Three polls that shake Labour to the core
May 18th, 2008
Graphics - News of the World
Can it get any worse for Gordon?
Reproduced above are the graphics that appear in this morning’s News of the World showing the key numbers from its ICM survey of Crewe and Nantwich voter ahead of next Thursday’s crucial by election.
Given that a week ago the same pollster was reporting a margin of 4% for the Tories it is very hard to see how any other result than an emphatic victory by Cameron’s party is going to be possible. The response to the £2.7bn tax package seem particularly damning.
As well as being bad news for Labour the ICM survey could impede Lib Dem efforts in the seat. Clegg’s party has thrown an enormous amount at C&N and this does not seem to be bearing fruit. The one viable strategy left, which will be played hard, is to go to Labour supporters to say that a Lib Dem vote is the only way of stopping the Tories.
The betting markets have reacted as though the Crewe and Nantwich result is now a near certainty. Betfair’s Tory price has tightened to just 0.11/1. So a bet of £100 will produce a profit of just £11.
The other two polls to be published were on national general election voting intention and both had Labour in the mid 20s. ComRes in the Independent on Sunday was the last one to appear and has with changes on the April poll CON 43%(+3): LAB 26%(nc): LD 19%(-1). This is the biggest ever Conservative lead that the pollster has recorded.
The ComRes figures are in the same area as YouGov for the Sunday Times which has, with changes on the last survey by the firm nine days ago - CON 45%(-4): LAB 25%(+2): LD 18%(+1).
The totality of this must be particularly worrying for Labour strategists and the hundreds of MPs who face the prospect of losing their seats, salaries and allowances.
The question is whether there is anything that Gordon can do to reverse the tide? For in the past fews days he has added £2.7m £2.7bn to the national debt to fund the tax changes, put forward all his developing policy ideas into the so-called “draft Queen’s Speech” and had a media blitz on a scale that we have not seen before.
This story will continue…..
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
The last few weeks have been a sea-change, no doubt
2. Typo in article (final paragraph) - should say £2.7BILLION, not £2.7m!
This signals a coming political earthquake of great magnitude.
Or a political hurricane, if you prefere atmospheric analogies; violent waves for change are coming…
Now — my question is: what kind of Conservative will Cameron favor?
I mean: conservatism is not indexed to a political Party, it is a trans-partisan movement, right? Beyond partisanery and electoralist oppurtinism.
I understand that Brown is eroding the credibility and popularity of Socialism in the UK.
Now: what kind of post-socialism pro-conservatism flavor will the Conservative Party of Cameron lead to?
Is the graphic accurate in that the ICM poll had the voting intention question as question 3? That is if true incredibly unusual is it not, isn’t it normally question 1?
To ask the voting intention question after what are 2 potentially leading questions (on the “bribe”) is normally bad form.
3.
Policy Exchange’s “Compassionate Conservatism” pamplet might be an indicator.
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/libimages/170.pdf
“This suggests three broad principles of political action.
The first is one of freedom. It recognises that many interventions by the state are of necessity coercive, and others may be desirable. But it insists that indi- viduals,as citizens,should enjoy a default presumption for freedom and against state interference in their lives. The counterpart of this freedom is that individuals should take a greater degree of personal responsibility for their lives. After all,if the state is the means we use to pay for our
health,welfare and education,then we can expect it to take an interest in how we are doing.
The second principle is one of decentralisation. It pushes political
power and responsibility further down to individual citizens,saying that political decisions should where possible be taken close to the people they affect. In other words, those whom we have empowered to act must do so in plain sight,ideally from within a given community. That community will vary. Some decisions must be taken nationally, in defence for example. Some must be taken internationally,such as those governing trade and market access.But many more could and should be pushed down to the local level.
The third principle is one of accountability. It allows citizens to exer- cise their political will effectively by insisting that those in political power should be clearly accountable to the citizenry for their actions. This is to ensure better performance on pain of removal,and to main- tain the legitimacy not merely of our public elected offices but of a political system that places elected office at its core.
These principles underline the extent to which compassionate con-
servatism is about limiting state power, and preserving and extending our democracy.”
If the questions were asked in that order then it’s incredibly leading. It would be interesting to know what the results would have been if the order had been 3 2 4 1.
O/T
Putin: the Face of National-Socialism in Russia
Re: my predictions for C&N: here is a clue: B and R; same place twice.
5
–freedom
–decentralisation
–accountability
“limiting state power, and preserving and extending our democracy”
Wow! Love it.
3 Philippe Magnan: I understand that Brown is eroding the credibility and popularity of Socialism in the UK.
Now: what kind of post-socialism pro-conservatism flavor will the Conservative Party of Cameron lead to?
Philippe, please note that this is no criticism of you… in the first sentence quoted, there’s an assumption that Brown’s and New Labour have been and are socialist. Most socialists would argue all night with you that they have been and are. Yes, he’s thrown money at schools and hospitals, but he’s also respoinsible for things like in effect creating a tax haven in the UK for the vulture-like private investment partnerships, for example, and New Labour has been far more friendly to big business than the Tories ever were. At least some in the Conservative Party were able to understand business and finance matters and thus knew where regulation was needed.
But isn’t it the reality that politics has moved far beyond mere left and right, Conservative and Labour? Cameron’s “hug a hoody” comment is evocative of that. Dealing with delinquents, for example, is far more complicated than just throwing the book at them, which is the standard right wing thing to want to do.
8 Woops - I should have made it clear that I was meaning that most socialists would argue all night that Brown and New Labour are not socialist.
9
Being “friendly to big business” is socialistic: check Putin in Russia.
Conservatism is frriendly to every business — by caring about actual competitivity in the markets; Socialistic policies often create state-sponsored pseudo-private monopolies (public funding/private profiteering).
As for fighting crime in the domestic sphere: Conservatism can be very libertarian, like in the US, where right-wing Libertarian Nominee BOB BARR is actually advocating the legalization of drugs and on-line gambling (to which Edwards and Clinton opposed).
And in the US, Conservatives are advocating the right ot bear arms — which deprives the Police from having a dangerous monopoly on guns, like in every socialistic states.
Because Conservatism, as well as Socialism, comes in different flavors, I was wondering about the preferences of Cameron and his friends.
In this regard, post #5 was very helpful. Many thanks.
if labour can’t stop the toffs, how will the limps?
Take a look at the photograph heading this article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/may/18/crewebyelection08.economy
and tell me - which one is Gordon Brown? I think they all are!
3 Philippe
Wake Up!! Brownstuff and NuLabour have absolutely nothing to do with socialism. They are a market-oriented alternative Tory Party. Whilst a few old-fashioned socialists may linger in the party most left, as I did, when it became clear that Blair was a Tory, and an authoritarian.
Democratic Socialism does not believe in elected dictatorship that ignores the will of the people. Hilda started that in the UK and Tony B Liar and Brownstuff have been willing converts to Hilda’s centralistic tendencies.
The closest government to Socialist in Europe is the one in Spain that was just re-elected to power.
Malcolm
Philippe (7), don’t be taken in. “Freedom, decentralisation and accountability” sound lovely, indeed they are lovely.
Previous Conservative Party governments were characterised by freedom for the rich and powerful; excessive ccentralisation and control; and lack of accountability.
Cameron’s project is all about image and presentation. There is no reason to think that the reality would be any different from that of previous Conservative governments.
So the NotW finds LibDems have lost one in four of their 2005 voters, eh? That would be a disastrous showing for them - though I expect they will be closer to their previous number come Friday morning (but not ahead of it).
PS What a nice change to see bar charts in their correct proportions!
PPS Given the 69% “no difference” presumably includes all those who were already committed to voting Tory/LibDem/other, the tax giveaway stunt has broken against Labour voters in the ratio 6:1. When this Government of all the Muppets can’t even bribe its core supporters without cocking it up, then it really is time to move on. Hint to Labour Bunker: don’t steal my pension and then offer me a little bit of it back a decade later - and expect me to be grateful!
Off to C&N to test the waters for myself. Report to follow….
14. whatever cameron is he is not a thatcher or a major. brown is a carbon copy of heath. so maybe you think cameron is the new macmillan or holme. the trots have a problem, as their crewe campaign illustrates. they have no idea how to characterise cameron.
the limps too.
16 Agree that the LibDems haven’t worked out how to characterise Cameron. Clegg uses PMQ’s to try and tag Cameron to Brown, as both being opposite sides of the same two-party coin - when what the people really want is a nice crisp banknote! In reality, the LibDems these days are as anachronistic as finding a half pence coin down the back of an old sofa!
“Oooh look, kids - they might look kinda funny to you, but once upon a time these things were everywhere….”
“Why did they get taken out of circulation, daddy?”
“Because individually, they were pointless; and even if you had lots of them, they still didn’t amount to anything.”
Forecast: We shall see a surge in the Cons figures to beyond 50 over the next 3 monnhs, Labour and the Lib Dems will be hammered in European Elections next year the 2010 election will be a 1997 in reverse, except the Lib Dems will hang on better than most would predict. Get your bets on now. Perhaps that could be a treble.
re 4. A very good point. I am 99% certain that the numbers linked to the questions in the NOTW graphic DO NOT reflect the order in which they were asked. ICM always ask the voting intention questions first.
Another in a long line of excellent threads by Mike.
Some of us suggested prior to the Mayoral election and locals that we were about to witness a sea-change in British politics. I think Thursday will seal it.
A few on here scoffed at the suggestion that the media narrative would completely change, but it has. We are now looking at the next Conservative Government in waiting, rather than an opposition. We all know that the writing is now on the wall. Labour’s decline is going to be messy.
I think the interesting thing to note though is that poll after poll is now putting Labour support below 30%. This has to be extremely worrying for them, especially with the Conservatives substantially above 40% consistently. It indicates that if an election were held soon Labour would go down to a substantial defeat.
21. Agreed. Long gone are the Labour people saying the Conservatives just can’t breach 40 and can therefore never win a majority. Indeed the margin I often look at is between Labour and the Lib Dems in all the recent polls. If that gets much small then they’re really in trouble.
As well as losing the centre, Zanu Labour are in the process of losing their core vote. They can go a lot lower than 26%.
23 - I don’t actually think they will. I think 26% probably represents their floor of support, in the same way that 31/32% represented the floor of Conservative support.
Where did it all go wrong…….?
For my money it’s all down to weakness indecision and a lack of conviction. Fatal flaws for a political Party. What’s the point in having a commission to look at cannabis classification and then ignoring its findings?
CGT was the start and probably Labour’s single biggest mistake. Limply following Osborne’s lead when they had the opportunity to explain why it was a fair tax was completely destabilizing. Since then this feebleness has been repeated so often that the public no longer believe Labour know what it’s doing or more importantly what its values are.
There is a template for recovery which is M+S. It could do worse than copying it’s strategy to the letter. Unfortunately for Brown this includes changing it’s MD. I noticed that Nick P has said the Parliamentary Party is generally happy with the leadership. If this is the case then they’re selling themselves short and I speak as someone who was generally supportive.
mike do we have the icm data to find out what the dont know adjustment was in the latest poll?
“The one viable strategy left, which will be played hard, is to go to Labour supporters to say that a Lib Dem vote is the only way of stopping the Tories.”
Oh please, oh please! Let it be true…
@24:
What basis do you have for making that claim?
We’ve seen no evidence yet of stickiness in Gordon’s bottom.
24.
Maybe, but I don’t think so. The blindly loyal core vote is based on the belief that the party is basically *on your side* despite any ups and downs over individual policies. Mass immigration has been slowly killing that belief among Labour people. It’s a very slow process melting that kind of glacier type loyalty but it’s there imo and I doubt it can be stopped now.
Could be wrong though.
25. Good to see you back Roger. I disagree, CGT was just a symptom rather than the cause. The fundamental issue is that Brown’s entire career is based on the Cunning Stunt. It was, perhaps, Blair who made him look good after all. Brown rode a fantastic wave in global fortunes and took all the credit but the reality is that he added no value what-so-ever. He has borrowed recklessly, spend incontinently and complicated everything he has touched to obscure the reality of that has been going on.
29 - Canvassing evidence from my area suggests that the blindingly loyal core vote will make the argument that “OK, our Labour government is screwing us over royally, but it would be a lot worse under anyone else”.
If I were a Labour backbencher and the most positive thing that I could say about any of these polls is that Labour look like they’re going to finish a bad second in a previously safe seat, that’s not good. But polls should be taken, not inhaled, and they shouldn’t be shaking anything or anyone to the core. The Labour party collectively needs to get a grip of itself - in other words, it needs to be led. Right now, it appears to have lost confidence in its leader. If so, it needs to find a leader that it will follow.
More evidence of the disintegration of Labour in this Times article, also mentions some incredible by-election tactics.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3953718.ece
@32:
But that’s tabloid footballthink. “If only we could find the right manager, each an every one of our massive, fundamental flaws would evaporate!”
Sometimes the leader is merely symptom. Have you considered that Labour may have exactly the leader they want and deserve?
re 26. Test - we don’t yet have the detailed ICM data but my guess is that the methodology would have been the same as the pioneering new approach that was used last week.
Also we have not seen the scale of any “spiral of silence adjustment” which, last week took the lead down from 12% to 4%.
33 - from the last paragraph, Shaun Woodward appears to have switched allegiances yet again. I wonder what the Labour hierarchy think of his actions?
36 - They are probably too busy knifing Brown to notice.
Well, if Philippe Magnan believes that Putin is a Socialist, he’ll believe anything.
On-thread, it’s extraordinary how similar “compassionate conservatism” looks to government policy - expecting people to take responsibility is surely just a posh way of referring to the kind of actions that are otherwise called the “nanny state” - and decentralisation is something that oppositions tend to love but which loses its charm when you’re in government. Would a Tory government really let local councils subsidise mosque-building programmes or operate racially discrimatory social housing access policies? No, of course it wouldn’t.
Yes, the Tories almost certainly will touch 50% in a post C&N poll. The question of where Labour’s floor might lie strikes me as a much harder call. 25%? 20%? 10%? I don’t think any of us know. All that seems clear is that Brown inherited a co-alition held together by Blair, not by Blairism. The electorate may want Blairism, and see Cameron as the man to deliver it.
One test of the strength of the Tories, as opposed to the weakness of Labour, might be membership figures. Are people joining the Conservatives to-day in the numbers in which they joined NuLab in the 1990s?
And finally, Q4 in the NoW poll is not actually good reading for the Tories. The “makes no difference” figure should be a lot higher than 10% if people have decided that they actually want the Tories in, as opposed to despising the present lot. And Brown will go. Unlike John Major, there’s no evidence that he has any relish for campaigning in the country and after Labour have lost Crewe by 6,000 votes or so the TU leaders will let him know what’s what.
34 - Labour may very well have exactly the leader they deserve (after all, he was appointed unopposed). All the smoke signals are that many of the upper echelons no longer want him, and we have already had an opinion poll suggesting that a clear majority of Labour supporters want him to resign.
Will replacing Gordon Brown solve most of Labour’s problems? Of course not - it wasn’t as though they were doing that well under Tony Blair, and it’s hardly as though Labour is brimming with charismatic, dynamic leaders in the wings. However, it is an essential first step, given the internal ferment that Labour is going through.
38. Very perceptive post IA.
I think your paragraph “All that seems clear is that Brown inherited a co-alition held together by Blair, not by Blairism. The electorate may want Blairism, and see Cameron as the man to deliver it” may have hit the nail on the head.
30. ToneyBaloney. Thanks for your welcome. Have you posted before or just changed your username?
On Betfair’s Party Leaders market there are four options extant.
Let’s get the two exotica out of the way first.
The two ‘exotica’ are BROWN ONLY and NONE.I have assigned between 4 and 5% to these options combined but will settle for 4% so as not to offend Tory Boys on here.So in other terms I think a fair price for either choice is around 50-1.
Now we are left with the only two realistic options…..Cameron Only and Brown/Cameron.
Reading these threads one gets the strong impression that the former should be favourite.This is not correct.The last traded price for Cameron Only was 2.52 and for Brown/Cameron 1.87.
Sadly the market is weak and flabby, but that in its turn creates the opportunity for someone other than me to step in and tellBetfair the way it is !
Mike’s tip of Brown to depart in 2008 at 6-1 and 5-1 was a cracker, because if he doesn’t go in 2008 then when ?
I do not like Cameron Only at 6-5 but some of you may disagree.
There is a hidden bonus for playing this market because some folk think that Ming is due a comeback !
Antifrank. Labour don’t need a charismatic leader. Someone saying what they mean and meaning what they say and being consistent would be quite enough. I notice from the Times link at 33 that focus groups have said Cameron most reminds them of a Foxton’s estate agent and there is something not quite right about him. At the moment I think Labour would settle for that!
Watched John Denham being interviewed this morning, he came over well. If GB were to, ‘fall on his sword’ given Denham’s position on Iraq etc. he’s a credible candidate for the top job: could be a decent bet.
Although being in a marginal seat might be a problem.
Amazing set of polls. Labour’s support does seem to be bottoming out at around 1/4 voters. But it COULD get worse. Not saying it will, but it could.
When the Tories were are their lowest ebb 1997/2004 they concentrated on shoring up their historic base by pandering to the right. It was seen as disastrous but it did stop UKIP becoming a major threat to the future of the party. It enabled a firm base of 30% to be retained and to be a rock to rebuild from.
Labour, on the other hand, have consistently chased the swing voter at the expense of their bedrock. The latest tax trick is another example of that. 1 MILLION core voters shafted for a by-election bribe (that will fail) is not the way the typical Labour voter wants his/her party to behave.
I’ve been looking at the Welsh local election results and going back over the 2007 NAW election and it is clear that Labour are losing both the top end of their vote to the Tories and the bottom end to ’screw you guys, I’m going home’ or Independents.
In constituencies that previously a profile would have said ‘Labour weigh their vote here, rather than count it’ I now have to write ‘Labour are under threat from apathy and independents’.
They hold TWO councils in Wales. Neath Port Talbot they hold 37/27 and Rhondda Cynon Taff 44/31. Even there they are not registering the one-party whitewashes they used to.
Wales is the legs of the Labour movement. The party is in danger of having its legs swept from under it at the same time as having its head cut off. Another six months of opinion polls like this and the party will have to consider a radical left-wing manifesto to shore up the base and establish a fall-back position. A tactical retreat in military terms.
just seen the Comres poll that must be even more alarming for Gordo than You Gov. I wonder if Dave will raise C&N on Wednesday PMQ’s . After all the jibes from Gordon about substance, the Labour campaign in the by election has been completely devoid of substance, and just full of bile.
As for Tamsin tallking to Gordo and making him change his mind over the 10p issue, its plainly laughable. How Labour can think that such a pathetic line would work is beyond me.
38 - It doesn’t say much for Brown that people think he’s so pathetic he won’t even try win a mandate for himself.
Where will he end up in the pantheon of PMs? Somewhere just above Neville Chamberlain?
I’m not at all surprised that Phillipe Magnan should be so interested in the prospect of “socialist” mismanagement inciting muslims in Europe to break into our homes and cut our throats because we weren’t intelligent enough to prescribe to the particular brand of “libertarianism”. The reason why I’m not surprised is that there is obviously nothing of note going on in his country. Reading his “interesting” questions (so cleverly designed to shake us out of our slumber) I found myself wondering 1)Who is the PM of Canada? 2)To which Party does s/he belong? 3)Are they lef/right/indifferent? 4)How many parties are there in the Canadian Parliament? 5)How many of these are dangerously socialist and hence pro-muslim immigration? 6)What are the prospects of the latter winning the next election?
I am totally ignorant on all of these questions whilst I realise, to my shame, that Phillipe can, owing to his superior knowledge, also advise on what I should be having for breakfast and how this could influence a muslim takeover of Europe (not too daft since I do most of my food shopping in a local Turkish supermarket).
BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of a new ARSE poll of polls that comprises ICM, Populus, YouGov, CR and MORI that gives :
Con 41.6% .. Lab 28% .. LibDem 19.2% .. Others 11.2%.
The PISSED Wells/Baxter Index with added SOAMES weighting shows :
Con 362 seats .. Lab 208 .. LibDem 48 .. Others 32.
Con majority of 74.
……………………..
Sources :
WIND ….. Whimsical Independent News Division.
JNN ………Jacobite News Network.
ARSE ….. Anonymous Random Selection of Electors.
PISSED …Political Intelligence Seat Selector Election Determinator
SOAMES …System Of Amending Measured Election Scores
46 - The worst since Walpole, perhaps?
Where did it all go wrong? Events, cunning stunts, and attacks on Labour’s own supporters.
Even if we assume the government can do nothing about the credit crunch, nor undo Brown’s idiotic stunts that cost him his post-Blair goodwill, it can end its assaults on its own.
Stop the advertising campaigns that every day accuse Labour voters of being benefit thieves who don’t pay the tv licence or tax their cars. Scrap Balls’s plan raise the school leaving age, and Johnson’s to make it harder to see your doctor.
Drop however many days it is this week detention without trial, that will alienate muslim Labour voters while doing nothing for security. Forget about ID cards that send the civil libertarians back to Cameron (which will incidentally free up money for counter-cyclical spending).
In short, the government needs to remember whose side it is on.
How socialist has the Nulab govt been? Arguable—and it is argued on here, as a political betting site.
But it is unarguable that socialist govts tend to ‘cosy up’ to big business. They like big businesses and corporations (and the unions that go with them). 40 years ago, whenever the CBI (remember them?) agreed with the TUC, it was bad for the little man, and bad for small businesses and traders of all sorts. But good for a socialist govt—it gave them a measure of control.
However, because socialist govts know very little about business life, they are very poor at handling large companies. They have a seriously unhealthy relationship with the main destoyer of communities in this country—Tesco.
48 Jack , did you update your Arse for the millenuim bug? The Con majority is creeping ever closer towards 3 figures….
46. It depends how you judge these things. The worst since Thatcher?
[51] David, please list the legislation introduced from 1979 to 1997 which favoured small business at the expense of big business. You may find that the edge of a postage stamp is big enough.
I was unaware that Tesco have ever given any money to the Labour Party, but I’m willing to stand corrected.
53 - intriguing, do you assess Gordon Brown as worse than John Major?
Its difficult to assess these things but GB is probably similar to Ted Heath, men with good intentions, but they find it difficult to either inspire or convince.
55. To early to judge. I certainly thought John Major a better PM than Thatch.
52 MTF. I had to adjust the SOAMES weighting considerably after considerable rumbling from West Sussex !!
13. Labour are a crony capitalist party, not a free market party.
57. Cont…Major was the start of the healing process after the disaster that was Thatcherism. A role much underestimated in my opinion. Though Blair largely completed the process major’s contribution is too often ignored.
The Times article, Test, reports a view diametrically opposed to Nick Palmer’s last night.
““There has been a shift in mood,” said one MP. “Mutterings about regime change used to be confined to the fringes of the party, but now there is a more widespread view that Gordon will have to go unless he can win back public support.”
Thatcher will leave a historic legacy - unlike Brown AND Blair.
60 Roger you omit to mention that radical surgery was necessary in 1979 , painful it was, but absolutely necessary nevertheless.
Thatcherism wasn’t a disaster.
From the link at [33] - “Observers in Crewe say a glamorous outsider candidate could win enough votes in the by-election to have a significant impact on the outcome. Gemma Garrett, otherwise known as Miss Great Britain and candidate for the Beauties for Britain party, is said to have become a focus for disaffected Labour voters”.
On the one hand, please don’t let this be true - The Sun will never shut up about it and its influence in politics. On the other, it would be mightily funny to see her keep her come even close to third place.
The Guardian picture looks as if Brown is already in the dock with his harpies.
http://image.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/05/17/brown10a.jpg
46 David Roe. Surely not above Neville Chamberlain? NC was at least an honourable man.
I see that Guardian article is still supporting the Labour line describing Timson as a millionaire (because of his house?) but not mentioning the rather better off background and living quarters of Tamsin Dunwoody.
Pretty pathetic article compared to the Times.
65. I didn’t realise nose-picking was contagious.
45. LOL. Apathetic attempt to make him seem relatively youthful and happening?
63. Her reputation would be a good deal higher still though were it not for her third term. Some great work was done from 1979-87. 1987-90 weren’t her finest hours.
And a word in defence of Heath. Unlike Brown, he had political convictions and the courage to argue for them, and to win the arguments. He was dealt a very tough hand, and while he might not have played it very well, it was substantially better than that which Brown got last year - which he hasn’t played well either. Temperamentally, the two are / were very similar; both were too reserved and insufficiently people-friendly to make good PM’s. Heath also won an election no-one expected him to.
Jack W
Your ARSE is much admired by all but it does have a tendency to lean a little to the left. (Is this the side to which you dress?) Despite this, it suggests a Labour meltdwn.
Point is, if Your ARSE is predicting Labour 208 seats, there is a massive opportunity in selling them in the seats market with SPIN, which had them at 240 last time the maket was open.
All devotees of your ARSE, Jack, should grab the chance with both hands.
I remain astonished that Frank Field and the MSM have accepted this ‘compo package’. Those who lost out because of the 10p rate being abolished may have had their status quo restored. However, because everybody else has received the same award, they remain £120 worse off than other tax-payers as a consequence. Compensation? Maybe. Fair? Not at all.
From the Telegraph:
“The Government is staring at a corporation tax black hole of more than £10bn a year, as the pensions crisis ravages companies’ balance sheets, a leading investment authority has warned.”
Whoops. Really whoops after borrowing another 3 billion for party political purposes.
[54] Help for small business during the last tory govts? Firstly, SMEs don’t usually want specific help—they just don’t to be disadvantaged.
There was some help on planning (I benefitted in particular from circular 22/1980).
There were many exclusions from onerous (especially employment) legislation for companies which employed fewer than 5 people. That has been mostly (all?) scrapped.
But the big issue that has been ducked, is the way that more and more towns have been ‘hollowed-out’; become ‘clone’ towns.
When capital had too much power, it was right for the govt to sponsor trade union legislation. When the unions had too much power, we needed madam Thatcher.
When corporations have too much power (esp Tesco) we have, er, the govt giving them a leg-up….
72, the problem (one of them anyway) with the tax giveaway was that it’s mostly affecting those who didn’t lose out at all (17m taxpayers).
Three quarters of the money Brown has generously borrowed on our behalf is entirely unnecessary.
I had to laugh when Darling said they’d gone for this option because it was less complicated than other potential measures.
49 Walpole was actually a very effective Prime Minister (though a very nasty man).
72 - “because everybody else has received the same award” is a misconception, brought about by a misleading statement to the House of Commons.
Hansard, 14 May 2008, Column 1377:
“Mr. Clegg: The fact remains that under a Labour Government the worst paid are worse off. Why do they have to pay for the Prime Minister’s incompetence? They cannot wait any longer, so when will he come back to the House with specific proposals to compensate in full the 1 million people he has betrayed?
The Prime Minister: We have said that we will come back in the pre-Budget report, but the right hon. Gentleman must not forget the fact that every person in the country who is an income tax payer at the basic rate will receive £120. Twenty-two million people will receive that money, and households in which there are two such people will receive £240.”
EVERY PERSON IN THE COUNTRY WHO IS AN INCOME TAX PAYER AT THE BASIC RATE is, simply, a lie. There are millions of Old Age Pensioners who continue to pay tax on their occupational pensions at 20%. They will NOT receive a penny from this “largesse”.
Hope Nick P is telling all his OAP constituents that they don’t count.
46 David Roe. When I commented on Chamberlain, I had not read to the bottom of the page, so had not picked up Roger’s posts. Fortunately, however, his comments were as always meaningless and can be ignored.
[74] Ah, I see now - DK is a small retailer who’s losing out to Tesco.
He’s in favour of market competition - except when he’s uncompetitive, when of course that proves that the market’s rigged against him.
I do understand, David, I really do. Most of the self-employed people I know regard making provision for taxation, insurance and writing business plans as unreasonable socialistic impositions. All too often they remind me of a friend of my father’s, who told me that he became a pharmacist because there was a law against robbing banks.
71 PtP. The right cheek of ARSE is in full flow presently in stark contrast to the left which is somewhat numb as its piles of votes prevent a fuller extraction.
Whether this is a permanent affliction or a result of temporary disatisfaction regularly found mid bowel of most governments is the 6/-4d question.
As you indicate ARSE has highlighted an opening in the market. Punters may wish to take advantage before voter constipation sets in.
The trouble for Labour, as Mr Jones avers above, is that THE DAMAGE HAS BEEN DONE.
Mass immigration is the main reason core working class voters are hacked off with Labour. The Labour party deliberately quadrupled net migration, to unprecedented levels. This has impacted most on poor British communities, and depressed unskilled wages.
No wonder the chavs are revolting.
And there is not a lot Labour can do about it. Except buy a new bolt for the stable door, while the stallion goes cantering down the motorway. Changing the rules for immigrants now, after you just let in a couple of million, merely adds insult to injury.
Everyone knows that Labour did this; Labour get the blame. It may take a long time for Labour to win back the trust of core voters. Meanwhile voters turn to the Tories, who they instinctively trust on this issue.
What is amazing here is that Labour didn’t realise this would happen. You allow historically high immigration and you expect everything to be hunkydory? What were they thinking in Number 10?
It can certainly get worse. If we was to go into an actualy recession and Brown was still at the helm, I could see figures of;
Con 50+ Lab -19
Becoming a frequent occurance.
The markets dont reflect the potential Tory seats because the general view is that the Tories a 20 squillion percent lead to get a majority.
Whilst they do need a certain size of lead I have always considered some of the accepted maxims and also the likes of the seat calculators absolute bunkum.
As is usually the case, Labour will probably be losing the votes where they matter most, swing seats. Why anyone think Gordon didnt call an election, he took one look at the swing seat polling and realised theyd lose some seats despite riding high in headline polls.
I have few doubts the sheer size of Tory lead would not be relicated in a GE, there will be some fallback. In the current climate howevetr. wehen that fallback would occur to affect the markets, particularly seats, is anyones guess. There is still Tory upside on the spreads and thus Labour downsisde.
I suspect polls such as we are seeing now dont move the market as much because
a) people dont believe them (I don’t believe the Tories would havwe a 20% lead if there was a GE tomorrow)
b) Actual event move things more. So a comfortable Tory victory in C&N for example will filter through
I postulated this iodea a week or so back and have taken a bit on the spreads in anticipation but am already committed from a long way out on Tory win bets for the next GE.
61. Yes, if we ignore Nick’s complacent disinformation, it looks increasingly like the game is up for Brown.
And my bad typing continues…I’m off for a jog….
70. David - Heath didn’t win in 1970, Powell did.
Yokel @ 85. Download Firefox, install it’s English dictionary, problem solved!
Brown’s increasingly shrill whining and desperate attempt to portray himself as a victim will not play well with the voters IMO. If this is his last card then he’s clearly doomed.
“Gordon Brown has clashed with the BBC over claims that John Humphrys told him he gave him a “hard time” on the Today programme last week because of complaints by Tories……
…..In addition, BBC political editor Nick Robinson has responded to claims that he treated Mr Brown “with contempt” on Friday’s Today by calling him a “moody insomniac” and comparing him to tragic Tory Prime Minister Anthony Eden.
Mr Robinson said the comments came from unnamed Labour sources.
In a separate flare-up on Thursday, Mr Brown was alleged to have ripped his earpiece out after being interrogated on Sky TV about his U-turn over the 10p tax rate….”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=567056&in_page_id=1770
If Gordo can’t take the heat and is resorting to whinging and tantrums, then he knows what to do.
40
Roger I thought you were planning tn leave London if Boris won,have you now relocated?
[86] Presumably you would say the same of February 1974.
But of course it doesn’t check you’ve used the correct version of ‘its’
is this another front for Labour to attack the SNP?
From the Scotsman today:
“Elections watchdog Ron Gould revealed he is “not comfortable” with the view that all 129 MSPs elected last year actually received more votes than their opponents.”
And surprisingly enough the article seems to suggest most of the dubious wins were losses for Labour.
83. I’ve previously argued that the 1/2 on the Conservatives getting most seats (not necessarily a majority) at the next general election is the bet of the decade. The 1/2 will disappear when they will Crewe and Nantwich on Thursday, although could reappear when Brown goes and Labour get a new leader. I agree that they need a big percentage lead to get a majority, as we see the spread markets understating the majority compared to the current polls. I’m pretty long on the Conservatives myself but the prospect on them not even getting the most seats just seems so remote… Also the spreads, although indicating a majority of around 40, don’t seem to have too much downside (although the value went some weeks ago). I also agree that the Liberal Democrats are understated and there could be some value in buying their seats - again, low risk?
90. Yes, certainly.
81 I think they believed their own propganda. They really did believe that the mass of the population found diversity as exciting as they did - and because the only people they were communicating with on the subject were Guardian-types and the BBC, it became an intellectual closed loop. They could reassure themselves that the only people who objected to mass immigration were Conservative core voters, who they could ignore. At the same time, years of tight immigration controls up till 1997, had taken the heat out of the immigration issue, and it took several years for people to realise just how many people were being allowed to settle here.
And, now, Labour get beaten by the BNP in Ed Balls’ seat, and are close to running third in Dagenham & Rainham.
95. I’m sure there was an element of trying to ‘breed the Tories out’ as well, in Labour’s immigration strategy.
[79] IA is working in the state sector. I did work in the service sector—-in one of the few not harmed by Tesco. I made my money in tool hire (kendrick hire plc, sold to Speedyhire).
But I can see damage done to communities by certain companies, especially Tesco. If he needs it spelling out, I’m not the man …
Thatcherism saved the country from the death-grip of leftwing decline.
She reformed the economy, drastically reduced taxes, gave housing back to the people, resolved the union problems, burned out the cancer of socialism, slimmed down the sufocating aparratus of the state, reduced immigration to a proper level, and she turned the City of London into the powerhouse it is today.
During her elevenses she defeated a proper fascist junta, restoring democracy to Argentina; when she knocked off work she decided to win the Cold War, alongside Ronnie Reagan - just for a bit of fun.
For comparison, Labour invaded a foreign country illegally, killing half a million, and betrayed its most solemn promise to the people on an EU referendum. Labour are a plague carrying rat-flea next to the mighty lioness that was Maggie.
The reason sad old lefties like Roger hate Thatch is because she is so titanically superior to anything the left has produced since Atlee, and probably before that. And they know it. And they hate it.
Heh.
86. Amongst other things, the 1970 government delivered membership of the EEC, the Sunningdale agreement, a dash-for-growth followed by a U-turn to state intervention and regulation, and the nationalisation of Rolls-Royce, so I’m not absolutely convinced that Powell would have regarded that as a ‘win’.
If one person bears any more credit / responsibility for the 1970 election result than any other, it would be better to look to the Labour benches. As it is now.
david kendrick-Were you living in Ipswich circa 1975-76 ? If so we know each other !
Well, I agree the polls are rotten for Labour. Purely for the sake of balance, note that Cameron’s personal ratings remain low on everything except charisma, and that a 12% swing in a mid-term by-election, if that’s what it turns out to be, is an excellent result for the Opposition, but far from unique. I’ll be surprised if there’s a huge rise in the Tory C&N vote over the GE - the issue, as shown in numerous polls, is Labour supporters’ readiness to vote.
On that, incidentally, quite a few of the potential abstainers who I phoned told me that they saw it as a protest vote and would probably come back at the GE. That, of course, will then be only of interest in C&N itself.
Oh, witan - I simply denied there is plotting under way to remove GB. The Times report doesn’t say there is - it predicts it at an unspecified time in the future on the basis of some unnamed sources. That’s fairly standard - if a party is in difficulty, you can always find people to say this sort of thing.
Incidentlaly, the discussion we had the other day on my amendment on Tuesday and related issues is touched on here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/18/stemcells.medicalresearch
Overnight delegate update from over the pond - Obama +5 Clinton -2.
Three SD’s and two cross over pledged delegates from Hillary.
81. Yup. The damage has been done but there’s a big time delay between people deciding Labour isn’t on their side any more and actually voting for someone else. Took me 8 years for example. London is at the head of that wave for obvious reasons.
The problem for Labour with a “core vote” strategy now is it can’t work anymore except in a few areas. The immigrants are in direct competition for resources with the native working class so even if local councils were even handed the locals still resent having to share the same slice of pie with a greater number of people.
So basically they’ve driven a wedge into their core vote and can’t keep both chunks happy whatever they do. If they switched back to being on the side of the natives they’ll lose both the immigrants to parties like Respect and the leftie middle class. So they’re stuffed imo.
101. Not entirely true that Cammo’s personal ratings remain low.
According to a magazine poll, nearly two thirds of British women aged 25-45 agreed they would like to marry the Tory leader, and thought he would be “good in bed”.
Meanwhile, the same poll found that 61% of the same women would like to “push Gordon Brown off a cliff”.
I’m not joking, read it here:
http://tinyurl.com/6zr26d
More interesting quotes from the survey:
“The magazine said women aged 25 to 45 are the largest group of floating voters in the UK, and are becoming more politicised, with 91 per cent of those polled intending to vote in the next General Election, compared to 64 per cent last time.
The poll found women look for the same qualities in a Prime Minister as a partner or friend, including having strong morals and a sense of humour.”
i.e. Women like Cammo, they despise Brown. There’s another problem for you.
101 Nick, have you tried whistling to keep your spirits up?
99. Indeed Powell became bitterly opposed to Heath for all the reasons you state - and more such as the ridiculous attempt to dictate by legislation all prices and wages. Hence his determined and successful effort to get rid of Heath in 1974.
Both Heath’s government and the succeeding Labour government did deliver tighter immigration controls, though - a testament to how potent an issue race had become and the effectiveness of Powell’s campaigns on the subject.
106 When that legislation was introduced, Powell asked Heath at PMQ’s whether “the Right Honourable Genetleman has taken leave of his senses?”.
44 What may the results be leading you to predict there at the election
SeanT - Thatcher obviously achieved a lot of her objectives but to pretend that she left a gleaming utopia is wide of the mark. She did little to help communities devastated by the closure of coal mines and instead seemed to take great delight in their misery.
And you overestimate the axe she took to the state. Total managed spending fell from 44.8% of GDP in 1979-80 to 40% in 1990-91, and the figures were up to 42.3% and then 44.2% the following years. The average during her time in office was 44.7%. Hardly massive cuts. Also this is made to look worse given the privatisation that took place, meaning the state was doing less.
101 Nick Palmer you say you “maintain that there is no significant plotting against GB.”
The Times says, as quoted above, “Mutterings about regime change used to be confined to the fringes of the party, but now there is a more widespread view that Gordon will have to go…”
There may be a difference there based on your definition of ‘plotting’ but not much. Casuistry is indeed an art.
Ed Miliband getting a caning off Boulton on sky right now.
101. Nick - thanks for the comments and the post. Unlike some others, I genuinely believe you when you say that there aren’t moves underway to get rid of Brown. There would be if the Tory Party was in power and presiding over a situation like this, but (a) it’s still not guarenteed that it would come to anything and (b) Labour isn’t the Tory Party.
You’re right about Cameron - the public isn’t prepared to give him a blank cheque and is more wary about him than it was about Blair, in a similar situation. That’s fair. In many ways, I wouldn’t want Cameron to have the kind of adulation that Blair got in the early years; it only leads to tears later on. It could guard against overconfidence as well.
Even so, I’m reassessing my opinion that a workable overall Conservative majority is too big an ask. It is still huge - considerably over 100 net gains; similar to what Blair achieved in 1997 - but not now out of the question. Once the polls start showing a party in the mid-40s, that to me indicates that either the public has bought into them sufficiently to matter in the marginals, or that there is enough discontent with the other that they’re prepared to countenance the alternative to get rid of the first lot. Labour looks to have dropped through the 30% barrier and doesn’t yet have a workable strategy to get back above it, never mind to reach the mid-30s that is the minimum required.
As was noted earlier, it could still get worse for Brown. The government finances are looking very ropey. The government was already borrowing far more than it should have been, and what vestiges of ‘prudence’ remained have gone out of the window with the 10p changes. There is now the unpalatable option of reassessing the BoE’s inflation target (which will undo for all practical purposes the independence which is Brown’s one remaining success in delivering change), or accepting interest rates high enough to slow down the economy significantly and get inflation back under control.
Its interesting to compare post-Thatcher Major with post-Blair Brown….
Major did a lot of ‘healing’ while at the same time consolidating the Thatcher reforms - had he lost in ‘92, then a still-Socialist Labour Party would have undone a lot of work and we’d all be a lot worse off. Unfortunately for Major he also inherited a post-regicidal Parliamentary party still, in the words of the historian Richard Vinen, behaving ‘like a deranged seance’….’can you hear us Margaret….are you there? In the end they imploded.
Now Brown - what exactly has he inherited from Blair? Blair maintained the Thatcher settlement - just spent more money on public services - and had reform of them blocked by Brown. Much of the economies management - and some mis-management (house price bubble, pensions)can be laid at Brown’s door. Then there is Iraq. In Brown’s favour, his Parliamentary party, so far, seems a lot better disciplined than Major’s Tories.
Net, Major helped protect and consolidate the legacy of a great PM. Brown has followed a pygmy….and is making things worse. He has the ‘long-term vision’ thing (child poverty) - but thats not going to make a difference for 20 years - its the short term tactical stuff he fumbles - and badly. While personality wise he may be similar to Heath - Heath, for better, or worse, took us into Europe. What will Brown’s claim on history be?
109 - http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn43.pdf
101: ‘I simply denied there is plotting under way to remove GB’.
Nick, it is unlikely in the extreme that there isn’t any plotting to get rid of Brown even if it’s only being conducted by the likes of Charles Clarke. You are plainly out of that loop (which isn’t a bad thing).
Give it some time though and MPs who thought they would hold their seats at a GE and now look like they won’t will start getting restless.
Q4 is a bit odd. The Yes/ No/akes no difference I can understand but “other”? “Don’t know/Don’t care” would amke sense but I’m at a loss to dream up all that many alternative responses could fit under “other” for such a straight-forward question
112 - do you think the difference in public opinion re blar/cameron at what look like similar stages in the lifetime of a government/opposition is because of Blair rather than Cameron per se? i.e. Blair had an almost unprecedented situation when he was swept into Downing Street and people really bought into what he was saying. Maybe the situation now is that people feel that trust was misplaced and aren’t prepared to show that sort of support again, and that cynicism with politics in general has increased markedly since 1994-5
95. “I think they believed their own propganda. They really did believe that the mass of the population found diversity as exciting as they did - and because the only people they were communicating with on the subject were Guardian-types and the BBC, it became an intellectual closed loop.”
That’s pretty much it exactly. Any objections were assumed to be racism and ignored. They’re not dependent on things like cheap housing themselves so they didn’t realise how much grief they were causing.
Tesco sponsored the Millenium Dome learing zone.
Rumour (lawyers note I said rumour!!) has it that the big supermarkets were told that if one of them came up with a decent sponsorship deal the car parking tax proposals would be punted into the long grass.
Tesco took one for the team.
118. I imagine the ability to get cheap nannies and gardeners was assumed to a be benefit the whole population could share in as well.
117. Yes, that’s very much what I think. I can’t see any politician being given such an uncritical ride for so long, for many years to come. Too many people feel betrayed (rightly or wrongly) by what Blair did or didn’t do.
I don’t think anyone will buy into a politician the way they did with Blair for a generation with that let down still lingering in the memory. It is far better for people to have a lower expectation and for it to be exceeded rather than Blair’s massive expectation which led to let down and massive disappointment.
These polls illustrate the power of the media and how Brown has seriously balls up his relationship with the 4th estate. The media called it a “bribe” and as if by magic 59% of people think it’s a “bribe”. As such follow up questions are predictable, who in their right mind would ever own up to being bribed?
Goes to show Gordon’s first job should be to mend broken bridges he demonished during the election that never was. Labour will get nowhere with such a hostile press. Probably too late. Cameron is a media darling.
119: Wouldn’t they just have got Labour’s favourite supermarket to do it?
66 - Honour doesn’t really excuse sleepwalking unprepared into a second world war. In fact, his sense of honour and misplaced attributing it to fascist dictators was one of his biggest weaknesses, sadly.
[100] Yes, URW. I did live in Ipswich in the mid 1970s.
123: Or, Jonathan, perhaps people off their own bat can see that a party in political difficulties offering millions of people money just before a by election it looks like they might lose as a bribe?
Has anyone seen actual evidence that Labour have tried to smear Timpson as a ‘friend of P.D. O’File.’ I wasn’t wholly convinced by the Sundry Trends article, but if the link was made then I will fully understand Brown’s moral compasss is haywire.
Does the poll date break down by age?
104 It’s good to know the destiny of the Nation sits on such weighty matters.
127 Perhaps, but the bigger point is that Brown will never get anywhere with the papers gunning for him like this. They smell blood and a way to sell papers. I suspect this is now unreversable, but what do I know.
Surely you can agree that if the press, who had demanded a 10p fix, had splashed it as a “good” thing it would have had an effect on the polls.
un=ir
123. I don’t think McBean has a chance of making things up with the media now. Everyone’s getting that “Lord of the Flies” buzz and he’s Piggy.
Have been away so a bit behind, but just noticed this from Mike yesterday.
“7. Labour did exactly the same to the Lib Dem candidate in Hartlepool in September 2004. She was a lawyer and they dug up cuttings of a case where she had defended a drug addict. We then saw a leaflet - the Lib Dem candidate “speaking up for junkies”.
Why haven’t the Tories done serious attack research on Tasmin Dunwoody? There must have been things during her time in Wales that can be blown up.”
Er Mike. Unless you hadn’t noticed the Tories are by all accounts WINNING this campaign. It seems a bit ridiculous to implicitly criticise their campaign for not going negative! You seem to be under the view that there is only ever one way to fight a campaign (ie. down dirty, negative and “anything goes” as long as you can get away with it). As JohnO said, “spoken like a true LibDem”.
123. The media is following, not leading, public opinion. They said it was a bribe because it looked like one. Millions of people up and down the country will have come to the same conclusion without needing (or reading) the papers.
Looking to mend relations with the media and hoping that popularity will then follow is getting things back to front (but is exactly how Brown likes to work - cut the deal behind closed doors). Get the popularity right and the press will come onside.
108 - I’m only halfway through my work on the subject and I am inclined to think Labour will still win most of the seats but a hell of a lot will be marginal. I’m wondering if Paul Murphy could face a strong independent challenge in the wildcard of the election. But chances are Labour will be having to actively defend in seats like Gower and Bridgend. I think they might hold both but Labour’s weakening membership and having to defend previously safe seats will spread their resources to the point that they might have to tacitly abandon the seats currently marginal.
I’m wondering if the financial constraints Labour are suffering might mean an electoral Hindenburg line having to be placed roughly at 250 seats.