seats keep ringing in my ears! Were this to be the case we should all now be buying the former and selling the latter on the spreads.
Oh, hang on there a minute ……
23. Tactical Voting
I don’t think we have seen the effects of possible Tactical Voting is showing up in the figures, mainly as the news of a hung parliament and the fact the Tory win isn’t a foregone conclusion is only just breaking in the real world (as opposed to the excitement on this site of every daily poll). Voters (still) tend to identify with a particular party; tactical voting will always be a last minute decision.
As to which way the Lib Dems would go? They need to retain seats from the Tories to keep their position, which will skewer their message, as they will need to attract / retain disaffected (politically savvy) Labour supporters.
I still think Gordon Brown’s AV referendum ploy will pay dividends. After all reform of the electoral system is the holy grail for true Lib Dem voters (as opposed to tactical Lib Dem voters). The offer of a referendum at least shows willingness to move on this issue (even if it is disingenuous), and Clegg may think that in a hung parliament he might even extract a concession of getting STV as one of the options on the referendum.
Cameron on the other hand simply cannot afford to give an inch on electoral reform.
41: If the media were serious about being serious at all they might want to look into a small unelected cabal of unions having such influence on labour….
They won’t of course.
37: PfP Got to dash but I do plan to do a longer post this evening in order to eat humble pie about my April 8th Election Day theory following on from a March 10th Budget. I think I identified the correct issues but underestimated the effect of the feud between Chancellor and Prime Minister. I’ll also cover my prediction in the same post. In haste….
47 Bunnco …… I can’t wait!
RE Intro
Mike you say that Anthony Wells has computed that the marginasl poll suggests a national lead for the Tories of 10%.
That lead is double that shown by You Gov.However it is closer to the Non you Gov polls lead.Much of the difference is the Lib Dem labour split.Add two points to the Lib Dems take two off labour and You Gov tracker would give Tories an 8% lead.So not much chnage in the national picture and a another marginals poll showing Tories doing better-enough to deliver an overall Tory majority.
The Lib Dems have been out of the headlines for a couple of weeks.As the more equal coverage develops expect them to claw back
from Labour.
The final figures still fit broadly into the 40,30,20 range with Labour likely to fall to 28% on the day,the Tories 41.5%,Libs c21%.
Morning all and on thread, sorry Mike but this LibDem arrogance, denial is now beyond belief.
In 2005 the Tories were barely 10% ahead of the LibDems and had a net gain of 2 seats from the LibDems in an election at the outset of which the LibDems proclaimed they were going to decapitate leading Tory figures, most of whom in the final event doubled their majorities and made their seats safe for a generation.
Move forward to 2010 and even accepting the LibDems may poll around 18-22% rather than the 14-18% they are polling at present and they are likely to end up between 18 and 20% behind the Tories.
The polls, even having closed, are telling us the Tories are going to capture close to 100 Labour seats including some with majorities in the 15-20% range.
Against the backdrop the LibDems are tying to tell us because of some untested magical incumbency factor the LibDems are not going to lose between 10 and 20 seats to the Tories. It defies belief.
If the Tories take 90 to 100 seats from Labour at the General Election then they are going to take between 10 and 20 seats at least from the LibDems. If not then please some sensible LibDem (like Yellow Submarine) give us chapter and verse on why the LibDems can repel the Tory tide.
49: I think thats more than reasonable…no real need for the Tories to lose confidence completely or panic (which is probably what the media and labour are trying to bounce them into) the 40/30/20 is a realistic result given the extra polls we now have, and that should be enough to secure a small workable majority, which will be a tremendous result for Cameron and Co.
Has Cameron made another dodgy decision when it comes to alliances??
Following his catastrophic decision on which group to support in the EU, ganging up with Neo Nazis and Homophobes, as well as alienating his natural allies in France and Germany. It looks as if he could have made a similar mistake in Northern Ireland. His chosen allies the UUP look like they will attempt to derail the Peace Process by opposing Devolved Police Powers, which even the more hardline DUP are set to sign up to. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/08/george-bush-david-cameron-ireland
NI politics don’t normally effect the rest of the UK, mainly due to the almost seamless cross party support and continuity stretching back to 1969. But allying himself with one party and getting dragged into the events, reflects badly on Cameron’s judgement (again). He is starting to look like a serial poor decision maker.
52- LDs are running a touch scared down in Sth London.
In our area they took the disaffected Tory vote from around 92 but increasing through 97 and 01.This started to unwind in 05.
What you have to be careful of however is the LDs uncanny ability to get their vote out.We know in Sutton that Burstow(LD) will get between 17-19k votes but he wont get more than that.The equation then becomes simple..find 19001 Tory votes.That is why turnout will be crucial in the LD/Tory marginals because even on a low turnout the LDs will get their vote out.
Are the polling companies giving the newspapers what they most desire rather than the mundane truth i.e. poll results that everybody is talking about. Shock poll results make television headlines and get discussed in pubs and over water coolers.
The 38%/38% split and recent 2 points difference sells newspapers and makes good publicity for polling organisations whereas a 40/30/15 split doesn’t.
52, RedRiding, the US can go to hell if they think they can dictate what we should do in NI or the Falklands. For George W to criticise Cameron is a plus for Cameron.
54, hard to say. The 38-38 could well be accurate, but it’s difficult to know and marginals occur relatively infrequently, and unless they poll the exact same area they’re not properly comparable.
I do agree with whoever above suggested an FoI about Unite and government funding for a union spending millions on campaigning.
If the BBC et al. can get all hot and bothered about a man using private money to donate to the Tories they should bloody well get excited about taxpayer’s funds being channelled into a union which is then spending cash on Labour’s behalf. Unless of course being a non-dom is the worst of all sins, and the moral equivalent of putting the election campaign on expenses is fine, which it probably is in Toenails’ World.
#52, by RedRiding March 9th, 2010 at 8:09 am
Leave a Comment
Has Cameron made another dodgy decision when it comes to alliances??
Following his catastrophic decision on which group to support in the EU, ganging up with Neo Nazis and Homophobes, as well as alienating his natural allies in France* and Germany.
RedRiding,
You seem either very naive or very ill-informed. We [Tories, be they 'Conservatives' or English Democrats] avoid the racist h0mophobes of socialism.
Have you finished last-weeks homework; school-time is approaching.
* The asylum of Wodger.
50 Easterross
Morning.
I doubt you will get a sensible response. I have been trying to find an LD on PB who can give a sensible view on why LDs are not doing much better.
All the criticisms of Cameron equally apply to the other opposition parties. Worst recession for a long time, unpopular PM, worn-out Govt. with no policies. If the Tories aren’t benefitting hugely then somebody should be, indeed perhaps more, since they don’t have as many legacy issues.
I can give credit to the Labour team for managing an effective recovery from their low point last summer. However Labour ought to be suffering more from the other parties, especially the LDs. But no LD as yet has been prepared to step forward and say why they are not doing better.
RedRiding @45: “After all reform of the electoral system is the holy grail for true Lib Dem voters”
No doubt the activists care about this. But is there any evidence their voters care about it as well?
54. I can’t see any polling company compromising their integrity to give a client the headlines they want.
There is much criticism of YouGov’s adjustments but they must think they are valid, because if they get it wrong no one will commission polls from them in the future.
Morning all.
I’m surprised to see that James Kelly, of all people, has finally seen the light at 5: how on earth does an incoming government make macho swingeing cuts to public services (remember, we just can’t go on like this) while simultaneously ingratiating itself with the electorate in preparation for another election just six months or one year into its term of office?
Precisely! That is exactly the issue and the great danger which faces the British people. And imagine how much worse it would be if it’s some sort of cosy stitch-up between Labour and the LibDems which faces this dilemma. Can anyone seriously believe that they would be able to do even one tenth of what is required, especially given that Unite, the dominant public-sector union, has Labour by the balls?
The public is, I think, beginning, just beginning, to get a glimmer of understanding of this. As tim says above, the budget will be crucial.
The choice is not, in the end, between Osborne’s view and the view of Darling, Balls, Brown or whoever is setting the dividing lines this week. It is between acting on Osborne’s view now, in a controlled fashion, and leaving it for a year or two, in which case aggressive and very damaging emergency measures will have to be taken by whoever is in power.
As for the polls: I don’t think there is much new here; most of the recent polls (other than AR) indicate a narrow lead in the 5% to 8% range, with the LibDems making no progress. At least the lead doesn’t seem to be dropping further at the moment. Nonetheless, confirmation of the closeness of the race may well budge the seat markets in the short-term.
Punters should not, however, make the mistake which I see many are making, of underestimating Cameron and Osborne. They are trying to win an election on May 6th, not today.
For a v short spell. Labour seemed tn have momentum. Thats gone now. To me, this poll gives succour to the Tories. And the press coverage may may convince waverers they need to vote.
58, media bias.
Yes, yes, I’m sure lots of you expected that. But Toenails has just gotten flak in the comments for a 5th Ashcroft post with 0 Lord Paul posts. Media bias explains both the Tories *and* the Lib Dems under-performing. Labour coverage (favourable) blankets the media, allowing no airtime for either opposition party whilst bolstering their support (aided by weighting).
But when the campaign happens this will have to stop, or at least stop being so overt. Labour will lose leftists to the Lib Dems and centrists to the Tories. Expenses will enhance minor parties to an extent.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7053190.ece
Revealed: Nazi spy duped by failed actor in ‘Monty’s Double’ hoax
244 - PfP agree with you on the seat bands.
There’s some good prices to be had in the constituency markets as the Iraq voters return to Labour.
Check the Labour odds in Hornsey and Wood Green and Hampstead and Kilburn
Do we know which seats were polled? I ask because if you look at UKPR, seats 51-150 includes 23 seats that aren’t Labour ones.
So is it seats 51-150. Or is it Lab v Con starting at 51-150? Or does it start at Con target 51 then go for the next 100 Lab v Con seats?
This makes a big difference. Eg, if it starts at Con target 51, then includes the next 100 Lab v Con seats, this goes down to Delyn (number 182 on the list). It goes even further down the list if it starts at Lab v Con number 51.
So the Conservatives are neck and neck when they have “no policies” and hostile media. Labour are desperate to smoke out policies from Cameron ahead of an election announcement, so they can use their pre-election media advantage to firstly rubbish the Tory policies, then steal them for their own manifesto, thus neutering the choice for the electorate. Cameron is playing thing right, keeping quiet, and taking the hits till Brown announces the date, and letting the finacial markets wobble over fears of another Brown premiership.
Once the election is called, the Conservatives policies will be out and Labours dominace of the media will be over. Newspapers will nail their colours to the mast, and the narrative will be Comeback Cameron
50. Mike’s analysis that on these figures the Tories would be just short of an overall majority looks about right to me. The key words there though are ‘on these figures’.
Add 97 gains from Labour to the new starting line after boundary changes, plus say 15 to 20 gains from the Lib Dems and it’s very close to the 325 mark. There should be another one from the Kidderminster Health guy but that may still leave things dependent on Northern Ireland - both in terms of Con-UUP MPs and Sinn Fein abstainers.
For reference, and to repeat a point I’ve made before, the most gains the Conservatives have made at any single election (in crude terms - ignoring boundary changes etc), is 87 in 1950 - and that didn’t even eject Labour from office. This poll predicts something like 120 gross gains for the Tories: more than they’ve managed at any election since 1931. Of itself, that would not be an inconsiderable achievement.
57 Fluffy
At my age I wish I was back at school! Mind you leaving school in the early 80s in the teeth of a recession caused by Tory economic mismangement had clearly tainted mt view of the world!
Maggie, Maggie, Maggie OUT OUT OUT!!!
Further to my last, if it only includes Lab v Con seats, number 51 is Brigg and Goole (target 68, 4.1% swing) to number 150 which is Cannock Chase (target 196, 10.3%).
If it is simply targets 51-150, then obviously this includes seats held by the LibDems, SNP and an Independent.
65, 69 denmark - According to the Times article: The survey was carried out by Populus in 100 key seats currently held by Labour and targeted by the Conservatives.
As you say, it makes a difference, so this poll may be a shade better for the Tories than it appears at first sight.
Is it 38%:38% or 38.45:37.6% (or vice versa)
It’s going to be close so we need to know!!
63 Plato i Remember reading his book “I Was Monty’s Double” when I was a youngster. Perhaps Labour could send out a double for GB , but this time one who didn’t just repeat Tractor Stats.
Mandy for Labour leader seems very unlikely now
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/wintour-and-watt/2010/mar/09/peter-mandelson-lords-commons
Further, the analysis by OGH and the Times DOES NOT suggest a 10% tory lead.
Yet Peter Riddell is telling us it DOES suggest a 10% lead.
So I think this must be seats that go a lot further down the target list which would suggest a tory majority.
If Populous had polled all 150 marginals then they wouldn’t have delivered a 38%/38% split and or course that would not have made newspaper and television headlines this morning.
You can make statistics say what the customer wants to pay for. Seems to me that the polling companies are being economical with the truth rather than telling outright lies.
58 Alanbrooke
A good point. There was a lot of discussion here last night as to why the LDs aren’t doing better. The favorite theory seems to be that certain Labour migrated to the LDs in 2005 because of Iraq and have now returned.
But we get posters claiming that the LD share will increase during the campaign proper to 20% or more.
There’s a further factor, though. Conservative-leaning LDs might return to the Conservatives if Clegg continues to support Labour.
I’ve looked at a couple of scenarios in which the LD vote is restricted below 20% using the Electoral Calculus model (so no Andy Cooke effects).
If we use the current poll rating of about 17% in conjunction with the Conservatives on 41% and Labour on 31% (thus replicating Wells’ assessment that the Populus poll is equivalent to a national lead of 10% for the Conservatives), we get a Conservative overall majority of 28.
If a further 5 percentage points is lost from the LD rating (due mainly to Conservative returnees), the splits modelled become LD 12%, Conservative 45% Labour 32%. Unsurprisingly, this gives a large Conservative majority of 112 seats.
This scenario is somewhat similar to the London Mayoral election, where the LDs were heavily squeezed by both main parties.
I have no idea whether either of these views of the future will come to pass. But the lesson seems to be that if the LD vote on the day is significantly below 20%, the Conservatives are likely to have a workable overall majority.
Yet another piece of blatent Stealth Taxery- “The Dog Tax”!
Sky News are leading with this story.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Dogbos-Could-Be-Introduced-Under-Changes-To-Dangerous-Dogs-Act/Article/201003215569805?lpos=Politics_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15569805_Dogbos_Could_Be_Introduced_Under_Changes_To_Dangerous_Dogs_Act
What is it with this Labour government and state control of everything? The people that this law is aimed at, are the people who won’t bother to abide by it, it’ll be the average law abiding bloke who will be paying it. They should be concerned with soldiers killed by underfunding,dirty hospitals,criminals reoffending on licence, not squeezing more cash from the general public.
I was wavering about who to vote for, but Alan Johnson has just made my mind up for me.
61. “It is between acting on Osborne’s view now, in a controlled fashion, and leaving it for a year or two, in which case aggressive and very damaging emergency measures will have to be taken by whoever is in power.”
That is exactly how I see it. Controlled spending cuts and tax rises, or emergency spending cuts and tax rises. Sadly quite a lot of people seem to think there is a no spending cuts and tax the rich option.
50/58 Easterross/Alanbrooke. You are both making the classic mistake of your estimates of Lib Dem seats on the basis of UNS and straight % share of the vote.
It simply does work for the yellow peril. Try and make sense of these figures from 1974 for the Libs/Alliance/LibDems
1974 - 19.3% - 14 seats (Feb)
1974 - 18.3% - 13 (Oct)
1979 - 13.8% - 11
1983 - 25.3% - 23
1987 - 22.6% - 22
1992 - 17.8% - 20
1997 - 16.8% - 46
2001 - 18.8% - 52
2005 - 22.6% - 62
74 - According to Riddell, the national shares equate to Cons 39, Lab 29, LibDem 20. Had this indeed been an actual national poll with those shares of the vote, the Conservatives here would have been very much relieved.
(FWIW, I’m in the Robert Waller school that these marginal polls should be treated with some caution).
59. Edmund
That is why I would make a destiction between ‘true’ Lib Dem supporters and ‘tactical’ Lib Dem voters.
I think true supporters probably do worry greatly about Electoral reform. However I have no idea what percentage of their support this represents
So neck-n-neck=Tory win?
77 The Twisted Fire Stopper.
I honestly can’t believe Labour are planning a dog tax. That should be the subject of the Tories’ next poster.
73. The whole wash-up thing could be very awkward and not happen anyway depending on the dates of the Easter recess - a key clue in pointing to whether it will be a May 6 election or not.
The normal practice would be for a recess from March 25 or 26, with parliament returning on April 12. Unfortunately, April 12 is also the day on which parliament must be dissolved for a May 6 election.
Therefore, the outcome will be one of the following:
- Parliament returns before April 12.
- Bills not passed when parliament goes into Easter recess will fail.
- The election is after May 6.
One extremely important piece of legislation to be thrown into this mix is the Finance Bill, coming from the yet-to-be-delivered budget.
“Maggie, Maggie, Maggie OUT OUT OUT!!!”
A happy blast from the past!
Did anyone notice Andrew Rawnsley in his fawning Cameron interview last night mention ‘Latvian SS homophobes’?
Our ‘Tim’ is a legend!
80
Cheers for that. It confirms the ICM and my hunch that the marginals included go a lot further down the target list.
Also looks better for the Lib Dems.
No wonder the paper wanted the more sensationalist headline.
#77, by The Twisted Fire Stopper. March 9th, 2010 at 8:41 am
Maybe it is time to buy a . That will keep the socialist 5cum at-bay.
#77, by The Twisted Fire Stopper. March 9th, 2010 at 8:41 am
Maybe it is time to buy a Cayman. That will keep the socialist 5cum at-bay.
[ Fecking edjit.
]
Ha! Just heard the Today Programme pushing the latest Labour/Guardian talking point: why the Tories and David Trimble (winner, Nobel Peace Prize) must take lessons in peace-making from George W Bush.
You couldn’t make it up.
85 - Following his triumphs over Europe, Ashcroft, Archer etc, have you noticed the Hague genius is at work in Northern Ireland?
Where the hell did that strategy come from?
Back of an envelope after an after dinners speech it looks like.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/government-backs-crocodile-insurance-201003092538/
79 Jack W
Thanks for the reply.
Personally I have made no assumptions on seats. My question is beased on why LDs are not worried they are not doing so much better.
The PM, economy etc. means all opposiation parties should be doing much better. The LDs also have the advantage that in say Northern England where some people will never bring themselves to vote Tory, they should be picking up more support; but based on the polls they don’t appear to be doing so.
Even if the LD policy is to concentrate on key seats there should be a higher level of support. In 1983 the Alliance had 25% of the vote and were closing in on Labour at 27%. My question is why are you not in a similar position this time ; from my perspective the LD underperformance is one of the mysteries of this election.
Personally I think a 6.7% swing would, in the end, be enough to see the Conservatives win with a very small majority, particularly taking into account the gains they should make from the Lib-Dems.
Hello mods, please release my 8.51am post, it just contains a link which must have a banned word in it. Thank you, and may all your gardens be bushy.
LONDON (Reuters) - Seeking strategies for Britain to “sell to China”, Conservative leader David Cameron has turned to the inventor of a best-selling vacuum cleaner for ideas on how to foster success in high technology.
The Conservatives want to end 13 years of Labour government in an election expected to take place on May 6. Most recent polls point to a Conservative win, although they suggest the party could fall short of an overall parliamentary majority.
“I want us to be a country that stops just borrowing and buying from China and instead really starts selling to China,” Cameron was due to say on Tuesday, according to remarks released in advance by his party.
I do hope that we wil now have a post from Seant attacking Cameron for having anything to do with those dreadful Chinese Communists, the regime that crushed Tibet and threatens the freedom loving people of Taiwan.
77…the mind just boggles at the sheer stupidity of NL and it’s top men.Johnson,i am sure,is a decent guy with whom to have a pint but………
Hmmm, spoke too soon
It’s not “reform” you dunderheads; it’s a tax and another infringement of civil liberties. Does anyone think that gang members who use dogs as weapons will care one jot about this law?
Sorry, that is from this
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7054651.ece
94/77 - The Tories are accusing Labour of being too slow in implementing this sort of policy and wish to claim the credit, citing Wandsworth council.
http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/legacy/news/pressreleasedetail.asp?id=6670
C +6.5; Lab -7.3.
So if there’s no marginals bonus at all, that implies national shares of C 39.7; Lab 28.9. Fixing the three-party share at 89% (I expect an Others share of 10% to 12%) gives a Baxter majority of 14.
Of course, the national lead could be smaller, which would imply there is a marginals bonus and the Tories are getting the votes where they need them…
77
Labour need the ******* money! (as St Bob Geldof would say…)
And they are fully prepared to tax anyone to get it.
79 Jack W, in the elections prior to 92 support for the Liberals & SNP was spread quite widely so return in seats for votes was poor. From 1997 onwards tactical voting depressed LD votes in Con/Lab seats, increased LD votes in Lab/LD & Con/LD seats and LDs started getting a better return as their votes were no longer spread widely but concentrated.
In last election the targetting of seats as shown by cash spent per seat was very focussed by the LDs, building geographically areas of strength. Since 2005 we have however seen poor performances by LDs in three of their core areas, Scotland, Wales and the Sout West.
What If the polls are telling the truth?
99 tim
It’s stupid “consensual politics” like this which drives people away from the political process. Another word for consensus is stitch-up.
I don’t even have a dog, but can you imagine how many dog owners will be happy that Rex has to have a £30 microchip and expensive insurance scheme, just so the government can be “seen to be doing something” which will be totally ineffective anyway?
90-Alanbrooke.The issue is that the LDs/Alliance learnt from the debacle in 83 when they spread their resources too thin on the ground.They didnt pile up the votes where it mattered.
Since 92 the LDs have become adept at consolidation and firming up the foundations of their vote in strategic areas.
Take the “Golden Triangle” in South West London where they hold Richmond Kingston and Sutton councils.There is a strategic mass of support in that area which creates a barrier to the Tories.
It has become a “Quality of life” issue down there rather than anything to do with major national issues.
People with money in those areas vote LD because it makes them feel good.Their area is nice anyway.
103, I agree. The family hound has a microchip and insurance (which I think covers biting poor people and so forth) but there’s a world of difference between choosing those things and having them thrust upon you, together with the cost, by the state. It’s like organ donation. Encouraging donor cards is great [I still need to get one, actually] but harvesting corpses, assuming that cadavers are the property of the state, is appalling.
I am not sure what effect polls like this have on the Labour party as a whole. Gordon Brown has already conclusively demonstrated a complete lack of interest in the fate of foot soldiers but about 1/4 of Labour MPs are facing defeat on these figures. If there is any panic about I suspect it is in the Labour 125-175 category who probably assumed they had a job for life. If the polls don’t change there is going to be a lot of demoralised socialists wandering about and probably going off message (oh why didn’t we get rid of the b when we could have?”).
90 - ‘have you noticed the Hague genius is at work in Northern Ireland?’
Not really no. If the the UUP want to vote against something against the advice of the Tories how does Hague fit into the jigsaw? You see a Hague in every dark corner. Spooky.
102 Ted
I agree with you. The polls should be showing the LDs with high levels of support in their targetted areas and a rising level elsewhere. This would then deliver seats where targetted and a platform for growth the next time round ( since if the party is to grow, it can’t just stay in its citadels ). However that is not the case at present and the LDs are hiding their heads in the sand.
85. Good morning Roger.Yes Tim is a legend,cant tell you where.
90 Alanbrooke. You’re analysis of Lib Dem underperformance is again based on % share of the vote. It’s the fools gold of polling.
The difference with 1983 and the Alliance is clear. Labour had the longest suicide note in history and Cameron isn’t Michael Foot’s Labour party !!
Clegg’s strategy is essentially “Defence Plus”. He’s been concerntrating on 80-90 seats and putting all the resources into them and then some. The rest - over 550 have been left to paper status campaign where the yellow peril are marginally more visible than hair on the top of OGH !!
http://twitter.com/NewStatesman/status/10213009780
Comment on Ashcroft in The Times:
“The row over the tax status of Lord Ashcroft, the Tory deputy chairman, has damaged the party. Of the 68 per cent who said that they had followed the story quite closely or even vaguely, some 28 per cent — including 10 per cent of Tories — said that it had made their overall view of the party less favourable”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7054655.ece
I guess we need to see breakouts to make any sense of that - any non-Tory voter probably only requires a minimal trigger (scandal du jour) to plump for ‘less favourable’….But its not quite the ‘absolutely irrelevant non-event’ some have wished for…Perhaps Cameron’s ‘I outed Ashcroft’ story will stick….
111, odd move. Labour have had little pressure over Lord Paul. If they called for Ashcroft to pay tax on his non-UK earnings, won’t this move raise that issue for Lord Paul, to an extent?
Mind you, Toenails will probably present it as proactive Labour.
103
The Dangerous Dogs act, which party introduced that I wonder?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Dogs_Act_1991
All dogs should be registered, fee about £100.00 which would include chipping and sterilisation. Anydog found not to be registered and chipped would be immediately destroyed, and the owner fined heavily or imprisoned.
97: It’s just another law which the law-abiding will pay for, and the non-caring won’t and nothing will be done about it.
According to Populus themselves
http://twitter.com/PopulusPolls/status/10213157040
99- I don’t have a problem with chipping dogs- both mine are, and so they are already on a database, so I can’t complain too much if the government use that as a way of compiling a national database of owners. What I can complain about is being used as a way of raising revenue under the guise of “Antisocial Behaviour” legislation.
As I said before, the area of the population that this is alledgedly aimed at, won’t be the slightest bit bothered about complying with it, and certainly won’t be paying it.
112. CarlottaVance.
So after a week-plus of bombardment by the left and the bitter, fewer than 20% can be persuaded to say it made them think less of the Tories, and most of those would never vote Tory anyway? Looks pretty much like a non-story to me.
115 coldstone
Yes, and it is extremely bad law.
This is not a marginals poll. It is a poll of those marginals that Labour have a large enough lead in to get close to parity after a large swing to the Tories.
You can get any result you want if you ask the right questions.
Is Lord Paul ending his nom dom status by moving abroad ?
Meanwhile Grayling back in the game.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2010/03/chris-grayling-vindicated-as-independent-evaluation-concludes-violent-crime-has-risen-by-44-under-la.html
Also nice to see Cameron b1tch slap toenails last night on BBC news.
112 Carlotta - You can’t conclude anything from that. Ask the same question about any negative story and you’d get a result like that. In fact, 28% (of the 68% who took even the slightest interest) is a very low figure, given the massive media onslaught.
What matters is whether it is regarded as a significant negative.
106 - Its not like organ donation at all, unless your kidney plans to attack the postman.
Chipping and insurance should really get cross party support.
As for irresponsible dog owners, lets be liberal and only put down their dogs.
104 timmo
I can understand the strategy of targetting key seats, it makes sense. But why are the LDs not receiving more support nationally ? It can’t just be, nobody in the LDs can be bothered.
As national support piles up then the dynamics of seats change, seats further down the target list become more winnable and success breeds success. The LDs have had as many open goals last year as the Tories but appear to have dome less. LD support should be much higher, but they are in denial.
Coldstone- I think the Dangerous Dogs Act is certainly a law that is needed. Some breeds of dogs just shouldn’t be kept as pets.
90 - The Nobel Peace Prize means squat. It was devalued to a trinket last year.
The LibDem vote share is IMO misleading. This election is going to be remarkably polarised and perceived as close and it will be impossible to maintain their share in seats where they’re clearly third. Coversely, though, they should make further progress in eating up Labour tactical votes in their own seats: the Tory menace (as Labour voters see it) is now much more obvious than in 2005.
What would be really helpful would be a poll of Tory-LibDem marginals. Perhaps Mike could interest AR in one. The doubts about AR’s methodology seem to concentrate on Labour’s share (because it’s the one out of line with every other methodology), but that needn’t be a problem in Lib-Con seats. It’s even worth looking at seats held by the Tories with the LibDems a close second.
By the way, it’s a mistake to think that the Tories will necessarily hold every seat they have now - by-election gains will tend to be vulnerable.
102 Bono. Labour certainly do need the money viz another 2.5p tax increase on petrol effective from April 1st. Tax on road fuel has increased by 13% since Nov 2008 at a time from our Euro counterparts have seen rises of less than 5%. Another reason why anyone hedging on an April 8th GE will be disappointed.
When is the next AR poll, so that we can have the proper figures to talk about?
102 Ted. Partly correct. TV has been a staple of Lib targetting going back to Grimmond’s days. Certainly both 74 elections saw plenty of it.
The difference has been the establishment and growth of small blocks of solid LibDem support around the country backed up by a decent base of council seats. This has been added to far better targetting. Essentially it’s the growth of the 1960’s celtic fringe into a nationwide network that often also has a university and/or wealthy suburban base.
116
As the Bandit Leader, Calvera, from the Magnificent Seven might say under these circumstances:
“If God did not want them sheared, He would not have made them sheep”
104 - People who reuse to insure their cars should have them crushed, same with dogs.
Why is that difficult?
128, regarding holding seats: I think most incumbents will be vulnerable due to expenses. Obviously, that’ll hit Labour hardest because you’ve got more incumbents (for now, mwahahahaha!).
124: This is where the idealogical differences between right and left split.
We can all agree that chipping and insurance is a good thing. But wether there is a law to enforce that which is needed is another matter. Especially if you look at the matter of enforcement and wether it will actually make a difference.
It’s at the heart of wether the state should run our lives, or whether personal freedom is more important.
107. The issue here is that the Tories have publicly aligned themselves with one of the parties in Ulster.
Traditionally they have held them at arms length, even Major who relied on UUP support.
The problem is that Ulster politics are not like British politics, every time the UUP do something that British voters think is wrong ie Opposing the Peace Process, turning up at violent orange parades etc etc. Cameron will have to come out and defend them or distance himself from them. And for what? The UUP are unlikely to get more than a handful of seats.
New Staesman spinning this as a bold move by Lord Paul which will put the pressure back on Ashcroft.
No it wont it will just focus attention on the other Labour Non Dom donors.
133. Might help bring down the violent crime which has soared by 44% under Labour - so I support your death to death dogs tax.
122: ‘Meanwhile Grayling back in the game.’
It sounds as if Mr Grayling deserves quite a few apologies in that case, not least from Mark ‘ASBOs are joined-up thinking’ Easton of the BBC.
130, this week, I think.
133, puppy farms should be tackled. Reputable dog charities and breeders will be far less likely to sell a hound to Terry Chavsberry than unscrupulous sellers.
128 Nick Palmer MP
I doubt the Tories will lose Norwich North, even with the new boundaries. Chloe Smith seems to be wowing everyone there.
I have no information about Crewe and Nantwich but Timpson seems to be a decent and diligent sort of bloke, with no expenses problems. Has also rebelled a couple of times against the party line (including on post office privatisation, I think) - which will help him locally.
Therefore, you must, of course, be talking about Henley. A nailed on Labour win if ever I saw one.
133 tim…give the canines a break,dear boy.
137: Really? Ashcroft said he’s likely to become domiciled after the election hasn’t he. (In fact he will have to keep his place in the Lords under tory plans).
138
Seem to remember that the Tories had the odd problem with crime violent and otherwise when they were in power: Hungerford, Dunblane etc. Broken Britain perhaps?
The Mail’s take on the Poll.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1256514/Labour-Tories-level-marginals-raising-hung-parliament-fears.html
I don’t fear a hung parliament I welcome it, poetic justice on ‘em all.
Morning all!
Interesting developments in Dublin where a third minister has quit politics, this time for personal reasons. Martin Cullen’s resignation now means there are 3 Dail seats vacant after 2 other ministers quit for various indiscretions. The coalition no longer has a garuanteed majority and is dependent on deals with independents to survive, given the state of the Irish polls it’s highly unlikely that FF and the Greens could hold all these seats in by elections and this could tip the balance in the Dail in favour of the opposition. So we could be looking at a change of government or a general election later this year!
133. “104 - People who reuse to insure their cars should have them crushed, same with dogs.
Why is that difficult?”
Crushing dogs to death, I look forward to seeing that in the Labour manifesto.
136 - If the UUP get a handful of seats, they will be dancing in the streets and the Tories will need fewer seats from the miraculous vote-protecting wizards of the West Country (AKA Lid Dems).
111 Jack W
Jack I understand the key seats strategy, not an issue. However I disagree with your analysis on the “paper seats”. This election is not like the previous 3, and the fundamentals of UK politics are moving. The last 3 elections were more or less slam-dunks, the only debate was the score.
This time we have had a hugely unpopular PM, the worst recession for a long time, it’s clear the government has run out of ideas and there is a feeling that a change is needed. In such circumstances I would expect all opposition parties to be picking up support. The LDs have also had some issues which further play in their favour, Cable gets lots of airtime, The Gurkhas, not the Tories and their tax policy is the best on offer. That alone should be giving them an extra 5% on their national polling.
The LDs seem to have no real ambition.
141 - I wonder whether Shadsy might like to put up a market on the number of by-election wins which will be reversed at the GE. Could be quite a fun market.
144. Was it not the Liberals in power when the ripper struck ? Nick Clegg should resign..
133 tim
More people have emotional attachment to dogs than to cars.
119 LondonStratto
68% are aware of a non-story? Have you any idea how difficult it is to drive awareness? I thought this would not penetrate beyond the Westminster Village?
123 Richard
I agree - from the presentation in the text its impossible to say whether this has affected voting intention - as I wrote any ‘vaguely negative’ story is likely to trigger a ‘less favourable’ response from opponents. Perhaps there are more details which will cast further light. But to pretend its ‘not a problem’ has, in my view, hobbled the counter attack, which only really started on Sunday with Fox, and continued last night with Cameron. As I wrote, perhaps Cameron’s line will stick, better late than never.
No doubt this bill will require the need for a huge doggie database. More millions which can be wasted on IT projects.
#124, by tim March 9th, 2010 at 9:12 am
106 - Its not like organ donation at all, unless your kidney plans to attack the postman.
Chipping and insurance should really get cross party support.
As for irresponsible dog owners, lets be liberal and only put down their dogs.
‘Tupac, surely someone of limited cognisance as yourself can understand this is a stoopid idea? Think it through:
# Where Labour are strongest normally equates to higher criminality. [I give Preston and Glasgow where Labour are the problem and not the solution.] Labour will not attack the criminal elements upon which their support lies.
# Cats also bite; how do propose to attack this flaw (as most cats own their human)?
# Foxes bite; as they cannot be taxed (being as wild as Labour’s feral youth) should we hound them from our urban-areas?
# How about the inconvenience of fleas. They bite, but how do we determine which animal is their point-of-origin? What about those who may have adverse allergies to the parasites that live off the host (Scots excluded)? How do we compensate them and their venal murder-of-crows…?
In conclusion; a useless piece of legislation that won’t make the Statute book. Maybe Labour have seen the books and want to lose this election….
150. Wrong - wiki says Prime Minister - Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, Conservative in 1888. Cammo must go !
145 - Leinster House must be like a funny farm at the moment.
133 tim
Why not take your argument to its logical conclusion, viz
“People who refuse to insure their cars should have them crushed; same with children”.
It is interesting to note that the BBC’s report and viedo clip of Toenails’ interview with Cameron, both omit Cameron saying “I would put it to you that it’s now time for the BBC to go after the Labour Party and ask questions about their donors and where they pay tax”.
http://bit.ly/bHf7fP
91. What role do you imagine Hague has in Northern Ireland? It’s a domestic issue, not foreign affairs.
128. Well Nick you can get very good odds on Labour in Norwich North and Crewe - have you put your money on?
155 - What an opportunity! Cameron should go on TV and publicly apologise to the people of Whitechapel.
148-Alanbrooke.
Locally there is a tension between the local council and the MPs,both LDs.
I know that given a choice the LDs would rather hang onto the council locally than their MPs.
On election day ,if it is May the 6th the MPs need to get their votes out from all wards in the borough but the LDs locally will need to get their vote out in individual wards to maintain control in the council.
Therefore activist stretch becomes worse.
From what i am hearing it is the council side that are winning the argument.
136. Rubbish.
146 - Crushed, minced, whatever.
If you have a dog that isn’t insured or chipped it goes down to the pound for a week then if you can’t be arsed picking it up then it’s hello doggy heaven.
158. interesting or suprising ?
On crime when will Mark Easton surface - seemed to be missing from “today” this morning ?
tim trying to be controversial on dogs to switch the postings away from crime and the economy - will probably work given the number of dog lovers on here..
155
How typical of you ‘arry, (he of the SE 3500) not to check ‘yer facts.
When any politician of any party starts the, ‘Crime Rhetoric’ I look at my fingernails, look at ceiling, the floor, anywhere but at them. You can’t vote bad things away, bad people will do bad things, always have, always will, if you think any differently, you’re a moron.
161.155 - What an opportunity! Cameron should go on TV and publicly apologise to the people of Whitechapel.
128. Personally I think they’ll keep Crewe and Nantwich because from memory the candidate (Timpson?) was a very popular local candidate.
Much less sure about Norwich North. Thats not natural Tory country is it?
164. Execution based on the fear of what they might do but probably won’t. How very Labour.
152. CarlottaVance: 68% are aware of a non-story?
68% said they’re at least vaguely aware, when prompted. The amount of coverage this has had from the left and the bitter makes it quite difficult not to be vaguely aware of it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a non-story.
I understand re-cycling is the current fad. Ergo; Cammers, get Roger Waters to allow you to use this theme for the upcoming election!
169. Indeed. The true face of Labour shows itself once more….
166 coldstone
I agree, it didn’t matter how many times the Soviet people voted, Satlin always came back, often with an increased majority.
164
you’ll be wanting every human microchipped soon, in case they misbehave. Microchipiing wont solve anything if the register isnt kept up to date.
170: The 68% is basically a measure of : ‘Have you watched any of BBC news the last week?’.
The marginals polls seem to be suggesting that the swing in the marginals is around 2% greater than the overall national swing. With this in mind, my approach to digesting national opinion polls has been to add 2% to the Tories, take 2% away from Labour and put the numbers into the Wells’ seat calculator. This, I believe, gives a decent approximation to the real seat totals, as it is essentially applying UNS on a quasi-marginal extrapolated basis (!?!). There may be some errors in the Lib Dem to Tory movement - possibly an over-estimate in the number of seats changing hands.
Anyway, on this basis, I concur with some of the estimates expressed above, that the Tories will be just about level pegging in seats with all other parties combined, based on current polling.
I find it hard to see that there will be sufficient further movement in the polls to deprive the Tories of most seats, but my hopes of depriving them of an overall majority are greater now than at any time in the past 2 years.
http://twitter.com/vicderbyshire/status/10213801123
137
I refer you to 158, courtesy Gadfly.
The pressure will only fall onto other Labour Non-Doms if the media wish it.
I suggest that these people will remain hidden away and that the Spectator spin is an indicator of the direction that things will take - remember Mandelson is pushing this now.
174: The need for the doggy database, the need for ‘dog enforcement wardens’.
The state will just get bigger and bigger for little to no benefit.
167. Well someone has yet to apologise for the extermination of the Neanderthals. Perhaps Dave should do that one before Brown does it (Labour have apologised for just about everything else they weren’t personally responsible for)….
148 Alanbrooke. You’re now moving into partisan analysis.
Broadly speaking I’m expecting the yellow peril to go into the camapign proper on around 20%, Labour 32%, the Conservatives 38%.
Let the games begin !!!!
177. Remarkable if true, given the complete lack of attention the mainstream media have given his affairs. I wonder if all the other Labour non-dom donors will follow?
Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for this weird and indefensible tax anomaly.
I agree with tim and coldstone.
Please help me.
174 - You’ll be supporting it soon because it will be in the Tory manifesto.
169 - Irresponsible dog owners WILL let their dogs crap in the park, there is no MIGHT about it, I’m not arguing for Execution without defecation.
I see this is becoming a tim-bites-dog thread.
182: The Domicile whole thing is a bit of an outdated system. But its the responibility of governments to deal with it, not individuals to try to make ‘moral’ judgement when it comes to tax rules.
Speaking as an accountant of course, so maybe biased. But we always operate within the rules as defined, just use them to our clients best position…thats what we get paid for.
174 NO I wont.
160 runnymede - that sounds a good tip to me. Where are these very good odds that you recommend - Ladbrokes or Betfair or…?
179. SB
Don’t forget that ‘barking detectors’ and ‘dog poo sniffers’ will need to be installed on every street corner and ‘dog pee alarms’ on every lamp post. Of course it will all be linked into a grandiose national computer system that will come £10 billion over budget and 10 years late. I can’t see Labour bringing it in for less than £100 billion myself. Brown will be pleased….
184 - You’ll be supporting it soon because it will be in the Tory manifesto
Let me fix this for you:
You wont be supporting it soon because it will be in the Labour manifesto.
There.. much better. And true.
187. Yes I agree - and I think the Conservatives should take the lead on this, and leave Labour to defend the absurd feather-bedding of the super-rich this system allows, if they dare.
181 Jack W
Let the games begin in indeed. I’m expecting the 3 big parties to get a shock. There are enough disaffected voters around to give some nasty surprises. The Tories and LDs did not do enough to consolidate support from September last year and the Labour recovery is full of soft votes.
What people should remember about C&N is that it only appeared to be safe Labour because of Gwyneth Dunwoody’s huge personal vote. It’s characteristics are more like those of the marginals polled by Populus. For the reasons outlined above I suspect that Timpson will hang on very narrowly in a result which will be more in keeping with the seat’s natural inclination
184. The presumption of guilt, again. Labour started by applying it to humans, and now plan extended across the species barrier.
174
You are getting ahead of me there.
173
Not sure I get your point, but if Stalin where to run for office in Russia today.
The nostalgia for Stalin has support outside the remnants of the Communist Party. A 2003 survey by the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Centre, found that 20 percent of those surveyed had a “very positive” view, and 30 percent a “somewhat positive” view of Stalin. Only 12 percent had a “very negative view” of Russia’s late leader.
Well who knows?
191: Should relate to 185 (at the moment)..post number changed
193 Alanbrooke. Where were these shocks come from ??
So, is Lord Paul coming onshore or b*gg*ring off back to India?
As Ashcroft has already said he plans being in the Lords for a long time to come in the light of the Conservatives’ proposals to change the law regarding sitting in the Lords and non-dom status that implies he’s coming onshore.
So either Lord Paul is catching up with Ashcroft or dumping No10 in it.
171 LondonStatto - so a ‘non-story’ is what you say a non-story is then?
If its a non-story, why was Cameron on the BBC news last night (effectively) distancing himself from Hague & Ashcroft:
“I have sorted out the funding of the Conservative Party. I have made it a lot less reliant on a few wealthy people. I’ve broadened its base. I’ve paid off loans, including a very large loan to Michael Ashcroft, so the party is not in his debt one piece.”
Lord Paul story now on BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8557201.stm
164. - Crushed, minced, whatever.
If you have a dog that isn’t insured or chipped it goes down to the pound for a week then if you can’t be arsed picking it up then it’s hello doggy heaven.
by tim March 9th, 2010 at 9
Excellent! Vote Tory and they will eat your babies. Vote Labour and they will mince your dogs!!!!
That should boost T/O
189. NPMP.
Norwich North: Labour 2/1 (Bet365)
C&N: Labour 7/4 (Ladbrokes, Hills)
Looks like the, ‘Fat Man’ is about to do a purge.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/09/eric-pickles-young-britons-foundation
So if any of you lot are associated, burn any evidence, its FCS all over again.
179
And remember the uniforms - you must have a uniform - and on-the-spot-fines.
How can any self-respecting local government minor apparatchik bully the local populace without a uniform and on-the-spot penalties?
Ooh, ooh - and one of those dog-chip reader thingies that you can carry in a shiny black leather holster.
And you must have a radio so you can call up a police community support officer if the criminal offers any resistance.
And a stab vest - no telling what these chavs are like with their dangerous dogs.
And bite protestion armour - and maybe have a police armed response unit on call to deal with the dog (they like using their weapons…)
199. Looks like Lord Paul is following Ashcrofts lead.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8557201.stm
He’s paying full UK tax.
200. CarlottaVance: So a ‘non-story’ is what you say a non-story is then?
No, a non-story is what people don’t care about. Except for a few addicts, like you.
If its a non-story, why was Cameron on the BBC news last night (effectively) distancing himself from Hague & Ashcroft:
He was asked a question, so he answered it.
200. CarlottaVance: So a ‘non-story’ is what you say a non-story is then?
No, a non-story is what people don’t care about. Except for a few addicts, like you.
If its a non-story, why was Cameron on the BBC news last night (effectively) distancing himself from Hague & Ashcroft:
He was asked a question, so he answered it. At least, I presume so. Until I read this thread I wasn’t aware there had been an interview last night.
194 - That’s a nice thing to say about Gwyneth Dunwoody, who was a great Parliamentarian, but I’m not sure it’s totally true. She gained but then lost Exeter in 1966/1970 then inherited a reasonably safe Labour seat in the form of Crewe, which had been Labour since the war. Boundary changes made it a little less safe, but the idea it’s a key marginal that was miraculously held by Dunwoody during the bad days is a bit far fetched.
Timpson might well hold on because he’s a decent candidate and Labour are weak, but I would expect it to revert at some point to being a pretty reliable Labour seat.
193 Jack W
I guess that the BNP vote is once again understated and will rise as they get more publicity. The Welsh and Scots nationalists could equally pose problems as homes for disaffected voters in their respective countries. Tories will suffer from UKIP in the South and the Greens will eat at the LD share. The big three have all tried to occupy the limited space for Middle England and are ignoring the disaffected voters on their flanks. Maybe the cold calculation of electoral numbers allows them to do it, but with a general anti-politics feel in the country I think they will get some shocks as a result.
Has anybody noticed this from Iain Dale?
“On my way home last night I heard details of the Times/Populus poll which apparently showed Labour and the Conservatives neck and neck at 38% in the marginal seats. Except that it didn’t.
“All the media reporting I saw gave the impression that this poll was a poll of marginals. All marginals. Only in the small print did we discover that it didn’t include LibDem marginals, or the top 50 Con-Lab marginals. It was a poll of the Con-Lab marginals from 51-150. Knowing that, it reads rather more encouragingly for the Conservatives as it shows a 6.7 swing to the Conservatives since 2005. Labour is down from 45.3 to 38.2% while the Tories are up to 37.6 from 31.4. This would enable them to win 97 Labour held seats, leaving them needing to win more than 20 LibDem seats to gain an overall majority.
“What this poll confirms, despite the way it has been portrayed, is that the Tories continue to perform better in the battleground seats than elsewhere. Which is exactly what they need to do.”
181. Well someone has yet to apologise for the extermination of the Neanderthals.
jsfl
With Labour on 30%+ I am not sure they have been exterminated.
According to the NS website Lord Pauil says: “I think they have been caught with their pants down and what better than try to reflect on others. First of all, I am a born domicile. I am born in India. He was the only one who was asked to pay full taxes. Nobody asked me. I have always been open about my non-domiciled status. There are lots of non-doms in the House of Lords but I don’t know of any case where they were asked to pay full tax, apart from Lord Ashcroft.”
This, of course is absolute bullshit.
Ashcroft was NEVER asked to pay tax as a UK domiciled resident. The conditionality placed on ham for appointment to the Lords was purely one of residency to ensure he spent sufficient time in the UK to fulfill his role as a working peer.
His tax position had nothing to do with his appointment.
And, if Paul’s statement about Ashcroft being asked to pay full taxes, then that is the scandal. Why should Ashcroft have been singled out, as a potential Comservative appointee to the Lords, for a position that was being asked of no other?
211, if that’s the case then is it 97 gains + whatever they get from the first 50 Lab-Con marginals + whatever they get from the Lib-COn marginals?
Why don’t Gordon Brown’s actions manifest themselves in a negative impact on poll results any more?
Lying to the Iraq Inquiry
Bullying Downing Street staff
Using British Forces as a photo opportunity
Why are the pollsters instead telling us that support for New Labour is slowly gaining ground?
Why, oh why, do even the Lib Dems support the dog tax?
Although the Tories have become considerably more liberal under Cameron, they always had their Michael Howard authoritarian types. But the Lib Dems??
Bad news for holidaymakers - £ down again - no special reason mind you
http://news.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/currency/11/12/intraday.stm
210 Alanbrooke. I certainly agree the ‘Others’ figure will be boosted. My prediction is up 2 points from the 05 election to 10%.
Outside of a few gains for the nationalists I do not expect either the BNP ot UKIP to figure at all in seat terms.
211
Gosh! failed Tory candidate puffs up his sides chances, how bloody amazing.
Surely if you are neck-n-neck in 100 seats say, you can’t assume that they will all fall to you: some will, some won’t.
133
Let’s go a bit further, chop the hands of kids who pinch a few apples from an orchard, little b******s.
Get a grip!
213. Cretinous comments from Paul - they’ll have to put a gagging order on him soon.
204. And then of course the EU will introduce a health and safety directive that will say that no public official should approach within 20 yards of a dog just in case said dog might harm them. At the same time they will also ban tranquilliser guns in public places because of the risk to people.
At which point the Government will spend billions on an airborne tranquilliser that they will find also subdues the people as well leading to headlines about the whole of Ashby De La Zouche being knocked out by a ‘Dog Management and Care Officer’ who accidentally managed to discharge his complete supply of the gas.
212. Rep Tory. There’s a difference
Neanderthals walked on two legs and lived in caves. The sorts that Labour produce tend to walk on all-fours and frequent sewers….
222: “headlines about the whole of Ashby De La Zouche being knocked out”
A someone who knows (but does not live anywhere near) Ashby de la Zouch I can say the town has been ‘nocked out’ for years, along with Measham and Swadlincote
59 - “I doubt you will get a sensible response. I have been trying to find an LD on PB who can give a sensible view on why LDs are not doing much better.”
Simple. This LD will.
The difference between now and previous elections, is that with 62 MPs the LDs are part of the establishment. This is a Good Thing in some respects, because it means that the party has now developed something approaching a core vote (of between 10-15%). But there is also a negative effect.
In the past they were a repository of a protest vote. That has now fractured away to Greens, UKIP, BNP, Nationalists etc. This is a result partly of the LDs now being seen as part of the establishment, and also of amove more generally in society towards greater investigation and expectation of choice.
There are also the ever present “they can’t win here so I won’t vote for them” and lack of national media coverage. Although St Vince has improved thigns lsightly, he tends to be seen as an “everyman” rather than specifically as a Lib Dem.
Also, at such a time as we are now at, there will be a huge polarising pressure on voters, which we are seeing to a certain extent in the narrowing of the poll lead.
So - ATEOTD yes it is frustrating that the LDs haven’t capitalised more, but the above reasons are very difficult to mitigate against. Clegg has developed a solid Liberal approach to all issues, but the “other two” borrow these in their flirting with the centre ground and for financial and historical reasons are able to shout louder.
So - the ststus quo ante is where we are nationally, and we’ll have to see how that plays out in individual seats.
219. Yes about half which when added to the first 50 not in the poll equals 100. The key then is how many Lib Dem seats are also taken. Here information is slight but I am nervous about reading too much into the Lib Dems poor national rating. They have been increasingly successful in getting the votes where they need them. We really need some polling on the first 25 Lib Dem/Tory targets.
219: Coldstone..I don’t think you’re understanding what the poll says. it’s taking 51-150, working out the poll rates, working out the SWING then working out many seats that works into. It is of course not saying it will win them all.
It’s saying, the first 50 targets will fall regardless. Then out of the next 100 targets, the expected swing shows another 47 labour losses. Making a loss of 97 seats in total.
218 Jack W
UKIP and BNP probably have only 2 realistic seat chances Farage and Griffin.
Where they can have a big impact though is taking votes from the main parties and changing the votes numbers under FPTP. In some of the marginals this will change seats. So far however none of the issues which gave a boost to both parties at the Euros have been addressed. There has been window dressing but nothing solid. So if disaffected voters really want to make a protest to the 3 big parties that they are all the same now’s a good time to do it.
I seem to remember the Mail refered to Major as, ‘The Grey Fox of the Desert’ on that visit.
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/03/major-churchill-and-the-gulf.html
Yeah!
4 What I find remarkable, is that with all of the money the tories have spent on the marginals, with an incumbent government of 13 years, with a record recession and budget deficit, why is DC only level pegging with the ‘Scottish Idiot’?
by rik_v9 March 9th, 2010 at 3:08 am
Move out of the PB.com bubble and as long as the main media channel the State Broadcaster (which most watch) shuts you out, down and always briefs against you while protecting the scottish one from any attacks whatsoever then this is the outcome.
More champagne bottles in the corridors of Shepards bush? You pay for it by the way as you will also pay if there every should be another term of these Labour idiots.
217 Might be this Jan trade gap widest since Aug 2008
227
Even that is an assumption you couldn’t take for granted, could be a third, could be half, could be all, could be none.
224. GeoffH. Indeed I have stopped in ADLZ a few times back in the day and I concur with your view!
From my point of view, anything that knocks out Ashby de la Zouch cannot come too quickly.
to insure dogs is ridiculous. Fine have a system of registration of the more dangerous breeds but what good will insurance do? When we read of a tragic tale of a baby being ripped apart by a dog in the future will we take comfort in the fact that the dog was insured and that the baby’s relatives will get some money?
If anything insurance will make owners more blase about dog control
213 GeoffH - Quite correct, Ashcroft’s domicile was never an explicit part of the discussions on his Peerage.
However, his situation from Lord Paul is quite different.
Lord Paul was born in India of Indian parents, so he was born a ‘non-dom’.
Lord Ashcroft was born in Britain of British parents - so he was born ‘dom’ - and only later (probably sometime in the 80s) became a ‘non-dom’.
The Public Administration Select Ctte are going to have a nose around this one….someone’s forgot to tell them its a ‘non-story’
228 Alanbrooke. I expect Farage and Griffin to be monstered.
Clearly it’s possible that that ‘Others’ might sway a tight recount marginal or two but again their overall influence is at the margin.
233 ashby de la zouch seemed nice enough when I visited its castle last year
232: What assumption? The first 50 seats require such a low swing, that there is a very high chance of winning them all. (Of course, some seats may defy the odds, but then the converse can easily be said and some non-target seats may very well fall as well).
This doesn’t look too good:
The UK’s goods trade deficit with the rest of the world unexpectedly widened to its biggest since August 2008 in January.
And exports saw their sharpest drop in more than three years, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The UK’s trade gap in physical goods widened to £7.99bn ($12bn), well above the £7bn forecast by economists.
The news was disappointing especially since the weak pound might have been expected to boost sales abroad.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8557200.stm
I don’t think the Lib Dems are doing as badly as the polls suggest. I think many of the people who say they are voting Labour actually vote Lib Dem. This would then iron out the understating of the Lib Dem and the overstating of Labour. For example a You Gov poll saying Con 39%, Lab 34% and Lib Dems 16% probably will actually be Con 39%, Lab 30% and Lib Dem’s 20% you also have to account for Labour tactical voting for the Lib Dems.
230. One of my favourite themes is the growing power of incumbancy arising from a politicised civil service, an ever icnreasing number of special advisors and polticos employed and funded by the State for the party in power, a politicised and vocal quangocracy and a National Broadcaster whose default position is “well what would you do differently?” It makes it very hard for even the Tories to get heard in a coherent way. It partially explains why the Lib Dems are in melt down. I am 48 and in only 1 election since I was allowed to vote has there been a change of Government. Hopefully this will be the second time but it is not going to be easy.
236: The actual fact of being domicle or not is a matter between ashcroft and HMRC. They’ve had ample opportuity to examine his case, so one should assume that he meets the fact of that issue.
Harry,
I thought the pound could not get any lower in Oz today than the all time level against the Oz dollar but I was wrong. This loss is on a par with a full crisis. The pound is POISON. Strong currencies like the Swedish Kroner also at all time highs as well.
Ludicrous and serious, and still no manufacturing export industry to speak about despite that financial benfit as a pick me up.
Spoke to my mate who dabbles at Westpac and he said significant foreign buying happening to prop the pound up late in the day, i.e. from abroad, maybe Britain, but like a finger in a dyke, only one outcome.
I told a mate who had 25k pounds in investments to move them at Xmas over to Oz, had he done so he would be about 15% better off. And it will not stop until it gets to about 70p to the dollar. half what it was earlier in the decade. The yen will actually be less than half what it just 2 years ago. 250 yen down to around 120 to the pound as a maximum by end March.
Brown may be in denial but the markets are speaking and they know how bad it really is. better announce the election as the debt needs to be repaid in foreign currency and pounds are just not doing it as well as Britain needs.
Now some are talking about this dog’s breakfast of a plan as costing around £600 per dog. Only the rich will be able to afford a dog. How many old people will no longer be able to have a companion. How many young struggling families children will no longer be able to have the pleasure of growing up with a dog?
Once again Labour propose regressive one size fits all measures. Once again Labour attacks the many to address an issue with the few and punishes the many because of the few. Once again Labour lives up to its manifesto ‘A Future Unfair For All’.
225 Tabman
thanks for the reply.
I can relate to a lot of what you say re core seat strategy, however it does say to me that the LDs are afraid to take risks. Unlike the last 3 elections there are more of the votes up for grabs as people are less loyal than in the past. The LDs appear to have too much focus on keeping what they have rather than expanding into new territory, to me the two are complementary rather than incompatible.
240: But tim say’s the falling pound is good for trade???
240 Good God thats awful. if we cannto export with such a weak pound it means something is fundamentally wrong with Britian as an economic nation
245 - How much does it cost in Wandsworth?
Graham Stuart (who he???) just ripped airhead Derbyshire apart. Looks like the Tories have finally decided to put the “enough about Ashcroft, what about Paul/Unite/etc?” into every interview.
238. I haven’t been their lately and it probably is very nice these days. I only picked it for its rather unique name.
250 LondonStatto
Graham Stuart was really good. Haven’t heard of him, who is he?
250 - “what about Paul/Unite/etc?” into every interview”
About time too, of course the BBC should not have to have been told this, it’s what being impartial should entail.
194/209: Well, I went over to help in Crewe and Nantwich, and one of the problems was that Gwynneth, for all her distinguished Westminster profile, had apparently done zero canvassing in her constituency. There were no records of it whatever.
That has…changed. The question is whether Labour voters in crewe had been motivated by their admiration for her independence of mind in chairing her Select Committee. That wasn’t my impression, but I was only there for a day. I think they were simply classic Labour voters minded to give us a by-election kicking.
249.
Wandsworth is better governed than the country, welcher.
It is slightly disturbing that our goods deficit has grown, despite Sterling being so weak.
10 year Gilt is back to a yield of 4.1%. Remember, each 0.1% increase in the yield is an approx £1,000,000,000 increase in the amount of interest we have to pay each year. Which itself is rising even if yields remain flat.
250/252
Graham Stuart…
http://www.grahamstuart.com/
236. There are lots of people living in the UK born in India of Indian parents who I suspect do not enjoy Paul’s privileged status. Why should he?
240 the non-pick up of exports with a falling pound plainly means we are just not up there any more for exporting stuff. The public sector has sucked too much life out of the producing sector. Back inthe 1970’s at leats the public sector helped with exports thorugh nationalised manufacturing now al it does is make pointless and damaging laws about dogs and ‘equalities’ . Massive cull needed of the public sector if we are ever to recover as a economic nation that can compete on the world stage
237 Jack W
I don’t think it will be one of two marginals. At the last election UKIP swung 30-35 seats away from the Tories. ( see Eastleigh !). A larger swing to non-big three parties will by itself create more marginals. Many of these smaller parties have a bigger funding problem than the LDs, so they are saving their cash until the campaign starts. However what they do have is clear no holds barred messages ( unlike big three fudge ) and keen party workers. It appeals to the anti-politics sentiment.
This dog tax thing will resignat far more than lord ashcroft. Im so annoyed with the idea. Its one of those policies which just reminds me why ive come to hate new labour so much. Why on earth should i have to insure my cavilier king charles spaniel (which is a toy breed) against hurting somebody?! its absolutely crazy. It like insisting people must take out car insurance for any remote-controlled cars they have.
Well labour, youve just lost 8m dog owners votes. And people are struggling enough to care for their pet dog’s at the moment, all this policy will result in is a surge in dogs being abandoned and giving to the animal shelters and ultimately destroyed. Ridiculous policy.
236 Actually Lord Paul is so confused he said: “I am born a domicile”.
Well. Aren’t we all?
225. Tabman - that’s a very sensible analysis.
Even at 20%, the Lib Dem coalition is not a particularly easy one to keep together. There’s a mixture of former SDP-type progressive professionals and ex-Labour voters in the suburban seats (think Richmond Park, Solihull), fairly traditional liberals in some rural seats (think Montgomeryshire and North Devon), students (or more precisely now recent graduates) and minority groups in the cities who switched to the party over Iraq (think Leeds North West and Brent East), and the disaffected Labour voters whom the party is now seeking to target (think Burnley and Newcastle East).
In a political climate like 2005, holding such a coalition together was not too difficult, but since Cameron took over the Tory party it has been clear that the Lib Dems needed to sharpen their approach. At the same time, as the party has grown (and as the economic situation has worsened) it has had to become more focussed about what it wants to achieve and how it plans to achieve it. Hence the growing pains of the past parliament, not helped by Clegg’s slightly off-the-cuff leadership style and apparent determination to “take on” the party over tuition fees and other issues.
258 one shoudl also ask why an indian born businessman shoudl have political influence in this country when he reatains his domicile in india?
Very interesting marginals poll (am posting in a quick tea break).
With Riddell’s comment that the swing is “1.5-2% larger in the marginals from 50-150″, it implies that a lead of around 6.9% will get the Tories to the threshold of a majority or just over the line (dependant on results from the Lib Dems and others).
With the 39/29/20 figures quoted by John O above, I make that a rewind figure of between 65% and 85% (depending on whether it’s 1.5 or 2%).
Labour need to push hard on the forced question and C2’s while retaining as many of the C1s as possible to minimise the rebound. The Tories need to keep/re-extend their lead on the forced vote, hang on to the C2s and make gains amongst the C1s to maximise the rebound (IMHO).
From the swing quoted and a quick look last night, it does appear that the figures refer to the 50-150 Labour-held targets (just targets 50-150 going to level pegging seemed to be about a 5.7% swing when I ran the figures last night), but populus will probably clarify - they’re usually very good at releasing the data quickly, I believe.
There will have been 4 or 5 Scottish Labour-held seats in that sample, I’d guess (glancing at the target seats list from Anthony Wells), but although there’d be some distortion because of that (due to expected Tory comparative underperformance north of the border), I doubt it would be at all sizeable.
252. wibbler.
MP for Beverley & Holderness. First elected 2005. I’d never heard of him either…
Right is Right (is right), and Harry is spot on, if Britain cannot export now then we never will.
In Oz they have huge respources of iron ore and uranium to boost the economy. The North Sea Oil saved Healey in the 70’s going to the IMF but I genuinely think that things are worse now.
Nobody wants to talk the country down but be realistic, nothing says Made In England anynore, except Patak curry sauces from Llancs which I admit I am partial to!
If Scotland went independent and the oil revenue ended tomorrow they would have to turn the lights out and declare the country bankrupt, and even that is not enough now.
245, if it does cost £600 then it’s not only unworkable but may lose some votes. A dog can be very cheap to buy, slapping on a huge mandatory cost like that won’t go down well.
I will always say, what started the polls moving against the Tories was the BBC OneShow Party Political Broadcast run by Labour activist Kaye Adams and Kevin Maguire of the Daily Mirror, on 14th January; the most perfect piece of political propaganda I have seen, chiming exactly with the Labour spin line (Tory toffs, millionaires and all the rest of it) but resonating with the public because most people viewed it as a piece of neutral reporting. Once the polls start moving, like a glacier they are difficult to stop. The Tories will hope that a two month campaign will make the glacier melt and even retreat.
245 - would not the insurance co actuaries sort this out? Harmless breeds would be cheap to insure, dangerous ones would be costly. Sounds good to me.
(Doggies always retort that there is no such thing as a “harmless” dog or a “dangerous” dog, it is all down to the owner; but the plain fact is that some dogs are physically capable of tearing your arm off and some aren’t; of the latter, some breeds are inclined to do so and some aren’t.)
Oh, and cyclists should be registered and insured too, btw. [Runs for cover.]
Personally I think all dog owners should be castrated. They breed to create new dog owners.
Problem solved in a lifetime…
270, no. The only Balls I want to see destroyed is Ed!
latter –> former
250 LondonStatto….about blinking time too! Its only taken a week….
269: Oh now cyclists….now you’re talking. Menance of the streets. Tax them…tax them all.
274. Caravan owners should be taxed £2000 per annum and any substandard caravan should be crushed at the roadside forthwith.
267. MD Indeed when you look at the vetinary costs as well Dogs can be extremely expensive. Imposing such laws is only going to punish the poor and vulnerable whilst further creating privilege for the rich.
In addition given the Government now owns part of the insurance industry (e.g. Prudential, Churchill and Direct Line brands are all part of RBS) the whole thing stinks of the Government swelling the coffers of its ‘pet’ banks.
Basically such ‘insurance’ is little more than another of Browns stealth taxes…..
Yougov data is up… And according to the tabled data the shares are as follows: Con 40; Lab 34.
MIKE, CAN YOU CHECK WHATS HAPPENED HERE? THE SUN REPORTED 39%; THE TABLED DATA REPORTING 40%.
On a seperate issue, yougov have excelled themselves this time!
Unweighted: Con 634; Lab 384
Weighted: Con 553; Lab 480
so a gap of 250 becam a gap of just 73. Incredible, just incredible. Percentage wise we get:
Unweighted: Con 45.4; Lab 27.5
http://www.yougov.co.uk/extranets/ygarchives/content/pdf/TheSun-results_08.03-trackers.pdf
246 - “I can relate to a lot of what you say re core seat strategy, however it does say to me that the LDs are afraid to take risks. Unlike the last 3 elections there are more of the votes up for grabs as people are less loyal than in the past. The LDs appear to have too much focus on keeping what they have rather than expanding into new territory, to me the two are complementary rather than incompatible.”
And therein lies the dilemma.
When resources (in both personnel and £) are tight, as they are for all parties (with the exception of the Tories and £ which means they can buy in people), you are faced with a difficult choice.
Do you take a risk with what you hold in order to expand, or try and retain what you’ve got, esepcailly when you know you’re being outspent 10 to 1?
Realistically, who is going to want to go down as the man who chased 100 seats and ended up with 20?
Re 277. vetinary = veterinary doh!
When people ask why the Lib Dems aren’t doing “better” you need to be clear about better than what? If its the 2005 share of the vote then fair enough the current ratings look weaker. However for the last 20 years the party would have killed for Anothy Wells poll average of 18% 2 months before an election. Is the Iraq result the base line or high water mark in peoples expectations?
264 - I don’t disagree with any of that.
“Trust punters not pollsters? It’s one of the daftest things I’ve heard” sorry if this has been posted already but its Mr kellner quoted in the Standard.
The question of credibility is looming large in the forthcoming GE.
The credibility of the election process itself.
The credibility of the polls and pollsters.
The credibility of Cameron and the Tories.
And the incredible incredulity of the voters of Britain wanting to vote back into power the most worthless but Stasi like government ever. A Labour government that has wrecked the economy and want’s to turn us into pawns and robots of the great socialist hell.
282: Does it matter? Either you’re looking to progress and improve, you’re not. If you’re not, then what’s the point of the Lib-Dems if you don’t want to form a government?
I have a question for you psephology boffins…the current best odds against a hung a parliament are around 7/4. I appreciate that if the Populus poll was borne out in an election today, that would probably be the most likely outcome. But this gives us no sense of how much volatility of result away with we could see around today’s best estimate, and still end up with the same result. In options terminology, I guess we are asking, how big is the Delta?
But what I am trying to grasp, in terms of all the conceivable vote shares that the general election could result in, what proportion of those vote share outcomes, or what percentage of them would result in a hung a parliament? The campaign has barely started, and the live tv debates represent a major possible source of volatility.
If they go ahead there is a good chance the polls could break decisively in favour of one candidate or another - but my question would be, even if there was a decisive break in the polls in terms of percentage overall vote share, what chance we are still in NOM territory?
To crystallise this rather rambling question: if you imagined all the concceivable Tory vote share outcomes for the coming general election, and attached a probability to each one and portrayed this information as a normal bell curve, what percentage of the area under the curve would result in a hung parliament? What are the lower and upper limits of Tory vote share percentage which would be more likely than not to lead to NOM? Feedback from the experts welcomed! Harry of http://www.elitebet.com & now http://www.autokeysquad.com/
280 Tabman
you are looking at it the wrong way IMO. This election profile is the most unsettled for a generation ( last time 1983 )if you can’t make progress now when will you ? You have too many H&S officers among your activists ! This has little to do with spend, there are large parts of the country where the opposition is Labour and they have no cash either.
Spectator 6 March (Brendan O’Neill): In Britain, there is an average of 2.3 fatalities a year due to being bitten or ’struck’ by a dog … about 10 people a year die in horse riding accidents.
Clearly we need a new law: if your horse’s passport isn’t up to date, we’ll crush your horse. All horses to be fitted with CCTV. A new inspectorate of dangerous horses to be created.
Surely ‘dangerous’ dogs are the preserve of English Democrats and non-voters and won’t yield any political capital. Cracking down on dangerous horses should play very well in the class war.
251
Now begins the selective use of e-mails.
Pick a few of the most ludicrous e-mails supporting Stuart and ‘balance’ them off against the ‘vast number’ of e-mails which support the BBC, denigrate Ashcroft, support Lord Paul etc.
279. That’s amazing. No, wait, not amazing. It’s bonkers. Have a word YouGov.
279: I’m truely amazed by those consitant adjustments. Thats a ‘undersample’ of labour by roughly 25%.
Wheres all those missing labour ids?
209. Plain wrong.
Crewe and Nantwich was one of the most startling results of the 1983 election. The addition of classic Tory Nantwich to industrial Crewe turned the seat notionally Tory with a majority of 3600. Then factor in the 4% Tory swing in 1983, and Dunwoody should have lost by 7,500 votes.
She won by 290…
286. That is a fair point, you are only as good as your last single etc etc. But the Lib Dems transparently aren’t going to form a government. They are engaged in a 3 pronged process between which there are tensions.
Firstly getting big enough to form a blocking minority big enough and strong enough to deliver a 1910 style crisis and proportionality.
Secondly transfering the efficency of its local government vote to westminster elections. Look at the percentage of councillors we get compared to the percentage of the local election vote and the same gap in Commons seat.
Thirdly turning its self into a proper political party rather than being the protest vote that harrods would sell you.
278. I’m surprised Labour haven’t considered public auto insurance. It would be a practical socialist policy and could play very well with young voters. And it appears to work in Saskatchewan.
(As a Liberal, I’m not convinced by it as a policy, but it would be a good political move for the Labour left.)
What the hell are Yougov up to?
Their published tables are different to the figures the media reports. What is going on??
Dog Tax? Either someone’s having a laugh, or Alan Johnson’s spending too much time sampling the contents of the Home Office drinks cabinet.
New Labour cannot enforce the existing 3000+ laws they’ve introduced, using their compliant goons in the police. let alone check every Tom,Dick and Rover for insurance documents and ID tags.
I look forward to the day when Officer Tim Bot of the UK Canine Revenue Compliance Force attempts to confiscate some savage beast from an angry Yardie on Moss Side. It’s going to be messy.
Trouble with exports and a falling £ is
1. there is usually a lag, when there was a similar devaluation in the £ in the early 1990s it took a year to 18 months for this to feed through to trade figures
2.You need a bouyant market to sell exports into. Unfortunately this is a global recession and our biggest trading partner the EU is showing almost no growth.
287. You could start by looking at this…
http://hungparliament2010.blogspot.com/2010/01/introducing-new-graph.html
288 - “This has little to do with spend, there are large parts of the country where the opposition is Labour and they have no cash either.”
Yes - but look at the majorities. In all but a handful of seats where the Lib Dems are second, they are way, way behind. Not near enough to eradicate the Labour folk-memory. As I’ve said before, the work should have been done in 2005 and wasn’t; “we are where we are”.
In particular, if the Tories are over the pschological 40% again then that is a big polling story in itself.
There is a big difference emotional difference between 39% and 40%…
294 YS
on that basis all your current activists will be dead. Your strategy says only you have no ambition to be a government. In somebody else’s maybe, but not one in your own right.
[106] - Morris Dancer, you can sign up online and it only takes a few minutes. Finally did it myself recently after much procrastination:
http://www.organdonation.nhs.uk/ukt/how_to_become_a_donor/registration/consent.jsp
279. That looks very fishy - perhaps it’s a mere clerical error.
Graham Stuart is a good chap. He was slaughtered while I was campaigning for him in Cambridge in 2001 but Beverley and Holderness should give him a long career.
He was always upbeat despite knowing he was in for a terrible stuffing in 2001.
279. So we have the Conservatives back on 40% and more importantly the largest net adjustment as a result of the Party ID Weighting from Conservative to Labour so far in this tracking series.
The Labour constant attacks on Lord Ashcroft are starting to backfire.
Lord Paul is now being investigated.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8303547.stm
292 - Labour are going to get stuffed and they will be as surprised as they were in 1992.
Mike…can you have a word with YouGov? Is the actual tory share 40 or 39? Only 1% but it makes a big difference, and makes the numbers even more strange. A 40/34 share means both the Lib-Dems and ‘others’ are definitly getting the squeeze.
261. Alanbrooke At the last election UKIP swung 30-35 seats away from the Tories.
What evidence have you got to substantiate that complete nonsense? Are you assuming that all UKIP voters would, in the absence of a UKIP candidate, have voted Conservative instead? Are you assuming that none of the UKIP voters in the previous election would have done so? If so, you is a booliak of utmost splenesterousness.
291. What i dont understand is how the sun have reported con at 39% when yougov actually found them at 40%. It works out at 39.56%.
E&W unweighted: con 48; lab 26
E&W weighted: con 42; lab 33
299 Tabman
except that the 2005 majorities are probably meaningless. The game has shifted based on the recession. If the BNP can walk away with 16+% in large parts of Northern England it says a large part of the “tribal” vote is no longer safe, the Tories will never pick this up, so who’s left ?
(A 40/34/16)means that ‘Others’ are down to 10%..which is nigh on the 2005 election level.
299 - I’ve ranked all the seats where LDs came second to Lab in 2005. As you can see, only 10 have a majority of 20%:
Edinburgh South .9
Islington South & Finsbury 1.6
Oxford East 2.3
Watford 2.3
Aberdeen South 3.2
Edinburgh North and Leith 5.0
Durham, City of 7.4
Oldham East & Saddleworth 8.3
Norwich South 8.7
Leicester South 8.8
Bradford North 10.2
Newcastle upon Tyne Central 11.1
Glasgow North 12.0
Swansea West 12.9
Derby South 13.0
Blaydon 13.7
Holborn & St Pancras 13.9
Liverpool, Wavertree 14.7
Burnley 14.8
Edinburgh East 15.6
East Lothian 16.6
Newcastle upon Tyne North 18.3
Streatham 18.4
Aberdeen North 18.5
Birmingham, Hodge Hill 19.2
Midlothian 19.3
Manchester, Gorton 19.9
Birmingham, Perry Barr 20.4
Birmingham, Ladywood 20.5
Liverpool, Garston 20.6
Leyton & Wanstead 20.6
Bristol East 20.7
Dulwich & West Norwood 21.0
Hartlepool 21.1
Islington North 21.3
Newport East 21.5
Wrexham 22.4
Nottingham East 23.1
Walthamstow 23.2
Sheffield, Central 23.5
Blyth Valley 23.8
Newcastle upon Tyne East & Wallsend 23.9
Huddersfield 23.9
Ealing Southall 24.3
Sheffield, Hillsborough 24.5
Hull North 24.8
Hackney North & Stoke Newington 25.3
St Helens South 26.2
Bristol South 26.3
Bishop Auckland 26.4
Vauxhall 26.7
Dunfermline and West Fife 27.3
Lanarck and Hamilton East 27.4
Glasgow South 28.2
Greenwich & Woolwich 28.5
Doncaster Central 28.5
Wansbeck 28.7
Glasgow North West 29.6
Glasgow Central 30.4
Lewisham West 31.1
Redcar 31.2
Hackney South & Shoreditch 31.7
Liverpool, Riverside 32.7
Pontypridd 33.3
Sheffield, Heeley 33.3
Manchester, Central 33.4
Hull West & Hessle 34.0
Durham North West 34.0
Paisley and Renfrewshire South 34.9
Stoke-on-Trent Central 35.0
Salford 35.2
St Helens North 35.6
Rotherham 35.6
Swansea East 36.5
Rutherglen and Hamilton West 37.2
Hull East 37.9
Leeds West 38.0
Brent South 38.1
Leeds East 38.5
Gateshead East & Washington West 38.7
Lewisham Deptford 38.9
Middlesbrough 39.1
Tyne Bridge 39.4
Leeds Central 40.7
South Shields 40.8
Jarrow 40.9
Tottenham 41.2
Barnsley East & Mexborough 42.8
Sheffield, Attercliffe 43.1
Manchester, Blackley 43.6
Knowsley North & Sefton East 43.9
Barnsley Central 44.5
Durham North 44.9
Ogmore 45.3
Aberavon 46.3
Houghton & Washington East 46.3
Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney 46.5
Camberwell & Peckham 46.5
Birkenhead 46.5
Bolsover 47.6
Knowsley South 48.5
Liverpool, West Derby 50.0
Sheffield, Brightside 55.4
Liverpool, Walton 57.1
Easington 58.5
Bootle 63.8
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8557200.stm
Trade figures “surprisingly” bad
On topic why does mike Smithson say
“It’s been computed by Anthony Wells at UKPR that this is the equivalent of a 10 point Tory national lead.
All this is going to provide real heart for Labour supporters and add to the jitters at Cameron towers”
But a 10-point lead would be heartening for the tories at this stage, no? They would take that on May 6th - a 10 point lead would surely give a working majority.
Lol…yougov have now changed it again down to 39!
I can’t imagine pitbull owning chavs stumping up for dog insurance, when they wouldn’t bother to get car insurance
309 JL
so you’re saying Farage is talking bollocks then ? Well I suppose it’s his right.
294 - The third one is the most difficult. It is hard to change from being a party shouting from the sidelines to being a party of government. Your sums suddenly have to add up and you can’t just play student politics sounding angry all the time.
Diverting resources from Eastleigh to Twickenham would be very sensible.
For an example of a young party caught in the headlights, see Labour 1924. For an example of a party doing OK after being thrust into the limelight see SNP 2007…
Glad I said that during the day, I’d not want to encourage them at night
312. Thats what the Sun has done. The totals round up to 101%. So they have taken the 1% off the Conservatives to get it add up to 100%.
hmmmmm?
So before YouGov’s voodoo, the Tories have a 22 point lead in England and Wales?
Under pressure, Mandy said a week ago that Labour’s big donors should make it clear if they were non-doms.
A week later, the BBC, etc appear not to have made any further enquiries on this point, either to the Labour Party, Sir Ronald Cohen (personal donor to Gordon Brown), M. Bollinger or the rest.
Can you imagine if it was the Tories who had taken their money?
313 - should have said only 10 have a majority of less than 10%, 17 have majorities between 10 and 20% and 79 have majorities greater than 20%.
So even a Lab - > LD swing of 10% would only just make up for potential losses. And that’s above a high water mark of 2005/Iraq and the much greater fear of the Tories in 2010.
The mathematics is against us this time.
315. Ah, a mere clerical error, as I thought.
Why not take 1% off ‘others’? Or Lib Dems - no one would notice
319 Indeed Yougov do seem to have morphed into voodoo pollsters…..
313 Tabman
and at some point in the past a similar list could have been made for the Tories ( Solihull FFS ) and yet seats have been won and consolidated. 2005 votes are not guarantees that 2010 will be the same.
279, an 18pt lead becomes 5pts (and should’ve been 6 apparently)? It’d be shocking, if we hadn’t had 14pters becoming 6pt leads.
284, maybe he’s annoyed with the way the Q&A went, and the increasing lack of faith here in YouGov.
302, darrr. I will at some point. Before I do, I’ll want to check and see what’s happened/happening to/with the opt-out plan.
315, so the pdf table thingy has been altered during the course of this thread?
Weren’t YouGov known as “AnythingforYouGov” when IDS first took them on as private pollsters?
So the Tories are supporting the Hillsborough deal but campaigning for and with candidates that oppose it.
And pissing off the Republican and the Democrats equally.
David Cameron and William Hague.
Never!Never!Never!
312 Others were 8% at last election.
326. Yep, its been altered! Im guessing what we can assume is the con number was 39.5%!
Yougov have now changed the PDF to say 39 again for the Conservatives!
326. I’ve saved down the original version.
From the YG tables, Con lead on everything except the NHS (-3) and unemployment (level). +6 on the economy.
332 jsfl
I too have a copy of the original. This is ridiculous. At the very least, it is incredibly unprofessional.
332, good stuff. But even with that, it’s a marginal change compared to the enormous weightings. Of course polls need some sort of weighting, otherwise they’d be prone to sampling errors all the time, but it seems that for YouGov the raw data bears increasingly little resemblance to the final results, and all the changes to methodology advantage Labour and disadvantage the Conservatives.
333. LS Then unwind the pro Labour weighting and ……
292. I was going to post something like that but you saved me the trouble!!!
The fact that Gwyneth achieved that result in 1983 despite the Tory tsunami that swept Britain that year tells you all you need to know about how well she was thought of in that part of the world!
Do we know anything about rounding in the Populus poll? As things are tight clearly if the actual figures were for example 37.6% rounded up and 38.4% rounded down it might make a significant difference to the number of seats each party won compared to 38% exactly.
I think another issue is profound ignorance ( sorry ) of how the Lib Dems build support for a party with no obvious demographic base and a small philosophical core. I was campaigning in one of the seats very close to the top of Tabmans list 20 years. I think we might do it this time but 20 years of building a local government base, beating the wasted vote arguement, squeezing the tories to death etc etc. The idea that you can just roll up in a Labour heartland and just talke votes of them with externally imposed resources just doesn’t work.
334. It’s a nonsense. IMHO Yougov are losing the plot.
339, Mr. Submarine, what’s your view regarding the Lib Dem prospects at the GE?
I used to think they’d get slaughtered, buyt not think 40-45 is roughly what they’ll end up with.
338. Norm.
We know that as a normally-sampled poll, reporting to decimal places is nonsensical given the margin of error.
Interesting that the latest Yougov unweighted Party ID figures are Con 31 Lab 25 LD 10 which is near identical to the latest BSAS survey (Con 32 Lab 25 LD 9).
Now the Party ID weightings provide a 6% swing from Con to Lab on these figures. Once again something must be wrong when the weightings are providing such a swing surely?
341, but now*
We are heading for a hung pollster ! (I will keep repeating this joke till somebody laughs)
343. Labour will poll 28% in GE max. Use this chaff to fill your boots at the bookies.
345 To save everyone else from such repeated cruelty. LOL!
346, is that including postal votes?
346. TGOHF.
To answer your question from yesterday, insufficient time and express political bias.
By my calculation the Tories have 39.57% and Labour 34.34% after taking out the don’t knows and the won’t votes (20% by the way-still very high). I really don’t understand why that would have been reported as 39:34.
I also agree that the weightings are absurd. If Labour supporters are that hard to find surely that is telling us something?
345: fr
I favour a hung parliament.
Err, sorry.
Oh and another thing to note in the unweighted sample in terms of Party ID. This Yougov poll had the largest number of Conservatives and the lowest number of Labour voters (loyal and disloyal combined). Just by looking at the figures (i.e. no calculations) it seems that this might be the lowest Labour loyal figure as well.
Where have all the Labour supporters gone?
339 YS
of course you can’t just roll up and take votes. However there is also the consideration that some elections present better prospects than others. It’ like driving down a winding road at 30 and then coming upon a straight bit. You can still drive at 30 or you can accelerate. The issue in a number of these seats is changing the tribal voting pattern. Get people to move their loyalty once and you open up the door for future gains. The number of times tribal voters will actively consider switching is fairly limited.
342:
Yes but we’re apparently happy to calculate swings of “6.7%” which are equally inaccurate and meaningless.
Surely quoting the decimal place at least pins down the centre of the 95% confidence interval accurately. If it was 37.6%, then the chance of the true figure being e.g. 40.0% are much smaller than if it was 38.4% originally.
Ah it’s only a bit of fun - in 8 weeks we will have the truth! Can’t wait.
(As long as labour lose like they deserve to…)
350 ‘If Labour supporters are that hard to find surely that is telling us something?’
Maybe they’re all out at work, in Browns booming economy?
325 - the point being that “at some point in the past” was a long long time ago. See Yellow Sub’s point at 339.
339 - exactly.
Has anyone else seen the hilarious ‘Is Cameron Thatcher or Heath?’ banner at the Spectator? It’s not just funny because of the morphing Dave, but also because the speakers on the Heath side are oh-so predictable; Heffer, Hitchens and MacKenzie.
357. I think Cameron is probably Cameron.
353 - OK, tell us how you’d do / have done it differently then.
Re YouGov, a few points to note following Anthony Wells response to my questions on Friday.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2489#comment-604326
Per para 3, in YouGov’s eyes, they haven’t changed their methodology. They previously controlled the Labour Loyal/Dis-Loyal split through their sampling, which they can’t do now under the new process from Sep 2009 onwards, and so they weight for it instead.
The fact they are having to reweight up massively for Labour Loyal, and the applicability of assuming that the “missing” 30% of the sample will vote the same as the core 70% needs further investigation.
My questions are more around the accuracy of their overall hard weighted ID splits, (e.g. Labour = 32%, 26% Loyal, 6% Dis-Loyal), and whether they will hold true in this particular election.
Therefore it’s slightly worrying per para 2 to see that Anthony Wells is not even privy to the how the original weighting proportions were set as they were done before he worked at YouGov. Understanding the original rationale for these is key to knowing whether the assumptions will hold true this time, especially as the current systemic under sampling of Loyal Labour ID’s seems to indicate they might not.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/09/january-trade-deficit-widens
Does anyone remember when it was customary for trade gap figures to be talked about on the news on an monthly basis?
I see Gabble has resigned from Total Politics.
http://www.totalpolitics.com/blogs/index.php/2010/03/08/denis-macshane-aamp-total-politics
The comments are quite amusing.
355. Ok I didn’t think of that. Still Tories work too don’t they (I mean the one’s not in Belize or in their country estates)?
356 Tabman
the reasons the LDs had so many gains from the Tories was they Tories made themselves unpopular and so lost voters. Labour has just done the same. The LDs have decided to play safe, but they are missing one of the best opportunities to become the second force in UK politics they are going to see. Their only other chance will be if Labour implodes after a GE.
353
I am surprised that in my seat of Hertford and Stortford the Lib Dems have seemingly done no campaigning whatsoever. Labour have a single councillor in East Herts, and the Lib Dems have quite a few, despite being 3rd in the last GE in the Westminster seat.
This seat is solid tory now (with a whopping swing Lab–>Con last time as well), but who knows what coud happen in a few years? There are several examples of seats in the South and SW where the tories held it for years, but the Liberals are now challenging or even have won. Surely the LDs should be campaiging hard to come 2nd this time even though they can’t win. If they are 2nd, then next time, if there’s an unpopular tory govt, or favourable boundary changes, whatever, they might get closer. And then in 2019/2020 or whenever, they might be in with a shout.
Yet they (and their candidate, sometime PB poster Andrew Lewin) are nowhere to be seen. Why?? Are they ALL in Watford or Cambridge?!
2005 notional:
Conservative: 24682 (50.3%)
Labour: 11859 (24.2%)
Liberal Democrat: 9059 (18.5%)
Other: 3480 (7.1%)
Majority: 12823 (26.1%) (C–> Lab swing 7.25%!!)
360. Caveman
Indeed it all boils down to whether that weighting is still valid or whether it is out of date (as BSAS suggests is possible). If it’s the latter then the whole poll is skewed….
354. Alanbrooke - I think it’s important to remember just how little coverage the Lib Dems get in the national media outside election times. Granted, they might have made better use of what they have had, but a broad assault on soft ex-Labour voters (outside target seats) can only really be made in an election campaign.
Traditional Labour loyalties clearly have been worn down to a significant extent (though not as much as Tories and Lib Dems sometimes hope). One of the challenges for Clegg in the election campaign is to persuade these ex-Labour voters that the Lib Dems are a plausible vehicle for their progressive beliefs.
342.
Not so. The process is known as “censoring”, and providing the point estimate to 1dp would slightly improve both the MOE and the confidence interval.
Until the late-1980s polls were usually published to show 1dp, and it’s a great pity that they stopped doing so.
Experiments with the KF show that censoring adds a further bit of noise to the estimate, usually around 0.2%…
Off topic. As well as dog owners taking out insurance, should the wielders of samurai swords be required to do the same? They appear to be even more dangerous. You never see owners of samurai swords chatting amiably in the park.
Police tackle samurai sword man in West Hampstead
361
I do…..Grim faced politicians saying, “The world does not owe us a living…..export or die….etc”
Johnson on sky telling us that cases of domestic violence have fallen by 64% since 1997.does he actually understand what that means?
“All this is going to provide real heart for Labour supporters and add to the jitters at Cameron towers. It’s also going to make the coming campaign that bit more exciting.”
Never mind Cameron Towers, it has got us on the ground more than a little jittery. For all the work we have put in for the past (in my case) five and a bit years, it could all be undone because the national party cannot get its arse into gear. If we lose this now, it will not be because those on the ground did not work or lacked belief, it will be the Millbank set who have to answer for it.
361
Only when people couldn’t be charged with: “Talking The Country Down”!
(the prosecution will be asking for the death penalty, m’lud)
362 ‘…or in their country estates’
Have Sean Woodward and Quentin Davies jumped ship again?
353. Before a rising tide can float all boats you have to have a boat to float. The reason the Lib Dems are only fightening 90 or so seats seriously isn’t because we have agrophobia. Its because thats all we have the resources to win. While I accept that brutal targeting is something of a cul de sac in the long term whats the plausible alternative? Go back to an Alliance style 26% of the vote accompnaied with an Alliance style 20 seats ?
Mr Morris Dancer. I don’t know. When ever I get my note book and pencil out and look at the lists it always comes out quite close to the spreads.
My feeling is that this campaign would have a very different feel to it if News International had commissioned ICM rather than You Gov.
I’m not a You Gov conspiracy theorist however it does seem to struggle with the Lib/Lab split
361. Yes. Part of the fantasy that we have lived for more than a decade is that the Trade figures don’t matter. A deficit shows either that we are consuming more than we are earning/producing or that there has been an equivalent capital investment (since that is the opposite of the Trade balance). Given that investment is at 30 year lows I think we can exclude the latter possibility. What this indicates is that we are not only loading our children with debt but also spending their inheritance by selling off assets in this country (Cadbury Shares being a recent example). To coin a phrase we can’t go on like this. Excess demand created by excess public expenditure is boosting consumption beyond what we can afford.
360: How I understand yougov is this.
Orginally, political pollings were sent out targetted to the required demographic. Obviously there was some limited need for weighting still on those figures.
Now, a much larger pool is used, where people sign in for ‘general polling’ and the political poll is the obtained from those which do that.
I cannot understand why their samples are so out, when in theory the second new method should select from a bigger pool.
Why this is on a consistent and political basis, I’m stumped, although the danger is that they are selecting ‘core’-voters much more and weighting them up over ‘labour, but flaky’, and overstating the labour share…
376. Its simple - yougov need a daily poll - they cant find enough previous labour supporters to poll - the reason for this is bad luck - move along nothing to see here.
130. An April 8 election would require a dissolution on Friday AND the budget to be delivered and enacted before then. I’d rate that at around 200/1.
361. As the monthly trade figures are wildly unreliable (the BoE now says it only considers the annual data worthy of inspection) it’s not too surprising no-one pays much attention.
More fundamentally, these data lost a lot of significance when we finally gave up trying to fix the pound at artificial levels.
353 Tabman
I think after the highs of the Gurkhas\Cable last year, Clegg should have been pushing harder to build the LD vote in Labour areas. He should have squeezed Labour in the same way Kennedy did to the Tories. Yes he risked losing some seats in the Tory areas but the incumbent effect would be a noticeable ally and gains would outweigh losses. The LDs have probably got the most attractive personal tax policy at present (before the others steal it ) and they are not the Tories which counts for a lot in many constituencies. If the LD s had consolidated votes at the 25% levels from last year they would be approaching this election in better shape. The “don’t waste a vote argument” is less convincing when you are looking successful and donors are more readily available.
378: No date for annoucement of the budget yet I see as well….tick tock.
378. David H.
I think you will find an April 8th election requires dissolution on Thursday (allowing for the two Easter Bank Holidays and St Paddy’s day, which is a holiday in NI)
The Tories thankfully equivocate on pet insurance - though not microchipping
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23813404-pets-would-be-dumped-if-insurance-was-compulsory.do
380 - I think lots of Tories think the Lib Dems should be going after Labour and lots of Labour people think they should be going after the Tories. The Lib Dems are probably more interested in implementing the best strategy for the Lib Dems though. Even if this differs from the advice so generously offered by the other parties.
Another reason to vote Blue
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2010/03/-the-guardian-faces-commercial-ruin-if-the-tories-win.html
Will the amendments to the Dangerous Dogs Act proposed by Alan Johnstone apply to politicians, pollsters and political pundits who have savaged the pound?
Our currency is lying wounded and bleeding in the corner of the exchanges. Pints of blood have been lost.
Who or what is to blame?
385
Johnstone = Johnson
The problem is the Lib-Dems went for the Anti-War vote in 2005, bringing in a lot of new voters to the party. They haven’t really done anything to look after them, or keep them onside, and as such, they’ll drift away either back to labour, or not vote at all.
Frankly, I’m suprised that Clegg hasn’t been bold on this issue, at least try to grab some headlines…what huge ‘bold’ things does he have?
If I was him, i’d at least gambled on somethng like ‘immediate withdraw of troops from Iraq and Afganistan…’
375. I notice Ken Clarke opposed a sensible Government suggestion that a two thirds shareholder majority (rather than the present simple majority) be required before UK PLCs are sold off to foreign bidders. Events at Cadburys since the Kraft takeover proves a great case in point as to why it should be made tougher for foreigners to buy up our UK companies. The only beneficiaries are the hedge funds who made a quick buck on the sale.
Pound now $1.4950.
tim, are you prepared to bite?
383 Neil
actually Neil I think it’s up to the LDs to decide how they want to run their campaign. My interest is in understanding why they are doing what they are doing. The observation that all opposition parties should be doing better is to me quite an important one. This could be one of those elections which has a sea change effect like 1979 or 1997, with large parts of the electorate undecided what to do. I am therefore puzzled why the opposition (all parties ) is not making more of the current climate.
384. Marvellous news.
Can somebody talk me through how to make sense of the YouGov tables.
39% Con of 1747 respondents = 681, yet YouGov suggests 634 unweighted and 553 weighted.
@364 I assure you we are about Jon! But some of the best campaign / shock swings are achieved under the radar…
If you fancy a chat, I will be on th campaign trail in BS town centre this coming Saturday morning!
Have you seen the Herts & Essex Observer over the past 2 weeks, we have had lots more positive coverage than the Tories…
And feel free to check out http://www.andrewlewin.co.uk!
390 - But you have no basis for supposing that your strategy would give them better results. You have a hunch. They have self-interest. That and their resources makes me think they are more likely to be correct.
Love this article about BBC 3 & 4, particularly the quote from the BBC shill:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/7398590/BBC-Three-and-BBC-Four-could-face-the-axe-under-the-Tories-says-shadow-culture-minister.html
“The run-up to any General Election is bound to generate controversy about the BBC and its governance. However, the Charter framework is explicitly designed to stop these issues becoming a political football, and to avoid ill-considered proposals which risk compromising the BBC’s independence.”
Love the argument that the BBC loves its independence and must not be a political football, while simultaneously calling the Tory proposals ‘ill-considered’.
392: The total respondants include ‘don’t knows’ and ‘won’t says’ so you can’t take the total figure and divide it. You would also need to know the ‘Others’ number, add to the lab, lib, con number to get the total expressing a political party.
394. On the other hand, their ‘decapitation strategy’ in 2005 was an embarrassing failure.
O/T http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/09/bill-define-election-brown-legacy
Polly rather massivly missing the point…I’m sure that electoral reform is much, much higher than measly things like ‘the economy’.
Question; why are the press so blinking lazy? I’m reading things like “It has been claimed the Tory peer may now stand down as the party’s deputy chairman after the general election” when I knew that was the case a month ago. It’s a great example of the press adding 2 and 2 and getting a big, sexy 5 - just so they can go ‘wooo, look at our awesome 5!’.
395 Neil
It’s their party and they do as they see fit. I notice however that electoral change points only come along about every 20 years or so. In these times voters are more willing to listen to other views, a lot of the rest of the time their minds are closed.
388. And he was right to do so. The answer to a lack of competitiveness is not to try and protect companies which are publically traded and therefore properly accountable to their shareholders. The answer is to cut consumption to what we actually earn as a nation. Once we have done that we will find that UK companies are taking over as many foreign businesses as are being bought here. That is called free trade and it is a good thing.
The idea that monthly variations or revisions in the balance of trade means you should pay no attention is absurd. Our annual trade deficits are huge. We cannot expect our wealth generators to get us out of this hole when all the Government does is impose higher taxes (NI beign a recent and particularly stupid example) and regulation. We need to make money as a nation. It may sound a bit ugly and capitalist but it is true.
400. I imagine (though I have no evidence) that the decapitation strategy was designed to fight an IDS-led Conservative Party. In circa 2002, before Iraq, it must have seemed a sensible strategy. Then Iraq gave the Lib Dems a genuine chance of a breakthrough in Labour areas as well, and IDS’s replacement with Howard made a Tory meltdown much less likely. This required a full-scale reorientation of Lib Dem resources (and strategy), which seems to have been only partially executed.
It is easy to forget what an effective campaign the Tories fought in 2005 in terms of getting their core vote out (and also distancing themselves from their Iraq votes). “Are you thinking what we’re thinking” wasn’t pretty, but it’s easy to see circumstances in which the Tories could have fallen below 30% at the 2005 election - to the benefit, primarily, of the Lib Dems.
401. It is to someone like her who is entirely immune from the economic pressures ordinary people might feel.
401
Looks like she’s back on the Absinthe…
sorry on 404 388 should now read 391. These numbers are getting as bad as Government statistics!
356 It is certainly the case that the swing in the national polls would only deliver a small number of seats from Labour to the Lib Dems.
BUT the national Lab to LD swing last time was 4.6% yet the LDs won a 14.5% swing in Hornsey & Wood Green, 8.7% in Cardiff Central, 12.1% in Islington South and 17.3% in Manchester Withington. There are many more examples besides these.
It was a similar story against the Tories in 1997.
The LDs seem to be capable of generating swings well above the UNS in seats they are targeting against the Government party.
406. We’re all in this together - all of us Guardian journo’s that is - see 384.
401. From that article:
“In the Lords the Conservatives will want to block it; as you would expect, not one Tory voted for electoral reform in the Commons. But Cameron should be careful of what he will be voting against. In this bill are all the Kelly reforms to the MPs’ expenses systems. Will Cameron vote them down? In this bill is the power to remove criminal peers – and the anti non-dom clause, requiring all MPs and peers to pay British tax. Will he vote against that, really? In the bill is also the final removal of hereditary peers. Does Cameron really want to face an election accused of supporting sleazy MPs expenses, hereditary peers and non-doms?”
Can the Lords pass SOME of the Bill which relates to the Kelly reforms and throw out the referendum stuff, or would they have to send it back to the HOC to have the Bill ammended and be passed all over again?
379 I thought you Gov’s database was in the hundreds of thousands. If so why can they find enough past Labour voters?
405. The decapitation strategy was the product of hubris, and the failure to amend it in the light of changed circumstances points to a notable lack of strategic nous - which still appears to exist.
395. Gadfly
First you need to deduct the Dont Knows / Will Not Vote (20% or 350)
and then do the calculation.
So weighted Conservative figures = 553/1397(1737-350)= 39.6%
And Unweighted Conservative figures = 634/1397 (1737-350) = 45.4%
412: A very good question. The difference before being that politcal polls were directly targeted, now they fish from a larger pool with the other polls for people.
Why there isn’t enough past labour voters? Who knows..
Thanks Slackbladder. I have it fathomed now.
YouGov data Did anybody save the PDF or take a screen shot of the first page of results before it got amended?
Please can you email me
Cheers
Anthony Wells has posted an update with some very useful info on the Opinium poll methodology:
Firstly, the fears about a panel of only 1,960 asked every week are thankfully unfounded – Opinium are drawing samples from their larger panel of 40,000 (so about the same size as Angus Reid’s).
Weighting is by gender, age, region, working status and social class – there doesn’t seem to be any political weighting, but the robustness of the samples has been tested on things like past vote and propensity to vote for the main parties, so presumably Opinium feel their samples are sufficiently politically representative to not require it.
There is a two stage voting intention question – “If there were a general election tomorrow, for which party would you vote?”, with prompting for the three main parties or “some other party” and then a second question for those who say other asking which other party people would vote for. There is no squeeze question or re-allocation of don’t knows – an aproach that is broadly similar to YouGov.
The topline voting intention figures include all those who say they would “definitely” or “probably” vote in a general election tomorrow (which sets Opinium aside from the other online pollsters, neither YouGov nor Angus Reid have a likelihood to vote filter).
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2497
NOM moving in again on Betfair. Tory majority moving out…
Thanks also to jsfl for his very helpful input.
BenM if you’re in. My straw poll at work today on the simple question of “do you think crime in the last 5 years has gone up or down” is currently running 2 to 1 in favour of crime has gone up. This is more prevalent in the less educated and several people have mentioned John Venables to back up their view. Therefore bleat away about the British Crime Survey as it’ll do you no good.
417, at least two chaps here did [alas, I was't one of them].
419. I’m waiting for the flip-flop - day before the budget..
Could one of the wise men (or women) of PB please answer my question at 411?
Oh dear:
The UK’s goods trade deficit with the rest of the world unexpectedly widened to its biggest since August 2008 in January.
And exports saw their sharpest drop in more than three years, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The UK’s trade gap in physical goods widened to £7.99bn ($12bn), well above the £7bn forecast by economists.
The news was disappointing, especially since the weak pound might have been expected to boost sales abroad.
The UK’s currency has fallen by some 24% against a basket of world currencies since early 2007 - before the global economic crisis.
————————-
Oh dear, oh dear:
Further rises in house prices may be held back by more properties coming on to the market, surveyors have said.
The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (Rics) says new instructions outpaced inquiries from new buyers in February.
It was the second month in a row that this had happened.
————————-
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
Retail sales bounced back in February after a tough January on the High Street, figures from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) showed.
Like-for-like sales were up 2.2%, the BRC said, compared the 0.7% fall seen in January, when snow put off shoppers.
The rise was greeted with caution, however, as sales for this February compare with very weak trading in February last year.
Food sales were also sluggish, growing at their slowest rate since 2007.
“Despite appearances, these results are not that strong,” commented Stephen Robertson, director general of the BRC.
‘No more boom and bust’.
If anybody wants a really useful screen capture program then try Fscapture.exe
It’s small and freeware so I’m happy to email a copy to anybody who wants it.
339,343,348,376 Re Lib Dem prospects.
My money is in the 40-49 seat range.I expect final vote shares of
Con 41%,Lab 28% Lib 21% with a loss of up to 25 seats to the Tories and a handful of gains from Labour.
Quite rightly the strategy is seats rather than share with concentration of resouces.Bluntly there are 500 seats where the Lib Dems have no chance.
425 - Marcus.
Have you used ant Ashcroft money in your constituency, as its an non issue and all.
428 c’mon Tim you can do better than that..
428, tim, do you happen to know in which constituencies Unite is pouring money, and how much of taxpayer’s money the Government has given to Unite during the course of the Parliament?
There seems to have been a definite shift in momentum in the last few days IMO with some helpful narrative for the Tories in a number of areas.
1. Brown looks defensive on MOD funding in the light of attacks on him by senior Forces people.
2. Brown’s visit to Afghanistan looked cynical even if it was pre-planned.
3. IOD and CBI views on the timing of cuts is helpful to Tories.
4. Grayling being vindicated on crime stats chimes with public unease on Venables.
5. Spotlight on Ashcroft reduces as Paul/Mittal etc come under scrutiny.
6. ICM and Populus polls seem to take us back to 40/30 or thereabouts.
All in all, despite the Tory wobbling, not much cheer for Labour in this lot despite MacGuire and Whelan ramping.
417 Mike Smithson
Have emailed you the original Yougov PDF
385 - You do realise the Tory policy is to microchip cats as well.
433 tim
That’s why I said they are not equivocating on microchipping in the very post you refer to.
428 tim, are you surveying where the Unite money is being as well? Just for balance of course.
Careful lads - Tim may well be paid by UNITE. Can’t expect him to slag off his bosses.
433. Would that include chipping Gordon Brown, as he was reported to be the son of a Manx in a newspaper article yesterday?
343 - Microwaving cats with chips?
38 Wow Drollery…
437 - We apparently the Tories have Andrew Rosindell MP - Front Bench Animal Welfare
Presumably his role is to follow Grayling Hague and Lansley around with a scooper hoping no one will notice the mess.
On the subject of the Lib Dems and their GE strategy we do need to consider that in 2005 Kennedy said publicly that they had no alliance with Labour and he then pursued the infamous decapitation strategy against the Conservatives. A couple of years later Ming admitted that the LD campaign manager Razzall was in constant contact with Labour’s campaign team co-ordinating a joint strategy.
Going into this GE it is much the same. Publicly the LDs state that they have no alliance with Labour meanwhile most of their £ and people are focused on fighting the Conservatives. Behind the scenes the reliable Peter Oborne reports that discussions are underway between Labour and the Lib Dems over election and coalition strategy.
Just follow the money to see where the Lib Dems are heading.
The problem I have with YouGov is that it seems to be at odds with what other polls are telling us about respective loyalty of past voters.
The ICM poll on Sunday said that of 2005 voters, people intending to vote Conservative were drawn from 90% of 2005 Cons voters, 15% of 2005 Lab voters and 18% of Lib Dems, which would indicate that of 2005 voters 39% now intended to vote Conservative.
Labour support from 2005 voters was drawn 69% of 2005 Labour voters, 1% of Cons and 19% of Lib Dems = of 2005 voters 29% intended to vote Labour
for Lib Dems its 58% of 2005 LD voters, 5% of 2005 Cons voters and 8% of Labour = 18% of 2005 voters.
39:29:18 wasn’t that far from the published 40:31:18 figure after adjustments/weighting.
ICM are telling us that of “Loyal Labour” only 69% intend to stay loyal with the remaining 31% going 15% to Cons, 8% to Lib Dems, 2% to SNP, 3% to UKIP and 3% to Greens. In return they are getting back 2005 disloyal and other voters coming from 19% of Lib Dem voters and 1% of Cons plus an unknown but probably small number of other voters.
Yet YouGov indicates a nett loss of only 2 points from the 36% gained at last election - really need to see a break back of voting intention against party ID in the YouGov to understand the differing messages.
377. That would also explain the falling pound. It’s not just expectations and speculation driving prices.
384. I’d forgotten about that. Probably a 500/1 shot then!
40 Unbelievable… more of it and its getting better.
In the absence of any hard data, I think I can confirm that the question of which seats were polled is pointing towards 51-150 of Labour-held target seats (ie 67-195 on Anthony Well’s target list).
If it was seats 51-150 of the target list, looking at Labour-held only, swing required is an average 5.55%. This would imply (assuming a 6.7% average swing) a Conservative lead of approximately 2.3% on average.
If it was seats 67-195 (the 51st to the 150th Labour-held list in the target list), average swing required would be 7.07%. Which would imply that - on average - if the recorded swing was 6.7%, Labour should be ahead by about 0.7% - which seems pretty close to the figures Peter Riddell has quoted.
So the seats in question would have been the Labour-held seats between (approximately) Bedford and Arfon.
Apologies if all this has already been cleared up - only have a few minutes online and not enough time to read the entire thread.
Dear Tim
Ashcroft money? No.
Tens of thousands of generously donated and freely volunteered money from hundreds of donors nationwide? Yes.
And I am proud of it.
I need every penny of it to combat the roughly £2,000,000 in office costs, staff and communications allowances gifted to my opposite number since 2001 by your Labour friends. Yours is a Government that gerrymandered the expenses system to make it far harder for opponents to dislodge sitting MP’s as well as feathering their own nests.
Brown was busy Nationalising party funding by stealth, and he would have got away with it if it hadn’t been for MP’s greed and your own freedom of information act.
442. Good post Ted
I should have said in my post above “the roughly £2,000,000 in office costs, staff and communications allowances gifted to my opposite number since 2001 by your Labour party through corrupting the expenses system.”
#392 Interesting from YouGov - the largest the sample can be less don’t knows/refused etc is 1400 in order to support the Lib Dems on 16% - in this case they are 217/1400 which is exactly 15.5%.
The Conservatives are then on 553/1400 which is 39.5% exactly.
In both cases the numbers should round to 16% and 40%.
Another way of looking at is 217 is a minimum of 15.5%.
And 553/217 x 15.5% = 39.5% [again exactly].
So if YouGov want another go - can I suggest changing the 553 to 552 or the 217 to 218 - that should make it consistent.
The lack of Budget date announcement is interesting. I was rather expecting an announcement today for 24th, although I guess maybe tomorrow would still leave two weeks - which has to be around the miniumum notice period. If it’s not announced tomorrow I guess that means after the easter recess? But that squeezes 6th may as an election date. It’s all mightily odd. Hard to see that they will decide not to have a budget and equally hard to see that they will move the local elections. I’m somewhat baffled.
396 Andrew Lewin
Sadly I am away this weekend
No mailshots at all though, not even a dodgy bar chart…and I have mostly been following the car crash that is Bishops Stortford FC not the local politics I must admit. Front page has been about the mega-school stitch-up lately - what’s your view?
Will you come second?
442 ‘meanwhile most of their £ and people are focused on fighting the Conservatives’
And your evidence for that statement is?
A new EU treaty? I see trouble ahead
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100029209/a-new-eu-treaty-i-see-trouble-ahead/
447 - Pleased to hear it Marcus, and I hope all candidates will be so honest.
Although the roughly £2,000,000 in office costs, staff and communications allowances gifted to my opposite number since 2001 by your Labour party through corrupting the expenses system.”
Your pledge not to take staff and office costs describing them as corrupt is a brave and unusual pledge to the people of Torbay.
450, Sorry to be a pedant, but 553/217 = 39.24%
“This could be one of those elections which has a sea change effect like 1979 or 1997, with large parts of the electorate undecided what to do. I am therefore puzzled why the opposition (all parties ) is not making more of the current climate.”
Another large part of this is fragementation. Many people now have no engagement with politics whatsoever.
55 Tim… Tim… Tim… What a prat.
454 wibbler - That is really excellent news if true. It would give Cameron an immediate lever to grab back some powers.
If not that one, another will turn up.
Just a question of waiting. They’ll need something at some time in the next few years.
456 try again
426: Marcus Wood
Sadly that is a stereotypically “nasty party” post - very disappointing. How is crowing about the economy going to help you? Yes it’s worse than the government pretends, yes things are bleak and the “recovery” meme is on thin ice to say the least, but you do yourself no favours by laughing about it.
What voters want to hear is what you tories would do about it, do differently.
I am currently praying Brown is kicked out because he is awful, in denial, economically clueless and you lot can’t be any worse. However, something a bit more solid to go on would be nice.
Have you seen the polls? You cannot coast to victory I’m afraid.
Perhaps you would like to read post #374 by Danko.
444 David H - So, safe to lay April yet?
460. DOH.. is there a delete button to hide my embarrassment?
From James Kirkup in Telegraph
“from Fitch, one of the ratings agencies* that have a scary amount of influence over the UK’s economic future. The Fitch view: the UK Government plan to cut the defict is “pedestrian” and “too slow.” Cut more, cut sooner.”
With the Trade figures it will just add to pressure on the £.
I hope Huhne is right because otherwise he is in for the “mother of all kickings”
Huhne ‘not aware’ of being backed by any non-dom donors
455. all candidates honest Tim.
What like Blair’s dodgy War?
Like Campbell’s dodgy dossier?
Like Mandelson’s dodgy mortgage?
Like Brown’s bullying?
Like Prescott’s dodgy fist?
Like Harman dodgy equality bill?
Like Labour’s support of Ian Blair in shooting an innocent man?
IMO Labour definitely have the odds on the Tories as regards organisation. Someone here talked about Great Yarmouth. Well next door in Lowestoft ( the Waveney seat ) the Tories are absolutely dreadful - really the Tories should have that seat as well. People debate about Thatcher but her ability to run a party was piss - poor.Brown can’t run the UK but he can certainly run a party - all those years in student politics weren’t wasted on him.
465. This is presumably the same excuse we had re. Michael Brown, no?
466 - The main story today is YouGovs methodology.
Not the Unionist Tory Unionist mess.
So Huhne is saying he doesn’t check where his donations come from. I find that…hard to believe.
455. You are trying to be too clever by half, Tim.
I have indeed long ago pledged not to take the communications allowance, not to employ friends or family on the taxpayer, and that if I do hire anyone on the public purse to do so with a transparent application and interview process open to all, I have also pledged not just to publish ‘expenses’ but put up a full monthly ‘company account’ of every penny of public money I spend, so that constituents can challenge *anything* on there be it the cost of the photocopier contract or how much is spent on teabags.
I have also pledged not to rent an office from my local Conservative Association.
I am also totally confident I can run a first class constituency service for a *fraction* of what is being spent on supposedly ‘non political’ activity by the current incumbent who enjoys the taxpayer-funded services of his wife, his best mate (also picking up £12k from taxpayers as the Lib Dem leader on Torbay council) and at least three other staff, and who rents his ‘office’ in a property the local Lib Dems own.
468, unionist Tory unionist?
Thanks for telling us all what the big story is today, timmy. We’ll be sure to consult you in future.
Still feeling good about the Tories matching Labour in target seats 51-150?
Con gain Morley & Outwood!
469. astateofdenmark - do you also find it very hard to believe that William Hague and David Cameron did not know Lord Ashcroft was a non dom?
462. Yes. I’ve already done so.
By my reckoning, the first realistic election date now is April 22: announcement of budget date today / tomorrow, budget next Wednesday (17th), Finance Act rushed through and ‘wash-up’ legislation cleared in time for a dissolution on March 26th. However, that’s only two weeks before the local elections and it will be almost impossible to bring them forward by an Order in Council as it would place intolerable pressures on local election offices (and I think the timeframe for locals is longer than that for general elections).
In addition, as most of this year’s locals are in more Labour-inclined areas (the Mets), the disruption to Labour’s campaign would likely be greater than that to the Tories’ were the two dates to be so close or were the locals to be moved forward.
472
Do you believe Huhne doesn’t check where his donations come from?
471. This will be tim’s story of the next few days, constantly repeated with slightly different wording, always aimed at making out the guardians hysterical article contains nothing but FACT!
370 Marcus Wood on top form today , smearung his local LibDem MP and running down the economy of this country in a previous post . Positive campaigning at it’s best . Clearly all not going well with the Conservative campaign in Torbay to go completely negative .
476 oops refers to 470 .
376 Mark Senior…isnt it ime for your nap..
476
Just taking tips from Chris Huhne’s relentless negative campaigning.
Huhne is also a hypocrite to boot.
470 thats shut tim up!!
toenails - its cos all the Tories hate Ashcroft too is why I focused on him for 10 days..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/03/nondom_donor_lords.html
“But the added factor which has made Ashcroft’s position so explosive is the fact that he’s made so many enemies - not just in the parties he’s trying to defeat but on his own side where many resent him throwing his weight about and in the media too - thanks to his keenness to turn to lawyers to sort out his disputes. “
468 tim, the UUP votes are not required to pass the issue, Cameron had a productive call with George Bush. Non story as unfortunately NI politics bore the mainland voter.
YouGov are currently driving narrative and betting markets; more understanding of possible issues with their polls could point to opportunities and this is a betting site.
If you wander if there is any truth in the Bullygate affair just watch this clip of Gordon Brown at Sky News.
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=VLYIQnpMQ_Y&feature=related
Ah yes, the Lib Dems’ decapitation strategy. A blast from the past. I think they got carried away with their by-election successes at the time and believed that could take any seat if only they put their mind to it.
476 Clearly not going well… Do you have any evidence for this assetion? Are you campaigning in Torbay? Do you have a specific insight? If so, pleaase share it with us.
473 Thanks David. I agree; the idea of holding an election just a couple of weeks before the locals is a non-starter.
484 yes! -The lib dems who stare at seats!!
478 Miss Nightshade 14.30 at Exeter has a favourite’s chance
461 Jon C - Laughing about it? Get real.
I have property, I have loans, and both my wife and I have a business each; businesses that depend on a reasonably buoyant economy to be able to pay their way and pay us. The prospect of a double dip fills millions of people in business -all who have debts, personal guarantees, mortgages and all the rest of it at stake - with utter dread; myself included.
I am old enough to remember the agony we went through to set this country straight after the last Labour party left us bankrupt following their last ‘dash for growth’ fiscal stimuli.
I am heartily sick of being told by Labour spinners that the economy is alright - it is perilously close to melt-down. I also don’t agree that telling it like it is is being ‘nasty’.
“Markets crash after Tory PPC for Torbay talks down economy”
Tomorrows FT headline (guest editor Mark Senior)
476 - Marcus Wood claims that the Lib Dem Council leader is on the MP’s payroll.
Is that true?
I can’t see his name on the MPs register of Interests.
My continued prediction of a “Double Dip” expenses scandal is largely based on what you can get away with quite legally on MP’s office expenses. Marcus Wood sets out the main issues quite well.
491 read it again tim.he didnt say that..
493. Never stopped tim before.
489 Go Marcus! Plain speaking is something we are very short of in politics.
492
The Lib Dems give their people a handy guide to milking the system for political gain. One of the more memorable phrases is ‘be innovative’. Sarah Teather got caught out recently.
Lib Dems are also the original Tithers. Increase allowances, so that Cowley Street can rake in an increased amount. Whiter than white are the Lib Dems.
489 With property , loans , a business each for your wife and youeself you clearly have no time to be a full time MP though I am sure you would welcome the salary and expenses .
Complaints about “running down the economy” ring about as true as wartime regulations against defeatism - “no-one would be defeatest if we weren’t being fscking defeated”, as I almost read in a book.
They ring even hollower from someone who cliamed there wouldn’t be a recession as recessions only happen under the Tories.
489. Go get em Marcus….
489 - The agony was much worse for the average individuals under Lamont in 1992 - interest rates at 15% and re-possessions double what they are now - but ` no regrets ` .
493 - the current incumbent who enjoys the taxpayer-funded services of his wife, his best mate (also picking up £12k from taxpayers as the Lib Dem leader on Torbay council)
Doesn’t he?
“I am heartily sick of being told by Labour spinners that the economy is alright - it is perilously close to melt-down.”
On this (if on little else) I agree with Marcus Wood entirely.
476…. Mark, it’s going to be a dirty campaign; probably the dirtiest ever in modern times.
Get used to it. You know the old proverb: “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”.
491 The guy is both leader of the Lib Dem group on Torbay council and he is also a paid member of the MP’s staff
http://www.torbay.gov.uk/doi-darling-stephen.doc
496 Another Tory poster another smearer .
490. No sillier than some FT headlines
503 Or even the trouser press
Mark Senior doing his bit to raise the LD image I see.
497
Chris Huhne has a property empire. Do you think he has time to be an MP?
501
No he didnt tim, wouldn’t the leader of a Council be funded by taxpayers money??
Yes, charming chap is Adrian Sanders MP whom Marcus is opposing in Torbay. Who can forget the blog post by Julian H, who alas has forsaken pbc for other pastures.
http://orangebyname.blogspot.com/2008/09/exclusive-eye-witness-account-of-adrian_16.html
504
Yet you haven’t denied a single thing in the post.
How many Lib Dem councillors are allowed to opt out of tithing?
491: Why would it tim?
http://www.torbay.gov.uk/doi-darling-stephen.doc
look there…
500. You have to factor in average house prices and average income to make that a valid argument.
When you do you’ll find an epic fail.
507 Well at least the Libdem image is not in the gutter wher Marcus Wood lives .
tim, if you look on the torbay website, under members interests it gives who each councellor works for. Under Mr Steve Darling it lists the current Torbay MP and ‘case worker’
513 - Mark - 16%
No give it some thought as to why.
501 Tim see here
http://www.torbay.gov.uk/doi-darling-stephen.doc
where he lists his ‘other’ job working for the MP.
Mark Senior, you will have to try another line of attack I am afraid. I long ago promised to step down from my company if elected and work full time as an MP.
It looks as if the NI stuff tim was keen on is part of a concerted Labour black operation:
‘…the criticism being pushed around by Labour and its chums [is] that Dave is somehow unpicking the devolution deal by snubbing the DUP in favour of the UUP. They claim he has abandoned the ‘even handed’ approach adopted by John Major (quite why his successor should follow Irish politics to the extremes is not explained).’
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100029188/george-bush-reassured-by-david-cameron/
611 You did not give any proof of your smear against Sarah Teather .
509 - But Marcus makes his allegation clear.
enjoys the taxpayer-funded services of his wife, his best mate (also picking up £12k from taxpayers as the Lib Dem leader on Torbay council)
A very serious allegation, as the leader of the Lib Dems on Torbay Council is apparently a man who does not appear on the MP’s register of members interests.
501 - That will be his various Council allowances. So, no, Marcus didn’t!
I see Tim is not disputing that the Torbay MP employs his wife though on taxpayer funds. This practice I find distasteful tbh how can MPs set employment law with strict observances for interviews etc and then employ their wife as their assistant . I wonder how many people were interviewed for her job?
RE 513.
Is this Mark Senior’s
ner ner ne-ner ner moment?
Of course living off the proceeds of crime or off non doms tax avoidance keeps the Libdems out of the gutter doesn’t it?
513 Are you still up Mark
516. Not a very good operation, only the guardian has bitten, and it’s article is so hysterical as to be funny.
517 - You seem very exercised by smears against Lib Dem MPs but not at all reluctant to smear others yourself.
I see Mr Robinson is getting yet another kicking in the comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/03/nondom_donor_lords.html#comments
519: the leader of torbay city council, a Mr Steve Darling has within his own interest that he works for the Lib Dem MP as a ‘case worker’.
you’re getting it the wrong way around.
513 - Or physically in the gutter as Mark Littlewood was when assaulted by Adrian Sanders.
524 I have not smeared anyone .
526 so if steve darling is employed by the torbay MP and its not on his members interests is the torbay MP committing an offence?
Perhaps Tim needs to complain
203/189
Norwich North: Labour 2/1 (Bet365) BETFAIR 3.3
C&N: Labour 7/4 (Ladbrokes, Hills) BETFAIR 2.9
Broxtowe: Labour 7/2 (Hills) BETFAIR 6.2
There are decent odds on Betfair on virtually every seat now, with some fascinating 3 way battles:
Norwich South (4 way), Derby North, Edinburgh South, Poplar, Aberdeen South, Brighton Pavilion, Hampstead are really exciting.
528 you seem to think that marcus will not be a full time MP Mark Senior. That is a smear and unproven I would suggest . don’t be a hypocrite
524 You are doing a cracking job on yourself…too tired maybe
287 bazz
Just seen your very interesting question.
There will be many more qualified than me to answer it here but the best way to get a feel might be heuristically. You can play with the various seat calculators with various vote shares (UNS or not), and look down the list of Tory target seats as listed on UK Polling Report.
529 Don’t be so foolish
Ted at 443: You’re making the same assumption as VIPA, that all that matters is the people who voted in 2005. This disregards the effect of people dying (or emigrating) and coming of age (or immigrating), so a straight comparison of gains and losses is misleading.
Marcus Wood’s condemnation of the Comms Allowance skirts over the fact that it’s been enthusiastically used by Tories from David Cameron downwards. I think there’s a legit role for it - the problem has been that it wasn’t limited to factual info on local issues unrelated to popularising the MP. That said, it’s for the chop anyway as one of the reform decisions, so he can safely promise not to use it.
529, if he engages in the verbal equivalent of fellatio he can’t complain if everyone calls him Brown’s bitch.
Waugh reminds us that Lord Paul non-dom exploits are not the only feature of his time in the House Of Lords……
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/03/former-mi5-chief-to-probe-lord-paul.html
501: “Doesn’t he?”"
No.
Sylvia Heal standing down
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/8557720.stm
537 refers to 535 under new numbering
526 - Possibly. All I am saying is that Steve Darling will be getting several thousand pounds in Council-related allowances, particularly if he is a Chairman of Committee. If he is also paid by Adrian Sanders as a case worker, that is a separate matter and he may be obliged to declare that income in the Council’s own register of interests.
I cannot find 1, not 1 person here in one of the highest unemployment towns in the UK who will vote Labour and very few who will keep the LibDem MP here in his job. A very big tory win will happen here in the South West, and that is without any spin regarding councillor/MP fiddles.
new thread
528 - I would suggest you reread your posts at 497 and 513 and then invest in a dictionary.
Mark Senior: we all know you’re a deeply unpleasant human. There’s no need to attempt to prove it every opportunity, we get the point.
Torbay local newspaper has been lookin in to Marcus’ funding:
http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/Bay-hopeful-used-cash-peer-s-war-chest/article-1891908-detail/article.html
Gilt costs up, exchange rate against main currencies in free fall, everything costing more than last week, and last week was more than the week before. No solution and few exports even with the pound at all time lows.
It is time the IMF were called. I think evn Greece are better off marginally. At least their government admits they are rooted and are not still in denial.
Any budget now cannot be based on reality with full PFI disclosure. If only the tanks could be rumbling along Downing Street, hopefully with Joanna Lumley to take over and sack the lot of them in the Commons and the Lords. That would do me.
A lot of people would like to serve under Joanna Lumley, not just me I would venture.
550,me to.
Nick I think you have read this wrong.
194/209: Well, I went over to help in Crewe and Nantwich, and one of the problems was that Gwynneth, for all her distinguished Westminster profile, had apparently done zero canvassing in her constituency. There were no records of it whatever.
That has…changed. The question is whether Labour voters in crewe had been motivated by their admiration for her independence of mind in chairing her Select Committee. That wasn’t my impression, but I was only there for a day. I think they were simply classic Labour voters minded to give us a by-election kicking.
by Nick Palmer MP March 9th, 2010 at 10:23 am
My sister lives in Crewe, and Crewe has changed a lot from the Old railway town that it was, to a town with lots of new housing estates, and people there that do not think as their fathers did.
They did not like Dunwoody daughter who came in saying she was a local, or her life style. The Tory guy there has gone down well, he may be rich, but seems a good local MP.
I think he has a very good chance of holding Crewe.
Re 386 Dog insurance.Typical Labour approach -sledgehammer to crack a walnut.
The problem- A few dog breeds some allegedly popular with criminals are boosting number of dog attacks.Labours solution. let all dog owners pay for insurance.That probably means all other dog owners since if there is a breed /crinality link these owners wont be bothering about insurance.
Proper solution.For specific breeds have a heavy mandatory insurance paid at time of buying,plus savage fines for any attacks including liability for damage/ injury.
I agree with those that say this marginals poll is good for the Tories. From canvassing I am also detecting a significant number of people that start off saying they may not vote Conservative or may vote Labour but with very little discussion then say they will vote Conservative. I’ve not seen that before in the same way or to the same degree it is manifesting itself this time. I wonder if the expenses saga and other issues is leading to a set of people who actually do vote (rather than those that play hard to get but don’t vote) but want to rock the boat a bit. The right sort of questions might tease out the numbers on this group but ordinary polling might not be picking them up much.
Perhaps punters are waiting for the budget before being prepared to accept the hung parliament narrative.