YouGov reports that the Tories are down a point
July 28th, 2006
-
But is Anthony King right with his historical comparisons?
This month’s YouGov poll in the Daily Telegraph has with changes on last month: CON 38(-1): LAB 33 (nc): LD 18 (nc). So the only difference is a one point fall in Tory support reducing the margin over Labour to 5%.
These shares are broadly similar to this week’s Guardian ICM survey which had the Tories on 39% - four points ahead. The big difference between the two pollsters is the trend - ICM had the Tories moving forward by quite a big amount - YouGov has them moving back a notch.
The big story of the morning perhaps, is the way the Daily Telegraph is reporting its poll. In his report Anthony King makes this remarkable statement “the Tories today are no better off than they were under William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard.” Eh?
I cannot find numbers to support this. In early 2004 YouGov was showing Tory shares of up to 40% but was very much out of line with other pollsters.
Certainly it’s hard to back up King’s assertion based on the only firm that’s been carrying out surveys using similar methodology since before 2002 - ICM. The only valid historical comparisons are those where you compare like with like.
The Tories will be a touch disappointed that the big surge that ICM found has not been picked up by YouGov but will feel reasonably comfortable that their substantial progress on the General Election is being sustained. Their main concern should be the Daily Telegraph’s reporting.
Labour will be relieved that the party funding stories are not having any real impact amongst the voters and will not be too uncomfortable with their deficit.
The Lib Dems will be pleased that the pollster that has been showing poor shares for the party is not recording a further reduction.
-
What we are all going to have to get used to is that we are now in an era of stable polling without the turbulence of years ago.
The techniques that the three pollsters with the monthly newspaper contracts, ICM YouGov and Populus, use to ensure representative samples mean that big shifts are much less likely to happen. It is also my view that public opinion does not move all that much.
Apart from using the Internet rather than the phone the big difference between the YouGov approach and ICM is that the latter adjusts its figures to take into account the likelihood that people will actually vote. The reason the Lib Dem have been dropping is that barely half of their supporters in the latest ICM survey said they would be certain to turnout at a General Election.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I think your point about stability is the most relevant Mike. I don’t see how someone as experienced as Anthony King could miss the fact that there is basically no change. One point here or there is statistically within the MoE. Maybe it is more to do with the line his editor wants him to take…
I too think Mike has got this about right. In my view, the Telegraph is being overly pessimistic for some peculiar reason (though some form of editorial pressure seems the most plausible explanation) considering that under David Cameron, the Tories have had a consistent and firm lead over Labour for the first time since the early 1990s. ICM yesterday had us up 6 points on our GE share of just over a year ago; YouGov today puts our progress at 5 points.
It is true that we need to be doing 3-4 points better to be confident of a General Election victory, but not being one of those who buys into the snap election theory, I think there is time for that sort of lead to build. The decline in Cameron’s personal rating is obviously the most worrying aspect of this report for us, but these readings do seem to fluctuate to a greater extent than the main voting intention results and I think we need more data on this before drawing any conclusions, though he does still have higher personal numbers than either Blair, Brown or Campbell. Much will depend on events of course, and I have no better idea than anyone else what the future may throw up, but I feel very optimistic about our prospects.
This week’s figures must be a mild relief for Labour after all of the adverse publicity of recent weeks, but they have now well and truly lost their decade long poll lead and there is going to be a lot more turbulence and turmoil for them until Blair stands down, and probably beyond. They are pinning all of their hopes for recovery on Gordon Brown who, quite remarkably for someone who has been near the very top of politics in this country for so long, remains untested in many ways that could mean the difference between success and failure as Prime Minister.
The Liberal Democrats have got to be worried, if not yet panicked, that they are either stagnant or falling back in these surveys after expecting a lift from their near miss at the Bromley by-election, publicity for their tax proposals and a fortnight of unremittingly bad news out of the Middle East which has furnished the perfect opportunity for their leader and foreign policy ‘expert’ to shine. They clearly are not attracting the anti-Government vote they think they should be getting, Campbell’s slightly improved PMQs performances are having no positive impact on his standing and they certainly ought to be the party most concerned with these figures and the trend these figures confirm.
These numbers leave us in the realm of a Parliament with no overall majority. If that is what it looks like to journalists then the narrative, as far as the Liberal Democrats are concerned, will revolve around “Who will you support?” If the polling continues to show a significant loss of seats, members of the Parliamentary party will find themselves under increasing pressure to express a preference that (they believe) increases the chances of holding their seat. It only needs one or two to break from the “We are not going to tell you” position and the pressure for them to publicly argue will become unbearable. This problem becomes more acute if the leadership is ‘managerial’ rather than ‘inspirational’. Where the line is complex or nuanced it becomes considerably more difficult to hold it. The failure to capitalise on the foreign policy position, given the public perception of the Liberal Democrats on Iraq, does not auger well for the party (which I have supported at every election since, and including, 1974).
Interesting to see that the Tories had similar leads in 2003. July of that year had 37-34-22 and August 38-34-21. This is evidence that when the government is as unpopular as they are at the moment the Conservatives reach their glass ceiling of 38 to 39% even with a leader like IDS. The fact that the figures have been sustained for longer just points to Labours troubles lasting for longer. The Cameron effect therefore is probably close to zero.
re 4. But Roger you are making your case based on just one pollster which was still finding its feet and had been carrying out its Telegraph surveys for little more than a year. The ICM maximum in the same period - the time of the Kelly suicide and all the Hutton inquiry - showed a high mark of 34%.
Today’s figures have been sustained and across a full range of pollsters for a several months.
There has been a major shift in Tory support.
Please sign the Straw pledge here: http://www.pledgebank.com/strawman
I’m sure we’re all meeting people who are becoming less impressed with Cameron. Becoming a self obsessed PR junkie was always going to be a risk. You can fall as quickly as you can rise and the vaguaries of fashion can turn you from hero to zero overnight. If he wants to build up the brand in a sustainable way he should concentrate on serious sustainable policy and eschew the fadish PR gimmicks.
Simon-i-t-m: I’m not as pessimistic as that. I think the foreign policy stuff has a longer lead-time to filter through (Iraq took quite some time to be a vote winner & longer still be identified with the LDs). Tax plans also haven’t hit Focus - and won’t do so until after Conference, I would think. Mood among LDs I know is remarkably upbeat and I think with good reason: the last 6 months (& rest of the year) have been all about building a platform (party structures, policy etc) and that is going well.
I also think the elephant in the room is what you say in your first sentence: pretty much every poll for the last year has indicated that a hung parliament is the most likely scenario. Strategically, that’s good news, as it gives us the best chance of having some say on the Westminster agenda for years (indeed probably since ‘74 - but this time with far more seats in the House). Standing back from things, that’s got to be good news for the LDs.
I think it is well instilled in LD MPs not to speculate about a hung parl (though we on pb.c get to do so to our heart’s content!). It’s also not as simple as an MP in a Tory target seat looking over his shoulder and suggesting the LDs might support Cameron. As mentioned on here before, in pure tactical terms LD MPs in more Tory areas are just as reliant on squeezed Labour voters, and would be loath to upset them either. Hence not prejudging any hung parl discussions is the logical approach for LD MPs and I would expect them to stick to it.
4. But no other pollster found them then (ICM had a Labour lead of up to 13% throughout the first half of 2003, dropping to a fairly consistent 5% in the second half). Now, all the pollsters are in line with each other with the Tory share in the high-30s, Labour in the mid-to-low-30s and the Lib Dems in the very high teens. Besides, all this talk of ‘glass ceilings’ or floors is nonsense. For a long time 30-33 was talked of as the Tory ‘box’.
The point about the stability of the opinion polls is interesting and I do wonder if they’re a little too stable. In other words, in correcting out misremembering, shy voters and the disproportionate way in which people might be contacted, the firms are so keen to return to base that some real change is also being ‘corrected’. As was pointed out recently, Labour’s vote in opinion polls is holding up quite well, whereas their real votes cast in local byelections are dropping off quite substantially. Maybe that’s down to a lack of motivation to support Labour mid-term, but I remember the mid-90s as a Tory and being told not to worry by old hands, because support had dropped off between every other election since 1979 and always came back - and then it didn’t.
Very impressed with you very, very early birds, 4.28am etc.
Mike at 5. Interesting to look at ICM from November 05-June 06 and then November 03-June 04. The Conservative average has only gone up from 33.57% to 35.71%. This seems to echo the results from Yougov. The Labour vote has gone down from 37.57% to 35.14%. Perhaps we’re allowing our euphoria at young Dave’s antics to miss the big picture. That is Labour really unpopular and down a couple of points and the Tories up a couple.
Oxonian 8 and Simon 3. What you are expressing is the glass half full / half empty phenomenon that has dogged the LDs since the GE. The problem is one of where you draw the line of comparison. If you had asked a LD in 97 about the prospect of 63 seats and opinion poll ratings of 17-20% they would have bitten your hand off.
But the ambition genie is out of the bottle now. I think the problem for the Ming leadership is that to a greater or lesser extent it was the ‘Ming camp’ that took the stopper out.
So there are two factors at work. Some of them are ‘political’. The tax plans are not universally popular in the party - and I bow to Oxonian’s greater knowledge of them - in that there are some who are uncomfortable with the ‘message’ they send, even if the intention is from the great traditions of the party.
The more important factor is that the optimists are keen to point out the organisational improvements that have been going on at all levels within the party since Campbell took over, whereas the pessimists are like Simon worried about the ‘inspirational’ aspects of the leadership.
My gut feeling is that the *best* Ming can hope for is grudging respect from the doubters within the party, but grudging respect can take a lot of people a long way - Margaret Thatcher had a lot of grudging respect after all, with only a strange and small group of people who actually were enthusiastic about her (and before anyone jumps on me - check out Mori’s satisfaction with leaders question on their website - Thatcher’s swings more wildly and becomes more negative throughout her career than most politicians - a reflection of how much she was disliked, but put up with for whatever other reasons)
Another no news poll. Would not really have expected a Bromley bounce. Good result though it was, whoever heard of a by-election bounce for a losing party?
No coverage in the main media of Ming’s words on the Middle East, and precious little of the tax plans. No surprise then that there is no move in the polls.
A by-election result that we missed from last night.
MIle Cross Ward (Norwich City Council)
Mayhew, C (LibDem) 789
James, B (Labour) 702
Curran, S (Green) 155
Mackie, D (Con) 106
T/O 24.4%
LibDem HOLD majority 87
A pretty good result for the LibDems, despite this being a hold. Labour have now taken the other two seats in the ward. The previous councillor, who sadly died, was very popular and they ran a campaign “in his memory” - but the new Councillor is young and inexperienced and did very well. He fought the seat in May and lost, only to go on and fight the by-election and win. Labour had a very high profile candidate, the Chair of the Ward Residents Association. Greens and Tories did very, very little between them. Labour should have gained this seat and it is credit to the LibDems that they stopped them.
11 cont…..And with Yougov the Tory average since Cameron became leader have gone up from 35% to 36.57% and Labour have gone down from38.28% to 35,85%. So yougov and ICM are telling the same story. Only little Conservative improvement in the seven months since Cameron became leader.
1. I would hate to think Tony King is so badly paid that he is willing to produce dubious spin of this sort to please the Hefferlump tendency at the Telegraph. But it is difficult to reach any other conclusion.
15 cont…using the dates November 03-June 04 and November 05-June 06
I agree that hoping for a Bromley bounce as the losing party was optimistic, and also that despite I belive being in tune with public opinion, the LDs haven’t yet had the media coverage to gain support over the Middle East. While political positioning is hardly the most important aspect of the crisis, I do wonder how many people will come over to the LDs who stayed with Labour/the Tories over Iraq? My guess is pretty few.
But if consolidating support means more members, more deliverers etc., and if Ming is still working on his organisation and policy platform, then I can see an uplift in support coming, if not imminently.
16 Fred. Anthony King has always been a bit of a drama queen and what one day can be ‘no change’ can the next be ‘dramatic change’. I guess it’s difficult to make an interesting story out of not much change. However to libel him as you have done is both ignorant and typical.
Tony King is shamelessly anti-Tory and I ignore absolutely everything he has said, ever.
US Presidential election? 2003 local elections?
Nevertheless, it does seem to back up the idea that the Tories and LDs on pb.com have been getting a little overexcited too soon.
No one really loves the Tories yet. IMO Labour are polling very, very well given the hammering they have been getting recently. They not even trying to be popular at the moment and they’re not much down on the GE.
Roger 15 & 17. Why not re-work your numbers using Cameron’s election as the start date and today. Makes more sense - but would undermine the point you were trying to make.
18 As I said yesterday - it is a big “If” with “improvements in organisation”. This line has been spun out, but I wonder whether your average supporter / member of the LDs has actually seen great evidence of this?
I’m sorry Mike but I started in November which I thought was the start of Cameron’s reign and went to the last date on the ICM link that you have provided, this one.
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/vote-intention-reports/guardian-report.asp
The striking thing about the YouGov poll is surely not the trivial change in party support (1% is just not worth discussing at all and with rounding could even be one bloke shifting to Don’t Know) but the dramatic drop in Cameron’s rating since February:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/28/ntory128.xml
This is presumably mostly the hoodie thing, plus a bit of EPP and a bit of ‘He doesn’t seem to be saying anything much’. I suspect it’ll recover a bit next time but the risk for the Tories is that the gap between DC’s popularity and their lack of appeal closes in the wrong direction, and at present DC and the Government’s current unpopularity is really all they’ve got going for them.
Labour remains in the doldrums in public esteem, so the 32-35% range seems to be the core vote in the absence of any particular controversy that week. The widespread disapproval particularly among GMW voters of lack of forthright condemnation of Israel (which I’m continuing to register - two or three emails a day) doesn’t seem to be having a poll effect, which presumably means that even this group don’t vote primarily on foreign policy, at least not where Britain is not directly involved. John Reid will be mildly encouraged by the positive rating for his work so far, though the public are sceptical about the long-term prospects for the Home Office.
“Certainly it’s hard to back up King’s assertion based on the only firm that’s been carrying out surveys using similar methodology since before 2002 - ICM. The only valid historical comparisons are those where you compare like with like.”
I think the assumption that keeping the same methodology over a long period of time makes polls more comparable it questionable.
It’s obviously the case that if a company suddenly changes its methods, comparing the before and after polls needs to be done with care. But in the long run, polling methodology is not designed in a vacuum to produce the most perfect poll possible in abstract, but rather the methodology has to reflect the current behaviour of the public. As that changes, methodology changes. What you need to do is compare best with best.
Turning your point around Mike, it’s like saying that the best form of poll for knowing how the Tories and Labour were doing 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago is one that uses the same methodology as is used today. Which means - for example - that you’d be saying having approaches that adjust for low turnout would have been much better than those that didn’t even in the times of high turnout.
NIck - I broady accept what you say but the striking things I take from the detail of the poll are the virtual collapse in the Govt’s economic competence rating (which could bode ill in the future), and the very poor ratings of Ming Campbell in the potential PM ratings. 7% is a derisory share!
I was one who saw Ming as something of a threat to us as he is a serious figure with the much sought after ‘gravitas’. It appears that compared to Blair and Cameron the public just dont ‘buy’ him.
Yougovs question “Who would make the best Prime Minister” is a much more sensible one than ICM’s where they subtract the negative ratings from the positive ones. Shockingly Blair and Cameron are within a point of each other. Even I would be a “don’t know ” on that question and I’m starting to think Cameron a buffoon.
25,
Don`t think EPP resonated at all with anyone but political junkies.
However the “hoodie thing” realy hit home, with lots of people, as I heard it without any prompting in the workplace, spoken with complete derision.
I think Cameron will learn from this, as the attacks hurt, and nearer to an election would cause real damage.
27. ” the very poor ratings of Ming Campbell in the potential PM ratings. 7% is a derisory share! ”
I think that maybe even McDonnell can get more than 7%!
Morning all :). I don’t quite buy Mike’s argument on poll stability because that’s a guarantee of something unexpected happening
With the SDP Mark 3 in the high 30s and the SDP Mark 2 in the mid-30s, voters will be spoilt for choice at the next election
As for Menzies’ 7% poll rating, I doubt CK was doing any better in his early months as leader while ICM’s assertion about the likelihood of the LD vote coming out isn’t anything new either. The LD vote has always been the softest and least reliable - that’s why we have to work so hard to get our votes out and why we’re so good at it
“The Liberal Democrats have got to be worried, if not yet panicked, that they are either stagnant or falling back in these surveys after expecting a lift from their near miss at the Bromley by-election,”
AHM you don’t really DO poitics do you? The Lib Dem ‘expectations’ of what you describe rank roughly with your own production of your current membership card of the Women’s Division of the Vladivostock Young Communist League.
Only seasoned poliical hounds like yourself take a great deal of notice of the (very minor) press coverage of Lib Dem tax proposals, and mid-term by-election near-misses make no ripples in the sea of life. With our two large parties having leaders who are more likely to sell you a duff Volvo than show the remotest element of principles of any discernable sort, there is ‘no change’ at all out there except that the public become more and more ‘anti-politics’.
Female not A lister defeats female A lister to get Bury South….they were the only 2 applicants there….not a surprise considering Labour probably needs to collapse to lose it.
Excluding Bob Neill, 6 out 18 women have been selected so far
28- Roger. Cameron is hardly a buffoon.
7% for Ming is not good and he needs to lower his profile in order for it to rise.
Average You Gov polls since Election 2005:
Con 35.52% (this poll +2.48 on average)
Lab 36.17% (this poll -3.17 on average)
Lib 18.35% (this poll -0.35 on average)
Oth 9.96% (this poll +1.04 on average)
29. Dez. I’m not sure what the lesson from the Hoody fiasco really is? That he got involved in yet another “eye catching initiative” that backfired? Or that he has gone from ice caps in Norway to chauffeur driven shoes to windmills on his roof to gatecrashing the Beckhams Party to camel rides in Afghanistan to……..? At the moment he is undergoing a metamorphosis from serious politician to something of a laughing stock. When you employ a full time PR just to promote yourself this ia always going to be a danger. Ask Posh Spice.
Mike you mention the ‘dramatic rise’ in Tory share since last month as reported by ICM yet looking at the comparison with the post May elections there was only a 1% rise. Stripping out month by month fluctuations one can say that DC’s arrival produced a modest and immediate 5% or so rise in the Tory vote since the GE, mainly at the expense of the LDs. There has been no gain since then and frankly given Labour’s travails I’m disappointed there hasn’t been. We’ll have to see how GB does next year but Tories would be very foolish to be complacent. The task of winning an overall majority at the next election still looks formidable.
Mike, You said “The reason the Lib Dem have been dropping is that barely half of their supporters in the latest ICM survey said they would be certain to turnout at a General Election.”
Although these voters are damn all use if they sit on their bottoms on election day at least it is probably easier to motivate them to vote LD than have to convert them back from an opponent rather than convert them from apathy.
Do you have the percentages unadjusted for this factor.
36,
Roger, I feel as you state there is a growing element of mockery about Cameron and his stunts.
If this gets traction, could be dangerous, if people do not percieve him, eventualy as a serious politician.
The Anthony King analysis of the latest YouGov poll is his most bizarre to date.
I wonder what the Tories have to do to NOT be condenmed as having a poor showing by this old man. Have a 20 point lead tomorrow after 13 years of being in the doldrums?
The Tory position is still in need of strengthening but what an old misery not to give some credit for what has been done to date.
If he were a fortune teller he would look at your palm and look mournfully at you and say, ‘You are going to die.’
And then after a long pause,’ You will be 90, but you will die. And you will be ill and you will fully recover only to die years later.’
There is always a black cloud blocking his view of the silver lining.
[37] Quite right- I think that there is everything to play for here. As for Alastair Matlocks [2]insistence that the Lib Dems are in deep doo doo, actually tracking along in the high teens mid term is pretty good in historic terms. (BTW I think that the anti-Cameron editorial line the Telegraph has been pretty consistent, and it could potentially get worse for him)
The Telegraph, like me, seems to think there is a real risk of the Cameron bubble actually bursting- the fall in his personal ratings is interesting: perhaps he is beginning to look like William Hague.
Andrea, Bury South is a far better bet for the Tories than a lot of the seats down south these stuffed shirts are going for. It is a classic ‘aspirational’ working-class Tory seat which was swayed by Blair’s easy answers and may well want to ‘buy’ the same twaddle from DC. Trouble, from the Tory point of view is that there is a growing Lib Dem cell in the local council seats there.
Cicero The Telegraph is afraid the Cameron bubble, as you put it, will NOT burst, and so they are doing their damnedest to ensure it does.
42. They had troubles to hold it when Kinnock was in charge (a less than 2% against Hazel Blears in 1992)
Incidentally whilst on the subject of marketing 10 out of 10 to the Labour Ad agency for inventing ‘Dave the chamelion’. People said it was friendly , it gave people a nice cuddly feeling about Dave etc and it would backfire. But what the agency had seen was the subliminal truth that the public hadn’t yet grasped. That Dave would flit from one fad to the next and the chamelion label would stick. Very difficult to do with only a couple of showings unless it is so catchy that it develops it’s own momentum.
44. Indeed - but my inside track info says the local blues there are much better organised these days - and there is more demographic ‘flight’ from Manchester to ‘milk’. All they have got to do is get those non-voters to vote and eyh-oop you’re in Rhodes Boyson nirvana. Or eric Pickled in a slightly more femalse sort of way.
45 Spot on Roger. This Chameleon is a cold-blooded creature which will only really get to run around in the heat of an election run-up.
[28][32] Nail on the head time… pollsters ask what their clients commission them to, and I suspect that if they were commissioned to ask “Do you think [insert name here] has the necessary personal qualities to make a good Prime Minister?” you’d be very hard pressed to find a name that would score a net positive rating. FWIW I suspect Brown and Kennedy would come closest…
46. zebidee. Maybe you’re right and Labour will lose it…..but on this blog every Labour seat is considered in danger….could someone tell me a seat Labour is sure to hold next time (barring a very bad election)?
Bury South is one of the classic “barometer” seats - the sort of seat the both Labour and the Tories need to win if they’re going to form a government. It’s exactly the sort of place which will test the appeal of Cameron to the lower middle / skilled working class voters who supported Thatcher in the 80s and switched to Blair in the 90s.
The odd thing about it is that it doesn’t actually include any of the town of Bury (that’s in Bury North). It’s basically various north Manchester suburbs which were lumped in with Bury to form a new district council in 1974 – something which is still rather resented even today.
49 - I’d have thought whatever Blair does… Sedgefield would be a tick in the Red column…
No 1: Alastair Matlock
I too think Mike has got this about right. In my view, the Telegraph is being overly pessimistic for some peculiar reason (though some form of editorial pressure seems the most plausible explanation) considering that under David Cameron, the Tories have had a consistent and firm lead over Labour for the first time since the early 1990s. ICM yesterday had us up 6 points on our GE share of just over a year ago; YouGov today puts our progress at 5 points.
Those bl**dy Barclay Brothers and their interfering threaten to put our carefully laid plans out of kilter by their insistence on telling it like it is for the traditional members. Don’t they realise that if people realise we’re still like that we’re sunk?
It is true that we need to be doing 3-4 points better to be confident of a General Election victory, but not being one of those who buys into the snap election theory, I think there is time for that sort of lead to build. The decline in Cameron’s personal rating is obviously the most worrying aspect of this report for us, but these readings do seem to fluctuate to a greater extent than the main voting intention results and I think we need more data on this before drawing any conclusions, though he does still have higher personal numbers than either Blair, Brown or Campbell. Much will depend on events of course, and I have no better idea than anyone else what the future may throw up, but I feel very optimistic about our prospects.
Cameron is god, I want his babies and I would happily sell my soul to ensure the sweaty-socks get booted off the green leather. For far too long People Like Me have been excluded from influence and its time we resumed our rightful place!
This week’s figures must be a mild relief for Labour after all of the adverse publicity of recent weeks, but they have now well and truly lost their decade long poll lead and there is going to be a lot more turbulence and turmoil for them until Blair stands down, and probably beyond. They are pinning all of their hopes for recovery on Gordon Brown who, quite remarkably for someone who has been near the very top of politics in this country for so long, remains untested in many ways that could mean the difference between success and failure as Prime Minister.
I hate the lot of them and I’m really pissed off that they’re not lower in the polls.
The Liberal Democrats have got to be worried, if not yet panicked, that they are either stagnant or falling back in these surveys after expecting a lift from their near miss at the Bromley by-election, publicity for their tax proposals and a fortnight of unremittingly bad news out of the Middle East which has furnished the perfect opportunity for their leader and foreign policy ‘expert’ to shine. They clearly are not attracting the anti-Government vote they think they should be getting, Campbell’s slightly improved PMQs performances are having no positive impact on his standing and they certainly ought to be the party most concerned with these figures and the trend these figures confirm.
As to the Yellow Peril, nothing gives me greater satisfaction than the thought that they might suffer a serious reverse. I am still smarting that they have had the temerity to take our seats, and am jumping up and down with glee that they have taken a slight dip.
What a laugh I have had this morning reading through this thread. The facts are inescapable yet still posters like Roger try and escape them.
There is massive gulf between the satisfaction ratings for Cameron and every other leader or leadership contender, only Cameron has positive ratings and his rating has returned to it’s pre Local election level where I expect it to stabilise.
The Conservatives have maintained a consistant poll lead ever since Cameron became leader in every poll by every pollster.
The internal polling and research figures which I have seen are even more convincing, the problem left to be dealt with is all brand ‘old’ (Bromley-style) Conservative, not ‘new’ (Notting Hill) brand Cameron; and this has happened before we have made a single policy announcement.
And before Roger gets too exited about that he might remember that the main plus the Tories had in 2005 was the policy platform, the public traditionally prefer Tory policies, so the potential is worrying for Labour.
The main victims in the resurgence of the Conservatives have been the Lib Dems who have lost approximately a fifth of the support they had at the last election.
Why is anyone arguing about this? Why is anyone surprised?
Surely the interest is not about where we are now, but about where we are going to end up?
As a Conservative moderniser I see us appealing more and more to the soft centre voter (people who originally liked Tony Blair back in 1997 and who have always liked Charles Kennedy as both being decent middle ground leaders ‘not like usual politicians’) and probably as a consequence irritating political deep thinkers on both sides of the political divide, and on PB.com.
The missing result from Aylesbury Gatehouse was a comfortable LibDem hold LibDem 559 Con 343 Ratepayer 90 - 2003 result LibDem 474/439 Con 180/160 Lab 160/141 Ratepayer 83/75 .
Completes a good night for the LibDems and a poor week for the Conservatives though there are byelections today in the safe Conservative seats of Guildford BC and Surrey CC Ash Ward .
The Norwich result in May was Lab 849 LibDem 700 Green 250 Con 235 and in the County Council last year with GE size turnout Lab 1797 LibDem 799 Con 537 Green 322 .
52. You’re not STUART Jackson MP in disguise, are you?
54 - Any idea what the reason is for holding by-elections on a Friday rather than the normal Thursday?
I suspect the hug a hoodie speech, or rather the way it was spun, and then ridiculed, may be a factor behind the drop in personal ratings reported in today’s telegraph - it’s only speculation but, given his vulnerabilities to charges of lack of experience, and to the Right, it may well be that this widely-reported speech came across as naive, divorced from everyday concerns, touched these vulnerabilities, and then hit his ratings
Its a shame as the speech itself was nothing like the tag-line, and everything sensible (and quite moving) about how kids from some disadvanted areas don’t stand a chance if their families are breaking up around and over them (or if they never had one in the first place), which is when they need the love, rather than parental abandonment into gangs, drugs, violence and (sorry DC, pretty aggressive) hoods - the love element in the speech is about how the state and the voluntary sector can work together to help families stay together, and provide that love - not about hugging the hoodie 10 years later if he’s trying to relieve you of your mobile
Just shows that headline-orientated spin can sometimes bite you in the bum
Still, I think he’ll personally recover quickly, not least because at least he’s been seen to err on the side of humanity, and every leader, particularly a young and obviously talented one, may be forgiven the odd mistake
Perhaps the difference causing the lack of poll movement for LDs is the lack of a “mouthy” and gutsy Ashdown/Kennedy figure to hammer the message of outrage in the message to the media.
The comparison between what Israel is doing in Lebanon and with what Milosevic did in Kosovo is striking. The KLA were a local “terrorist” group with popular support that was fighting a guerrilla war of attrition against “occupation” by the Serbian army. Milosevic decided he would destroy the KLA once and for all and shatter support for it, and launched a wholesale bombing attack on ethnic Albanian villages where KLA fighters were “known to be”. Compare this with yesterday’s Israeli cabinet meeting: “Everyone in southern Lebanon is a terrorist and is connected to Hezbollah” and the response yesterday from Israel’s biggest-selling paper, Yedioth Ahronoth: “In other words: a village from which rockets are fired at Israel will simply be destroyed by fire”. There is virtually no difference in tactics or results between Kosovo 1999 and Lebanon 2006, in the way that civilians are being explicitly targeted as assumed terrorist sympathisers. However, one crucial difference was that because Serbia was only a Russian ally with its fingers still dripping with the blood of the despicable Yugoslav wars, while Israel is a US/UK ally with its hands dripping only with the “terrorist” blood of lowly Palestinians, the western media turned in favour of the KLA and indeed cheered while NATO waged its own bombing campaign Serbia to force Milosevic to cease.
It’s notable that Ashdown was instrumental in carrying the message of how Kosovan civilians were being targeted to the western world. However, no leading politician today has the guts to take on the Israeli lobby in the same way and highlight the parallels between Kosovo and Lebanon, and the hypocrisy of the west.
53 Marcus we had a debate on here a couple of months ago on Cameron’s falling ratings and they have continued to do so . Then the trend for those approving of him was holding steady Don’t knows were moving to disapproval . Look at the figures in the Telegraph Yes he is a good leader Jan-39 Feb-46 Now-35 , No he is not Jan-17 Feb-19 Mow-33 Don’t know Jan-44 Feb-35 Now-32 and other pollsters tell them same picture .
56 - No idea why Friday , lennon , nor for the one on Tuesday in Aldershot .
50 Jeremy S. Am I missing something on Bury South ?? Lab maj almost 9,000 whereas Bury North Lab maj under 3,000 ??
……………………………………
On Antony King and the latest YouGov, I’m surprised by the lukewarm analysis of the Tories position. It’s crystal clear that presently the Tories are way above the old “box”. Yes the current polling indicates a hung parliament and the Tories are way off a working majority but Cameron has placed the Tories in a much stronger position where the prospect of Tories in government is not viewed as a laughable spectacle as it was under Messrs Hague, IDS and Howard. Progress indeed.
61. Jack, if you want to win a bottle of wine:
http://www.wakefieldtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=702&ArticleID=1657681
62 Andrea. Ed Balls : “Bad idea babysitting Diane Abbott’s mouthy teenager !!”
This Michael Brown fraudster who have £2m to the Liberal Democrats - does the case look increasingly like a set up? The Libidems fell for it hook, line and sinker!
Actually thought King’s anaylsis to be pretty good- underwhelmed being the operative word. Underwhelmed with the government, underwhelmed with Cameron and underwhelmed with Ming.
Cameron is a lightweight simple as that. Like Hague his personal ambition for power and status has thrown him into the leadership job far too early, and without natural gravitas and authority he is increasingly going to be picked off as a figure of fun.
Like Hague he should have waited for his moment much later in his career.
With all the difficulties in government any opposition would be ahead in the polls, probaly more so with Howard or Davis who would have pulled the populist card to exploit the government, and Clarke just for his natural popularity (and Rifkind just for being bloody bright). Cameron is rapidly spending his political capital, and once it has gone its gone. A few exceptions- Thatcher post 1982, and Clinton post 1994, both bounced successfully back, but Cameron is no Thatcher or Clinton.
Since Thatcher the Tories have shown the strategic sense of Saddam Hussein with their leadership choices, policies and planning. Brown is going to maul poor Cameron- the Tories should have seen it coming, and chosen a leader who had been tested much more.
61 - Good Morning Jack , I agree Antony King’s analysis is way too pessimistic but so too are the eulogies for Cameron from some Conservative posters on here . I go back to my question yesterday as to why Labour are doing well in and only in the question as to who people will vote for in a GE . You and others said it was down mainly to the economy . The Yougov figures do not back this up at all . which party is more likely to run the economy well - at the last GE 49% said Labour now 31% an 18% fall but with negligible impact on voting intentions .
See the figures for Norwich at 54 - almost 1,000 fewer voted Labour yesterday than at the GE , yes a GE turnout would bring back the stay at homes but not I think anywhere near 1,000 .
62 - I note it says “Deputy headteacher Doreen Redmond said: “It was a bit like Jeremy Paxman’s show, with a really diverse set of questions.”
I thought Paxman always asked the same question - repeatedly. Also “Jeremy Paxman’s show” sounds good! Can see such a title rivalling Messrs Norton, Ross, Parkinson, and Trisha too!
66. Mark, how do you know how many voted Lab in GE (and the GE turnout in that ward)? then I think you’ve to take into account potential voters who vote something in GE and something else at the locals.
[63] I’ve had a go - far too rude to post here…
Andrea I agree there is not complete correlaion between voting in GE and local elections on the same day which is why I said around 1,000 . As you know in most cases it is the Lib Dem vote which is around 4% higher in the local elections compared to the GE held on the same day .
54 Mark Senior The Aylebury election: the LibDems increased their share of the vote from 53% to 56%, a small increase when there was no Labour candidate this time although you say there was in 2003. The LibDems should have done better taking in much of the Labour vote.
The Conservatiivees increased their share from 20% to 34%, and so seem to have soaked up much more of the Labour voters who had no candidate. Not a good result for the LibDems when you look more closely.
70. Mark, I see you’re made the confront with 2005 CC elections…I missed this point earlier.
I think the Green vote is also higher in locals in Norwich than in a GE.
52 “Cameron is god, I want his babies and I would happily sell my soul to ensure the sweaty-socks get booted off the green leather. For far too long People Like Me have been excluded from influence and its time we resumed our rightful place!”
Precisely why the Tories will not get back into government. People know what they are like.
I can’t see any mention of what might in the longer term be the most important political issue to come up in the UK this week: Yet another big increase in the price of Gas.
At the moment, during the summer this can easily be ignored by the general public. It will really hit the man in the street, including OAP’s next spring when the quarterly winter bills come in. Comparing those bills to the bills of 12 months earlier will be dramatic, and the 2005 bills were pretty awful.
And as far as the OAP’s are concerned this winter Brown’s 2005 election fuel bribe won’t be there so there could be a lot of angry people.
A lot of this anger might be directed towards Brown for stopping his bribe but there may be some who are angry at the tories for privatisation of Gas.
This issue might have a big impact on next year’s council elections particulary if the OAP’s turn out in disproportionate numbers. It could have the same sort of impact as the price of Gas (petrol) is likely to do in the US November elections.
Perhaps the electoral threat will prompt Brown to do the decent thing and organise some help for those who are likely to be hammered by this.
The reason why Labour is doing OK in the polls is that they are still the safe default position. The Conservatives don’t seem to have any momentum about them. Even Norwich points to a lethargic Labour vote-not an enthusiastic Tory one. The Lib Dems are the only party that can substantially increase their vote in my opinion. Labour have a history now and the Conservatives brand is basically finished.
66 Hi Mark. I wonder if the fall in the economy rating is more to do with the general feeling of disappointment with the government. Also as I mentioned yesterday perhaps there is an element of discounting the Blair years when the GE question is asked.
I don’t pretend to have an academic take on polling, rather I use a well honed antenae to deduce where the parties stand and IMO the punters are still dockside awaiting which political ship to board. Presently though I consider the Lib Dems as being slightly low, but broadly I view the polls as on the money.
71 I don’t know much about the Aylesbury situation but 1 poster said the LibDem councillor left under a bit of a cloud though not as big a one as the Dartford Conservative councillor . Generally in local elections I would expect the Labour core vote who voted in 2003 to stay at home with no Labour candidate rather than vote LibDem or Ratepayer .
75- Roger - well said !
20 - Looks like Tony King’s SDP roots are showing.
Sorry if this has been mentioned before but the ICM poll data confirms a post I made yesterday.
Of those certain to vote the July figure was 47% a massive 6 points drop on June. Even those who marked their likelyhood to vote as 9 (out of 10) was 5% against 6% in June.
We discuss a one point move ad nauseum and but the most important figure is a 6 point shift to the cant be bothered party.
As this excludes people who when rung by ICM didnt want to take part in the poll, I would expect that those answering the poll are actually more likely to vote than the population as a whole.
25 - NickP, lies, damned lies, statistics and frothing at the mouth right wingers at the Telegraph is the answer.
They use Feb figures for Cameron support which was a real outlier, all the others this year had his support below 40% so there is no dramatic fall at all. When someone manipulates figures my first reaction is always to ask why and to manipulate them myself to see what they are hiding!
76. ‘antenae’ is plural and so does not agree with the singular ‘a well honed’. It is also misspelt. Creeping dyslexia, as well as loss of hair and teeth?
Icarus- precisely the point. People are underwhelmed by politcis, politcians, and parties. Politics is boring and irrelevant to most people. This is being reflected in the polls, and will become even more entrenched if we cannot get some exciting and accessible ideas and debates.
80 Very good point Icarus .
81 Agreed the Feb figure was an outlier but the trend has been clear for some time and with all posters .
84. Mark, any news from the byelection in the Rhondda?
81- do not agree at all. The write up from King was a summary of the last 6-9 months. Why beat around the bush in the analysis- the data shows that the Tories are far from govermnet. A slender lead in the midst of such government unpopularity- how can he present it otherwise?
85 No Andrea where is cymrumark when you need him lol ?
Candidate name Votes
Greenhead byelection result for Kirklees Council
*LAB Labour Barbara Ruth Jones 2,904 Elected (Majority of 2090)
LIBDEM Liberal Democrat John James O’Reilly 814
CON Conservative Paul Nicholas Murphy 287
GRN Green Paul Francis Cooney 240
RESPECT Respect David Alexander Ellis 178
BNP British National Party Barry Reginald Fowler 148
Total votes: 4,571
Turnout: 35.14%
* indicates defending party
Compared with the May results
Labour +6.5%
Lib Dem -0.8%
Con -4.1%
Green -2.1%
Respect +3.9%
BNP - 3.5%
82 S & G C. Shouldn’t that be Spelling and Grammar Check ??
As for my disslexea … Gilty az chargd !
0 - Excellent point (probably because it backs up everything I’ve been trying to put across for months!)
It’s the whole business of politics that is in trouble, chasing after a dwindling number of voters. The party that addresses this problem is best placed to benefit electorally. That cannot be the government as they are in power and tainted until they are not in power again, who out of the lib dems and tories is going to grasp it instead then, or are they going to let the BNP/Greens/Respect and so on benefit?
86 - The Telegraph want a hard right position, King is giving them what they want. No further analysis is necessary!
It’s been fascinating to read the anti-Tory posters on this site since Cameron became leader. Originally we were assured that the Tory right would never tolerate Dave’s centrist positioning and his humiliation at the hands of his own party might only be weeks away. That prediction has been abandoned. Now a new strategy is unfolding before our eyes: to strip Cameron of any claim to be taken seriously. So Dave is ‘a buffoon’ (28), ‘without natural gravitas’ (65), ‘a laughing stock’ (36), ‘a figure of fun’ (65) and - most devastating of all - ‘he is beginning to look like William Hague’ (41).
It’s clear to most, I think, that Cameron is a highly skilled and intelligent politician, so this sort of nonsense will obviously fail, but it’s interesting to speculate what the next line of attack will be. Douglas Alexander’s speech gives us a clue: that Dave is really a popped-eyed right-wing ideologue and that the Tory party is even further to the right than it ever was under Howard, Thatcher or IDS. I look forward to reading the parroting of this line of attack by certain PB.com contributors over the coming months.
88. Good Labour hold.
92. Spot on.
91 The Telegraph wants a Tory government and would be backing Cameron if they thought he would deliver this. All King is saying that the signs now are not good. Speaking the obvious really.
O/T Liverpool have been drawn against Maccaba Haifa in the Champions League, I expect the Israeli leg will be held outside the warzone.
92. Does it not sometimes cross your mind that Cameron is too inexperienced, young, lightweight to pull off the feat of an election victory, or do you think like your co-suppoprter DC, that he has assumed the mantle of greatness?
91 - The Telegraph don’t want a Cameron style government, they want an IDS type government. The problem is that very few do so, in actual fact the outcome of the Telegraph’s desire would be a purist opposition not government at all.
If Blair had had the guts to annoy his Murdoch masters I’d have given him the same sort of approbation as Cameron facing down the loony right but Blair has always been too craven and weak to do it.
97 No.
92 - I totally agree. All we ever hear is how badly ‘Dave’ is doing. And yet we are still polling better than we have for over a decade. Yes the government is having a rough time but that has been the case before and it did not benefit the Tory party.We can also ask ourselves if the rise in support is solely down to an unpopular government why are the Lib Dems not doing better as well.
And yes we here that ‘historically’ the Lib Dems are polling well but given all Ming’s supposed qualities surely they would be expecting to do rather better than they are. Although I note this is not s topic they like to discuss - far more intresting to indulge thir obsessive dislike of Cameron.
One more reason why labour support is holding up - tories and lib dems have not made a good job of attacking their failings and have tried to take chunks out of each other instead. Make no mistake, if you don’t turn your fire on labour they will hold and take seats that you otherwise should win, not turning your fire on the government is electoral suicide.
Dave the lizard is doing well - that’s fair enough to admit. He’s doing better than any Tory leader for 13 years. Not saying much, but as a LD I am a charitable person prepared to tell the truth. It’s all a bit light and frothy from him at the moment, but we’ll wait and see. So all you Tories, you have a LD paying your man a compliment, of sorts.
Ming is a bit disappointing at the moment, but there’s always time. In fact there’s a lot of time before the next election.
96 - The sighs of relief from Merseyside and Milan are almost audible on hearing that they wont have to face the mighty Jambos.
I think we might be in with a chance in Athens.
6. Does anyone here really want to sign a petition that would put their name alongside that of Richard Littlejohn?
#95 - Well, not exactly. The Telegraph wants a *right-wing* Tory government and isn’t willing to put up with the Cameron-boy tacking to the left.
It would be far harder for them to take this line if Cameron were polling in the high 40’s, but I’m sure the sentiment would still be there.
Re some previous comments about a hung parliament. I think this is going to be a *big* issue as we get nearer the next election and it can only be bad news for the Lib Dems. They’ll only get mentioned during the campaign in connection with the question of which party they’d form a coalition with, which will be incredibly damaging for them as they’ll be unable to give a straight answer to it. I don’t think people will like the idea that Ming Campbell will choose who gets to be PM.
Personally I prefer the Greens position of tolerating minority executives and having each piece of legislation debated on its merits with “coalitions of the willing”, if you like, forming for each Bill. Seems much more democratic than a majority executive using the party whip to force through whatever legislation it feels like, or a formal coalition conducting backroom deals.
98. You may be right about the Telegraph, but Blair’s courting of Murdoch and Cameron’s jettisoning of just about every policy he supported only months before are both cynical and debase politics. In fact I find Cameron’s complete volte face nauseating, rather than the approbation that you give him in facing down the “loony right”. Where were his modernising, liberal instincts when he was drafting that racist manifesto. Cameron’s ambition for power is completely unedifying.
(rant alert! rant alert!)
Just in case anyone thought that Blair was in the US to focus on the middle east.
‘Media Mogul Summons the Powerful to Expound”.
Guess which one? No prizes it’s too easy!
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-fox28jul28,0,1928002.story?coll=la-home-headlines
99- seriously you think a 38 year old with 4 years in Parliament, and whose only piece of gainful employment was as a PR man has absolutley enough experience under his belt to be PM??
Compare that to this week the press are having great fun with a 69 year old politician who has stood in for 10 years as acting PM every summer, and who has been a major political figure for 25 years ??
From the Press Association:
The Liberal Democrats made the only gain in this week’s council byelections and also kept a key marginal against the odds.
Their candidate, Hazel Manning, took a Grange seat at Hampshire’s Rushmoor borough, where the previous councillor had become independent after being originally elected as a Tory.
There was also relief for the Liberal Democrats at Mile Cross, Norwich city, where they held on in a ward where Labour had won another seat in May’s main polls.
The Tories scored a huge swing at Rushden East, East Northamptonshire, where one of the ward’s three councillors is Labour. But the Conservatives narrowly hung on at Filey, Scarborough borough, North Yorkshire, by just 10 votes. In a field of seven candidates, the winner needed to poll just 22.8%.
Analysis of 23 comparable results during July suggest a projected nationwide Tory lead of 9.7% over Labour - slightly down on the findings in a BBC survey of May’s main contests.
A calculation covering 15 wards fought both times by all three major parties suggests a line-up of Con 41.7%, Lab 31.2%, Lib Dem 21.2%.
Results
Aylesbury Vale district - Gatehouse: Lib Dem 559, Con 343, Residents Action 90. (May 2003 - Two seats Lib Dem 474, 439, Con 180, 160, Lab 160, 141, Residents Action 83, 75). Lib Dem hold. Swing 5.8% Lib Dem to Con.
Dartford borough - Heath: Con 637, Lab 518, BNP 240, Ukip 179, New England party 174, Green 65. (May 2003 - Three seats Con 874, 847, 788, Lab 486, 481, 449, Ukip 261, Lib Dem 225). Con hold. Swing 6.9% Con to Lab.
East Northamptonshire district - Rushden East: Con 506, Lab 256. (May 2003 - Three seats Con 610, 521, Lab 496, Con 487, Lab 450, 417, Lib Dem 253). Con hold. Swing 12.9% Lab to Con.
Kirklees borough - Greenhead: Lab 2904, Lib Dem 814, Con 287, Green 240, Respect 178, BNP 148. (May 2006 - Lab 3343, Lib Dem 1089, Con 608, Green 433, BNP 394). Lab hold. Swing 3.6% Lib Dem to Lab.
Norwich city - Mile Cross: Lib Dem 789, Lab 702, Green 115, Con 106. (May 2006 - Lab 849, Lib Dem 700, Green 250, Con 235). Lib Dem hold. Swing 6.2% Lab to Lib Dem.
Oxford city - Hinksey Park: Lab 676, Green 436, Lib Dem 217, Con 155. (May 2006 - Lab 882, Green 543, Con 221, Lib Dem 161). Lab hold. Swing 1.2% Lab to Green.
Rushmoor borough - Grange: Lib Dem 515, Con 445, BNP 137, Lab 94. (May 2006 - Con 683, Lib Dem 373, BNP 257, Lab 209). Lib Dem gain from Ind. Swing 13.1% Con to Lib Dem.
Scarborough borough - Filey: Con 322, Ind 312, Ind 282, BNP 181, Ind 127, Lab 126, Lib Dem 62. (May 2003 - Ind 1020, Con 793, 712, 685, Ind 453, Lab 428). Con hold. Swing 1% Con to Lab.
108. It appears we have a new spoof poster to follow in the august footsteps of The Professor, Sarah J and others…
Why are Labour polling so high in the middle of a storm of sleaze and incompetence?
Inertia and ego.
People don’t, usually, change allegiance very easily. That is not because they have any real faith in the sinking party, nor that they do not trust the opposition party, but because a change is an admission that their choice has turned out badly, and they refuse to admit they were cheated or conned. The condition is even worse when the voter has reaffirmed his original choice at susequent elections.
You can see the same reaction every day: the girl who will not admit to herself that her boyfriend is cheating, the newspaper reader who will keep buying the paper he has for years despite the lack of satisfaction he gets from it, the patient who, despite all the evidence, will not recognise the old doctor has gone past his prime.
Its human nature. We are social creatures with strong egos and we hate to lose face, even to ourselves. So a real voiced change takes a long time.
1. Often the first step for the majority is to moan about what is happening but not voice criticism of the government for it although it is clearly the government’s responsibility.
2. The next step is to criticise the government but say you will vote for them
3. The next stage is to criticise and say you will vote for them but actually abstain
4. Then the criticism comes with a statement of non-support and the voter still abstains
5. Lastly the disaffected one votes for someone else but will not admit it publicly until the decision seems to be popular or successful.
The Tory decades demonstrated this ( and the many sub-stages on this roller coaster road) quite well but finally the disillusion becomes common and acceptable and the votes move to the opposition.
This is not a linear progression and all voters do not move at the same speed.
I suspect, looking at other polling indicators, such as economic competence and leadership and the collapsed vote for Labour at parliamentary by elections, that there are still a proportion of non-core Labour supporters at 3 moving to 4 and by 2010 a significant number might well be at 5.
81. King used only the figures from previous Telegraph polls. All newspapers compare with their own polls. They have done four polls on Cameron’s leadership.
January +22
February +27
March +14
July +2
Surely King is right to say his ratings are going down fast?
#111 - interesting, but I think you miss out on an important emotion which has played a large part in most election campaigns, namely Fear. “Better the devil you know” is a well known phrase for a good reason.
Mostly this fear is used by the incumbent to scare the voters from “voting for change” by scaring them with fear of the unknown, ie the Opposition.
The emotion that Oppositions mostly use against this is Anger.
I’m not sure that people’s individual ego’s about their past votes come into this much.
As you said before Roger it is not the approval rating which is changing much it is the shift from don’t knows to disapproval. Given the high party rating for the tories this would appear to be supporters of other parties who are now reverting back to disapproval. Nothing much to worry about I would think.
111. The other possibility is that they think the opposition are rubbish!.
13 - In actual fact, rather than anger, electoral change-arounds tend to come around when voters are given a message of hope.
Give a reason to vote *for* your party and you will be much stronger than a party of ‘moaning minnies’.
115 - got it in one! Also the reason the tories were in power for 18 years.
Some enjoyably silly stuff on here today.
If Dave is doing badly at the moment (Tories solidly up in the polls, good personal approval rating), some of you had better REALLY hope he never starts to do well…
11- what psychobabble!!
Politics should be about choices. Someone like me should dislike everything on offer from Cameron. I should dislike him with a passion. And his supporters and potential voters should be enthused. Infact I am quite indifferent to him and the best his natural supporters can say of him is that with a little more practice he’ll be exactly like Blair.
118 - But his personal approval ratings are NOT good . Yes they are better than the other party leader’s but they are NOT good .
Seems to me fairly obvious that there has been a shift in public opinion this year, probably based on (1) positive attitude towards Cameron from some previous Labour/Lib Dem supporters and (2) growing “state of decay” feeling about the government linked to the ’sleaze’ stories. This combination has led to a ‘time for a change’ feeling from a portion of the electorate.
Across a range of polls, the Conservatives are in the late 30s, Labour early to mid 30s and Lib Dems in the late teens, with a few points up and down here or there. It seems to be a fairly settled feeling.
Obviously this is probably not enough for the Conservatives to win the next election and it could lead to a wide range outcomes depending on how this national swing works from seat-to-seat, but the polling landscape seems fairly clear.
Interesting that polls that ask about Brown don’t change that landscape too much. Unlike Major who came from more or less nowhere in 1989-90, Brown has been Chancellor or Shadow Chancellor for around 15 years - so is unlikely to provoke a feeling of change if he gets to be PM (unless he does something drastic policywise). His accession is factored in if you like.
The question for the parties is still likely to be what to do in a hung Parliament, something that will be influenced by which of the two big parties is the larger (I am sure the Tories will be ahead on votes, but Labour could still be ahead on seats).
In Canada, the Conservatives formed a government when they were the largest party. This gamble looks like it is paying off with the government enjoying good ratings, the Liberal opposition stuck in a leadership contest and a widespread expectation the Tories will call another election which they will probably win.
Would the British Tories do the same? Or would Conservative MPs decide to go into opposition in the hope that a Lab/Lib Government messes up? Would the Tories or Labour form a minority government or try a formal coalition with the Lib Dems? Politics should be very interesting….
“Why are Labour polling so high in the middle of a storm of sleaze and incompetence?”
Let us try and break this down. The sleaze- political donors get honours. Shock, horror. Prezza strumping his secretary. Get real Incomptence- a Home Office that deals with 10’s of 000’s of prisoners, and not micromanaging them to the enth degree. Oh my god, the world is caving in !!!
Actually we have on the whole a pretty competent government getting on with business as normal, and trying to manage a heavy agenda. The hacks and Labour haters might want to create an aura of sheer chaos, corruption and sleaze. The public I guess are just getting tired of it all.
Andy D
Haha, that’s a good point to make!
No-one has the slightest idea what a Cameron lead Conservative Party would look like. Michael Howard stamped his mark on t