Apology to ICM
January 27th, 2006In the article on the Guardian ICM poll on Tuesday I made certain comments in relation to getting data from the pollster ICM about a poll in the News of the World earlier in the month. I said that I had requested the full data-set which had not been forthcoming. It now transpires that the email address I used to contact Nick Sparrow of the firm was incorrect and did not get delivered.
I also made the statement “ICM is by far the worst of the pollsters when it comes to transparency and its main client, the Guardian, ought to put pressure on. Maybe this is something that the paper’s Jackie Ashley ought to take up?” I withdraw unreservedly this and all the other critical comments about the pollster that appeared. I fully accept that my observation about ICM being the “worst of the pollsters” was wrong and went far beyond normal comment.
The article has now been amended and all the critical comments have been deleted.
My full apologies to the firm and its head, Nick Sparrow.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Can’t get much more fulsome than that (trust Sue, Grabbit and Runne weren’t on the case ;))
That word ‘fulsome’ is a dangerous one. It’s not another word for full.
2 - Ooops, sloppy me…you’re absolutely correct
It’s right for Mike to apologise profusely (with whatever encouragement), since he hadn’t asked for the data as he thought and said he had.
However, it remains true that ICM does not always publish full data when they are supposed to. Though (as Mike always points out) they are one of the more reliable and trusted pollsters, it would increase confidence if they did.
By the way, I missed all the comment about the original Jackie Ashley article (and don’t have time to hunt it down amid the hundreds of posts!), but it seems that current news coverage of the betting odds in the Lib Dem race bears out an argument Mike has himself made: that if you don’t discuss the nature of the market and assess all the available figures, it really is lazy journalism, and that is more true of the Lib Dem leadership contest than any other, since relatively small bets can change the odds enormously. A proper assessment of the betting market can be a helpful predictive tool, IF you make it clear how high or low the volume is- which newspapers, the BBC website etc. do not generally do.
Bad luck Mike…but this does underline the importance and influence of this site!
Re 1. Gushing it was not. Grovelling, yes. In the circumstances, Mike appears to have had little choice. But the fact that ICM expected such an apology underlines, as 6 above notes, the influence of this site.
Don’t let it deter you from making comments on polling trends, Mike.
At present ICM are my farourite pollsters.
Once again Gordon shows truly global (dare I say universal)leadership with his announcement on eradicating TB in Davos (with Bill Gates too - who needs Murdoch?). My point here is that GB will be an absolute collossus as PM and the next election will only go one way - all betting has to factor in the sheer wow factor of this great man.
With all due respect making statement about eradicting TB is fairly easy for a politician to do. Achieving it would be a very positive step forward though, I grant you.
However I still await any major speech from Gordon Brown on the war on terror and in particular how he would try and deal with Iran as they try and become a nuclear power. Frankly one of GB’s weaknesses in that recently on issues that require hard decisions like global warming, the war on terror and dealing with Iran, he has shied away from making any comment. A potential PM has to deal with all issues and face up to them, knowing which ever way he selects, will infuriate a mass of the public. Frankly GB has yet to show that sort of mettle.
Re 9: “Once again Gordon shows truly global (dare I say universal)leadership with his announcement on eradicating TB in Davos”
Surely GB should not have anounced it as it allows TB to get his security in order. Mind you I had not realised things had got so bad between GB and TB the GB wanted him “eradicated”. Cripes. Musn’t get on the wrong side of Gordon then!
10. If he makes speech about not Chancellor related issues, you’ve Blairites being irritated because he’s “invading” TB’s territory. If he doesn’t talk about those issues, he have other people criticizing him.
He finds critics in everything he does or doesn’t do!
Dear Professor @ 9. Do you take the same objective analytical approach in your academic work as you do in your comments here on your beloved Gordon?
[9] You are certain to clean up at the next GE. With everyone except you and GB out of step.
Considering his stealth taxes and clever off-balance sheet deals (PFI and Network rail), and the huge improvement in the public finances that he will bequeath compared with what he inherited, you will be able to get fantastic prices from the bookies.
No one in your family need ever work again.
A small tip (probably unneeded with your foresight): get on now, before the collusus alters the prices. Don’t worry about tying up cash–open accounts. Bookies love accounts from the professions.
Andrea, I am no Blairite, rather a true blue Tory. I also actually quite like Gordon on a personal level, finding a lot to admire in his hardworking puritanical persona, even though I disagree with him politically.
Your point has some validity, but during for example the Iraq war, I cannot remember him coming out and making any lenghty defence of the government’s position, despite the fact he was the war’s paymaster. I also continue to note, his refusal to go on Newsnight or Question Time, where such a defence would have been required.
15. Andrew M, I know you’re a Tory. But you can’t deny that everytime he tried to make a step out of his territory, the next day newspapers were full of articles about anonymous blairites being irritated.
The same could be said when someone else tried to enter his territory.
I take your point about Iraq.
Sara (4), it is simply not true to say that ICM ‘do not always publish full data when they are supposed to’. The rules of the British Polling Council specify that full data should be published within 2 working days OR UPON REQUEST. If anyone wants to see data tables from a BPC member and can’t find them on the relevant polling company’s website they simply need to contact the company and ask for it.
Bad news for those wishing to see the back of Widdy, apparently she intends to live forever. Commenting on being invited onto Strictly Come Dancing she said “But I could not see myself at 5ft 1in and overweight cavorting round the dance floor with one of those elegant mortals that we see.”
19: Yes, very good; but in fairness to Widdy, ‘mortal’ does have a jocular usage meaning ‘person’.
At ICM we put our polls onto our web-site and try to do so within 48 hours. However, at the same time we re-type the questions and answers into a database that then becomes fully searchable by any visitor to the web-site. This is time consuming and therefore, depending on workload, may not always take place within 48 hours. Andrew Cooper (18) has already referred users of this site to the BPC rule. I cannot recall any occasion when we have ever refused any reasonable request for information and that will remain the case. But we cannot respond to requests we never receive!
The big question for Mike is …… how will this apology effect his chances in the Lib Dem leadership race …… caught playing away from ICM in a saucy threesome with YouGov and Mori, let alone getting regularly pissed with my own Anonymous Random Selector of Electors …… well Mike, ICM (Incompetent Cameron Morons) in the guise of a Sparrow have Oatened on you from a great height !!! ……. however they need to remember every tasty sparrow makes a fine meal for a sparrowhawk …..
I do like the sound of the plucking of feathers …… Squark squark.
Understand the Lib Dem parliamentary party says it is in good heart and any reference of up to 3 defectors is being rubbished!
Recall back in 1980 at the Durham Miners Gala I recall James Callaghan denying there would be any Labour splits. All we can do is see how history pans out and then analyse afterwards what might have been.
This reminds me of the apology John Cleese gave to Kevin Kline in ‘A Fish Called Wanda’.
I do hope they didn’t come round and hang you out off the window…
O/T (for once it may be better so) - from time to time people here complain about the “payroll vote” of public sector workers. And I’d be astonished if UNISON doesn’t place large newspaper advertisements reminding people of the local elections in due course (they usually do). Has anyone got any evidence as to whether Council workers are more likely to vote, particularly in local elections - has any pollster been asked to find out?
I see that Labour has accused SNP to attemp to rape the Greens:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4651766.stm
Not a very fortunate choice of words!
26 Andrea. Absolutely shocking …. a sex scandal not involving the Lib Dems.
BTW Andrea what was your journey home like today ??
24 -
27 - Jack - have you heard the story about the male MSP (who was thought to heterosexual) who is said to have been caught on one of Hollyrood’s (I should stress not Her Majesty’s residence but the parliament) CCTV cameras having ‘relations’ with a male intern? The press still don’t have the evidence to name names though!
Mind you for all the money that was spent on the place at least someone’s putting it to good use!
27. Jack, the train just had 1 hour delay! I was told that the following train had a 2 hours delay…so I was lucky.
Then going from the station to home, all the snow which was on a tree fell over me.
Now it seems that the snow is less intense.
Milan is almost blocked. Schools and airports are closed, trains are all on late, buses aren’t going.
30 - Sounds like SW Trains on a ‘normal’ day…..
29. Max, I recall it! But I think you wouldn’t have doubt about my eyes catching that story
30&31 - You should think yourself lucky - we don’t have any trains in the whole of the Borders!!
29. Don’t tell me he’s one of ours Max…!
34. I think it was rumoured to be one of yours.
34 - I can neither confirm or deny! It’s an increadibly well kept open-secret though (and I’m pretty certain will remain so). I’ve a friend who works as security at Hollyrood whose been offered a large amount of money for the tapes but no one wants to take the risk!
David (S) at 23 - yep talk of defections is being rubbished - do you know why?
Because it is rubbish. Not one Tory poster has managed to come up with a credible name. The last Lib Dem MP mentioned was Southport’s John Pugh - a member of the Beveridge Group and sworn enemy of all things Tory over the decades.
I’m sorry I do not count Iain Dale’s blog as evidence - so stop repeating ludicrous rumours or I’ll be forced to reveal my story about what William Hague and Seb Coe got up to in Jeffrey Archer’s Thameside penthouse…
29. Good rumour, but which party in this case is yours or ours?
36. On vote2005, a poster claimed to know the name, but he didn’t post it on the open forum. He sent a privage message mentioning the name, but to be honest I forgot the name!
Andrea, it snowed very slightly here this afternoon, but ut seems to have stopped again now.
37.”what William Hague and Seb Coe got up to in Jeffrey Archer’s Thameside penthouse… ”
a) Dancing with Widdy
b) Wrestling like Alan Bates and Oliver Reed in “Women in Love”
c) Plotting to steal Dennis Skinner’s favourite place on Commons benches
Mike. I want to make it perfectly clear that I have complete confidence in the openness and probity of ICM and I unreservedly withdraw any suggestion I may have made on this site or anywhere else which might unaccountably have suggested otherwise!
Having said that what was your assessment of the poll having seen the underlying numbers?
29 Max. Yes I am aware, however the twist is that another MSP is said to be involved with the first MSP !! Nothing like cross party relations !!
BTW was he an intern ?? I’ve heard other job descriptions for his part-time activites …. of a temporary rental nature !!
30 Andrea. You must have been very cold in those pink lycra hot pants and that body hugging leopard print cut-away tea shirt.
43. Jack, you know interns need to have many skills in these days….
44 Andrea. Close but no cigar Andrea !
Andrea don’t mind the snow, you people have the best hot chocolate in the world.
As for this ICM business, it’s a mishap that often happens. I was recently moaning about a manager of a music venue not contacting me when his e-mail was in fact sitting in my Spam box.
45. Jack, languages are important too….
46. My email box sometimes delayes some emails. Especially if they come from Rik!
Julian, I’ve to confess I was “suprised” when I saw you eating a sandwich and drinking hot chocolate at the same time!
48. Is that a social faux-pas?
49. No, but no-one here drinks hot chocolate while eating a sandwitch.
When I visited UK, I was shocked when I was offered orange juice at dinner.
Did you really like the hot chocolate?
48 - Andrea - this isn’t the first time you’ve been surprised by what someone drinks - I remember you trying to articulate your amazement that the British sometimes drink orange juice at (can’t remember which mealtime it was - was it lunch?). Italians seem subject to social norms on this sort of thing that the British just aren’t aware of.
51. Cookie. I wouldn’t call them “social” norms. I think it’s just that the general feeling here is that those 2 things aren’t well paired with each other.
We don’t usually eat eggs at breakfast too.
50 Andrea. You Italians have little culinary appreciation….. until you’ve had a deep fried chocolate coated Lib Dem washed down by an Iron Bru, Carrot Juice and Campari cocktail ….. you’ve never lived.
Admittedly the hot chocolate and salami didn’t go together too well, but it was cold, so I wanted a hot drink, and I was hungry, so I wanted a sandwich. Any further complications were too much to fathom.
I once fell out with a girlfriend after ordering deep-fried haggis and a can of Irn-Bru.
52. To be fair though Andrea, my experience of Italy is that Italians don’t really have anything for breakfast, save an espresso and a fag…
Julian & Andrea - so you two have met?
54. I’ve to admit I was a really bad guide!
54 Julian. How could any woman fall out about eating such wonderfully tasty comestibles …. she was clearly deranged !!
55. Chrisco, yes, we don’t eat very much at breakfast. Just an espresso is common. Other common breakfasts are a cappuccio (maybe with a brioche) ot hot milk with biscuits (or a brioche). Orange juice is drunk at breakfast too.
Chrisco: yes, we walked around in the freezing cold then went for a hot chocolate. Conversation involved Justine Greening, Bob Marshall-Andrews, Silvio Berlusconi and A.H. Matlock.
[54] I once fell out with a girlfriend after ordering deep-fried haggis and a can of Irn-Bru
Yes, I’ve heard they affect the, ahem, performance adversely…
57. Deranged and vegetarian. It was my highlight of the trip.
59. Julian, you’re showing how boring I’m.
I don’t confirm anything he said. I’ll call my lawyer
“Conversation involved Justine Greening, Bob Marshall-Andrews, Silvio Berlusconi and A.H. Matlock.”
Boring?!
63. Julian, you’re the one who have to deny or confirm it.
Then I think we talked about Glenda Jackson’s leadership bid as one of the most entertaining moment the future could give us.
But if we had met during the LD leadership race, we would have more interesting thing to gossip about
61 Julian “….. Deranged and vegetarian …”
Nearly a perfect portrayal of Simon Hughes …… nearly !! GULP !! … Julian …. tell us it’s not true !!
http://blogs.bbc.co.uk/nickrobinson/ has an interesting theory about the Cameroonies emulating Thatchers 79 manifesto. Seems plausible to me as a way to reassure tories while making the right sounding overtures to everyone else.
Some say Thatcher wasnt viewed as radical when she took over the leadership ( a safe pair of hands ) and even the 79 electorate had little sense of where she would go in the 80’s.
Maybe camerons approach can resonate with the right of the tories for a while
65. Look Jack, I just haven’t found the right woman yet.
67- Like Simon Hughes….
67 Julian. You’re looking in the wrong places !! …. stay away from Cowley Street.
69. Jack. He’s probably hoping to meet one of those young LD girls, but he doesn’t know Jenny Tonge is hiding in the dark too!
“young LD girls” - careful, we’ll all end up on List 99.
71 Moi. Heck …. that post needs moderating …. I didn’t realize that Tonge fell into that catergory !!
SHOCKING LIB DEM NEWS
There are no Lib Dem scandals today!
Maybe the Sunday papers will bring something.
EVEN MORE SHOCKING LIB DEM NEWS
There are no Lib Dem sandals today!
Maybe the Sunday papers will have some for sale.
Does anyone talk about betting on this site any more or is it all frivolous chat these days?
74. And Jack, not even a LD beard today
75. The space on here does not appear to be limited (within reason). Frivolous talk does therefore not prevent betting talk appearing. Feel free to start some off.
My decision to lay at 6.1 on Hughes yesterday looks a very bad one now. I was sure he’d bounce back after a few strong televisual performances and positive polls; could still happen but he’s out to 9.something now.
Still got an “all-green” book on the three of them though.
77. Julian, he looks strong when he talks about politics. He have to avoud to talk about his personal life again: when he talks about it, he looks like a sad lonely man.
Likewise, I have been somewhat punctured by an anticipation that Hughes would bounce back. All the same, there’s still a month to go…
77 Andrea. Only the unreconstructed Liberals have beards !! …… I think they should have Grade II* listing as being of political and historical interest ….. a bit like socialists in the Labour party or conservatives in the Tory party !! ……..or teetotals in the Jacobite Party.
Former MP John Dunwoody (former husband of Gwyneth) has died after an accident.
80- Jack, I don’t mean the beard you’ve on the face…..
80 - Jack (or anyone else for that matter) - whom would you say is the most ‘unreconstructed’ of Lib Dem MPs? Are there any with beards?
David Heath is the only beardie I can think of off the top of my head.
Colin Breed. Annette Brooke. The list is endless.
Very O/T, but I am bemused by Euromillions ticket sales soaring (up 100% on normal) because the jackpot is £100,000,000. It gives an insight into the human condition when people don’t think it’s worth forking out the £1.50 to stand a chance of winning the normal £10,000,000 jackpot, but stampeded to buy a ticket this week.
Mike Hancock. And let’s not even go down the moustache road. Also ‘beard’ is a euphamism for the wife of a gay man, but again best not go into it.
87.”Also ‘beard’ is a euphamism for the wife of a gay man, but again best not go into it. ”
when I told Jack about not having discovered any LD beard today, I meant this.
85. does Annette Brooke have a beard?
86 - surely simple economics. Expected reward if you win multiplied by chance of winning. Adam Smith will be smiling down on us tonight.
It’s the first chance I’ve had to comment on this morning’s poll and it looks pretty bad for us and not that brilliant for the Tories either. Of course, 39% is still a long way in front of where they were but it won’t do David Cameron a lot of good if Labour are on 40%.
I’m just wondering if, somewhere in the bowels of CCO, the Cameron gang are wondering if their strategy of undermining the LDs has inadvertently backfired. It’s no good for the Tories if those ex-Labour voters who went LD in 2005 now run back to Labour even if the Tories gain seats off the LDs elsewhere. Gains from the LDs may be offset by a lack of gains from Labour leaving the Conservatives the second largest party but Labour in power. I wonder if Cameron’s strategists now realise that an LD party able to take votes off Labour isn’t such a bad thing after all.
For the LDs, these are difficult times but compared with the 4% poll ratings from after the merger, 13% doesn’t look too bad. We are still at least three years from an election and that gives time for recovery and no one, least of all Cameron, knows what is going to happen between now and 2009.
It’s times like this that make you understand why you are in politics. Both Tory and Labour activists have also known difficult days (I well remember the faces of Tory activists in the mid 90s seeing once safe seats fall) but basic principles and beliefs endure.
With the benefit of a few days hindsight, I’m relieved that a lot of this has come out (so to speak) now. Imagine if Oaten had got into a seriously powerful position (so to speak) or this had been revealed a week before polling day. Sometimes it becomes necessary to lance the boil if you’ll excuse the image. We were, I now think, heading up a cul-de-sac with CK and his leadership. His removal wasn’t pretty and the aftermath hasn’t either. Oaten and Hughes have been made to look foolish at best and duplicituous at worst. Occasionally, this “purging of the non-talents” is required and while I don’t always condone the activities of papers like the NoTW, in a way they perform a service of sorts (again, so to speak).
Nothing that has happened in the past month will ensure Cameron’s success - he still has much to do and I’m sure he knows that. The next election turns, I think, on Blair and the manner of his departure. If most people’s perceptions (not the real statistics of course) of the economy remain strong and Brown moves seamlessly into No.10, both the Conservatives and us will have a fight on our hands.
84/85 cookie/bv. Yes David Heath sports a full set and as for Liberals of the old school if not entirely of the open toed sandal persuasion I’d go for Alan Beith, Norman Baker and Bob Russell.
Of course the venerated Viscount’s Liberal and Jacobite heritage is unimpeachable …… although tofu has never passed his lips …. Rejoice … rejoice at that news and thank our brave peer ………. hang on that’s not right
:(
88 - excellent work - there befor me if only I had any subtlety to notice! No, Brookesy is a fine figure of a woman, I was being mean.
90. As lucid and accurate as usual; can’t disagree with anything there.
89 Andrea. I thought “beard” was a romantically linked FEMALE partner of a gay man … fag hag supreme. In many ways the Hollywood wives of gay closeted actors.
87 Chrisco. Same odds better prize ! Apparently the top prize can only roll over for 2 more weeks after tonight, so £150 Million is possible ….. we may only hope that Andrea wins so he may buy a snow mobile and the Conservative Party in one go and have £140 Million to spare ………. I’m also hoping Mark Oaten wins !!!! What fun !!!!!!!!
86. My point is though that very few of the participants in tonight’s draw who do not usually play will have sat down and worked out that the odds of winning are 76,000,000 to 1, so now that this week’s jackpot is close to that sort of return they should go out and buy a ticket…
Or maybe people are instinctively better at economics than they are given credit for.
94. Jack, a beard is the wife/girlfriend of a gay man. A fag hag is a woman who has lots of gay friend and she likes to spend lots of time with them.
So Liz Taylor is fag hag, Rock Hudson’s wife was a beard.
Personally I prefer fruit fly to fag hag…
90. Good post stodge.
A case of some of the people who voted LD in 2005 going “ARGH! The Tories are back! Best abandon this now-unhealthy looking yellow thing and run back to Labour to stop them!”
I suppose it depends on the attitudes of LD voters in Lab-Con marginals, whether they are more inclined to vote Con or Lab if the LDs don’t look worth voting for.
Still, as you say, there is plenty of time for recovery for the LDs.
96 Chrisco. Or they are instinctively more greedy
I bought a single ticket in WH Smiths at lunchtime …… I’d buy a distillery and put Charlie Kennedy in charge ! ….. and buy a peerage for Matlock from Blair ….. but would Alistair accept.
All this stuff about Libdem collapse not being in the Tories interest is nonsense IMO. The governing party will always benefit from a divided opposition because it results in malcontent “anti-government” votes fanning out and dispersing across a number of parties. Even people claiming Baxter provides evidence of “libdem collapse not helping Tories” are being misleading - these projections are giving the Tories gains of around 60 seats on 6% increase in the vote, with Labour staying around the same on 3% increase. No, the result of the Libdem “collapse” is not a Conservative government but it’s sending them towards much more respectable heights and leaves them as the likely sole beneficiary should the tipping point come, and people finally decide they want Labour out. It’s a side point, but it will also probably increase the effectiveness of negative campaigning should they go down that route to any extent.
At the moment we are in a false scenario - nobody really knows what the effect of Brown as PM will be, but my guess is that it will be at worse for the Tories a maintaining of the current polling situation.
98 Chrisco “Personally I prefer fruit fly to fag hag…”
You are Graham Norton and I claim five Vera n Tonics.
95 - people “instinctively understanding economics” is just another way for saying that people act rationally, and is hardly surprising since most economic theory is dependent upon this as a basic assumption.
Yes but alex, I am prepared to bet my winnings from tonight’s Euromillions draw that few people have any idea that the odds of winning are 76,000,000 to 1…
Only just noticed You Gov Poll in Scotland result, Lib Dem fourth with 11. SNP 24 and Cons 21. Dunfermaline has the sign of being a real problem for the Lib Dems.
The main reason i wouldn’t normally pay it is because the tickets are too expensive (just as the bus fares going up to £1.50 finally forced me to buy an oyster card!) and that I haven’t been able to discover where the non-prize money goes.
104. how big the sample was?
106 - 180.
104. Do you have a link?
105. It’s a deposit Alex - you can get it back if you return the card.
104. That must be the best Tory rating in Scotland for quite a while.
YouGov poll
Re: 100 - I disagree, Alex. We only have to go back to 1990-92 to see the comparable position. We can only speculate as to what would have happened had Thatcher fought an election in 1991 or 1992 against Kinnock. The fact is that enough of a minority in the COnservative Parliamentary Party saw her as an electoral liability to want her to go.
By the by, those who complain about the behaviour of LD MPs in the ousting of Charles Kennedy should remember that 1989 was full of “threats” to remove Thatcher. Instead, she faced Anthony Meyer and won what seemed a convincing majority. It changed nothing - the sniping and backbiting continued in 1990 and even the prospect of war in the aftermath of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait failed to stop the plotters who only moved once Geoffrey Howe had been sacked. Many Tories said “privately” they wanted her to go - it took them the best part of 18 months to do it.
Back to Alex’s argument - IF the transition from Blair to Brown is smooth, I do think the electorate will see it as enough of a change to re-elect Labour in the same way as John Major was regarded as something “new”. Ironically, the poll figures now are very similar to those from the autumn of 1990 yet the Tories won in April 1992. If the LDs stabilise in the low to mid teens, the question is whether Labour can hold on to around 40% of the vote. I don’t believe that unless we have a September 1992-style “event” that will completely undermine the fundamental credibility of the Government, Cameron will benefit. Labour are still in pole position and the next election remains theirs to lose.
Interesting that Chris Huhne does startlingly better among LibDem supporters (where he is presumably less hampered by poor name recognition) in comparison with the wider electorate compared with the other two candidates (although is obviously still behind)
110. They’ve the tories doing really well in London. Labour gaining points in the rest of the South.
The 24% in Scotland doesn’t seem only for the SNP, but for “others” in general.
Stodge, I’m not sure you’re really disagreeing with me. Blair is a lot more popular than Maggie was in 1990. Saying that Brown will maintain the current situation is not incompatible with suggesting that Labour will win the next election - the polls currently have them winning the next election!
I personally don’t think the situations are really comparable though - Major was a virtual unknown.
113 - Andrea I was going to comment on that as well. The sample is small but the figures are very encouraging for us. It is quite possible that we could hold Richmond in this scenario whilst gaining control of Sutton.
Do YouGov actually attempt to weight the regional samples?
One interesting detail that I found in the YouGov figures is that there are currently 17% undecided. I do not know whether this is higher or lower than usual. However, it appears that the undecideds and also the non-votes are excluded when calculatig the percentage split among the parties.
I would suspect that a large part of the undecided votrs could be previous Lib Dem supporters, who will probably return once things have calmed down again. So both the Labour and Tory percentages are probably over-inflated this month. We shall have to wait and see.
On another topic, I note that the Tories have stopped talking up the possiblities of a Lib Dem MP switching to them - not just one Tory poster - all of them seem to have stopped. It still looks to me as though this was carefully orchestrated black propaganda on their part.
[100] Alex, the reason that a collapse in the LD vote is bad for the tories is because most reaserch, apparently, suggests that there is a 2-1 preference from LDs for Labour over tory.
If that is correct, when the LD vote goes down by 6000, that means the tories go up 2000 and this govt puts on 4000 votes. That means for the tories to win a maginal, they have to gain a large number of direct Lab-to-tory switchers.
Conversely, if the LD vote went up by 6000, that comes 4000 from labour, and 2000 from the tories. The tories could thus make a gain without their vote improving.
Our host reckons that the tories will receive about 40% of the vote next time. A poor LD showing means more of what we have. A good showing trips a change of govt.
There is no requirement for you to believe this. But all the pollsters on this site seem to think that this is a useful approximation.
111. The Thatcher/Major change caused a significant shift in polling intentions for two main reasons though. Firstly, there was a much less strident and much more consensual tone to the government, and secondly - and more importantly - there was a major policy change in the dumping of the Poll Tax. Major was also a new face. He’d only been in a high profile job for a little over a year when he became PM. I’m not sure any of these factors apply to a Blair/Brown handover. (On the plus side for Labour, it should be done with rather less rancour than the 1990 episode). One further point contrasting it with the Lib Dems. Getting rid of the leader of an opposition party is one thing, deposing a sitting Prime Minister is a move of a different order. I can’t think when the last time it was forced on a PM solely by his own party before that - well back into the 19th century at least.
As others have said, it matters less how much of the vote the Lib Dems get as where they get it (and if there’s movement, which way).
117 - JOhn13 you do take wishful thinking to a new level! Every poll excludes a chunk of “wont says” and “dont knows”, and from what I recall 17% is not an unusual figure (Mike S may be able to help). To suggest that they are all Lib Dems who will shortly return is entertaining to say the least.
On the defection point, maybe, just maybe, some of us have been asked to talk about it less in order not to jeapordise sensitive discussions that may or may not be taking place!
120.”On the defection point, maybe, just maybe, some of us have been asked to talk about it less in order not to jeapordise sensitive discussions that may or may not be taking place! ”
Rik, how many time I’ve to tell you? You won’t get Jenny Tonge! Get real now!
118 - David - I think that was a useful working assumtion in the past but I would contend that it no longer holds true. From 1992 to about 2005, there is no doubt that generally Labour was more popular than the Tories and we had not begun to make any meaningful headway in the polls. Since Cameron’s election I would think that the Tories are likely to be more attractive to many ex-Lib Dem voters than a tired and discredited Labour party in government. I would therefore suggest that it is likely that the vote split if the Lib Dems drop away is likely to be more 50/50 or maybe in time, even benefit the Tories.
We so often reference things by the past even though circumstances have changed. For example, I have argued before that in the new climate I expect that the polls will stop overstating Labour and will stop having to compensate for “shy Tories”, as it becomes more fashionable to admit to being a Conservative. So the Mike Smithson poll paradox may soon be redundant if I am right!
9 Why doesn’t Gordon Brown eradicate TB in London? There are higher rates here than in many developing countries. What a useless kunt.
“Why doesn’t Gordon Brown eradicate TB in London?”
Because his security is too good…
37-Dan
‘Because it is rubbish. Not one Tory poster has managed to come up with a credible name. The last Lib Dem MP mentioned was Southport’s John Pugh - a member of the Beveridge Group and sworn enemy of all things Tory over the decades’
Mark Oaten?
Thanks but no thanks.
120 - Rik- Did you write that with a straight face, if you did you really should do stand up.
Next you’ll be telling us there’s a covert “rock” in Cowley Street helping you get inside info.
You say Lid Dems need to really see what’s happening, maybe so, but come on the last comment(even with smiling face) is bordering on Daily Mail dimension.
Re: 122 - Evening, Rik :)To be honest, how LDs would split between Labour and the Conservatives is an unknown to me as well but you can bet your boots pollsters will be asking that question more and more as the election approaches.
As to the answer, the split of 2/1 in favour of Labour is probably outdated but whether it’s back to 50/50 I simply can’t say. As for this morning’s poll, I won’t pretend it’s anything other than bad. It does remind me of polls from the Thatcher era in which advances for Labour often had voters flocking back to the Conservatives. The paradox Mike refers to may not simply be in the polls. The more swing voters see the Conservatives as potential election winners, the more they will (however reluctantly) swing back to Labour.
118 - That’s a very simplistic argument though. Just because recent evidence is for a 2-1 Lab/Con preference among Lib Dem voters doesn’t mean it will be ever thus.
As Max pointed out in a previous thread, a return to two party politics is a probably essential pre-condition for the Tories to ever return to power with a working majority. If that presents short-term problems then so be it.
(and on a technical point - the Tories have gone up 6pts since the election, Lab 4, Lib down 10. So where does that leave your 2-1 split?)
126 - Big Mak - Feel free to email me at Rik_w@blueyonder.co.uk
127. Surely if the Conservatives are beginning to look like possible election winners, it is precisely because swing voters are beginning to move that way?
37. Dan. “I’m sorry I do not count Iain Dale’s blog as evidence - so stop repeating ludicrous rumours or I’ll be forced to reveal my story about what William Hague and Seb Coe got up to in Jeffrey Archer’s Thameside penthouse…”
That is a totally different rumour from one that came sneaking and peeking my way Dan… but very much up the same alley as it were ;-). Can’t say who…but it was in December 1997…if I recall from behind a glass of malt
Re. 111 (I think), Howe wasn’t sacked, he went off in a huff (though part of the reason he went off in a huff was his demotion from Foreign Secretary to Leader of the House in 89).
The immediate cause of Howe’s resignation was Mrs. Thatcher’s “No, no, no” position on a single currency at Rome.
Sir Geoffrey’s resignation was a great pity and a loss to the government, of course, but Mrs Thatcher was right on the single currency.
A “funny” exchange in the Commons yesterday:
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab): I am listening carefully to the right hon. Gentleman. I happen to agree with him about the programme, but will he tell me why Conservative Front Benchers do not oppose every programme motion on every Bill? That would at least draw attention to the issue.
Mr. Forth: I wish they would, but my party’s Front Benchers are in consensual mode at present. They seem to think that we will attract more support from the electorate if we oppose the Government as little as possible rather than as much as possible. This is the new mood of the Conservative party.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order. Notwithstanding any new mood in the Conservative party, perhaps we could now address the motion, which is somewhat restrictive.
On this issue of defections:
A lobby journalist told me the rumours had been put around by Simon Hughes and his team in an attempt to destabilise his opponents and possibly force them out of the party.
Consensual on the Tory front bench just at present, Andrea, maybe - don´t worry too much about it. It does seems strange, but they are doing it only to change their image. Obviously, it does not apply to their supporters elsewhere…..
135: Andrea, I hope you don’t mind, but I’ve posted this on my blog. I’ve credited you & PoliticalBetting.com with a hat-tip!
[131] Greco Roman wrestling, wasn’t it? No? Tai Chi? Ju Jitsu???
Rik @ 120 - ‘On the defection point, maybe, just maybe, some of us have been asked to talk about it less in order not to jeapordise sensitive discussions that may or may not be taking place!’
Many many apologies Richard - I had you down as Iain Dale’s umpa loompa - I was wrong - you are clearly Johnny English!
Listen ver carefully I shall zay zees ounly wance!!
136 - Ask your lobby Jounalist who he wants to win the leadership contest. It obviously isn’t Simon Hughes. This looks just like more mischief seeing as the rumours are not in Simon Hughes’ interests.
To quote Daily Mail: “These four MPs could defect if Simon Hughes becomes their next leader, claim the Tories.” If anything that looks like an attempt to destabilise Simon Hughes’ campaign.
138. Iain Dale. No problem.
Sometimes there’re some entertaining exchanges during Commons debate.
Regarding the YouGov poll, I’m no expert in these things, but reading the raw data, it shows the Conservatives actually leading Labour by 679 to 651 on the actual “unweighted” figures but trailing 605/621 on the “weighted” data, which presumably resulted in the 39%/40% ratings. I don’t know what the percentages would be for the actual responses before “weighting” was applied but presumably the Tories would be ahead of Labour by slightly more than Labour is reported as being ahead, even with the Lib Dem slump?
And good figures in “the North” (39%!!!) and in Scotland - presumably we are level pegging or slightly ahead of the SNP if the “others” (inc SNP) totals 24%.
What will Lib Dem supporters say if David Laws defects over the weekend?
Bob - the other interesting thing about the YouGov poll is the prominence being given to the Scottish breakdown.
On a sample of 180 - I’d make the MoE about 10% which means Labour are first and it’s a statistical dead heat for the Lib Dems, Nats and Tories. So technically no change from the General Election.
45 Lurker - What will Tories say when it doesn’t happen?
45 - Lueker if he did jump why would he not wait unril after the leadership election, he’s backing Ming so why jump now?
146. well, it’s a statistical dead heat for the Libdems, the Greens and the SSP too!
Notable in the Yougov poll that the only place where Campbell has support greater than Hughes is in Scotland. Given that many of these seats are likely to stay lib dem whatever, what’s the point of a Campell leadership? Hughes polls better with voters in other parties (they may well switch) he also polls well in the rest of the UK.
Given all of the polls that are coming out with him in the lead, and the publicity coming his way e.g. a big Indy splash tomorrow, I think people are crazy not to bet on him at these prices.
You can tell some are realising he’s going to poll well when with the ridiculous spin about defections if he’s leader. Well if you don’t want to be a lib dem get the hell out then!
150.”a big Indy splash tomorrow”
I suppose it’ll be better than the coverage they gave him today.
47 - I said ‘if’ not ‘when’
48 - When Laws signed up to Ming the world looked very different.
I’m certainly not stating it as a cert. But not do I think it can be ruled out. For one thing, the rumours about him in particular (as primus inter pares) have intensified in the last three days. Not just in blogland but in the MSM (eg - Guardian) as well. I know that journalists who have chased Laws today have been given less than unequivocal answers.
The preference of Labour over Tory by 2:1 amongst Libdems is a reflection of the same thing that has caused such massive tactical voting against the Tories in recent elections: the Tories having drifted so very far from the political centre ground.
DC is dragging the Tory Party back to the political centre, maybe even past it. This will undoubtedly lose the Tories support on the Right. However, in the long term, it will remove the reason for tactical voting against the Tories.
If you’re on the left, why vote tactically to keep the Tories out, when by doing so you let in Labour who are no better and may even be worse? Especially, if Labour is MORE right-wing than the Tories on some issues (e.g. foreign wars, personal liberty, centralising public services, anti-”terrorist” legislation, etc.)
The unwind of tactical voting will undoubtedly occur, although it may take years to effect. Similarly, when the Libdems are squeezed by Labour/Tories, the votes will eventually split roughly equally.
The key word is “eventually”. In the long term, votes will drift back to the Tories; the problem is how long? I suspect that the decisive factor will be GB, not the Libdems.
GB has managed to garner a good reputation on the Left because he has given them financial respectability, while avoiding association with difficult decisions. (He has let TB take the flak for trying to reform public services etc.)
When GB becomes PM, he will no longer be able to avoid the tough decisions. If he ducks them, he will look weak and lose credibility outside the Left; if he tackles them, he will lose support within the Labour party. Either way, he’ll have problems. What will then matter is whether he can “sell” his policies. Put another way, can he maintain support while making unpopular decisions? I have to say that he has done little to indicate that he can. (How often has he had to defend an unpopular decision as Chancellor? Pretty rarely.)
Historically, Parties have tended to alternate in office because being in office forces you to make unpopular decisions, thereby making you unpopular. TB’s genius, coupled with the Tories’ decade-long flirtation with extremism, temporarily suspended normal politics.
GB lacks TB’s skills as a communicator, and will become PM just as the benign environment that TB enjoyed (viz. no realistic Opposition) comes to an end. This will lead to Labour becoming progressively less popular, just as DC’s clean-up operation removes the reasons to hate the Tories.
And at that point, fleeing Libdems will split equally between Labour and Tory.
I guess the only Tory opposed to the idea of David Laws defecting is poor George Osborne!
52 - Lurker, but what did CK do for the Lid Dems that Ming or Huhne could not in time. CK was a nice guy but hardly Orange Book man, yet Laws was never metioned then. Yes the party have had very bad press, but almost as bad as a lieing MP is one who jumps ship 2 weeks in to a crisis, with 3 years to recover. If he does then he has the backbone of a jellyfish, and as all MPs that do this he’ll never, ever be trusted again by any party.
153 - I agree, but scanning through the yougov data it appears to be happening sooner rather than later.
I did say that if Tories kept on recycling ridicoluos rumours of Lib Dem defections - I’d reveal all about what Hague, Coe and Archer got up to in Archer’s penthouse overlooking the Palace of Westminster.
But I’m keeping my powder dry (although some posters above have been close to the action - as it were).
However I can exclusively reveal a West of Scotland Tory MSP is about to be uncovered in a compromising position - on video - with a very young volunteer researcher.
Watch this space…
[157] And they’re trying for a baby
157. Dan, it’s always the same MSP caught on camera in May or is this a new one?
Damn, those MSPs are keeping their researchers/assistants very busy!
Oh for crying out loud, stop trying to slag each other’s parties off with innuendo and ‘you’ve got more pervs than us’ nudge-budge wink wink comments. You’re just looking pathetic and childish now.
Stick to politics and policy, Frankly I’m getting angry at those who think it’s admirable to insinuate and infer with their ’supposed knowldege’. If you weren’t a bunch of cowards you’d say what you mean in any case.
I’m just a commmon or garden voter and I can only be pushed so far before I end up wishing for a plague on all your houses. No wonder turnout’s falling.
160 - you aren’t that commmom!! well said.
60 - I agree, policy we can at least talk about and debate, but talking about this MP or that defecting or having this affair or that is not PB.com but more like OK or HELLO, title-tatle.
I thought the same when they did the whole Cameron drug thing, so what if he did, he’s not know, same with Hughes,lets get on and talk turkey!
61 - Damn not having an edit facility!
Common (naturally).
Just checking and I also wrote nudge-budge! It’s late, that’s my excuse…..
Well, there are only two Tory MSPs for the West of Scotland - and one of those is the redoubtable and highly respected Annabel Goldie - you’d be more likely to catch Baroness Thatcher in a sex scandal! The other is Murray Tosh who, I imagine, will be seeking Dan’s ISP - or at least his lawyers will.