Now ICM records a Labour deficit
May 19th, 2008
Is there anything that Brown can do to turn things round?
The May ICM national voting intention survey for the Guardian is just out and records what is the firm’s biggest Labour deficit of modern times - and is in line with the trend of other recent polls.
The figures, with changes on the last ICM poll at the end of April are: CON 41% (+2): LAB (-2): LD 22% (+2). The changes reflected in the chart above are from the last Guardian survey - my changes here are from the most recent poll by the firm.
Just to emphasise that these are NATIONAL voting intention figures and should not be confused with the weekend survey by the same pollster in Crewe and Nantwich.
Overall a consistent picture is coming from a range of pollsters showing that Gordon Brown’s Labour party is in very serious trouble. The Tories are well above 40% and Labour is in the mid to high 20s. Clearly there has been a step change and the £2.7bn worth of tax cuts announced last week don’t seem to have had any affect whatsoever.
These latest numbers set Thursday by election in context and add support to the specific polling in the constituency.
Everything now dpeends, in my view, on the size of the Tory margin on Thursday. If it’s getting on for double figures then Gordon will be in very dangerous territory indeed.
Methodology note: It seems that the methodological changes used for the Crewe and Nantwich polls have also been applied here. According to the paper the effect is to increase the Tory margin by about 1%.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
148.And when was the last time the Lib Dems were only five points below Labour?
When Labour lose Crewe ,could the Lib dems push Labour into third place in national polls?
There is a huge opportunity for the Lib Dems given the Tory policy vaccuum.Cameron today “lower taxes sometime” is a good example of Cameron,s vacuous “policies”.
rogerh
by rogerh May 19th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Lab (-2) , interesting typo, Mike!
Mike, I will be staggered if it gets anywhere even close to double figures. It’s a 7k deficit and we hope to turn that around and scrape home - see Ben Brogan on this. Expectations are wildly out of whack with reality here. I do expect us to win but talk of gigantic majorities is just risible.
And the graph says Libs up 3.
Not surprised by the Labour collapse. I’ve heard Labour people drafted in from Liverpool being chased out of a council state in Crewe by angry residents!
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 42% .. Lab 27.8% .. LibDem 19.6% .. Others 10.6%
The PISSED Wells/Baxter Index with added SOAMES weighting shows :
Con 370 seats .. Lab 196 .. LibDem 52 .. Others 32.
Con majority of 90.
……………………..
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
and reply to Jack W at the end of the last thread, yes, the Zanu-Lab stuff is tiresome. Not funny.
A couple of other pieces of trivia (or not so trivia). This is the lowest I could find going back to 1987 that Labour has polled under ICM.
Furthermore, it also equals the highest the Conservatives have polled in a ICM/ Guardian poll since 1992 I think.
Mike, while clearly all the polls now show the Conservatives pulling away from Labour as you indicate in your article, the one big question which remains is whether all the polls bar YouGov have been able to screen out the Labour bias which has shown Labour consistently poll several % below their opinion poll ratings when real elections take place, whether they be Local, National or International. If they have not yet been able to screen this out then Labour are truly in serious problems and perhaps Thursday will just be the point at which the scales will never swing back to New Labour.
3 I think you are wrong Test , the Nantwich part of the constituency should give the Conservatives a 5-6,000 lead , the Crewe part may have them in a small deficit but a very healthy majority is on the cards IMHO .
re 2. That is correct - the most previous ICM poll had Labour on 29%
There is nothing to say the polls will not start to overstate the Tories. It is now fashionable to despise Labour (hooray!) and people may soon start to consider it socially unacceptable to admit they support the yob-smashers.
7 - I think the question now in relation to ICM is whether “shy Labour” voters is actually a valid phenomenom to adjust for.
Average Tory result and Labour still on the floor. This indicates that the voters still don’t want the Tories. Every time I see Cameron I become more sure that something has to show itself that’s better than him before the next election. I just don’t think enough people will vote for him. He’s a phoney.
5. Agreed. These ZanuLanb attacks are also pointless. Labour are bad enough - with their endless lies and incompetence on immigration, crime, Europe, etc - without having to luridly satirise them.
I don’t agree with yr defence of Nick Palmer though. I know you have a crush on him but if he comes on here he must expect to get stick as a member, however minor, of the Labour government.
I respect Nick for having the cullions to post in his own name - and have said so many times. However he is a Labour PPS and that’s that.
His record on Europe is also a disgraceful litany of careerist fibbing.
9 - Mike, I think the point is that you missed out the Labour score!
9. Not from the last ICM/ Guardian Poll - Labour were on 34% (Con 39 LD 19). You are talking about the last ICM/Sunday Telegraph poll.
3 & 8. Prepare to be staggered! It may well be between 5% and 8% - very close to the ‘Gordon must go level’ He might - might - just survive with something like 7%…..
Key will be Labour not able to get their vote out, plus an awful campaign. Similar to the mayoral election, where Boris got his vote out in force and Ken couldn’t mobilise his support.
If C&N falls - and it’s almost certain it will - prepare to see the seats markets move further on Friday. There’s still some value in buying Cons (or selling Labour as Mike prefers), but this may be gone by midday Friday…
12 - Roger, surely if Labour were on the floor before (”still on the floor”) and they have gone down in this poll, then the floor has a hole in it?
16 - Ken did get his vote out in London.
Clearly another poll showing the LDs in meltdown. Clegg has failed to capture the public’s imagination and two party politics in returning. They will lose almost all their seats on this. They are an irrelevance.
12. “average”??? “average?????” Yes another mediocre 14 point lead for the Tories.
lol. The Tories are now regularly posting 40%+, previously considered the benchmark of true polling success. Indeed in some polls they are now around 45%.
“Average” my majestic Cornish butt.
19. Gordon’s fell through his own trap-door!
;o)
19 - God knows what Labour’s result counted as at the last election counted as!
12 - Oh look it’s Roger the Toff, PB’s very own ‘Comical Ali’!
I’ll have some of what your smoking please.
12. “Average Tory result …” Yeah, right. If 41% in an ICM poll (even with the new methodology) is average, then Cameron can be very happy indeed. With Labour stuck firmly below 30% now, this is getting towards landslide territory (see Jack’s ARSE for confirmation). Yes, that’s partly because the Lib Dems are now beginning to score well too, but that split is not a million miles off the 1983 election result.
That said, this is a mid-term poll and I doubt were there a real election tomorrow people would split in these numbers, as the election campaign would probably pull some back into the red corner.
New SUSA Primary Poll for Oregon :
Clinton 42% .. Obama 55%
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=43d3ad90-4714-4aef-ad28-931961c0aaf6
Sean, I believe that a PPS is not a member of the government.
I’m fully behind Anna Soubry as Broxtowe’s next MP. I’m a Eurosceptic who wants out of Lisbon and powers renegotiated and I support hunting, I oppose ID cards and detention without charge. I supported and still support the war in Iraq though as necessary and just, so I suppose we have that in common. But bottom line I’m against all he stands for. I merely see no need for discourtesy to your opponents particularly if they seem to be decent people. And they’re losing. Magnanimity in victory, defiance in defeat, Julius Caesar and all that. When he does lose his seat at the next election to the Tories I hope PBers will be polite about it.
Don’t like kicking people when they’re down. If Ed Balls came on here, it’d be a different matter.
14- Yes that’s what I meant. The Labour score is so bad, it’s not even poublished anymore!
16. Not really - he needed a better turnout to have any realistic chance. Talk of a 50%+ turnout, whilst never realistic, was in the air - and Ken would have won if so… I accept, however, that Boris won because he really got his vote out, especially - and famously - in Bexley & Bromley
4. Did you remember to adjust the SOAMES weighting to take into account the six penalty points?
I wonder when Edward Timpson rises to make his maiden speech, will Labour MPs apologise to him for the personal smears their party levelled at him during this campaign?
Paddy Power go 4/7 on Hilary withdrawing after Montana/S Dakota but before convention. Looks like good value to me? I continue to build a longer position on Obama on Sporting’s “next president” market - seems better value than the best price with the fixed-odds bookies…
16
” Ken couldn’t mobilise his support.”
What???? Red Islamic Ken got 200 000 MORE votes than previously…
29 - no. Although, ConHome criticised the Tory campaign in Cheadle, Tory MPs never apologised to Mark Hunter when he made his maiden speech. It’s a bloody shame in both cases.
31. See my reply 27. Remember all the talk of a huge turnout? At the end of the day, people who would have voted for Ken simply didn’t bother
25. OK, we disagree. I think/hope Nick is big enough to take the hits. He dishes out a few himself, in his own very subtle way.
If people attacked him for what he is - as a person - that’d be different. But they don’t.
Anyhoo - back on topic: I wonder just what it would take for the LDs to take over from Labour as the main opposition. The first aim, for themn, must be to record more votes in a General Election. Is this do-able?
I think it is. It’s not very likely, sure - but it is feasible, on poll results like this.
If they did do this, the constitutional implications would be deliciously complex. Labour would obviously have more seats and would assume the role as Opposition - but the LDs could morally claim a right to sit on the Opposition benches instead.
Trouble is, I don’t think the LDs have the killer instinct to knock Labour out. They could have done it over the Lisbon referendum - but they fluffed it, terribly.
Shame. Britain needs a proper moral left-of-centre party, not this bunch of crooks, liars and deviants.
Cor!
Grauniad ICM poll: 51% of all voters and even 35% of Labour voters think that John Major was a better PM.
Gordzilla is gonna love that.
30 London R. Good bet.
28 Gaz.
25 Test. Good post … Balls and all !!
8.Latest Guardian ICM gives swings fromGE of Torys +8,Labour-10%.This alone is sufficient to just deliver the seat.Given the usual “bash the government bye election factor the swing should be up to 10% above this.and that result would be poor compared to some of the 20%+ swings the Lib dems have pulled off against Labour.The Tories should have a majority of at least 10%.They are spinning -making it sound a harder than it really is!
rogerh
Mike, I have just seen the last thread for the first time. Labour are clearly sinking further into the mire with this one. No-one except Jacqui Smith (who is facing Redditch become a safe Tory seat again at the next election) and Gordon Brown believe Labour’s spin that crime figures are falling. It is rare now not to hear that a teenager has been stabbed or shot on a daily basis or that some poor soul has been in the wrong place at the wrong time and paid the penalty by being beaten to death or stabbed or robbed, whether it be on a London bus or on Oxford Street or indeed in a bakery buying your first lottery ticket.
Labour blame the judges, they blame the Human Rights Act (which they introduced and which if properly implimented is a good piece of legislation)they blame poverty, they blame anything except themselves. They have passed more Law and Order bills (Home Office bills in England) than any previous government and I understand they have another pile in the offing but they dont address the problems which are not poverty, illiteracy etc, it is their obsession with statistics and league tables.
Let the police pound the streets instead of filling in forms and sitting in panda cars. Let police officers kick the backside of trouble makers instead of charging them with assault and let householders have a genuine right to protect their property instead of fearing being charged if they tackle burglars.
33 - Basically your argument amounts to saying that if Ken had got some more people to vote for him then he would have one.
*won
33 - But the turnout was extremely handsome nevertheless - more appropriate to a bye than a local election. There was an underlying differential between Labour’s strong areas and those of the Conservatives, but that was always likely to happen.
12
Roger is correct. Despite recent adjustments ICM still do not apply the LDPSOF filter. (Large Dinner Party South Of France)
I have just nearly fallen off my chair laughing at Milburn and Byers canvassing together in C and N. Talk about vultures circling. I think now was the first time I have really though Gordon’s a gonna.
12. So Tony Blair’s 42% or so in 97 was just average with voters clearly not actually wanting him…come on Roger thats just silly and though often delusional you are not usually that silly.
Speaking of silly, Why do ICM overstate the Labdemers by so much?
Thanks Jack.
46 - They might not. If large numbers of Labour voters are transferring to the LibDems (and large numbers of LDs going to the Conservatives) then the LibDems could be in for a nasty shock at the next election (with a 1983/7 type vote distribution).
34 If anyone’s got more deviants than us I would be very disappointed.
46.I think thats whats happening.
The LDs can’t knock Labour out: there is no way they could appeal to all parts of Labour’s core vote equally. If Labour were to collapse (which is certainly not likely in the foreseeable future, even if a Tory landslide occurs), then the various sections of the vote - the middle-class progressives, the trade unionists, the non-white voters - would be spread among a range of parties, there’d no dominant left-wing force would be likely in the foreseable future. If the LDs amanged to beat Labour in the popular vote (also unlikely) they’d harp on it to make the case for PR, but nothing owuld happen.
Another abysmal poll for Labour. How long before the Lib-Dems overtake Labour? More and more Labour supporters must be doing a Roger and switching to the Libs!
Tories back into the 40’s, but understated next to YouGov, IMO.
EVEN NOW, David “Poo-smell Toff boy twat” Cameron can’t break through the pyschologically important 50% barrier!
You know that Labour’s entire 2010 strategy will be something along these lines. “Don’t vote Tory! They’re all TWATS. Labour: because we’re not twats (except maybe Ed Balls)”
Just had a look through the ICM series link and 14% is the largest ever Tory lead they’ve recorded (it has happened once before, in May 1987, a few weeks before Margaret Thatcher’s third general election victory).
On that basis, I thought I’d have a look at the Spreadfair prices. They’re looking at Labour losing about 117, the Tories gaining about 145, the Lib Dems losing about 18 and the SNP picking up about 4.
Mike earlier (today? yesterday?) said he was selling Labour seats again. That looks right to me. The SNP figures (a range of 8.7 to 10.9, implying 2.7 to 4.9 gains) also looks to have some value. It is a big spread, and there are two years for the SNP administration to make itself a good deal less popular, but perhaps our Scottish (or celtic or whatever
) contributors could advise whether 11 MPs for the Nats would be regarded as a good performance in the current climate? I’d think it was more towards the lower end of expectations.
Brown’s played all his cards, 10p bribe, draft Queen’s speech and the economy worsens daily. He’s toast. I expect Charles Clarke to make his move after C&N as there’s nothing to lose so the backbenchers might as well back a move. As no serious party can put untrieds like Denham and Cruddas in the PM’s role I expect Balls, Miliband and Clarke to fight it out. Straw or Johnson might just end up picking up the pieces.
5.38.com publishes its usual in depth primary prediction, this time for Oregon :
Obama by 13 points, 29/23 delegate spilt and +75,000 on the popular vote :
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/oregon-projection-obama-by-13.html
@51: Not really a problem, since Labour can’t appeal to all parts of their core vote either.
Anyway, the Lib Dems don’t need all of Labour’s core vote, just enough of it to wipe the filth out.
32 All I saw of Cheadle was the by-election declaration — IMO, Mark Hunter didn’t handle that well at all. He’d won, so he could afford to be graceful, but he launched a bitter attack on the Tories for their negative campaign.
By contrast, whatever had happened in the campaign, the Tory candidate WAS gracious in defeat after the declaration.
55 All these “Brown gone” alternatives come up against a huge problem when asked the question “What would you do differently?”. Actually so does David Cameron but that question might not get asked at this rate.
@59:
We know what we’d do differently, only we’re not going to tell you. It’s hardly our job to bail Tractors out of his own self-dug grave.
It’s quite amusing. By far and away the most sensible strategy for Labour between now and the next election is to keep quiet, stay out of the headlines, stop making announcements and launching initiatives and simply get down to governing within the existing policy framework.
Cameron even helpfully told them this.
Which is suppose isn’t quite as helpful as it should be
46 The main cause of the higher LibDem figures in ICM compared to ComRes and Populus is in the weighting for past vote recall . ICM weight to a figure at the last GE of 13% Populus and Comres 12% . This will lead to a higher LibDem figure of 1 1/2 to 2 % higher for ICM with the same raw data as the other 2 companies .
I imagine the LibDem MPs defending the various university seats will be sleeping a lot better of late. I expect us to keep the lot and add Durham… perhaps Edinburgh S is looking better too. There are a few others on the radar.
60 I’m afraid I don’t believe you..
CAMERON
is wrong here: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/45023/MPs-warned-over-hybrid-embryos
Supporting technologies aiming at creating monsters is not conservative!
57 - They’re perfectly capable of putting it back together after a period in Opposition, as happened after 1970 (even with ideological and other disputes that were almost as searing as 1979-83, and laid the groundwork for that period). The LDs might capture the middle-class progressive vote to some extent, but they can’t engross it in huge numbers without losing the LD-Tory battleground to such an extent that they lose out in seat terms.
41. Yes, it was always agreed that a very high turnout would have handed the election to Ken
@64:
You can try reverse psychology if you like. We’re STILL not going to help you.
Brown made his bed. Now he can sodding lie in it.
58 - well, the headline on their leaflets did link him with rape. He probably felt agrieved.
ElectionInspection’s Kentucky and updated Oregon projections :
Kentucky -
Clinton by 31 points 62/31 and a delegate split of 34/17.
Oregon -
Obama by 10.8 points 55.4/44.6 and a delegate split of 29/23.
http://electioninspection.wordpress.com/
@65
Oh, don’t be so melodramatic. Here’s a quick clue: if you have to link the the DAILY EXPRESS to back up your argument, it was probably not a very good one to start with.
68 Haha very good answer but I really don’t!
I believe that in 1997 ICM were the only polling company to understate the Labour lead and share of the national vote. It is also worth recalling that these figures differ only slightly from a poll in early April when ICM gave the Tories a 13% lead - given that the revised methodology has benefitted them to the extent of 1%!
67 - There was a high turnout. What there wasn’t was an unprecedented turnout for a non General Election.
71 agreed DC went up a few notches in my estimation when I head about this.
51. I’m not sure about that. What is the absolute core vote for Labour - the people who would vote for it irrespective, with all the other options available? Probably single-figures percentage-wise, possibly mid-single figures.
Why so low? Because for just about every constituent part of the Labour coalition, there is some other party who could fulfil that same role. Want a Guardian-style, middle-class, human-rights / nanny-state party? Vote Lib Dem. Want an economically protectionist, working class, populist party? Vote BNP. Want a far-left / ethnic minority-friendly party? Vote Respect (either of them). Socialist and concerned about the environment? Vote Green. Above all, concerned about the management of the country? Vote Tory.
Labour has survived as the best party to deliver a centre-left programme in government. It is still - by far - best placed to do so. It is not, however, anywhere near as invulnerable as the Conservatives are on the centre-right. Its voters can vote for it not only because they believe in what it stands for, but also because it has a good chance of making a difference. If that ceased to be the case (and as I say, that’s a *long* way from happening), what would be its purpose?
What’s the betting on the Lib Dems finishing second in C&N? Is there a price anybody can point me to? It might be worth a punt.
If Brown is pushed out, can Labour continue in Government, or will HM suggest a General Election to his replacement? What is the protocol?
68.
No, David Cameron and you lot want to lie in Brown’s bed.
And wear the same smelly pyjamas!
78. Up to the party, I think. Can’t believe the Queen would get involved.
The Guardian reminds us that in 2006 Brown only lead in one personality question (and he’s lost that now) And whilst Cameron has substantially improved his position, Brown’s standing as PM was never good. Whats happened since he took over is, infact, remarkably close to what the public said would happen before he took over. The public never liked him and never wanted as PM, and Labour took the disasterous decision to ignore what the public was telling them.
I just can’t believe Labour would kick out Gordo, so soon after defenestrating Blair. It would make them look like a joke party.
Hmm…
OK, now I see the point. They are a joke anyway, so it doesn’t matter.
However, I still don’t think they will do it. It would just look desperate and pathetic.
Hmm…
OK, they already look desperate and pathetic. However…
etc etc continued page 98
76 - parties do implode. The Liberal party went from 30% in 1923, to 10% (including Liberal National) in 1931.
71
I’m not arguing anything; I’m just saying: supporting technologies aiming at creating siliconized beasts from living embryo is not conservative at all.
Here you go with a SkyNews link, mista:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1316410,00.html
Oh!, maybe you’d prefer the Indy: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-vote-against-ban-on-hybrid-embryos-830969.html?r=RSS
80 - She can advise and warn though so she wouldn’t be officially involved.
New Siena Presidential Poll for New York :
McCain 39% .. Clinton 51%
McCain 38% .. Obama 49%
http://www.siena.edu/uploadedFiles/Home/Parents_and_Community/Community_Page/Siena_Research_Institute/SNY0508Release.pdf
80 - So in theory everyone can have a turn in Number 10 while an increasingly angry electorate look on in disbelief. Surely there must be mechanisms in place to prevent this?
59. Jon. You ask what a “Brown Gone” alternative could do differently. Easy. Lead. Inspire. Present.
The reason I am fairly sure Brown will be forced out is found in the body language of his cabinet colleagues. They have no confidence in his leadership.
There are no Labour alternatives with the political magic that Blair had. But Straw, Miliband, Johnson and Denham are all streets ahead of Brown.
O/T. More bad news for Gordon - C&G pulls its entire mortgage range and will announce new higher rates
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/19/housingmarket.mortgages
78 - Yeah, Labour still have a majority. And I would imagine they would go for a snap election to attempt to ride the honeymoon
78. There would be no requirement on Labour to hold an election. However, to have two unelected Prime Ministers in one Parliament would look extremly poor (IMO) and Labour would come under heavy moral scrutiny to hold an election.
Well for three months the public thought that this disastrous decision was really the right one all along did they not.
88 - The problem isn’t what would they do but how would the act of removing Brown be perceived. The public may just not buy it.
90 - Honeymoon? I’d be amazed if they got one - surely they’d just be cutting their losses?
88 Well possibly - but all that sounds just like PR. What policies would they change? Even John Major got rid of a few. It would be a lot of fun for Labour opponents to watch them keep changing leader without changing policy.
The trouble is that most of the problems that are affecting the country now have very unpleasant solutions, or even very unpleasant non-solutions if Labour were to lurch left and try and spend its way out of trouble (even more).
92. Did they really? Or did they just heave a big sign of relief at Blair going? I think most people saw the bg Labour leads last summer, and incorrectly deduced people were supporting Brown. Given the quickness of the collapse, I now don’t think that was the case at all.
94: Even a small honeymoon for a new leader might move things from a large Tory majority (and probably two terms of them at least) to a smaller one and make the next election up for grabs.
That relies on Gordon going quietly.
In all seriousness, replacing Brown would be, I think, the leaderly equivalent of the 10p tax U-turn, times maybe a gazillion.
The public saw through that 10p tax bribe in about two minutes. This is the reason it hasn’t worked. Many that gained from the bribe were unhappy that they’d been pauperised in the first place, others were unconvinced that the maneuver would do what it claimed. The whole country saw the U-turn, quite rightly, as a puerile and desperate attempt to avoid by-election defeat.
Memo to Labour: Public Not Entirely Stupid.
Replacing the leader who became leader after he replaced the previous leader (and none of this with an election) would just look AWFUL. Disastrouslly conniving, panicky, immature and self-serving. It really could see Labour voted into third place, and perhaps set them en route to oblivion.
Much better to go down to grim but dignified defeat under Gordon, then rebuild with their self-respect intact.
@87:
Theoretically, Her Maj can dissolve parliament at any time she desires, though no British monarch has dissolved parliament under his own initiative in some longer time than I can be bothered to look up on Wikipedia.
I’m not making a bid for anorak’s anorak but in answer to those who are happy with the Tories ICM score I’d point out that from November ‘93 to the General Election in ‘97 Labour never scored as low as 41% with ICM. Cameron has by no means got it in the bag.
99. George V insisted on a second election in 1910 before agreeing to Asquith’s demand to create enough Liberal peers to force its policies through if necessary. This was the time of the Budget crisis, amongst other local difficulties.
Comres in the Indy putting Tories 13% ahead in C&N. Has this been cited before?
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/independent/2008/05/today-in-pol-17.html
100 - Yeah, but at that time Labour were getting 30 point leads all the time. !
Anone just see Frank Field on ITV - how on earth is this guy not in Government ?
98. Labour are caught between rock and hard place. Whatever they do, I can ‘t see a way out for them. A new leader WOULD be more personable than Brown, and inspire Labour’s core vote, but on the other hand, as you point out, the public may be outraged at this lack or accountability and democracy. I can’t see how Labour can go on like this for the next two years with Brown, but on the other ahnd I just can’t see the actually getting rid, either.
Labour’s ultimate error was in ignoring the public and letting Brown take over last summer. Whatever they do now, they will suffer the consequences of that decision for many years to come.
76 - I don’t think these parties, taken together, cover as much of Labour’s ideological as the Conservatives and Labour, taken together, covered the Liberal core during its 1918-1924 collapse. The LDs can take the progressive social and cultural agenda, but find it harder to speak to Labour’s working class vote. RESPECT has no real potential except as a specialist Muslim community party. The Greens have made a big pitch for Labour’s left - but they, too, can’t really find much common ground with working-class voters or trade unionists. The BNP’s appeal to working-class voters is shallow, and their programme is, like many far-right parties, contradictory, and unresovable unless you’re motivated by the core issue of immigration. There are broad swathes of social democratic thought, or vaguely centre-left swathes, which none of these parties really fit unless there’s an alternative.
Even if these parties do pose an ideological threat, only the LDs pose a threat in Westminster terms (one reason why Labour will never really support PR like STV). As you say, Labour’s likely to surivive because it’s the best thing the centre-left have got; and it’s likely that Labour, in opposition, will find some sort of programme that can serve as a “next step”, in the same way some of its continental brethren have reconfigured themselves.
(While the Conservatives are better placed in terms of their core, a simulatenous threat from a nationalist-populist party and a socially-liberal free-market party could knock it below viability level at a period of vulnerability, although I don’t think it likely).
Talking of alternatives to Gordon Brown, I am increasingly impressed with Harriet Harman. She did very well when she stood in for Brown at PMQs and quite well on yesterday’s Politics show. Admitting that she did not like the negative aspects of the C and N campaign showed her in a good light both in terms of honesty and political judgment.
Mike points out that her voice is irritating but ukpaul tells us that sort of thing can be sorted, when I raised the same concern over Huhne.
And she has already shown she is electable by winning the DL election. Plus having a female leader could just be the “Black Swan” event that URW has referenced before. Labour need to do something dramatic to get back in the race.
Not sure what price she is?
80. It is *Her* Government though, i am sure she will be ‘forthcoming’ in advice at their weekly meets.
100. And its widely acknowlaged that the polls in the 92-97 period were wildely overstating Labour.
100. Agreed. Then again, the methodology’s changed since the ’90s, and Blair ended up winning by a massive margin. Not getting Blair’s result doesn’t mean not winning.
102 - Good spot.
102 nope good spot Sean T
ComRes 13% lead for us in C&N
102 seanT a 13 point lead in C&N is new.
The polls get worse for Brown each day.
It is like watching a train crash in slow motion.
Anyone now think that rushing a by election was the smart tactical move?
I can’t believe how quickly the site is growing!
I go off for a spot of tea and when I come back, bang, new comment thread with 112 comments on!
Eeeh lad … I can remember the days when 112 comments was a record for a whole day!
Oh Mike, what have you started?
102 - Can we find the figures?
107 As a Conservative (and I think I speak for all Conservatives) I would love Harriet Harman to be the Labour Leader.
Harriet Harman ROFL.
re several on last 2 threads if Ms Dunwoody is a single unemployed mother then surely she in new Labour terms is a scrounger and should have all her benefits cut as soon as possible.
Maybe Tory leaflets could draw attention to her entry in Burke’s Peerage and Gentry http://www.burkes-peerage.net/familyhomepage.aspx?FID=0&FN=DUNWOODY-KNEAFSEY(MOYRA)TAMSIN
I believe that she’s one up on Mr Timpson there.
I notice the the hybrid embryos survived today as part of the HFEB. The diary secretaries of Browne, Murphy and Kelly are going to have get very busy inventing fantasy meetings for them to attend over the next few weeks. Of course Brown could just take courage, exert his authority of what he reckons is a major government bill (at least he’s right there) and sack them.
With the 13% lead in ComRes, is there any value on an early election?
Scenario: Labour lose Crewe, a leadership challenge, a bloody eletcion, the new leader goes to the country for a mandate/limit the damage?
@108:
I expect so. Her Maj is not backwards about coming forwards when the so-called leader of her government is acting like a complete tool.
101 - That crisis could have been much messier, had not George V been lied to. When George V took office, he was insticitviely hostile to the Liberal attitude during the crisis, and might have insisted on asking Balfour to form a government before he’d agree to a second dissolution. Balfour privately told the King’s private secretary and old crony of Edward VII, Lord Knollys, that he would form a government in these circs (he’d have probably attempted a cross-party coalition, with figures like LG and Churchill from the Liberal side). However, Lord Knollys was a Liberal sympathiser too. He not only failed to tell George V this, but suggested that the Tories would refuse - and so, George V caved in to Asquith. When he found out he’d been tricked, he was furious.
116. Yes. Please please please give us Countess Harriet Harman - she of the all-black shortlists - as Labour leader.
Inshallah!
87. It is said that the Queen has never said no to a Prime Ministers request to dissolve Parliament. But, more curiously, has a Prime Minister ever said no to a request from the Queen that such a course of action may be for the best?
I suspect every PM is absolutely petrified of HMQ, she reminds them, just by her presence, that they are but fireworks that sparkle and make loud noises, but ultimately are fleeting, while she is a bonfire that slowly burns, and is there for all to see over a long period of time.
Would the Tories actually like a LD win in Henley, if it came with a Labour lost deposit? Discuss!
119 - They’re doing too badly for that.
124 - Er no. Not a difficult one really!
So what are the figures for C and N in this new poll? Could Labour come third?
@123:
We’d never know, since Her Majesty’s advice would be given under strictest confidence.
Has anyone noticed that Tamsin Dunwoody-Kneafsey doesnt miss her mother very much? She doesnt seem very sad.
102.Sean, well done for spotting that, it clearly appears to be a specific by election poll for C&N. 13% Tory lead after ICM showed they had increased their lead from 4% to 8% this weekend.
It looks like the Labour campaign is backfiring badly, I think that the poll lead has possible increased as the UK media attention began to focus more on the negative and highly personalised attacks against Timpson?
114 - Marcus, I know it’s hard for you, but you’ve got to give most of the credit to Gordon Brown here. Never in the history of pb.c has one man caused so many posters to vent their anger on here, pushing the posting rates through the roof!
Anyway, well done to the Tories, and credit to those who are showing some humility rather than just gloating as is tempting. I suspect the next few months will be where the focus turns on to ‘Are they ready for Government?’ and it will be fascinating to find out. Thursday should be a step forward, although purely based on their campaigning I would be delighted to see Labour come third…utterly disgraceful, and as bad as the Tories in Cheadle.
Yet another new thread - ComRes reports a 13% lead in Crewe & Nantwich
129 Until said PM’s wife spills the beans a year after leaving office you mean?
@130:
She’s one of those dreadful middle-aged Labour hack trolls. Mourning one’s own mother and basic human emotion surely take a back seat to the important work of self-aggrandizement and treating the electorate like imbeciles.
It is finished for Labour. The longer they are in, the lower they shall fall.
The best they can do is resign and rebuild.
Highly amusing piece on Telegraph blogs about Angela Browning MP posting her mobile through a voter’s letterbox
contained this fascinating snippet
“On a more serious note Labour is in awe of the Tory operation up here. They say that the Conservatives can turn around high quality literature very quickly and get it through doors all within a day.
In contrast Labour’s machinery is more grinding and less swift.
I dare say Lord Ashcroft will again be portrayed as the Bogeyman of the piece. But in short he has presided over the sort of campaign the Tories have never seemingly had the means, motive or opportunity to mount in recent memory.”
THANK YOU, Lord Ashcroft, you are a superstar. It wasn’t money, it was the sheer torrent of volunteers. Ashcroft’s gift to the party is the way he has professionalised campaigning
123. Wilson decided not to ask for an immediate second election in 1974 because he was not sure whether HM would agree to the request. He discusses it in his memoirs ‘Final Term’
re 104 Frank Field on You ask the Questions in today’s Indy
Who do you think history will judge as the finest PM: Thatcher or Blair (and why)?
Without question Mrs Thatcher…
137 - According to Hennessey, the Palace position would have been to allow Wilson an immediate one, on the basis that Heath had had “his” already. If Wilson had had one, and then lost of vote of confidence, then they would have denied him - and we would have entered unknown territory constitutionally.
136. I heard from our most excellent agent(ish, not really an agent, a rank above, but he still ends up having to sort out our leaflets) here in cumbria who seems to have moved wholesale to Crewe, that the other week we had over 300 volunteers out on the streets (he goes ballistic if he sees helpers eating sandwiches and drinking coffee instead of working), thats an incredible number of people…
Re Justins post at 73.
I believe that in 1997 ICM were the only polling company to understate the Labour lead and share of the national vote
Not so, according to UK polling report, ICM’s last poll in 1997 was spot on.
However, in each of the last 4 General Elections ICM’s last poll has overstated Labour’s lead over the Conservatives.
1992 by 8 points approx
1997 by 3 points approx
2001 by 8 points approx
2005 by 3 points approx
How the most recent change in their methodology affect this I don’t know.
@140:
You know, it’s okay to stop for lunch. I did when I was on the ConHome C&N bus yesterday.
139. Fair enough. My point was though that there was enough uncertainty in Wilson’s mind that he decided not to ask at all, so the principle that the monarch can refuse a request is still very much ‘live’.
It will be interesting to see whether it was a factor in Blair’s decision to hold the 2001 election in June, rather than May, as he’d prepared for.
107 - stjohn - Harman’s (as with Huhne’s) voice isn’t inherently irritating, no voice really is. She can seem a bit one paced and ponderous in the way that Mrs Thatcher was at times. Nothing a bit of variation in pace and the odd smile wouldn’t cure.
Harman has been surprisingly effective in comparison to most of the labour front bench (I know that’s not saying much); as with Straw she gives off subtextual signs when her heart really isn’t in it, her eyes are a give away, it makes either the interviewer back off or the observer feel more comfortable.
141 The eve of poll ICM poll published in the Guardian on 30/4/97 predicted Lab 43 Con 33 - Lab lead - 10
Actual 97 Lab 44 Con 31 - Lab lead - 13
140.
“I heard from our most excellent agent. . . here in cumbria”
would be that be the cunning so and so who helped Tim Farron get elected for the Lib Dems?
3. Test, the Cons majority will be in the region of 10, 000, there is a climate now of change, and the party in the best position to deliver that in a constituency will be the beneficiary,
it would have happened at Crewe for the Lib Dems or Greens if they were second at the last election. This is not an industrial constituency per se and it is Cheshire.
I have to say Alan Milburn could change all that.
Labour is no worse than any other party - politics is dead (on all sides) in Britain: there is no passion, no ideas, just strategy. Strategy has always existed, I am not naive: but now nothing is said, no ideas from any party, just tiny “management tweaks” - a beauty parade which Brown sadly has not won. Cameron should wath out, after a honeymoon period the press would go for him in just the same way - unless he started gassing asylum seekers. As it happens I think the Daily Mail will start to dislike him pretty quickly as he does have some genuine liberal ideas (small L) - he’s for it.
that should read “watch out”