Is this why Dave is going to find it hard to win?
August 30th, 2007
Does the Lib Dem switch to Labour look permanent?
One of the features that I focus on when the detailed data from ICM and CR polls comes out is how votes are churning between the parties. Both firms ask how respondents voted last time and both present their data in a way that gives some clues.
The latest data from this week’s survey for the Guardian has some encouraging short-term news for the Tories but does raise the question about whether there is any chance at all of them being able to win.
As can been seen above there’s been a clear shift back to their normal allegiance from Tory 2005 supporters. In the last couple of polls Cameron’s party was only retaining support of 85-87% of those who said they had voted Tory in May 2005. Now its at 92% not too far off the 95-96% that was being seen before the changeover at Number 10.
Much of the Brown bounce has come from more party supporters being ready to identify themselves to pollsters and saying they are more likely to vote than previously. That could easily move back a notch.
But the movement that looks irreversible is the big shift from 2005 Lib Dem supporters to Brown’s Labour. There’s been a net 13-15% of Lib Dem 2005 voters switching to Labour and this trend looks robust.
Unless there’s a step change prompted it’s hard to see the Tories getting back to more than 36-37% and it’s hard to see Labour dropping below 36%. For Labour those are general election winning vote shares.
Have you voted yet? The first round of voting in the PBC Poster of the Year elections will close at 6.30pm. There will then be the second and final round. Get you votes in as soon as possible. Click here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
**** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting a large number of endorsements for the election of Jack W to be the Supreme Being on PB :
Nelson Mandela - “As a fellow veteran statesman Jack deserves a statue as much as me.”
Peter the Punter - “Save ‘Mighty Fella’ humping my leg there’s nothing quite like a quickie with Jack.”
Andrea - “If Jack were a foot shorter, lived in Rutland and was called Alan I’d be first in the queue to lick his belly button fluff and make it into a designer suit.”
Queen Victoria - “We are always amused.”
Nick Palmer - “If Jack was a cat I’d tickle his tummy until he voted Labour ….. in fact I’d do it anyway, I’m in a marginal you know !!”
Rik W. - “As useful as the pox !”
George W Bush - “Yo Jack …”
seanT. - “Mind bending drugs, Conservative Euro policies and Jack W - The Triumverate of British politics.”
francis - “I want Jack as Speaker of the English Parliament.”
Ming Campbell - At 104 Jack W shows that age is no barrier ….. to er .. um ….. removing troops from a reduction in flying around Iraq in a penny in the pound !!”
Boris Johnson - “Ah yes Jack … now wait that’s, hang on, it’s the chappie from Scotland, right ??? is it ?? No …. er right ….”
Mark Senior - “Jack’s influence on Lib Dem polling in marginal constituencies in south west Kent has clearly shown up the total paucity of Tory policies and their subsequent fall in sub set 12 of ICM last twelve polls.”
Sean Fear - “If Jack was any more right-wing I’d kiss him on both cheeks and call him Genghis Khan.”
Roger - “If Jack was any more left-wing I’d kiss him on both cheeks and call him Stalin.”
John Major - “Marginally more boring that my underpants.”
George Galloway - “Sir, … I salute you and all your works.”
Nicholas Soames - “I couldn’t have done without Jack when I was circumnavigating my stomach.”
Stonch’s Beer Blog - “Probably the best lager lout in the world.”
In my previous incarnation, (or regeneration) I postulated, about the floating 5, that 5% of liberal/left voters went-a-wandering after Iraq. First to the Libdems, then off to Cameron’s Conservatives, they have now returned to Labour made safe by GB.
The next set of polls therefore are crucial, will Cameron’s swing to the right,(denied by the Tories as a swing to the right), bring back to the Tories, UKIP/BNP types, to replace their loss. If Labour holds onto a 5% lead, then voting intentions are solid, nothing much is going to change, GE result Labour 36/37% Conservative 33/34% Libdems 18/20% (dependent on campaign and tactical voting).
I can’t see any circumstances that have any historical precedent, that would actually allow the tories to get anywhere near government in the next election.
Interesting article- and one I broadly agree with.
I think three factors will decide the next general election.
first and most importantly, will Cameron be able to persuade a significant proportion of “soft” Labour supporters to switch to the Conservatives. The signs are that he was doing that under Blair, but that the numbers switching this way have declined since Brown came in.
If Cameron is successful in doing this to any meaningful extent, Labour’s chances depend on two things- first, on persuading a number of Labour identifying supporters who sat on their hands last time to come out and vote. Second, on “bringing home” a number of 2005 LD supporters.
The problem for The tories, I think, is that they need Brown to convert soft Labour voters, and hope that Brown fails to drive up labour turnout _and_ fail to convert meaningful numbers of Lib Dems.
This analysis is why part of me wonders whether there isn’t at least a possibility of Labour increasing its majority at the next election.
I know many posters will laugh at this, and indeed it is utterly unprecedented (and boundary changes mitigate against it), but if Cameron fails to convert many swing voters, while Brown brings back a number of labour supporting non voters and converts 5-10% of the 2005 LD vote to labour… well we could be in for a shock!
Just want to say that I shall soon be babysitting my daughter, and then I’m out for a drink - so I shall miss all the excitement of the poll.
But good luck everyone, and may the best Cornishman win.
Afternoon all again
It’s hard not to agree with Mike’s analysis though I think the departure of Blair who came to personify Iraq and everything involved with it was the pivotal event. I am convinced that had Blair still been PM the Ealing Southall by-election would have turned out differently. I met many voters who now claimed they could vote Labour again with the departure of Blair.
Looking at the above figures, I’m also interested in the number of ex-Tory voters who would now apparently vote Labour.
It seems then, as the polls suggest, that any gain from the LDs enjoyed by DC is being more than compensated by the gain enjoyed by Brown. As to whether either of these “movements” remains up till and including the election, I simply don’t know.
As for the LDs, the fact is the vote is softer and has a larger churn. That’s not to see the Party could not improve with a strong campaign and what we don’t know from these figures is whether the LD vote is holding up better in the seats the Party holds and its main targets (there was some evidence from the local elections this was the case).
“Just want to say that I shall soon be babysitting my daughter”
Enough of this American style electioneering already!
6. lol
On the way to BABYSIT MY DAUGHTER I will be helping some blind people across the road, delivering dinner to Romanian orphans, and generally healing the lame, the mute and the halt. So, a typical evening for me.
Ta-ra.
Meanwhile …. reports that Peter the Punters supporters queueing to vote are a dodgy lot appear confirmed :
http://www.wayodd.com/funny-pictures2/funny-pictures-job-that-stinks-11x.jpg
Stodge 5. I think you are misreading the table. Labour suffers a big net loss to the Tories. It gains three but loses 16.
Mike SMithson
5 Let’s wait and see. First do we mean the entire 15% is irreversible I doubt. Undoubtedly there is a figure within that, that will now stick with Brown but what is it 5%, 10%, 12%? I don’t know. Second Brown has already kept one bugbear with Lib Dem voters by keeping with ID cards. Labour voters like it but they’ll vot for him anyway whereas it seems to really annoy Lib Dems in particular. Third Iraq remains. Fourth Cameron has undoubtedly reduced anti Tory feeling among Lib Dems (well at least their voters), that alone should see at least some movement to the Tories. All in all everything in politics seems reversible, so let’s wait
Meanwhile II …. Labour bloggers resort to dirty tricks in support of Nick Palmer :
http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_oct2003/VoteLabour.jpg
These are the voters who are giving Brown a chance, they’ve shifted once so they can easily shift again though. ID cards, Iraq, other expectations derailed, it’s a lead built on shaky foundations and all can change quickly (as before).
This is why Brown needs to go for an October election, if it’s at all possible, otherwise he has to keep delaying decisions that will anger these voters or make those decisions which could make them stay at home or switch.
I don’t want to urinate on the Labour parade but if Brown does not capitulate to some of the traditional Labour voters than he could be in trouble?
For instance the Unions have been fairly vocal, if he does not give into them will they give him money or be quite so proactive in organising Labours electoral turnout. It is forgotten how instrumental unions had been in 2005 through postal vote organisation etc.
Other interesting areas of reluctant Labour voters maybe the public services, such as Health, education and some of the other services. The only thing Labour could say is “Tories…..”, that is not going to work for ever.
Other interesting groups such as first time buyers, council/public housing buyers (Qualifying periods have been extended to 5 years from 2 years pre 2005).
The working classes may also be less likely to vote Labour next time due to immigration; the double whammy of rising house prices for young working class folk and depresed wages in manual and semi-skilled work due to the huge unrestricted inflow of eastern europeans.
So whilst i don’t see the tories getting above 40% unless there is a recession or further catastrophic blow to the government (Who knows what some silly bugger has authorised or been upto). I don’t buy that the tories cannot win or even the LD are heading for a meltdown! (Though i like to rib them - sorry i cannot help it i am twisted!!!
(I do it to Labour as well! 
, but i don’t hate the people!).
11.
When i used to work in westminister i saw widdocombe one day and their were a load of builders.
They all started chanting get your tits out! And all that sort of stuff! 
very funny!!! 
14. The look on her face was very funny!
Labour under Brown are also shedding support - only retaining 85% of 2005 voters. That is surely the most significant figure.
As we aproach the introduction of ID cards that might cause some tactical LD to CON voting, probably not much though. I suppose British troops will be out by 2009 so I cant see any former LD voters leaving Labour unless the troops stay until then.
Also dont like to say so, but a couple more terror attacks in the UK could cause an imigration backlash, Labour would probably be forced to match the Tory line.
Interesting also the LD retention. I know they have the biggest churn but is that up or down in an electoral cycle.
Cameron has despite what Labour has said brought the prospect of bringing together a new coalition of 2005 Tory voters and voters from other parties together.
In his interview on Newsnight, he said the tories were going to be the party of the Environment, the individual and some of the traditional tory issues. So whilst Cameron does not have the Big Mo in the Polls or media at this time. It ain’t election time or likely to be for some time. He has all to play for and when i watch Cameron on the telly and then see Brown. Cameron gets my vote and support everytime. Brown on the telly today was hadly inspiring in relation to his thoughts on the the strikes.
As we aproach the introduction of ID cards that might cause some tactical LD to CON voting.
Just as important is the tatical LD to Labour voting - Some people would not have their botties on the green benches at this time if LD’s had not still tatically voted in 2005.
-2
+1
-1
+9
sorry i’ll try again d*mn return key and a default button
Re: 9 - Thank you, Mike. To be honest, I find that table very difficult to read. I think it’s poorly presented and put out but I suspect that if I saw it in the context of the whole fieldwork it would make more sense.
This is why I’m not a psephologist (and because I can’t spell the wortd either !!!)
Although it’s certainly interesting to see that 15% of Lib Dem voters have switched to Labour I don’t think that the Conservatives are going to lose any sleep over it. The anti-Blair Labourites were always going to return once Blair had gone.
For Cameron to win an election he’ll be looking to harvest an entirely different subset of the 2005 Liberal Democrat (and indeed Labour) voters to those featured in this article. If he doesn’t manage to do this than he’ll lose badly anyway, regardless of where the Lib/Lab floaters settle themselves.
OT - but I’ve only just got home and read the debate in the previous thread:
I thought that Cameron had a pretty good evening on Newsnight. He wasn’t on absolute top form but was good enough to deal effectively with all of the issues raised.
However - if Stephanie Flanders hadn’t been so astonishingly inept in her her line of questioning then he might’ve had a bit of trouble on the marriage issue. As it was though, for some inexplicable reason, Flanders chose to abandon all pretence at objectivity by bringing her own personal circumstances into the debate.
That’s fine to do if you’re some gobby member of the general public lurking in the Question Time audience - but not if you aspire to be a serious political interviewer (OK, maybe she doesn’t aspire to be one). Anyway, by so personalising her line of questioning she effectively destroyed her own credibility and handed Cameron a “Get out of Jail Free” card for his least sensible policy.
18- These strikes have the potential to be a disaster for Brown though dont they? A return of the winter of discontent would see Brown become what some had predicted before he became PM, a Callaghan (Although I can’t imagine the Police would acually go on strike)
Re: 23 - And I can’t spell that “wortd” either.
Re: 18 - The problem, Martin, is that you look at everything through the eyes of the partisan. For you, Cameron is everything and Brown is nothing so we can’t look to you for impartial analysis and comment.
I don’t agree that there is a new “coalition” of Tory voters out there and the polls offer little evidence of that either. A small number of those who have not voted Conservative since 1992 have returned to the fold but the evidence from this thread indicates that Labour are a lot nearer to their 1997 “coalition” than the Tories are to their 1992 grouping.
18 Depends which cycle. If you remove 2001-2005 because of the highly abonormal Iraq situation yes is your probable answer
19. Yes I think that wiill reduce. There will undoubtedly be some but I think Labour will striggle to get it on anything like the Hague or Howard scale. Plus the big unknown will Tory voters vote tactically. In quite a few seats Tories have never had to really concern themselves with that because Labour will always win anyway. Now at least on 2005 figures the Lib Dems are theoretically in with a shout. Will the Tory vote hold firm in those seats to flag loyalty, ir seize the wholly novel chance of turfing out their Labour MP. Uknown.
12 Agree. Given how unpopular Blair had become among Lib Dems it hardly shocking that so many are looking at him rosily. How long or how much that will continue is unknowable at present
17 We’ll probably have som presence even a token one as long as the yanks are there. Even a Corporals guard of some sort
Well observed article and there were many within the labour party in 2005 who observed that the lib dems were making a tactical error in trying to attract the lab vote in the first place. Brown continues to play a difficult foreign policy hand well and has effectively parked Iraq as a domestic political issue. He brushed off Ming the Mong’s attempt to commit to a departure date from Iraq - at the same time he’s getting harried by neo-con twits like William Shawcross, the aforesaid twit being a mouthpiece for someone else. Until George W departs the neo-cons on this side of the Atlantic will continue to make trouble – like Dracula they refuse to die.
With the exception of Iraq, which probably cost Labour many seats at the last GE, specific policies, ID cards etc do not seem to be having the impact they once did. Its almost as if a topor has settled on the electorate, voting intentions are in the doldrums.
If there is no real reaction to the Rhys Jones murder, what is going to shift people away from Labour and back to the Conservatives, an economic catastrophe perhaps?
In 1994, Labour took West Dudley off the Conservatives with a 29% swing, why have the Tories failed to replicate that sort of reaction in the last ten years?
Re: 18,24 - Strikes ? Winter of Discontent ?? I do wonder at times what planet some people are living on. I’m sure some Tories lie awake at night hoping for a re-run of 1978-79 but I see no sign of it.
The Prison Officers have a series of grievances which need to be addressed but to stretch that to anything like the late 70s can only be done by those too young to remember it (or only remember what some Tory has told them).
29- If the *POLICE* go on strike (which as I said, I very much doubt, but have made small hints) then I think that might cause some ‘Discontent’
29 Welcome your views on 10 and 26
28 Given that Howard was in favour of ID cards personally this was hardly given a testing among Lib Dems was it at the last election in terms of their propensity to tactically vote for Labour
The thing that struck me about the recent ICM poll was the regional analysis (page 3 and 4), especially since this was a subset of figures I had been filtering out. When compared back to the 2005 polls conducted during the GE there seems to be a North/South polarisation of voting intentions - the Lib Dem poll numbers appears to be holding up in the Midlands and further North, but have declined in the South and London:
Conservatives:
NE/NW Yorks and Humberside -2
E/W Mids Eastern +1
Scotland/Wales -1
SE/SW +9
London +2
Labour:
NE/NW Yorks and Humberside +2
E/W Mids Eastern +0
Scotland/Wales -7
SE/SW +1
London +7
Liberal:
NE/NW Yorks and Humberside -1
E/W Mids Eastern -2
Scotland/Wales -1
SE/SW -9
London -7
33. Join to choose - I was just going to make the same point.
There are some important differences to note between the Tories now and in 2005.
(1) Tories are mopping up the vote very well in the South-East/South-West according to the ICM poll. Local elections bear this out too.
(2) Tories still have a narrow lead on Health & Eduation
(3) Cameron is seen as a fully paid up member of the human race (despite the fact most left-wingers are desperate for people to see him as a posh pr@t, the only criticism I hear voters cite is his weakness on policy - noone cares about class anymore apart from Labour)
(4) Tories were in the lead in the opinion polls for almost 18 months, despite recently losing the lead to Brown - they never achieved this for more than 1 (or 2?) months in a row for the 12 years prior to Cameron - yes, you can cite Iraq, Blair etc. but the lead started when Cameron came on the scene, not when Blair c0cked up Iraq onwards
All this gives ground for some home for Conservatives. Personally, I don’t think Cameron will win a majority next time, but there’s more than a sporting chance of picking up 40-50 seats, getting the Tory seat total over 250 and denying Brown a majority.
I don’t think there’s any prospect of Brown bettering Blairs majority in 2005.
Ben Brogan is suggesting that tomorrows Telegraph/YouGov poll has bad news for the tories ( http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/08/bad-news-for-ca.html ), anyone else heard similar?
*** BREAKING NEWS **
Tyson and I will be having an emergency meeting very soon to examine the levels of our respective support and will decide which of us has the better chance of getting on to the final ballot.
We intend to hold a joint press conference where one of us will stand down in favour of the other while transferring all votes to the successful individual.
I have a number of pledges who have yet to declare for me and I remain confident of a bold showing. Michael Meacher is rumoured to favour my candidacy.
“some HOPE for Conservatives” naturally
Must get in there before the pedants too!
35 I think YouGov have a severe credibility problem at present centred on the Lib Dem vote. I can’t think of anyone even those who would dearly love it to be true who really have them at the 12-14% ratings YouGove are consistently getting. Until we can trust them on that it casts a shadow over everything else they report
35, jgc,
Brogan seems to be comparing across polling companies - the YouGov poll is apparently disappointing compared to the ICM poll. The question in my mind is “how does it compare to the last YouGov?
Odds are that it’s an improvement on that while still being worse than the ICM (guessing 6 or 7 Gordons, then)
Interestingly, he’s said that the Tories’ internal Populus poll has them level-pegging. Does this imply that under BPC rules, it now has to be published (ie, it’s leaked into the public domain)?
39 Not unless actual figures are quoted IIRC. Level pegging could of course be one or two points either side of matters
Some value available on the cricket ODI being played today. India scored 212, which is a bit below par, but England available to lay at 1.21 looks very good value.
Scores at Old Trafford tend to be lower than on other grounds, and the lights, under which England will be batting are poor. England should be favs, but 1.21 is way too short. Worth a speculative lay I would suggest.
Wealth Warnings apply as always.
34.”noone cares about class anymore apart from Labour)”
Interestingly I would say ‘class’ in the sense you use it has only ever benefited the Tories. There used to be a significant deferential vote which saw the Tories win election after election when the demographics should have seen only victories for Labour.
This has given the Tories a significant lead among the pensioners which still exists. As for ‘caring’ about class to-day I remember when Douglas Hurd stood for leader of the Tories against Major. Being an Old Etonian certainly counted against him with Tory voters brought up in Maggies new meritocracy
39 the last 2 YouGov polls have had labour over 40% and with 9/10% leads so it would either be very surprising or a rogue poll if it shows a bigger lead than these, the last ICM was 5% so a lead of 6-7% would be a drop. I wonder how the telegraph will report the story. Maybe the tories were hoping for some good polls on the back of what appears on the surface to have been a good 10 days for them.
42 I think it was more that he was Douglas Hurd than his school or classs lack of qualities - never has a man been more a product of the Foreign Service. Tories don’t like Whitehall and electing a Whitehall clone was never on.
35. According to Brogan the Tories are still claiming that Dave’s personal ratings are good in spite of a bad Telegraph/YouGov poll later tonight. I suppose they could both be right, I guess that personal ratings and voting intentions could go in different directions at the moment because Dave presents well and he has been on telly quite a bit lately. Believe me, I would employ him to do marketing tomorrow if here were available, he could sell coals to Newcastle. But brand labour remains strong, whereas people are confused about brand conservative, and Dave’s wittering on off the top of his head about mending our broken society, or something, will only serve to confuse people further.
correction: class but lack of the right qualities
39. That would be my reading of it as well.
Re the class debate. If it’s Boris vs Ken next year, we should get an idea of how much class still matters in an election (yes, yes - I know Boris isn’t technically upper-class based on his parentage etc, but everyone assumes he is).
33/34 There are a number of reasons why these figures are suspect and not statistically valid . These figuers apparently show that Labour support in the South/South West is a little up on it’s GE performance . Just look at the Labour performance in the South in May and in the recent byelections in Glos , Kent , Portsmouth and Suffolk . They are polling at just 1 quarter of the level of votes they got in 2005 . There is no evidence at all that the Brown Bounce has enthused one single voter to go out and vote Labour . The evidence rather is that in vast parts of the South and South West Labour support now is on a par with the OMRLP .
I feel very humble that I have had so many votes in the PBC Poster poll . For interest I voted for Sean Fear , Roger , SBS and Andrea in the various categories .
“I would employ him to do marketing tomorrow if here were available, he could sell coals to Newcastle”
Interesting you should think that. What always strikes me about Cameron is how much less impressive he is when compared to Blair-and Blair. I doubt many marketing people would use Blair to sell anything at the moment and by extension I would say the same for Cameron.
Advertisers have a scale for peoples marketability. Carol Vordeman was rated fifth most believable female (I know this because I recently worked with her). i doubt very much that Cameron would be in the top twenty males whereas Brown certainly would be.
48. I remeber when John Major’s govt was in trouble in the 1990’s they used to cite local election results all the time. It did not change anything the tories still lost. What is even worse for the LD’s in this respect is they are not a government, other than at some local councils. This means to put it bluntly the LD are deep shit!!!
I always like it when political parties, say their polls show them in the lead/level pegging etc. do they actually publish: think not.
49 - Can’t stand Carol Vorderman, something not totally trustworthy about her, then again I despair at all the Diana worship so I’m used to being out of step.
48 Local gov byelections are notoriously difficult to draw conclusions from with regard to the national picture. One straw in the wind is the table in the link here to the list of results. It suggests that overall the libs are 3 seats down this year with lab no change, this compares with previous years when the libs have made gains all years that I can see.
It may be that,as it is generally accepted the psephological mointain is too steep for DC to scale in one go,that were he to get the Tories to the c.250 seat mark next time,it would,in a sense,be a sort of moral victory for the Tories in so much that it would only take one more swing of 4-5 % for them to at least be within 10 seats of an overall majority-sorry if I have included too many ‘ifs’:wink:
Very much agree with you on the North South polarisation join to choose. I’d be interested to see objectively why people think this is happening. I think these figures came from collecting all the ICM polls since Brown became PM to get over problems you’d have with a small sample size in one poll but of course the national weightings wouldn’t apply regionally (would it be possible to re-weight the regional figures correctly?)
With these swings UK Polling report projects a House of Commons with Conserative MPs, 335 Labour MPs and 35 Liberal Democrats - a Labour majority of 20. I think this is about what I would think would happen if there were a a General Election tommorow and a much increased Labour majority is highly unlikely. It is yet more evidence that the bounce is coming from the north and already Labour seats.
Applying a straightforward uniform swing on the headline poll figures may suggest an increased majority but from these regional figures the swing could be anything but uniform. Labour may gain seats in the north from the Lib Dems (or even Tories) but could be heavily offset by losses in the south. There is also the incumbency that the 2005 gainers from labour in marginal seats will have built. We all know Lib Dem incumbents are very difficult to shift! The Conservatives have had very hard working candidates selected in marginals for many months, a year plus, my own constituency being one of them, where Labour have only just selected their candidate.
A visible presence of the Lib Dems and well fought Tory and Lib Dems campaigns in the run up to a general election could take a lot of floating Labour support, particularly that acquired during Brown’s honeymoon.
Which brings me on, I think Mike’s analysis is very interesting but I disagree with saying that the Lib Dem switch is permanent. Its far too early to say. I agree Blair was detested by these voters because of his relationship with Bush and how he came to personify issues like Iraq and ID cards. The changeover with Brown has been seen by them as a wlecome detox but post honeymoon and over the coming months the ongoing issues of Iraq and ID cards etc could easily come to stick to Brown. Particularly if he is seen to carry on where Blair left off.
If The Lib Dems and Tories do a good job of convincing the switchers of the “dual premiership” - Brown’s intimate involvement with the war and unpopular policies of the Blair government they could give some food for thought to the fickle switchers.
This is all ignoring the fact that we have seen little to no coverage of the Lib Dems, who will invariably recover some support once they come out of hinding and fight a GE campaign.
Selling to you Paul might be tricky! The first job of the advertiser is to establish the target market. In your case they might really struggle!
49. mm, part of selling is putting people at their ease initially, I am a great Gordon defender as you know but I wouldn’t say that is exactly his talent. But the point is that he’s trusted, which is what matters for politicians, and hurrah, it looks as if tomorrow will bring another crap poll for the tories, who aren’t.
56 - Get Myleene Klass fronting your campaign and you stand a chance.
I’m not sure what Vorderman sells but I doubt they’d be things I was interested in. I tend to like advertising that is intelligent and artistically interesting in its own right, celebrity endorsements tend not to do it for me.
48 Have you selected in Swansea West yet?
57. I’d be surprised if the poll result is real. Apparently they’re very careful to avoid leaks
50 The local election results in the 1990’s and the Westminster byelections were pretty disastrous for Major’s C0nservatives and foretold what would happen in the 1997 GE so you are way off beam here , Martin .
55,The regional extropolation of the Guardian poll shows a sharp deviance from the Electoral Calculus unifrom swing survey:
Regional breakdown,listing Lab first:335 249 35 32
Electoral calculus,ditto above :373 217 31 29
All sorts of variables have to be obviously thrown into the mix,but to my mind,as a Labour supporter,this surely kills any speculation of a snap October poll
60 - We’ll see, frankly while the press has (depending on how you spin it) not been “good” for the Government it’s not been as “negative” as it could (and IMHO probably should) have been… while at the same time beyond, admittedly positive, secondary coverage of Cameron and the Conservatives in the print media and the near total absence of Brown from the scene, i think there’s little to suggest there’ll be any massive shift shown in the YouGov Poll… whats more journo’s normally have contacts so there might be something to it.
Maybe YouGov are only polling people north of Birmingham?
64 For the first time ever , I was actually polled by Yougov yesterday ( apart from the Brand Index surveys ) . Apart from the polling question there were a number of multi choice questions on Brown , policy etc some of which in my opinion had poor choices of responses none of which fitted my actual views .
65 Refer you to 59
66 Not as far as I know , Punter . I have not been in contact with anyone this summer so have no idea what is or is not happening .
Well, I’m 30 in October and I’ve never been polled by any polling organisation!
One thing to bear in mind about YouGov is their weightings which are based on a “political identifier” gathered from data collected at the time of the last election. Those with an identifier have been weighted to achieve CON 34.2%: LAB 45.2%: LD 15%.
So Labour is up massively on its 36.2% at the general election; the Tories are up a whisker on their 33.2% while the Lib Dems are marked right down compared with the 22.7% that was achieved.
Is it any wonder that the Lib Dems do so badly and Labour so well?
Is this a desperate attempt to revitalise the voters interest in politics?
http://tinyurl.com/33×2sa
Is that the result of Tomorrow’s Yougov Mike? Gawd don’t tell test!
Sorry try this
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1282062,00.html
I can’t see the Lib’s falling below 18%.
” I remeber when John Major’s govt was in trouble in the 1990’s they used to cite local election results all the time. It did not change anything the tories still lost. ”
Martin, where on earth did you hear that?
I don’t recall Major ever citing local election results - they were absolutely terrible.
You must mean the “spin” put on retaining Westminster and Wandsworth councils as good. That was just some expectation management in London, nothing more.
David:
“Re the class debate. If it’s Boris vs Ken next year, we should get an idea of how much class still matters in an election ”
The contest won’t settle any of the debate on class! Boris could lose by saying silly things, not being serious enough and having a weak and inconsistent platform. Livingstone could lose because of high tax with nothing to show, congestion charge, crowded transport, high crime, obsession with himself and with left-wing foreign leaders.
There is whole host of reasons why either might lose.
Why is it you assume that people will vote according to class?
Yeah, I remember the 1995 local council elections where the Tories lost over 2000 councillors in one blood bath! I believe that remains the worst showing by a mainstream political party at a national election, in British history?
I guess what the poster may be refering to, is the local elections, by elections and opinion polls during the 80’s, that Labour used to regularly win, only to go on to lose in national polls. Although the 80’s was a very differant time, politically ans socially.
73. It was mainly in the economist and their local by-election indications but i have also herd it from tories as well. I meant by-elections by the way - I was referring to Mark Senior and his LD by-election spin!
Actually Brian Mahwinny did try spinning the 1996 losses!!!
Just googled Nick Palmer MP so as to put a face to the name and then looked up Brown’s profile - interesting!!
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/gordon_brown/kirkcaldy_and_cowdenbeath
52: If it makes you feel any better, my mates and I went to the video shop on the day Diana died since there was nothing on telly but wall-to-wall maudlin sentimentality and the Liverpool-Newcastle game had been cancelled…and we could hardly get in the door and the shelves were half empty.
So not everyone crying into their beer!
I thought the whole Diana reaction was cringeworthy, made me embarrassed to be British almost for a time. One of my worst, creepiest memories of Blair was him doing his best to fake tears when he said we’ve lost our queen of hearts or jack of spades whatever he said, yet incredibly he got a lot of praise for that. So I too am used to being out of step.
77
If you haven’t seen the Daily Mash’s take on Diana it is here
http://tinyurl.com/39um59
Telegraph’s article is now available. I think it was unchanged generally but Tories up 1% - fieldwork conducted before the recent “fight-back” on crime et al.
Internal Tory polls done recently suggest they’re on 36% and Labour on 37%, according to the Telegraph.
The Daily Telegraph’s homepage headline gives Labour 41%,the Tories 33%,the Lib Dems 14%,others 12%-I will return to read the editorial,whose headline sounded very downbeat
Can you offer betting odds on all sorts of political and other events.