Before “adjustment” Labour’s ICM deficit was 14%
October 25th, 2006-
How a device to deal with shy Tories gives Brown’s party a 4% boost
If it’s any consolation today’s ICM poll in the Guardian could have been much much worse for Blair-Brown but for the pollster’s final adjustment that was introduced after the 1992 General Election to deal with the phenomenon of “shy Tories”.
For instead of the CON 39%: LAB 29%: LD 22% headline figures that have been reported the shares were CON 41% - LAB 27%. For what ICM do is to use the responses to the “how did you vote last time” question to apportion part of the group in the survey who said they would be voting but refused or said they did not know when asked to name the party.
In recent months this has only changed the headline figure by 1-2% but with today’s poll it had a much greater impact. As Julian Glover writes in the Guardian “For years, it was Tories who could be counted on to mumble “no thanks” when the pollsters came calling but still turn out on election day. Now Labour voters may be the ones inclined to keep their politics to themselves…Labour will have its fingers crossed that its supporters are still out there, somewhere, even if these days they don’t like to admit it.”
With three polls on consecutive days showing very different pictures it appears as though the pollsters are all over the place.
In fact most of the differences between this week’s polls can be explained by timing and different methodological approaches.
The Mori poll on Monday was a week old so the field-work took place before the Tory tax announcement. Also, as we have said many times before, the pollster does not use past vote weighting.
The field-work for the Communication Research poll yesterday took place, like today’s ICM survey, from October 20-22nd. CR, like Mori does not use past vote weighting but has a very fierce “squeeze” question to try to get a response from those who say they will vote but won’t name a party. They are asked how they would vote if it was a legal requirement to do so. I think that the very high CR “others” figure is partly explained by this question.
Both ICM and CR include the names of the three main parties in their question with the SNP and PC being included for Scottish and Welsh respondents. This usually helps the Lib Dems but CR had them at 14% with ICM recording a 22% figure. My guess is that when we see the final data a part of this discrepancy will be put down to ICM past vote weighting approach.
The next poll should be YouGov for the Telegraph which is expected to be out on Friday. Who knows what the Internet pollster will bring?
Betting News. There’s been a big move to Gordon Brown in the Labour Leadership markets overnight. He’s tightened from 0.42/1 to 0.38/1 - so a winning £100 bet would produce £4 less this morning than yesterday.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
test
Not only the tax proposals may be affecting the polls but the Iraq war and Bush seems to be elevated in the news. This may reach a climax after the US midterm elections.
There may have been a big move towards Brown but at some point he’s actually going to have to address the English Question, especially given the recent media coverage.
If he doesn’t address it willingly, then he will be forced into addressing it by his opponents. Whichever way he falls he will alienate a lot of people. As far as I am concerned he can only ever be an interim leader foisted upon England by a Labour Party in its death throes and devoid of any imagination. And Brown as an interim measure would mean certain defeat at the next GE.
Shy Labour voters, eh? Well they might be shy - they’ve got a lot to be embarrassed about retaining their supports for this apalling Government.
Food for thought, though, as I well remember our own supporters being pretty timid back in the 1990s - and that was even we Conservatives were calling.
Is that a phenomenon Labour canvassers as well as pollsters are encountering now too?
Ps has anyone run this poll on Anthony Wells’ swingometer?
I’ve just run those numbers through Anthony Wells’ excellent swingometer ( http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/SwingCalculator.xls ), which factors in new boundaries, and the results come up with:
Con: 316 seats
Lab: 247 seats
Lib: 57 seats
Oth: 30 seats
Not quite as good news for the Tories as the likes of Eleanor might have expected - you’d still be in hung parliament territory, and even a deal with Ian Paisley wouldn’t be enough for a working majority!
… not that I’m unconcerned about 29% in the poll for Labour, but I feel quietly confident that Ol’ One-Eye will be able to turn it round once he takes over.
mmmmm….I no more believe that Labour is on 27% than that the LibDems are on 14%.
The polls are all over the place - but I suspect that there has not been any signiicant change since the Summer. Certainly the political fundamentals havent changed. The Tories are in the mid to high 30’s, Labour in the low 30’s and the LibDems just under 20%.
Cameron is doing well, but the public just don’t trust the Tories yet. Labour are treading water waiting for Balir to go, and the LibDems are flatlining.
Politics is in limbo at the moment, I don’t think we are going to see any real change in that scenario until there is a new occupant in No 10. Until then, fascinating though they are, I think we can essentially ignore the polls.
This poll appears to be more in line with some of the recent polls which have pitched a Brown Cameron showdown and shown Brown to be trailing Cameron by 10%+.
Also be worth knowing when the specific questions over Iraq were asked (as per yesterdays Guardian poll) which would have coloured a respondents view- hence the shy Labour adjustment, and extremely poor Labour showing, and high LD numbers.
Still- as I have said many times, the important polls will be 3 months after a Brown succession, but if Labour continues to be significantly lower than the Tories in the interim, a honeymoon poll bounce for Brown may influence him into a cut and run election.
So Labour’s ‘underlying’ share was actually lower than Michael Foot got in 1983. Is Blair’s much-touted ‘legacy’ to be the destruction of Labour as an electoral force, something that should have happened in the mid-1980s if only the Alliance hadn’t misplayed their hand so badly?
PM at 10. Labour after losing election in critical meltdown…. mmmm intersting possibility.
The Lib Dems could come up with an exciting new strategy to replace them…. “a new political force to break the mould of two party politics”.
A new catchprhase to sum up their ambition…. why not something like, ‘Lib dems. The real opposition’.
They could even ‘target’ top labour shadow ministers in vulnerable seats to … whats the word…. ‘decaptitate’ the Labour party!
11. Observer - you wouldn’t be insinuating - very gently of course - that the Lib Dems are basically a bunch of losers, would you?
This poll does raise the question as to what is Labour’s real “core vote”. For the Tories we know it’s around 30% - they’ve never really dipped below that, not significantly.
It was presumed, I think, that Labour’s core vote was in the same area, maybe slightly higher.
I’m not so sure. The Tories are parking their carbon-neutral tanks on the middle ground, the Lib Dems are nibbling the left anti-war vote, the Nats are attacking from the west and the north, and the BNP are grabbing the angry white working classes annoyed at all the Bulgarian windowcleaners charing tuppence an hour. Who’s left for Labour? Pro war lower-middle-class men in and around low-immigrant parts of Kidderminster?
Their core vote could be way down in the 20s.
The absence of the usual Tory/Cameron bashers today is noticeable.
This is an encouraging poll for the Tories from a credible pollster (unlike MORI). Together with the CR poll, MORI clearly can be seen as out of line and urgently needs a serious look at its methodology.
Those who take comfort in the line that the Conservatives are not ahead by enough to win the next election are living in cloud cuckoo land. Oppositions rarely surge into a massive lead in one go, and the Conservatives were always unlikely to do that. However, as Labour fall, support is shifting to the Conservatives and seems to be pretty consistent. Over the next couple of years Cameron has the chance to build a winning position. He has eliminated most of the negatives and now has people clamouring to hear his policies.
The achilles heel could be that Conservative support seems to be heavily concentrated in the South and London. To be sure of winning Cameron needs at least some progress in Wales, the north and Scotland. The Assembly elections next year will be interesting in this regard.
The Lib Dems appear to have gone into a cul de sac by electing Campbell as leader. He is seen as responsible and credible but uninspiring. There is no indication of the Lib Dems making any progress at all at the moment, and if the Tories do well in the South they could lose a lot of seats while maintaining their vote share.
At present the polls suggest a hung Parliament (which is what a lot of the public say they want) but Cameron can be quietly satisfied with progress to date.
I agree that it is early to be predicting the next election and until Labour has its new leader it will be hard to judge how things could look in a couple of years time but the omens for a Brown leadership are not good.
3-Toque
‘There may have been a big move towards Brown but at some point he’s actually going to have to address the English Question, especially given the recent media coverage’
Yup, this issue won’t go away and the launch yesterday of a new English Constitutional Convention will further highlight this scam.
The current university aparthied system that has been imposed by New Labour on English students will certainly not be forgotten.
GB needs to urgently come up with an answer to the current democratic deficit created by his party for the 49 million people that live in England.
Clearly today it is the turn of Labour supporters to be philosophical.
If the has been recent movement I doubt that it is the tax thing.
I would say that the NHS and crime are Labour’s problems at the moment. The Tories seem to be engaging in a lot of local under the radar campaigns at the moment esp. on the NHS that are having an effect. Not sure that the Labour machine is dealing with this.
Fair play to Mike; his “all Tory publicity is good publicty” theory seems to be holding up remarkably well.
LDs should be quite pleased with this poll too.
Any thoughts on how this may affect the Lab leadership?
What happened…Andrea has been beside himself with boredom for hours!
I guess all Tory posters spontaneuosly combusted on news of the poll- hence causing some kind of power spike at pb.com.
I would have thought that the real problem for Labour is that should (and I personally doubt it) they carry on to poll as poorly as ICM suggests they could face a serious loss of councillors in May which could severely diminish their ability to put a good fight up in the marginal seats come the next election even if GB is able to improve their polling figures somewhat.
The poll also made me wonder who would be more disappointed – Labour supporters or some of the regulars on ConservativeHome?
Sorry Mike I don’t agree with your suggestion that the Conservative tax announcement and attendant publicity has had an effect on the poll figures . I still think that party support has been pretty stable for the last 4 months with a bit of temporary movement in the conference weeks . Suuposedly volatile Mori have had Conservative figures of 36/36/35/35 ( could hardly be less volatile ) in their last 4 monthly polls and ICM 36-40 the variations well within sampling M of E .
Differences between pollsters are undoubtedly due to differences in methodology and will therefore no doubt continue .
The full data is on the ICM site and I don’t think they bear out your explanation for the difference between the CR and ICM LibDem figures . The figures for Conservative support for male and female are virtually identical .
seanT- glad to see you back from the strange encounter on Monday. If you read yesterday (late afternoon) posts following the Cruddas leader you might start thinking their is a pbCOM seanT fan club.
14. Progress in Scotland - unlikely to be more than 2-3 seats max anyway so largely irrelevant. Labour has lost as many seats through boundary changes as the Tories did at the 1997 GE. Progress in Wales - reasonable chance of 3-4 gains next time that would take the Tories back to 1992 strength. The problem area is Yorks/Lancs where the Tories need to win at least 10 seats.
Just an observation but occasionally on pbCOM there appears to be what I can only describe as playground bullying when a group of pbCOMers round up on one outspoken poster. Happened to ColinW last night and seanT the other. A great fascination for me with this site is to see people batting their corner (whichever corner), the more ferocious the better and it really is unedifying to see posters ganging up to stifle it.
Tyson, when ColinW uses four letter words to describe other posters - as he does all to frequently - he deserves what he gets.
I think on the other hand that SeanT delights in advocating controversial positions.
Tyson, dude - I saw the remarks made by you and Farfield et al. Very flattering, ta - I really mean that.
However you need not worry that I will be bounced into submission - not my style! I like a good argument, and the sense of being the underdog just makes me keener to have a go.
What IS preventing me from posting is inability to access pb.com, the site keeps doing down or taking ages to load - is this my server? (I’m on Tiscali so it’s quite possible
); or is Mike’s site just too popular for its own good?
Re 21 Seems a fair point. Though I expected Lab to fall below 30% in at least one poll there’s no clear reason why they should be down on last month. This may be a one-off but supports an overall picture of Labour down to 30ish. I have some sympathy with the activist who berated Nick P and colleagues for appearing to presume some up-turn before an election. We all know what happened to the last governing party to hit the 30% floor!
That said, Lab and LD can take comfort for the apparent inability of the Tories to hit the 40+ mark consistently. Trying not to be swayed by my relief and surprise about this, I do believe a party heading for a majority would have to be averaging at least in the low to mid-40s in the current political context.
26: Yes, unusually the site is a bit flakey today.
25. Hmm.. heh… true-ish. I am bit of a controversialist and I relish a scrap - as I say above. I know one of the reasons I became rightwing was because at University everyone but everyone was leftwing and it was a stifling atmosphere of forced conformity - you must believe in Troops Out, you must agree with the most extreme feminists, you must think Maggie Thatcher is a sea-monster, etc etc. It just got on my goat - and what made it worse was that all these silly students thought they wer being original and uniquely daring. Yawn. So I adopted some radically rightwing positions just to annoy them, and they were SO easy to annoy. Delicious.
However my gut instincts are on the right anyway - I’m a patriotic libertarian capitalist, and always have been. I’d nearly always choose freedom over equality.
So I never advocate a serious position without at least, ooh, three-quarters believing it.
24 Tyson, if you mean my attempt to get ColinW to remain within the bounds of common decency in his attacks then I refuse to apologise. His first comment of last night was a personal attack which didn’t really reflect any of the rest of the thread. Normally I ignore such personal attacks (I seem to remember he called all Tories losers) as I have a fairly thick skin. What annoyed me and caused me to hit out was the fact that no one had said anything to provoke such an attack - I thought we were all being quite polite to each other last night before his contribution.
Sorry for going off thread, but I wanted to explain myself.
29 SeanT according to a Political Calculator I took (at the behest of the Labour and Lib Dem Research assistants at my council) I am a slightly authoritarian right winger. Quite surprised me, as I always thought I was rather moderate and liberal on issues of morality and crime! But I too have to admit that much of my politics was developed in a highly political sixth form in the run up to 1997! Too much time spent being contrary for the sake of it I suppose.
30. Describing ColinW as the victim of ‘bullying’ is bizarre. You have nothing to explain.
I don’t know why MORI polls are routinely denigrated here. They are members of the British Polling Council, and their most recent poll is in line with the current average, which gives the Conservatives an overall average lead of 3.2%. Their eve of poll prediction was within the accepted margin of error in May 2005.
Certainly, some of their findings during the GE campaign were odd, but the same could also be said of Populus and ICM (who at various points, gave Labour leads of 14% and 10% respectively).
30 - Agreed. Perhaps he was drunk.
24 - Tyson, Thank you so much for rallying to my precious little soldier.
If he were here, I know Col would want me to pass on his warmest wishes…. to GFY
Interesting comments in the last thread about how winnable some seats are.
I agree the Tories will probably pick up quite a few long shots in London, while missing supposedly more winnable seats in the North.
London will probably see some very odd results indeed. Who would have thought 20 years ago that there could ever be a tory mp for parts of Poplar and the East End?
36 - Any seats in particular Sean – Brent North (which is still a fairly long shot IIRC) springs to mind.
37 - Mind you 20 years ago I doubt anyone would have thought you’d ever see (albeit briefly) a Labour MP in somewhere like Romford.
Max, I’d include Harrow West, Brent North, Ealing North, Feltham & Heston, Hammersmith, Poplar & Limehouse, Dulwich & West Norwood, and Tooting. Brent North, Harrow West, and Dulwich & West Norwood are odd examples of seats that seemed to have shifted hugely away from the Tories, but may now be shifting back.
Mitcham & Morden, Streatham, the Lewishams, Edmonton, Ilford South, and Croydon North seem to have shifted away for good.
39. Are these permanent shifts due to, ahem, ‘demographic factors’ Sean?
CollinW is an abusive playground LD bully. Roger is an abusive playground LD bully.
Is there a connection? Are they one and the same? Are all LDs so dire? Or are they Labour thugs looking for a new home?
so many questions
Meanwhile, it is becoming clear that the populace has turned against Labour. Do they yet recognise the best way to evict them?
39. Sean Fear, I think Hayes and Harlington can fit your second group of seats
41 - At one with you on ColinW….less so on Roger (who supports Labour albeit virulently anti Blair) who is generally not a bad bloke
24. Sorry Tyson, but Colin W will need to use bigger words than the 4 letter ones he favours, to either be outspoken or actually contribute to a political debate.
41 so many silly questions based on incorrect facts - Roger is not a LD supporter . Are all Conservative posters on here so dire or are they BNP thugs looking for a new home .
No of course not most posters on here of all parties make reasonably polite posts which do get a little heated from time to time .
43. Point taken. Still, a couple of unpleasant playground bullies.
We need to see more polls along the same lines, however, I think we are approaching a tipping point. Labour, beset by poor showings in the polls, only seem to add fuel to the fire with bizarre policies. The news that council snoopers will be able to enter your home - without a warrant - and take photos of your wife’s lingerie, is hardly likely to improve their showing.
The question for the people is, who should I vote for, to evict Labour? LD, BNP, UKIP, Conservative, Rspect???
40 Partly. The Conservatives seem to have picked up quite a lot of support from Hindu and Sikh voters over the years, and that’s enabled them to remain competitive in North West London, where those populations have grown strongly. Where the growing ethnic minority population is West Indian or Muslim, however, that does tend to boost the anti-Conservative vote.
But there are other factors. In some places, Conservative associations have remained strong and active. In most of the seats which have shifted heavily against the Conservatives, the associations have usually become empty shells (Streatham engaged in a massive internal war in the early nineties for example). Some places have just shifted to the Left ideologically (eg Hornsey & Wood Green, Streatham). And some places, like Croydon North, have just declined socially over the years.
Andrea - I don’t agree. Hayes and Harlington really is very safe for Labour.
39: ‘the Lewishams… seem to have shifted away for good.’
My granfather turned 90 in August. He was born in Catford and has a childhood memory of the kids’ having to line up and sing, ‘Vote, vote, vote for Mr Dawson!’. From my brief googling, it appears that Sir Philip Dawson was indeed Conservative MP for Lewisham West in the 1920s. Sadly, nothing else about this illustrious gent and his shameless exploitation of children for political ends seems available.
41 - At the risk of being accused of ganging up on you along with fellow Tory ‘bully’ John ‘Mad Dog’ O. I don’t think it’s fair to put Roger in the same box as ColinW. Roger is a pretty decent bloke in spite of our (numerous) differences.
And as John also points out he isn’t a lib Dem and can only be commended for this (joking!).
47.”Andrea - I don’t agree. Hayes and Harlington really is very safe for Labour”
I wanted to put in along with Edmonton and the other seats you mention at the end as examples of seats who shifted away from the tories.
Do you think it’s even safer?
45. Wasn’t Roger briefly a Lib Dem supporter, for about a week? Was that before or after he briefly declared himself a Cameron fan? Wasn’t ColinW a councillor at one time? how would he have managed under the new Standards Board for England? would he have racked up a record number of referrals to that august body?
I misunderstood you, Andrea. Yes, it certainly should be classed with Edmonton now. It’s worth bearing in mind though, that until Neville Sanderson switched to the SDP, it would have been classed as very safe Labour, and might well have been held by them in 1983, were it not for that.
43 John O- how do you know whether someone on this site is decent by what they write?? Hitler loved animals and painted a half decent landscape. Just not great to read half a dozen posters having a pop at one at the same time no matter what he is saying. Not really the fairest of fights.
Agreed though on Roger- labour through and through and a very amusing poster.
After the last two days it is good to know we can always rely on the accuracy of the polls!
Going back to the poll is there anyone who seriously thinks that Labour could poll under 30% in a national election?? The party still has an appetite for victory- it lost it momentarily in the summer, looked into the abyss and withdrew. Infighting and introvertion. Not particularly clever.
This poll is more indicative of those naming Cameron against Brown which have seen 10+ leads for the Tories for the last few months.
54 Is there a ranking of “most accurate polls”?
We can always take an average curve from scatter, but a reliability scale would be useful.
30 - Remember the EU elections?
But yes, under 30% in a General Election would be amazing
57- I have no idea why i put 30, I meant to refer to 55!
53 Finding Roger amusing is probably down to one of a couple of factors, one being, are you Lbaour or not.
One of the best ways to deal with a bully is to stand up to them
I couldn’t see Labour polling under 30% in a GE, unless it was held under PR.
58-I still think that Labour has a 4th election in them (not a 5th though). The significance of these polls is how long a post leadership bounce will last.
Significant poll defecits now will make the foundations for a bounce extremely weak- a couple of poor headlines could quickly reverse things. Brown will need to weigh this up. The most formidable chancellor of our time will not want to be the shortest lived Labour PM.
60. Didnt Labour get 26% in the 1980s?
Roger is not a bully- just an out an out Tory hater and baiter (much like myself). He rarely makes insulting comments against other posters- just Cameron and the Tory party.
60-Sean- what would you predict would be the %’s for the other parties in PR?? An interesting proposition.
62-1983 under Foot it got 25%. Different times my friend.
Still though it managed to win significantly over 200 Parliamentary seats.
64 - I’m not sure if nine counts as significant.
63 - One of the problems with hating the Tory party is that a number of people on this site are Tory members and activists which is why the insults directed at ‘Tories’ are indeed personal and do (as no doubt they are intended to) provoke a reaction.
My prediction for a PR election based on the 2005 results (an actual poll rather than these mid term things) would be
Labour 28% (down from 36%)
Tories 31% (more or less the same)
Greens 4%
LD’s 24 %
UKIP 4%
Others 9%
I think sean fear is right- the left vote would have fragmented much more impacting on labour’s total much more than the tories, which aside from UKIP has pretty much nowhere else to go.
An interesting thought indeed.
66 - A lot has happened since the 2005 election, dismissing the opinion polls is not a very sensible move
You know what they say….don’t walk out of the room if you don’t want to be talked about! Me and Colin the same person?? I don’t even know what FYS or FOT stands for!
Back to ICM (if we must) I think I’d like Snowflake to come and explain why this poll isn’t what it seems but could in fact be good news for Labour……
I think the damage was caused by that trigger happy General Donut(?) who comprehensively rubbished our Prime Minister’s foreign policy and then bizarrely got Blair to agree with him. Or perhaps voters thought it unseemly to have a twice reinstated Cabinet Minister doing a kiss and tell because he was short of cash……
It all just looks bad. What Labour needs desperately is something like the Son of a Preacher Man …..
65- Max-thanks- I now understand why the Tories here get so upset when I (or Roger) have a go at the Tory party. Poor sensitive folk- take it from me I am not having a go personally.
I really couldn’t care less what people say about the Labour party or the LD’s for that matter. The more vitriolic the more entertaining from my perspective.
68-Roger- where is the flake when you need her??
It seems unlikely that the adjustment mechanism used to account for shy Tories in 1992 is equally applicable in current circumstances to the Labour party.
One of the key reasons that Tories used to be shy was that the party was seen as being all about individualism. To admit to voting Tory was to line up with the Yuppies against the teachers, nurses and poor old miners. So survey respondents didn’t.
Many of those who vote Labour do so because they believe that the Labour party offers a more ethical and equitable solution. But this motivation is being undermined by failing confidence in the govts handling of the NHS and other public services, the continuing crisis in Iraq and a general sense of drift and pointlessness.
I don’t believe that those who voted Labour in 2005 and say they aren’t sure who they’d vote for today are embarrassed to say they’d vote Labour. They’re just disillusioned.
69 - Aye right Tyson. So when you describe all Tories as racist or all farmers as stupid that isn’t supposed to be personally offensive to a Tory from a farming family?
67- Rob- I was just being a bit geaky and trying to work out how the 2005 election would have played out with PR, and trying to make the clear point that Labour’s vote would have fragmented much more than the Tories leaving the Tories as the single largest party (slit your throat time)
Now a PR snap election called tomorrow would see Labour falling to the mid 20’s, perhaps even lower than Foot’s derisory share in 1983.
65 - Max. Excellent secoind para. The marvel of this board is the glorious mix of ‘rough’n'tumble politicking soothed by zany humour, sober electotral assessment, and beating the bookies, usually in the same thread. When hate turns to bait, without the collective peer pressure to lower the temperature, then we’re just left with the bear garden rent-a-rant of the late and unlamented Vote 2005
Max- didn’t I say all farmers were greedy, stupid certainly (if you say so), and ugly to boot
74- John O - ColinW is a complete embarrassment to the all the regular LibDem posters here - none of them can stand him - so Tory and Labour supporters here should be encouraging the sad, and obviously very lonely, little to$$pot.
John O- your post last night. Really I have never seen Roger or myself insulting another poster in this way. You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.
Politicians and political parties are fair game but personal insults to another poster (especially when you are ganging up with others) is pretty unedifying.
75 - Speaking as the son of former dairy farmers - I can do no other than take offence at such remarks.
Anyone who who thinks that farmers (real farmers - not agri-businesses) are either greedy or stupid ought to try doing the job themselves, if you can make it pay then good for you - my parents couldn’t by the end. There’s simply no money in it unless you’re operating on a huge scale. My parents were a very small 40 cow, 140 acre (mostly rented) outfit.
I doubt that there’ll be any small family dairy farms left in the UK within a decade or so from now. Nobody in their right mind would wish that lifestyle upon themselves. I certainly wouldn’t.
Mike S: I am experienceing major problems with politicalbetting.com’s DNS lookups today. The only way I can get the page up is by directly connecting to your IP (217.206.202.131). I dont think I’m alone in this either…
76 - Yep…after he told one poster to “Go F*ck Yourself” last night and with equal venom to many others since he appeared on pbc. But he is obviously your sort of guy, and I wish you well together.
In my anger should I have descended to his level? No.
Hello. Sorry about the technical problems. Register.com (my soon to be ex DNS hosting company) has been experiencing issues. Hopefully all will be well soon…
I think ColinW’s posts tend to be simply abusive, and in no way encourage an understanding of his position on anything. Contrast with ukpaul, who has similar views and often seems very angry, but never abuses anyone.
Adding up ICM’s party preferences on their website gives 660 of the 1000-odd sample, and another 130 said they didn’t know or wouldn’t say. i can’t work out what happened to the others - can anyone advise?
I used to live on a farm for a while at school. The farmer’s house was full of mud and wet Wellingtons. The farmer used to be up at ridiculous times like 5 in the morning and be in and out in the mud and slush all through the night. I can’t imagine he made much of a living though his house must have been worth a small fortune in a very pretty part of Somerset. His brother a very urbane TV and radio presenter grew up on this same farm though it’s very difficult to imagine!
Nick, I think the 660 figure is after weighting by likelihood of voting, so it will actually be the responses of more than 660 people, but lots of them will have been weighted down to fractions of people because they are less than 100% likely to vote.
Are we able to break down the poll to Scotland and Wales. Also will we see any Labour third place polls this year. Unlikely I’d have thought, would take a real existential shock to do that.
36. Like what comments.
36. Also how well do you expect the Tories to do in Scotland/Wales next year. The Welsh Tories seem to be having the better of their Scots comrades.
Not only the tax proposals may be affecting the polls but the Iraq war and Bush seems to be elevated in the news. This may reach a climax after the US midterm elections.
by Mystic Moon October 25th, 2006 at 4:28 am
I agree The decline in Labour support seems to be most likley the rsult of the movement of Iraq back into the news.
But the overall message from ICM - which still has best long term record of accuracy ,is that after the confernce season the Tories have strengthened their position with +3 % in a month.Th elib dems appear to hav eheld position but that could be a dip as shown in other ICM polls and some benefit as iraq becomes centre stage again.
RogerH
The unadjusted figures by age group show
Con Lab Lib
16-24 31 27 33
25-34 30 27 30
35-64 43 28 21
65 + 49 27 18
Libs are strongest in age group least likely to voe ,Tories strongest in age groups most likely to vote.
Perhaps it is time mIngbtried to appeal also to people of his own age!
Roger H
“poor, sick, tired, risible little specimen we found!!!!”
Tyson isn’t this a quote from you towards an individual poster?
It does seem to contradict your most recent pronouncement:
“Politicians and political parties are fair game but personal insults to another poster (especially when you are ganging up with others) is pretty unedifying.”
Pergaps you should take a look at your own contribution to this site before lecturing John O.
I take it our blue friends are measuring up for the curtains in 10DS?
Goodish poll for the Conservatives, but the inability to break 40% must be frustrating given the tons of ordnance Labour are pumping at both feet at the moment.
Evening all - nice to see everyone playing nicely tonight. Clearly ColinW’s “mum” has taught him everything he knows if post 35 is anything to go by.
I like the rough’n'tumble of the site - to see SeanT in full flight is a joy to behold - Roger too. I just find the abusive, personal and generally non-political insults of folk like ColinW so odious.
Interesting numbers in the detail of the ICM poll - especially the unweighted stuff. I had wondered for a while if Labour where reaching their core-vote tipping point. I suspect we’re shortly going to see what happens.
I take the point about a Brown-bounce. However, I have said many times bfore on the site that I expect it to be a dead-cat bounce. The base will be lower to bounce from following next May’s truly awful drubbing . And you can bet your bottom dollar that DC has a few good policy annoucements planned to coincide with Brown’s “victory”. We have some really interesting times ahead.
Robin, have you mis-spelt your surname? (Whig)
What do you believe is Labour’s core vote tipping point? I wrote an article for PBC a few months back where I speculated briefly on how Labour voters would react (they being the most tribal of all) if they finally believed that “their” party had abandoned them.
Liberal Democrat grassroots members will help to draw up the party’s next general election manifesto, officials announced today.
Can you imagine the flapping of exited sandals demanding election losing manifesto items that have only just been ditched, like a 50% tax rate?
The Old Emperor is a little worried about the loyalty of his fading army, perhaps?
88 Tabman - what would you consider a *good* poll for us at the present time? A 10% lead now on weighted figures that maybe you could argue overestimate Labour support (I’m dubious of the shy Labour phenomenon) certainly counts as more than “good-ish” in my book.
The polling methodology is more sophisticated and less volatile than it was 10 years ago - if we get to see 25% leads of yesteryear again, thenyou can be sure that somethin really seismic has happened.
I don’t know a single Tory activist that wouldn’t have settled for 39/29 if you’d offered it to them 12 months ago. And we’ve yet to turn those numbers into sticky converts yet with firm policy.
91 - B2W you’re showing your ignorance of the Lib Dem membership, who are far more pragmatic than the rather exciteable uber-activists commonly known as “sandalistas”.
I bet Cameron is glad he doesn’t have to do the same with your membership, or you’d end up with repatriation, the return of hanging and the birch!
92 - Labour were regularly garnering in th eupper 40s when Blair took over. As opposition support tends to shrink as elections approach, as you correctly recognise your suport will become more friable and you want a nice cushion. Even on this share we are in NOC territory.
90 That’s an interesting question. I think it very much depends upon the Lib Dem position snd strength as this is broadly where the left of the party could go once the tipping point is reached. The soft right of the party (pro-Blair Tories) have pretty much returned to us I think. The nasty element present in any party have probably gone to the BNP by now.
So the core that remains is the Left and the social democrat right of the party that currently forms teh leadership. The Lib Dems could try to appeal to the left if they become truly radical - but Ming also seems to be competing for centre-ground.
I suspect the tipping-point will not be one that is activist-based - more an electoral one. Once they dip consitently below 30% - say 28% then they simply look like losers and you have the whole phenomenon of the mid-90’s Tories all over again. it’s quite remarkable how Blair has squandered the Labour brand over Iraq and failed public sector reform. It’ll take a long long time to rebuild the brand again, and that’s why I see little chance for a Brown-led bounce back into a 4th term.
Just my idle musings FWIW.
91. It seems they should just propose ideas…bizarre suggestions will be probably thrown out and not proposed to the conference
93. Tabman, it can be possible that “rather exciteable uber-activists” will be keener to propose things that armchair members who attend a meeting each month
94 - but the difference with the high 40s pollings is that the methodology was much more suspect then. That’s the crux of my point - a 10% lead now on more stable methodology is good progress.
But you’re right - I want more of a cushion. The electoral maths is stacked heavily against us next time around. But I expect the policy announcements in time to consolidate current trends and deliver further progress. I’ve always said Cameron’s long-game strategy would be a hairy-ride but was the right strategy.
Labour got 29 per cent in 83 with michael foot.
If anyone gives a good price for Labour not getting over that, with Gordon Brown as prime minister, at the next general election, I would bite their hand off.
Anyways, if anyone understimates GB to that degree, they deserve to loose a bucket load of money.
91 - When I briefly slept over in the Lib Dems en route in my Owenite conversion from the SDP to the Tories, the Lib Dem grassroots were stuffed full of PR mad, cannabis-legalising republicans.
With the exception of some reasonable right-ish economic policy debates, I saw little from the conferencecoverage this year to suggest the membeship have moved significantly from that.
No doubt one of them will suggest that the manifesto is printed on sustainably farmed, fair-trade yak hides.
92 - “And we’ve yet to turn those numbers into sticky converts yet with firm policy.”
I think that is somewhat optimistic. The Cameron Conundrum is that when (if?
) he finally comes out with some hard policy he is bound to alienate some of those who are flirting with his mood music.
Ah, Tabman, my apologies. For a moment I thought you were part of a political party.
91 - The activists overwhelmingly voted to get rid of the 50% tax rate at conference. Certainly I think alot of the sandalistas are pretty excited by the new tax proposals.
Better sandals than jackboots or flip-flops.
And better sandals than scandals.
Evening all :). As is often the case, the ICM survey gives us all plenty to think about. I do think since the Dannatt intervention a few days ago, there has been a subtle seachange in opinion on Iraq. Those advocating withdrawal seem to have significant headway and the Blair/Bush approach is on the retreat. I do think the US midterm elections will be vital for this in a few days time.
Of course, Governments have been this unpopular before. In February 1986, ICM had the then-Conservative Government at 27% and in April 1990 ICM had the Tories on 31%, 23 points behind Labour. As we know, the incumbent Government went on to be re-elected so there’s plenty of time left for things to change.
Looking at the fieldwork, I was intrigued by the strong Tory performance in the 35-64 age group and in the Midlands where they have (apparently) a 25-point lead over Labour. If that is anything near accdurate, Labour seats will fall by the bucketload. We’ll see if this is a trend or just an outlier as it is the basis of the big Tory advantage.
I was also reading last week’s Spectator and a fascinating article in which the premise is that Iran or rather the threat of a nuclear-powered Iran could be serious for the Conservatives. If military action against Iran seems likely, what will Cameron do ? I believe part of his strategy has been to attract southern LD voters by distancing himself from Blair/Bush over Iraq.
All well and good but Iran will be very different. Cameron could side with Menzies Campbell and be opposed to unilaterla American or bi-lateral US/UK action but where would that leave foreign policy hawks like Osborne, Vaizey and Gove whose Atlanticist views are well known and whose support for Bush and American policy in Iraq has been well documented ?
IF Bush wants to take action against Teheran, time is running out as he has only two years left in office and it will be harder if he faces a more hostile Senate and Congress. I do wonder whether Iran could derail Cameron in the same way as Iraq has derailed Blair.
104.”And better sandals than scandals.”
yes, but the Libdems are scandals too.
76 ohn O- your post last night. Really I have never seen Roger or myself insulting another poster in this way. You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.
you clearly don’t read your own posts Tyson.
ColinW is some sort of troll or is a disturbed person. When I posted that it worried me that that ColinW and some other posters actually hated their opponents Tyson claimed I was ‘ganging up’ on him. I’m all for robust banter but to loathe people for having a different worldview is not rational and all his posts ever do is insult anyone and everyone in extreme terms.
101 - ah, B2W, for a moment I thought you were trying to be humorous
107 - yes, you have to wonder whether he’s a troll from another party designed to attract opporbrium to the LDs
testing…
74. ‘The marvel of this board is the glorious mix of ‘rough’n’tumble politicking soothed by zany humour, sober electotral assessment, and beating the bookies’
Agreed but you missed out one other source of entertainment - watching certain posters make fools of themselves day after day with ridiculous rants, gross factual errors and endless self-contradictions.
106 - not true.. apart from Hughes, Kennedy, Oaten, Michael Brown…
98 Sorry to disappoint, Labour got 27.6% in 1983 not 29%
Much of their vote (seats) was bolstered from Scotland. With 4 years to go, it could go lower
I agree with the general tenor of the debate (now that’s a boring remark in itself). Abuse, even personal abuse, is OK, in my eyes. Why shouldn’t people be angry? There’s plenty to be angry about - not least Iraq. However the anger should be leavened with a bit of wit to make it palatable, and it should give the impression that it might - just might - yield to a more forceful counter-argument. i.e. you want to know that the speaker has a not entirely closed mind, even if he has lost that mind for the moment.
People who are just unremittingly dogmatic and personally abusive without being funny cross the line. But there aren’t many of them on pb.com. Even Roger changes his mind at times, and sometimes his sallies sparkle with a smidgen of unlikely leftwing humour.
ColinW is pretty splenetic.
And now I shall go back to watching the snooker, you bunch of stupid geeky sociopathic friendless political-betting trainspotters.
105. In 1986 every pollster will tell you the metjodology was far inferior. Therefore pre-1992 comparison are risky as Mr Smithson has pointed out.
113. I think it was 28.28% in Great Britain…then NI lowered it to 27.6%
112. Don’t forget Hemming. And Oaten counts twice (there’s Belinda too…not that she generated a scandal, she just seems keen to remind us about the original one)
68.”I think the damage was caused by that trigger happy General Donut(?) who comprehensively rubbished our Prime Minister’s foreign policy and then bizarrely got Blair to agree with him.”
Roger, Blair’s problem was that everything that Sir Richard Dannatt said was true. The fact that his government has been cutting the MOD budget while increasing the troops foreign excursions, just did not leave him with a leg to stand on.
105. Stodge, they were highlighting the fact that David Cameron has a lot of support from the 35-65 age group on the Daily Politics today.
Baroness Kennedy seem to think that this age group feels most let down and is not feeling as optimistic about the future under Labour, I think she is right.
This age group feels the tax burden most heavily combined with future pension worries and their children facing heavy debt if they go into further education, their financial future does not seem as secure.
There are plenty of people here who make nasty bitchy comments about parties - eg “The Old Emperor is a little worried about the loyalty of his fading army, perhaps?” from Blue2Win today. It’s a bit silly, but many of us do that. It’s designed to get people’s back up and provoke a reaction.
Personal abuse is plain wrong though, however stupid you think people who disagree with you are.
114. Sean, I quite like your posts. You are logical, lay out your case well and finish with punchy points. However, surely, insults have no use on a site like pb. Is not pb designed to analyse scientifically rather than cloud issues with red mist?
116 - “112. Don’t forget Hemming…”
is that a reference to the number of Hemming scandals?
118.”There are plenty of people here who make nasty bitchy comments about parties - eg “The Old Emperor is a little worried about the loyalty of his fading army, perhaps?” ”
I don’t think that line was a particularly nasty comment
120. no, to Hemming’s sandals!
117. Just to add to my comment, a lot of the 35-65 age group grew up under Mrs Thatcher!
119. I think there are insults and there are insults.
“He is simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up” (Australian PM Paul Keating), is a famous example of personal abuse that’s justifiable - in my mind - because it is witty, and also says something quite telling.
“You stupid arsehole” is an example of personal abuse that is just pointless and boring, to my mind.
We need to be careful we don’t chuck out the former - which enlivens the political scene no end - when we rightly reject the latter.
But that just’s me ‘umble opinion, which I shall post on the other thread too to make sure it gets read.
124. I think that was Wilson referring to Heath in your first example you put. Keating was far rougher and less witty.
124 - There’s going to be a book of political insults coming out. It’s called ‘A conga-line of suckholes’ needless to sat the individual who came up with that line was also an Australian!
“he’s a troll from another party designed to attract opporbrium to the LD”
Is that a cross between a bad reputation and one of those things Hesseltine has in his back garden?
125. My online dictionary of quotations cites Keating as the creator of this pithy phrase. But I confess I did read somewhere that he might have nicked it from someone else. Harold Wilson I doubt, but I could be wrong.
Andrea??!
113,
You don`t disapoint just give me a price that Brown wont get over Foot per centage in GE.
My favourite political insult was Bruce Anderson on Yasser Arafat:
“He is a man who never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”
Never mind Arafat. This could be applied to so many failed politicians.
117 “35-65 age group feels most let down”
who has the biggest gripe?
a) Young people: University loans, low wages and no hope of buying a home?
b) OAPS stung with council tax & facing death by neglect in the NHS?
c) Middle age, probably ok - but, the pension they paid for may be gone then see case b)
105-What would regional breakdowns give you on the swingometers? Or are they not user friendly regionally. If the Tories are +25% in the Midlands then it doesn’t really matter if Labour are (slightly?) ahead in the North.
129 Me? dunno.
I’m after odds that Labour (Brown, Cruddas, Blair or whoever) will get less than Micky Foot.
It would be helpful if we knew how many marginal seats there were in each region to help judge this.
Jaysus Chester if you that bet came off Labour may just as well give up now.
133,
Same here but I wont to make money, not piss it away on a wish for party allegiance.
If some one gives me a price that Labour will poll less than they did in 83, I will pile in.
If ayone was that daft bookies wouldn`t be still 5 to 4 against Labour to be biggest party.
They would be nearer prices for Conservatives before last election.
133. An insane bet! Think about what has really changed since the last election and the answer is not very much. Blair is hanging around like a bad smell but he wasn’t a vote winner last time. Mid term voters are fickle. For a few weeks when the petrol price went up IDS was in the lead. The incumbent government have so many advantages that short of a catastrophe-like Heaths three day week Callaghan’s public servants strikes and Majors Tory Party mutiny-they nearly always win. Put your money on Brown and buy yourself a pension with your winnings!
124 - “Sir, I am unsure whether you will die by the gallows or of the pox!”
“Sir, that depends upon whether I embrace your morals or your wife!”
The guy from the Telegraph on Boulton’s show just gave the winner of PMQs as…Campbell.
surely the first time ever
134- How do you define a marginal?
137. Midterm blues of course - but the difference is this time the public are seriously bored, mildly nauseated even, by Labour. They yearn for anyone decent to take over. Until now the Tories have not provided an attractive opposition.
There are two other imponderables. The police investigation may wreck careers in Labour, and leave the party bankrupt.
And then there is Iraq. Blair may go but the stench of this appallin misadventure will remain. Brown cannot shake it off. Indeed he may have to deal with the messy withdrawal and the final admission of failure.
It is difficult to see how Labour can win an election outright from this point. But events, I guess, events..
90/95 – Taman/Robin Whig – interested in your point “The soft right of the party (pro-Blair Tories) have pretty much returned to us I think. “ but I don’t agree with it.
I think the soft right of the Labour voters is all that remains, I’m very much a tribal Labour voter (along with a lot of my family and friends) and whilst Iraq is so much of a disappointment [seant is so right]it is not the main reason not to vote Labour – my main reason not to is uncontrolled immigration, the nhs, prisons and released prisoners etc.
I’m a fan of Tony Blair and when he does leave assuming Brown does take over I will look strong and hard at what he stands for [Alan Johnson would be my choice – told you tribal]
Not all Labour voters are Millfield educated, use Bupa and have property abroad
142 - should read Tabman/Robin Wiggs - sorry
142 - Vino, Robin’s point not mine. I agree with you! Cameron’s pseudo-liberal posturing will not help in attracting those who like the strongarm authoritarian Reid tendency.
90/95/141. but with “Labour soft right” what do you mean? The old right of the party? Or the New Labour right?
129, 133, 136 et al
How about odds on fewer votes for Labour next time than 1983?
145 my view is he means the aspirants Tony has been so asiduous at courting and retaining; “Mondeo Man”, “Worcester Woman” and their ilk.
Its been a long time since I’ve seen the expression GMW for that matter!
Seant,
Don`t underestimate events as you say.
But to start writing off a government, who are about to change leader, would be reckless if you are putting your money where your mouth is.
Most people are still doing very well, economically, mildy bored yes.
“They yearn for anyone decent to take over.”
Think you need to get out more, most people don`t give a crap as long as its going not bad.
They don`t expect anything more than that.
145 - Andrea - “Labour soft right” is to me the working class vote which believes the Government should put the welfare and rights of it’s citzens at the forefront of most of it’s policies - even if this means “strongarm authoritarian Reid tendency.