politicalbetting.com

What’s Ming’s party’s role in the Cameron-Brown world?

The July ICM poll in the Guardian did match its billing - it was full of surprises for all three parties. The Tory 39% equalling their highest share from the pollster in 13 years; Labour maintaining their 35% in spite of everything and the Lib Dem 17% being their lowest ICM figure since before the Iraq War.

Until now all the focus has been on David Cameron attracting Lib Dem supporters and this is the standard explanation for the figures? But is it more complicated than that? Is the rise of Cameron reinforcing Labour as well? This poll seems to suggest that it is.

For the first time in a decade and a half there is just the prospect of a Tory General Election win and it is this that might be keeping Labour stable and squeezing the Lib Dems.

For the decade and a half upto Cameron’s election it was easy for anti-Tory voters to consider voting Lib Dem because because such a move posed no risk. Major/Hague/IDS/Howard’s party did not present a real electoral threat. Thus the Lib Dems did well last time in spite of the massive Labour onsluaght in the final week suggesting that Lib Dem switchers could let Michael Howard in.

That assertion might have sounded implausible in 2005 but with the Tories nearly at 40% then it certainly resonates today and is one factor I believe, that is underpinning the Labour share.

So there is a twin challenge facing the Lib Dems: the party has to stop further seepage of its Tory leaning supporters going to Cameron and it has to find a way of persuading anti-Tory factions to stay on board - a task that might be even tougher when Tony Blair has moved on.

Mike Smithson

But Cameron needs more than 39% before he can think of Number 10?

After all the waiting the delayed figures from the Guardian’s July ICM survey are now out and they have the Tories moving forward, Labour holding steady but the Lib Dems falling back.

These are the shares with comparisons on the last ICM poll which was in the Sunday Telegraph nearly three weeks ago. CON 39 (+3): LAB 35 (nc): LD 17 (-1).. Note that the reports that the Guardian is putting out have comparisons with the paper’s June ICM poll - not the last survey by the pollster.

For the Tories this survey, the latest in the longest continuous series of polls in any UK newspaper, is very good news particularly as it comes after the disappointments of the Bromley by-election. It will reinforce David Cameron in his efforts to shift the party in the face of growing opposition.

For Labour there must be some relief that the party is not paying a price for the loans for honours affair. Holding onto the 35% - just one point down on the General election - is perhaps more than they could have hoped for in the circumstances. Also a deficit of just 4% is manageable and the party would probably end up with most seats if this was the outcome at a General Election.

For the Lib Dems the numbers must be a disappointment particularly as they come after Bromley, some better performances by Ming Campbell, and signs that the policy and media relations operation is working better.

The message from these numbers is that the next General Election is wide open. It will be interesting to see if the trend is confirmed by YouGov which should be out in the next couple of days.

Mike Smithson

Why I’m putting more money on him going this year?

Three news stories in the past couple of days have caused me to put more money on Tony Blair not surviving in the job until the end of the year.

First the reports that Lord Levy - Blair’s tennis partner, Middle East envoy and fundraiser - did not answer police questions after his arrest but repeatedly said “no comment” indicate, surely, that this is getting serious. If this goes to the next stage and a charge the Prime Minister would be very exposed.

Second the court appearance by Des Smith - the schools’ fundraiser - yesterday in which his lawyer spoke of “a well-established link” between the provision of financial support for specialist schools and preferment of honours. The hearing was on a driving charge and his solicitor was trying to explain the pressure that his client had been under. If this is what is being said on his behalf in open court what has he told the police inquiry?

Thirdly reports of Rory Bremner’s conversation with Blair while they were holidaying near each other in 1996. A Sunday Times report from last year picked up by Guido has “…..After a pleasant game with Blair and making a few jokes at the expense of John Major, then prime minister, Bremner raised a serious point. “I said, ‘We’re laughing at John Major now, but if you get into power the boot will be on the other foot and you’ll be on the receiving end.’ “Blair laughed rather nervously and said, ‘Uh, um, how does Lord Bremner sound to you?’ ” It was a joke, Bremner emphasises, “but he was aware of patronage and bringing people within the circle”. If Blair was saying this to a comedian what has he said to other people over the past ten years?

In all betting you have to judge the odds you are being offered against your personal assessment of what is going to happen. I’m not predicting that Blair will go but I do believe that the chances of a departure in the final quarter of the year are higher than the price of 5/1 that I bet at overnight.

Mike Smithson

The wait for the July ICM poll continues

It’s now just on 2am and I am off to bed. There is no sign on the Guardian’s web pages of the July ICM survey even though they must have had the data for a couple of days.

After suggesting yesterday that the paper was playing a form of striptease this appeared in our comments thread at 5.19pm yesterday evening - “Sorry to keep you waiting for the rest of the poll. It will be out soon. The results are interesting for all three parties, I promise…”. The writer was Julian Glover who usually covers polls for the paper. He is clearly taking his inspiration from Sophia Loren - seen here in a 1963 shot.

Please use this thread to discuss it when it does come out.

Mike Smithson

For some reason the comments facility on the previous article does not work. Please can we use this one.

..and why are men unmoved by Cameron?

From the full dataset, now available, from last week’s ICM poll for Newsnight it’s clear that the leadership ratings presented on the programme might have given a misleading impression.

A chart was shown indicating that those interviewed rated Cameron at 41, Brown at 37: and Campbell at 24 when asked whether the three had the qualities needed to be Prime Minister. This prompted discussion here because the shares added up to 102%.

Now from the full data it’s clear that the interviewees were never asked to rate each of the three against each other. What happened was that there were separate questions for each of them and it was entirely possible for somebody to say that Brown, Cameron and Campbell all had the qualities.

Gordon Brown’s figures were 37% saying he had the qualities but 57% saying he hadn’t – a deficit of 20%.
David Cameron had 41% saying he had the qualities against 50% saying he hadn’t – a deficit of 9%.
Ming Campbell had 24% saying yes to 64% saying no – a deficit of 40%.

For comparison purposes Newsnight should have shown the different deficit figures not just the proportion of those saying yes in each case.

Tucked away in the details the poll was further evidence of the huge gender gap in British politics. Men are almost unmoved by Cameron but are more likely to look favourably on Brown. With women it’s the other way round.

This is a massive gap and reinforces similar gender data from other surveys.

COMMENTS:- For some reason the comments feature and this article clash. Please could you use the thread above which does work.

Mike Smithson