How much of Populus was down to Scotland?
November 11th, 2008
Does the data support the “heartlands” theory?
My apologies for the third post in succession about the Populus poll but it has been the most sensational survey that we’ve seen in months and it does merit close examination. The detail has now been made available and one element sticks out - how well Labour polled in Scotland in the immediate three days after the Glenrothes by election.
Just look at the numbers above which I should explain don’t represent individual people but voter units after the turnout weightings have been applied. Look at the massive 54% of Scottish “units”.
There have been warnings galore here about looking at regional subsets from polls and drawing conclusions about voter break-downs in the different areas. I’m not doing that here but merely pointing to the impact on the overall national numbers from what Populus found north of the border - particularly when compared with last month.
All this might support the theory put forward at the start of October by the Guardian’s polling expert, Julian Glover, that much of Labour’s recovery has been in its heartlands. That could matter enormously in SNP-LAB battlegrounds but is there a national implication?
I’ve long been of the view that there should be separate England and Wales polls excluding Scotland. The politics north of the border is so different that including the country might be giving a distorted picture.
The latest commons seat spreads from PB’s co-sponsor, Sporting Index are: CON 336-342: LAB 240-246: LD 43-46 seats. I remain a Labour buyer.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
First
Aside from anything else, 24% for the Nats is surely too low.
No
The implication seems to be that Labour success against the SNP would reduce the Tory majority, but not get into hugn parliament territory.
The Tories might still make the odd Scottish gain. Depends how many SNP-Labour marginals there are, and the scope for Labour not just to hold, but to gain seats next GE.
Obviously this may prevent losses of seats for labour, but being scotland there is not much of a downside for the tories there.
Is there a comparison to the last poll there so we can see the swing.
When is the next marginals poll out?
To answer the question, probably a fair bit. What would be interesting would be a comparison between England as a whole and the marginals.
It isn’t just Scotland either - on the basis of that breakdown Labour are doing better in the North of England as well.
7 - I think what is important is how this compares to last month, and how it relates where tories need to take marginals.
Mike, why do England and Wales? Why not just England? Plaid Cymru have a chance of upsetting the polling too.
That said, I’m not sure it makes much of a difference. Even if Labour’s recent recovery had been in the Midlands, it still isn’t enough on its own to save them from defeat. If Labour go on to recover further from here, then it’s not going to be because they start to poll above 80% in Scotland.
The important thing for Conservatives to not do is panic! Take a leaf out of Obama’s book and stay calm. Appear on as many news programmes attacking Labour for messing the economy up by forcing us into a huge structural debt, but stay calm.
In hindsight the tax reduction policy announced by Cameron today is spot on. It is costed and credible, unlike the Labour plan of borrowing.
I prophesise the next Populus poll will show the Tories back into a double digit lead.
I posted this on the last thread as part of the discussion about why there seem to be more lefties on here than in recent months:
This place can be reminiscent of open outcry on the floor of the LSE many years ago. In a bull market (Tories up) you get one lot of traders leaping up and down and shouting at each other, which is rapidly superseded by a bear market (Labour up) when a completely different bunch of badly-dressed, short-termist, money-grabbing chavs begins shouting and cavorting like demented fools at a mediaeval banquet.
As with the old stock exchange, the ones to listen to are the wise old heads who wander in now and again, sniff the air and follow the trends with the benefit of experience and calm rationality.
Personally, I’m closer to the demented fools in real life, but when betting I try to behave like the wise old heads. It’s paid off handsomely so far in political betting, but has let me down badly in house price forecasting.
by Baskerville November 11th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Intriguing figures. I think support for independence has not just declined - it has collapsed. You’ll still get 1 in 3 diehards saying they want it in polls, but I’m not sure that even they really mean it. It’s more of a romantic reflex, or a wistful daydream.
Hence the Labour surge north of the border: Scots have gone off the SNP cause they are the incumbments in a recession and cause of the death of “independence”; the Scots really don’t want a Tory government (as ever): they aren’t enthused by the Libs any more.
And so they have moved en masse back to Labour.
This must account for a large part of the Labour rebound. But the party should still be pleased: they needed to shore up their heartland, and they’ve done it. Bigtime.
As the election will be won or lost in the midlands, those figures are very uplifting.
Surely you just remove Scotland from the poll and you have the UK and Wales totals - If you only count England and Wales (South East, Midlans, North and SW+Wales) on this poll it turns out to be Labour 33.0% Tories 43.8% and Libs 16.5%
[12] - Yes, pretty much the only thing worse than the situation Labour are in now, is the situation Labour were in three months ago. Scotland is better than nothing.
Thinking about PMQs tomorrow and continuing Fraser Nelson’s excellent analysis of Brown’s press conference today, where he notes Brown’s ploy of ignoring Northern Rock as part of national debt and his claim that the fuel duty freeze et cetera are “tax cuts” I think Cameron should consider a very simply questioning line that begins to chip away at Brown’s trustworthiness on the economy.
Simply questions:
1) “The Prime Minister said in his press conference yesterday (quote the section on the government tax cuts already incl’ fuel duty freeze). Could the Prime Minister explain to me how the temporary suspension of proposed tax rises can be defined as a tax cut?”
2) On national debt, Cameron needs a press release with the ONS figure of 43% ready. He needs to open this line of questioning with: “Can the Prime Minister explain to the British people why the costs required to nationalise a bank - Northern Rock - paid for by government money, which as we all rightly recognise is public money, is not regarded as part of the national debt by the Prime Minister?”
Brown will bluster some answer and Cameron can follow up with the same questions but for PFI and make some remark about the Prime Minister misplacing national debt, just as he had misplaced his fiscal rules. He can also ask the PM to explain just why he disagrees with the ONS figures.
It needs to be clear cut, it needs to force the PM to answer or by failing to do so, suggest avasiveness, so that the media can hopefully follow onwards.
He then should finish by stressing Conservative policies. He should argue “The government claim to be offering serious solutions for serious times. This side of the house agree these are serious times, but we intend to tackle this crisis head on with policies that recognise the true extent of the problems we face, not ignore the debts we do not want to face. This is not overly negative, this is not doing down the British economy - it is being open and honest about the scale of the challenge and putting together realistic ways to overcome them.
How can the British public possible trust a Prime Minister who claimed the end of boom and bust but on whos watch the mortgage market has fallen to a 30 year low, unemployment continues to rise and national debt has grown at a massive rate and who does not even have the courage to admit his mistakes or acknowledge the real scale of the challenges we face. Its time for a change.”
Thats my line of argument anyway!
Labour scored 39% of the vote in the 2005 GE in Scotland. Do we really think they’ve added another 15 points? I think we need a Scotland poll to get to the bottom of this. The Scottish sample is of only 78 people.
Labour on 28% in Wales with PC on 10% ?
18. Ignore - includes SW.
16. Your analysis may well be correct but the wider public tend to consider the entire thing a global phenonmenom – think Cameron was getting a bit of traction before Lehmann, but not after it.
13 This is interesting. Very similar for Labour.
Populous Nov 2004
Labour 34%
Conservative 33%
Liberal Democrats 22%
Others 11%
It’s now all about what ex Lib Dems do esp. in the Midlands.
http://web.archive.org/web/20051231005123/http://www.libdems4cameron.com/
Interesting article, Mike, and there’s certainly no need to apologise for three in succession on this poll.
It’s certainly an interesting hypothesis, and one that fits the surprisingly good Labour performance in Glenrothes. It also seems plausible. Anecdotal evidence at the time of Glasgow East indicated that the 10p tax fiasco went down particularly badly in Scotland, and cheesed off traditional Labour supporters enormously. Some of those may have drifted back, and I suspect this effect is stronger in Labour heartlands than generally. Add to that a possible ‘SNP getting too big for their boots’ effect, and a stronger improvement in Scotland looks believable.
If this right, we might see:
- Strong recovery for Labour in Scotland
- Medium recovery in English heartlands
- Weaker recovery in more marginal English seats.
That would presumably mean that Labour do somewhat less well in a GE than the headline national figures would suggest.
Of course, the sample size is tiny, and this is only one poll, so we should retain a healthy scepticism until there is more evidence.
FAO Martin Day – you didn’t answer my question at the end of the last thread. Be interested to read your explanation anyway. Cheers.
16, sounds like a decent line to go down.
Bad day for all Market’s looming.
Surely Populus must have smelt a rat in their Scottish and N. England surveys. this lookls like an over 10% weighting towards Labour. Faugh!
17: Agree.
DOW tank’s 156 pnts!
27. Here’s why
http://finance.google.co.uk/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:GM
Mike, you are still a Labour buyer because you believe the media narrative will be pro Labour in the weeks to come? Or is it that you felt the Labour prices were depressed because they assumed strong SNP growth and Glenrothes and this poll suggests otherwise? Am just thinking through the implications of Labour piling up unnecessary votes in the heartlands.
That 54% for Labour in Scotland looks a bit dodgy to me!
(326 last thread). (23) benbobjim It means that the Tories and Labour can take more ideological positions that polarise the electorate. It means politics becomes more dynamic and more interesting. Choice becomes a driver again and the staleness of the last 14 years is blown away.
Whilst i do not agree with democratic socialism, it does give some hope. At the moment they have nothing! Of course if it is a repeat of the straights the Labour party got itself into in the 1970’s in terms of union manipulation that may not be such a good idea.
Even at the last election, other than punishing Labour for Iraq. The key issues such as MRSA, Immigration and even tax were discussed in such a way that gave some voters little percieved choice. Labour have an infurating habit of adjusting their position to the the tory position. Condemning it and then later implementing it like Brown’s deep clean of hospitals. It just debases politics imo.
The reason i would like to see a more ideological joust is the possibility that more creative solutions are produced and management of society and the economy is improved. It has just stagnated under the media driven culture of Campbell/Mandelson. Brown changing his monthly media grilling did not strike me as honest politics. I simply do not like Brown, I cannot trust someone who behaves in his partisan and hypercritical way. Brown = Joke!
28. Not only GM, but Starbucks haven’t any - Buck’s, I mean.
Heavens. One slightly adverse poll (still showing us 6 points ahead and over 40% support I might add) and it certainly sets the softer touches among my party colleagues on this illustrious forum quivering! One wonders how you dears are going to survive the 18 months until the election when you are prone to this sort of panic.
Steady on, chaps - we’re still ahead despite a month of global adulation for Gord Almighty, we’ve got a recession coming that will hit us harder than the rest of the world due to the meddling of the self same pseudo-deity and the “time for a change” argument usually trumps experience as witnessed in New Zealand on Saturday. Some people just don’t seem to recognise when they’ve won…
21
Jonathan. Re your question on the last thread. We are talking about the same dealership.
32, I agree the Tories are still heavy favourites, (and that some are prone to panic, having grown accustomed to strong double-digit leads) but complacency has to be guarded against also.
DOW still tanking strongly. Now minus 234 pnts
I think the Midlands share for Labour is the same as last Populus (29%).
Usual caveats about small samples apply.
32 - The ones who are ‘accustomed to double digit leads’ must be new to the game. I have been active in Conservative politics since Sir Winston Churchill was leader of the party and I’m sure he would agree that there is little point in panic.
There should be a YouGov poll very soon.
O/T For Mike and other former Segolene Royal backers
Following last Thursday’s internal election in the Parti Socialiste (electing the national “parliament” of the party, result: motion Royal 29%, motion Delanoe 25%, motion Aubry 25%, motion Hamon 19, others 2%), discussions have started on two key points:
- what alliance will be created to reach a 50% majority in the party’s central boards
- who will be candidate to the leadership (new direct vote of party members on 20 November)
The first question is supposed to be more important, but alliances cannot avoid the question of who the newly formed majority would choose as a common leadership candidate.
Everyone expected Royal to suggest a compromise candidate for leadership (such as Peillon or Rebsamen) and make a quick alliance with Delanoe and Aubry with a few concessions (especially regarding possible alliances with Bayrou’s Modem).
Well, she has apparently chosen to go for the leadership herself (all her close supporters have now confirmed it) and try to build a majority on her terms alone, thus challenging other leaders to “put up or shut up”.
This puts her in a very delicate situation: if a consensus candidate is backed by the three other motions, she could well lose and thus probably end her hopes of a second candidacy.
However, if the Delanoe motion (or at least a sufficent part of it) rallies to her and some defectors from the others also join the bandwagon, she will probably have good chances to win the vote (not with the enormous margin she got in 2006, though) and silence her opponents until at least the european or regional elections.
It is a gamble and it can go either way. I think it will probably end as a Royal/Hamon duel, with Delanoe backers (though not himself) + other elements of the right of the party supporting Royal and Aubry supporting Hamon. Royal would probably win but it would come at the price of losing a lot of left-wing party members.
All the while, Sarkozy and the UMP can continue to enjoy this comedy show and prepare for their dream scenario: a rematch with Royal in 2012.
35. GM down 16%
30. Fair enough – yes I have always thought our so-called experts lambasting of the US two-party system rather unfair and indeed may I suggest perhaps slightly anti-American.
I’m of the view that virtually no-one is dead centre in their politics. That’s why I often have a lot more political respect for sensible intelligent Tories (such as yourself) than for Liberals – even though many of my friends are Liberals.
Rather than a three party system, what we actually have in this country is a two-party system plus a third party that acts as a consequence free receptacle for disaffected people on the both the centre-left and centre-right. As I say, I may become one of those people but that doesn’t mean that consequence-free voting is a good thing.
The sub-samples are small. But the Lib Dems doing best in the Midlands? That’s astonishing: it has been their worst region since about 1886.
35. Watching the IG Index live stock prices, I’m always struck by how easy it is to misread Wall Street Daily Cash as something slightly more apocalyptic - and in recent times, appropriate.
Yes, it’s quite clear that the Labour rise in this poll is down wholly to the Scotch wanting to give their ruler Salmond a kick up the backside for his impertinence. After that the Scotch will once more turn their ire on the bungling, moth-eaten Brown and his fading government. Except the return of large Tory leads very soon. This poll was a chimera!
Good to see you back on line Mr Matlock. I agree with you, even 6% is a joy to behold for those of us who have been candidates through the ‘wilderness years’.
Dow and FTSE are tanking because of the ailing car industries. no one is buying cars right now, and particularly in the states . looks like the car industry will get a state bailout…lol more badly run private companies “too big to fail”. can i join the queue for a handout for running my firm badly. sounds like a good game to be in at the moment.
Right I’m off to go see Michael Portillo do an Audience at Leeds Football club! Just hope i have got the right day this time after last weeks dry run!
This has got to be the most sophisticated website on the net (unless physicists have a secret site discussing quantum theory).
I wrote this morning on a previous blog that our Great Leader was Lying through his teeth about his borrowing as Chancellor and PM.
Well here is proof positive of UK’s position in the world vis a vis our trade balance:
http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/11/right-up-there-with-pakistan-egypt-and.html
45. Six points.
(not that sophisticated obviously, for the poster below – people still insist on using innumerate phraseology despite their obvious intellect)
45 Marcus. Good luck hangin’ on in there. It must be really hard sometimes.
Wondered myself about the impact of Scotland - its a small subsample but is quite different to earlier sub-samples posed by Stuart which had Conservatives around 18-20%, Labour in low thirties and SNP in high 30’s. low 40’s, Lib Dems around 10%.
Looks like Glenrothes, with what looked like an overall unionist move to Labour, has been reflected in this poll.
It’s not the whole story as the underlying curious optimism on the economy probably also has a major part to play reflecting the success of Gordon Brown in convincing voters he can take the country painlessly through the downturn.
Its an interesting poll and would be good to get another so we could compare pre-Glenrothes ICM, immediate post rate cut Populus and the next one.
Problem for Conservatives is that this poll is the one, that, by its very different picture, is in line with media narrative, and so will be the one that sticks in commentators minds for some time.
46. The s**t is really hitting the fan today. Not only car’s are at stake here, everthing is going into the pot. The Pot which our Great Leader help fashion.
http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/11/right-up-there-with-pakistan-egypt-and.html
£ also sliding (perhaps surprisingly, given the bad news from Detroit) - now under $1.55.
These figures have to be taken with a grain of salt at the regional level - it would be ‘unusual’ to say the least to see the Lib Dems get 5% more of the vote in the Midlands than the SW for example - even including some of Wales in that. These subsets are just too small for any of this analysis.
Populus was the last pollster to show Labour in the lead. When the Tory lead fell back they were the only ones to show Labour back in the lead. Within days, another poll debunked it.
If you extend Mike’s theory to the pollster which shows Labour in the best position re the Tories it is Populus.
Nonetheless, Glenrothes may have helped Labour in Scotland against the SNP, who may have a problem unless they adapt their stratergy to the new circumstances [re independence].
The interest rate may have helped abit.
I shall take this as one poll from a pollster that is traditionally very favourable to Labour. The problem for Cameron is that the media only report the polls that fit in with their take and it seems to take several polls to make them think something new and only one to pat themselves on the back [BBC excepted, who report what suits Lsbour until it becomes embarrassing].
The problem for Labour is that their recovery may be against the SNP or in their heartlands.
And that it may be quite soft.
Anthony’s analysis,
Finally, while economic optimism for the country as a whole remains low - 66% think the country will fare badly next year, the second lowest Populus have recorded in five years, economic optimism for people’s personal financial position has become positive. 51% think them and their family will do well financially in the next year with 44% thinking they will do badly. In contrast people’s expectations for their own financial future back in July was strongly negative and this switch could be a big factor in the government’s recovery.
It does, however, also highlight a vulnerability. What if Labour’s recovery is based on people’s expectation that they themselves won’t suffer in the downturn… but then they do? That gap between expections and what is actually likely to happen in an economic downturn raises the question of what will happen when people’s expectations hit reality.’
46. The s**t is really hitting the fan today. Not only car’s are at stake here, everthing is going into the pot. The Pot which our Great Leader help fashion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7722644.stm
48 - yes, that used to be a better site, but it hasn’t changed a bit.
56 SallyC 51% think them and their family will do well financially in the next year With this level of delusion, current opinion polls probably offer very little guidance to an election at least seven months, and probably 18 months, away.
45 - Thank you, Marcus. Most of us would have bitten hands off for a 6 point lead as recently as 4 years ago. Memories can be terribly short, can’t they?
50. Surely, ’six percentage points’?
As regular posters on this site know I am a floating voter who would normally incline to Labour. I have to say however that I’ve found Brown and Darling’s performance is recent weeks abject. The main problem is that Darling doesn’t cut it! We’re in the greatest financial crisis of all time and who do we have as Chancellor? A man who was privately educated at Loretto School and later joined the Trotskyite movement Fourth International. Sorry, but for real people with real concerns a guy with that background sounds hopelessly out of touch! Brown needs to shift Darling and get a heavyweight - Charles Clarke perhaps or David Miliband - as Chancellor. (Darling can be Foreign Sec.)
US vote count - Obama has today gone over 66 million votes. Total vote now counted is 125.5 million.
http://scoreboard.dailykos.com/map/
A little more about student loans, here is a key phase in the SLC T&C’s handbook
This guide provides information about the terms of your loan and repayment at the current time. The regulations may change from time to time and this means the terms of your loan will also change.
If you entered higher education before 1 September 2006, and have already taken out a student loan for that period of study, the SLC
will cancel your loan plus any interest:
• when you reach the age of 65;
• if you die before you pay the loan off; or
• if you become permanently disabled and unfit for work;
as long as you have made all repayments based on your income to that date.
If you entered higher education after 1 September 2006, or if this is the first time you have taken out a student loan for your current period of study, the SLC will cancel your loan plus any interest:
• 25 years after the April in which you first
became liable to repay the loan (rather than
when you reach the age of 65);
• if you die before you pay the loan off; or
• if you become permanently disabled and unfit
for work.
o/t GM getting reamed on Wall Street.
Labour held Luton North and South on reduced majorities in 2005 - could they lose both in 2010 if GM closes the plant ?
64. the problem is that people get into the habit of consequence free debt
32. I bet you do a cracking Michael Winner impression Alistair.
66 - I couldn’t agree more. Many students I have known, over too many years at university, think that their student loan and their “free” bank overdraft are equal to free money. Furthermore, due to the minimum repayments been very small, people don’t really realise the true cost of how much this debt has/is costing them from the day they receive the money. Currently at 4.8% on the outstanding balance is now a significant figure if you aren’t making any repayments or only the minimum required.
The narrative of Labour making progress is reinforced by this poll, but it sets a new bar.
What if its pitched at the top end?
Glenrothes, interest rate cut, post Osborne/Mandleson, pollster favourable to Labour etc.
This is the one by which others to come will be judged. It’s the one the media will latch on to now to prove themselves right.
If Cameron manages to hold him off, new polls [and different pollsters] may show something different. Drip drip improvements are constantly reported and fit a long tortuous recovery narrative: small improvements are overplayed and small fall backs are ignored.
It might be better for Cameron to have an eyecatching Labour improvement followed by a retreat. It might be more noticable.
i heard some shocking figures that the vast majority of young women in their mid 20s are on average thousands of pounds in debt, with no assets to speak of. I think they are the most indebted demographic.
this is so different from even 10-15 years ago. No one can tell me this sort of debt is healthy.
Glad I took the money did something useful with it while I was a student then paid it back when the interest rates started to raise (with the rising RPI). However, I was in a lucky position that I didn’t require the loan to exist, but for many they aren’t in a position to do so, and it is another £10-15k of real debt they are hung with straight off the bat.
44
If you mean Scots please say so, I’ll think you’ll find Scotch is a drink.
I do hope Mike that all of these posters who are breaking, ‘Smithsons Law’ will be suitably admonished?
Just some good news for balance, 2 year fixed rates available at 4.49%. Hail to the Gord.
69 Great spin SallyC, 10/10 for effort!
68. to be honest they are the closest thing you can get to free money. even at 4.8% you are better off taking the loan and investing it - the incentive is there to get into 4 or 5 figure debt at a young age. this is then no bar whatsoever to getting into more debt via large loans and mortgages.
the 4.8% is a bit misleading, that was the rate last year but it is set each year to one month’s annual inflation figure, so this will smooth out. interest = inflation over time.
73. that is good. i am extremely keen for some lenders to start offering discount trackers again sometime very soon
72: ‘If you mean Scots please say so, I’ll think you’ll find Scotch is a drink.’
Tee hee. I wondered who’d be the first to bite at that. Works every time!
73. How much of a deposit do you need ? is it 25 or 30% ?
Good for remortgagers, f-all help for the housing market.
I agree with 69 to a certain extent, I think 35% or so is probably the top end for Labour. Brown has had a lot of cheerleading from the media plus Cameron/Osborne been poor and then the whole business with the Russian. Also it ties in with the sort of level Labour got at the last election. I just can’t see how they can surpass that, without Blair / with Brown, even more baggage, and far weaker set of senior Cabinet ministers.
What would really put the cat amongst the pigeons is if the Tory support went sub 40. That would mean Cameron is starting to lose confidence all those hard won Blair voters.
While it is still 40-43, I think Cameron is probably fairly confident that the Labour vote will drop off when things get worse and that he can beat Brown in popularity during election run-up. Furthermore, the core Tory vote i.e the blue rinse lot, are more likely to vote come any election despite maybe not being big fans of Cameron/Ozzy, compared to the Labour supports are traditionally seen as less keen to get out there and vote, especially if they don’t really like what is going on.
77
Everyone whose caught making a total a**e of themselves tries that one.
I fully expect seant to be leading the shock troops of the Libertarian Movement in a full frontal attack on Guldford Council. Sorry of course he won’t be its Tory controlled, he only gets irate if its Labour.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3417036/Roadside-snack-vans-threatened-unless-they-offer-healthy-food.html
61. Yes for the purists! However points is acceptable as a shortened term. Per cent is not acceptable as it is incorrect (the Tory lead is 17 per cent in fact). The most teeth-grindingly awful examples of this are on the BBC site which falls into the trap time and again, which is pathetic. It’s uselessness actually contributes to the innumeracy of the nation, as I sadly have to witness in my own staff.
75 - It is if invested correctly, and yes the 4.8% figure is the highest it has been. I made decent money on mine, but that was when the cash ISA rates were above inflation rate, and market was growing fairly steadily. Where are you going to get a solid +5% on you investment short-term at the moment? Interest rates are now at 3%, so ISA rates are sure to follow soon. Market is extremely volatile.
However, if you take the maximum amount, have to use it to get through university, then get a job paying £15,001, thus just qualifying you to pay the minimum repayments it is costing you a lot more than many think. Then it is definitely not free.
The later situation, rather than the former, best describes what more and more students are experiencing.
Why do I think this poll is pants?
For a kick-off Lib Dems in the South East will always outpoll that Party in the Midlands by a fair bit. Poll says opposite. And the inclusion of Wales with the SW in these figures (what a daft ‘region’!) will still not outweigh the substantial Lib Dem vote in the South West - higher than the party polls in the Midlands. Poll says opposite. Add that to Mike’s comments about Scotland and…. pants.
Who’s paid for this rubbish?
Labour 30 points ahead of the SNP? That seems a bit far fetched. Labour inching ahead of the Tories again in the North isn’t too much of a concern either because the ‘North’ is a touch general. If I saw them comfortably ahead in the NW / West Yorkshire I would be more alarmed.
I don’t think there is anything to worry about for the Tories in the long run.
Also NO greens in the whole of Wales and the South West and Scotland?
Pants.
79 I think Cameron needs a positive vision of the future to clinch the deal. He seemed to be working towards that before the banking crash, but tax cuts, sharing the proceeds of growth and more deregulation are clearly not the winners they once appeared to be. Brown will use all the scope for tax cuts, there will be no growth to share and deregulation is now a discredited agenda.
The Tories have been wrong-footed by the crisis and are still in search of credible policy options. A lot depends on them coming up with some in the next few months IMO.
82. plenty of savings accounts available at over 4.8% at the moment, and the interest on the loan will fall too.
most students in that category would shrug their shoulders and point out that it is in fact costing them 10p per year - after all, the debt is pretty much invisible. the only time you notice it is when the repayments cease and you (a) get a modest payrise (b) are inevitably mired in ridiculous unnecessary admin caused by the crass system used.
80: ‘Everyone whose caught making a total a**e of themselves tries that one.’
Well, no actually old chap because ‘Scotch’ is a perfectly respectable noun meaning ‘People of Scotland’; it’s just no longer the dominant form. However I still enjoy using it because it inevitably brings out misconceived rebukes from the semi-educated.
56. “the SNP, who may have a problem unless they adapt their strategy to the new circumstances [re independence].”
This is the myth that’s growing up south of the border, but I think Nick Palmer himself confirmed that independence simply wasn’t coming up on the doorsteps. The real problems for the SNP were a) the popularity of Gordon Brown as a local man, especially after the economic crisis, and b) the controversy over home care charges in Fife. There have been two polls on independence since the economic crisis, and both have shown only small decreases of support (about 3-4% IIRC).
Professor John Curtice suggested at the weekend that the two local by-elections on Thursday - which although both held by Labour showed pro-SNP swings even from their 2007 high - may have given a more accurate representation of the national position. The problem for the SNP (as this sub-sample might indicate) is that the Glenrothes result may have since had a powerful knock-on effect on the national position. But whether that will prove to be a temporary bounce or something more significant, we’ll have to wait and see.
What was the result of the last GE in each of the 5 regions as categorised by Populus?
Poll ratings of Con 47, Lab 32 (South East) and Con 47 Lab 29 (Midlands) don’t look too disasterous for the Conservatives.
Wales and South West numbers are harder for me to judge as they amalgamate large good and bad areas for both Parties into one region.
Oh dear, what a shock our Gordon would have got if he had gone to the country encouraged by this poll. I hope this happens again, as he may actually fall for it next time.
#89
Spot on.
The latest poll on independence - 2nd November, I think - in the Sunday Herald (done by either ICM or TNS System 3) showed support for independence at 35% compared with support for the Union at 43%. There were more people opting for “don’t know” in this poll than switching between pro and anti independence, compared to previous polls in the tracker.
86 - I agree, although the polling does seem to suggest that many people who have switched to voting Tory next time are giving Cameron a lot of time to do so. The increase in the Labour vote hasn’t really come at the Tories expense (forgetting the 52% polling for the Tories in one poll). Thus, rather than the soft Tory vote, that seemed to be the thought a few months ago, that following the banking crisis it could be argued that the Tory core support is a lot “stickier” than once thought.
However, I think if Cameron/Osborne hasn’t got a decent argument together in the next few months, that may change. It just seems like they are getting a lot more of the shake than they probably deserve. The reasons for that I’m a sure are many and varied. I think what the polls probably do show is that if come the election if they haven’t got a new Brown bashing strategy, simply hoping for a bad economy might not be enough. As it stands, enough people are willing to forget Brown’s past 10 years to get him 33-35%, thus the Tories need to get 40%+ to win.
70. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=455891&in_page_id=3
Well, the Sporting Index spread for Labour seats has now slipped back down to 238-244. That is six seats down from the opening value this morning, and I think is the same as yesterday, before this poll came out.
Looks like punters aren’t very impressed by the poll - despite the great Mike Smithson saying he’s currently a Labour buyer.
On the Lib Dem Midlands support, as one who lives there, I would say that I would expect the Libs to up their support in the Midlands, as there are lots of dyed in the wool Labour voters in Longbridge, Castle Bromwich and Solihull who have either lost their jobs at Rover, Jaguar and Land Rover or are now working short time or under overtime bans. These people are never likely to vote Tory given most of them will be union members, but may well switch to Lib Dem as a protest vote. Wales and Scotland have PC and the SNP as their protest party, the North and South apparently have the BNP as a home for a protest vote. The Midlands does not have any of these options, so disaffected Labour voters may well plump for Lib Dem.
88. Just looked this up in Chambers. It says “used of Scottish things, e.g. whisky, but not usually of people”.
Something for everyone in that definition.
89 Fair enough.
87- Yes I understand that, but my point was that the debt still exists, and is growing. Thus it is not free money to people in those positions, however much they think it is. Like you say it is invisible, until they eventually earn significantly more than £15k (by inflation alone, let alone promotion). However, the longer they do only earn £15k-ish the more the debt grows.
92 It’s not Brown-bashing they need - they have done that already and it hasn’t helped them - in fact they appear too negative - they need a clear vision of what a Tory Britain would be like - would it be the 1980s over again or would it be like the last 12 years with a bluish tinge? Will they cut taxes? Public expenditure? Or what?
benbobjim. Re Philip Green [93] I’ll believe it when I see the full accounts - suspect the profit is declared is before those annoying costs like interest and a few other bits and pieces.
96
Try calling a Scot, Scotch I have, they’ll soon put you right.
88
Stop digging!
100. Yeah Oh I know – just making the point that these heavily indebted twenty-something women to which the earlier poster referred women are out shopping in force! (Think Topshop is basically the favourite shop of that demographic!)
98. it is invisible even then unless you look for it very carefully, as the repayments never hit the bank account.
who on earth really thinks to themselves “oh no, the last thing i needed was a £2k payrise - that means another £18 a month down the drain towards paying off my student loan earlier”
95. I’m not totally convinced - the sample size is just too small. But the Lib Dems haven’t had much good news from the polls recently, so let’s look at which Midlands seats lie in their target list. I’ve asterisked those that are Labour held; apart from Solihull I’d be pleasantly surprised if any of the Tory seats fall.
Solihull (nominally)
Worcestershire West
Leicester South*
Derby North*
Harborough
Birmingham Hall Green*
Northampton North* (3rd)
Shrewsbury and Atcham (3rd)
Gainsborough (? - not sure which region)
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/liberal-democrat-target-seats/
Not many pickings there I’m afraid Albion, though I’d be optimistic about Derby North and Birmingham Hall Green.
Does anyone know of any possible ‘under-the-radar’ gains?
103 - I agreed it was invisible in my last post, I disagree that is it free money.
I think what I was probably trying to get at in a long winded way was the following.
Graduate jobs (or within a short period of joining a graduate type scheme) used to pay significantly more than £15k, in fact significantly more than the average wage. As a result the student loan gets repaid fairly quickly when people are on £30k+ salaries (in todays money). Thus it was pretty much free money, even if it hadn’t been invested.
However, increasingly there are a lot of graduates who end up in non-graduate jobs (or jobs that pay non-graduate money) and their salary doesn’t increase that quickly over the 5 years following graduation. There are a lot of people earning £15-20k out of university and not earning a lot more several years down the line. Thus, the student loan fails to be paid off, and becomes an increasingly large stone around their neck for the time when they do start to earn a higher salary (even by increases due to inflation).
101. I thought it was a weird usage hence why I looked it up . My view is that the poster is being contrary, although the Chambers definition affords him a chink of light (although no more than a chink)
Debt is still debt, even if you stick you head in the sand and pretend it isn’t.
Furthermore, how do we know that in the future the terms of the repayment will remain the same. They have already changed once in the past 10 years. If I remember correctly the Tories had a proposal a while back that said rather than fees, they would charge commercial rates (+ a bit more) on student loans. Never heard a peep about it since, however it doesn’t mean it won’t be implemented.
101: ‘Stop digging!’
From the Shorter Oxford Dictionary:
Scotch: collect pl. The Scottish People; the Scots. M18
I think we can just leave it there as my being right.
108. The OED is fusty, old fashioned rag of a dictionary. Anyone interested in language how it used today uses Chambers.
Ooops!
Looks like Gordon Brown has just had his national credit card cut up at the checkout
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sterling hit a 12-year low against a basket of currencies and held close to a record trough against the euro on Tuesday as evidence that investors were abandoning UK government bonds weighed on the pound.
Data from the Bank of New York Mellon showed that after a 12-month period of relatively stable flows of foreign capital into and out of UK fixed instruments, since mid-September extremely heavy outflows have been registered. This has coincided with severe downward pressure on sterling….”
“The evidence from our own data suggests that international investors may have already made their decision,” he said.
In the circumstances we therefore suspect that the announcement of a stimulus package will provide investors with a fresh reason to sell sterling.
Analysts said the news could limit the scope for the UK government to deliver a fiscal stimulus to the UK economy”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Looks like SuperGodo’s much lauded “fiscal package” will amount to not putting up fuel duty this year, and hectoring other world leaders on how to run their economies
108. Also Chambers is published in Edinburgh…
107. couldn’t agree more - the difference between now and the past is that 5-figure debts are now the norm for anyone in their twenties, and this is considered acceptable
i don’t think that’s good.
65 Vauxhall in Luton closed their main car plant about 8 years ago, which really hit the local economy, and means that Luton is one of the poorest towns in the South East (although about average for England as a whole).
Virgin media to cut 2200 jobs
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7722644.stm
113. They still make motors there though ?
11 Also note you should not agree to a fun game of Scrabble at Christmas unaware that one of the other players is associate editor of Chambers…….
109: ‘Anyone interested in language how it used today uses Chambers.’
Fair enough! Though I did point out in my post at 88 that ‘Scotch’ is an archaism, albeit one deliberately and mischievously used by me from time to time.
110 - seriously this is really bad news. It means The Splurge can never live up to people’s expectations. And if it does…..then sterling is toast.
117. I take it that misfortune has befallen you?
118. Fair enough.
119 James A: “It means The Splurge can never live up to people’s expectations. And if it does…..then sterling is toast.”
Quite. This is why Cameron’s strategy has been spot-on.
17. Agree , this does not look right, considering the SNP vote at Gllenrothes was up 13.25%. Its unbelievable that we do not get Scotland only polls considering the difference between it and England/Wales nowadays. Only way to get a real picture.
29. SNP had strong growth in Glenrothes , vote was up 13.25%?
122 .. and why Labour is a sell. You can still get 246-248 at SpreadFair (but Peter the Punter warns liquidity is poor). 8 seats less on SPIN.
In the 1979 election and in the 1980s Labour did well in its heartlands, even though they did badly overall. In 1979 I think they knocked out Teddy Taylor from his Glasgow seat against the national trend. Perhaps the weak and vulnerable look to Labour for protection when economic conditions are tough.
One loser if this is the case will be the Libdems. They have been relying on wins in the Labour heartlands to offset probable losses to the Tories in the South. I think we are seeing this in the polls and it is one reason why I still expect Libdem representation to half in 2010.
Also, I’m still mystified why LibDem support seems to be plummeting in Scotland. Surely, it can’t still be a hang-over from their coalition with Labour? Is it because they turned their backs on Kennedy and Campbell and don’t appear to have any major figures in Scotland? Glasgow East and Glenrothes were very poor results, even worse than the Tory performance.
“Also, I’m still mystified why LibDem support seems to be plummeting in Scotland.”
Isn’t it plunging everywhere? There’s a squeeze on. I may have mentioned it once or twice
126, 127: Maybe some of the fall in LibDem support is simply due to ex-Labour voters, who were put off by the Iraq war, drifting back to Labour? Just a suggestion - I really don’t know.
123. “Agree , this does not look right”
To be fair, MalcolmG, the margin of error for a sample size of 80 is about 11%, so the implausibility of the figures doesn’t mean the methodology is wrong. The true figure for Labour in Scotland could be anything from 43% to 65%, and the true figure for the SNP could be anything from 13% to 35%. And of course the idea that the Liberal Democrats are ahead of the Conservatives at the moment is fanciful to say the least.
126,127 and 128 - Chris Huhne would have appealed to disgruntled Labour voters more IMO.
126. “Is it because they turned their backs on Kennedy and Campbell and don’t appear to have any major figures in Scotland?”
A better way of looking at it is that the Liberal Democrats performed disproportionately strongly in Scotland in 2005 because of the Kennedy factor, and they’re now losing that advantage.
I am sorry but this poll is daft.
Lib Dems higher in the Midlands than Wales and the South West.
Come off it, I live in the Midlands.
Nonsense that’s what it is.
131. Fair enough – I always wondered why people voted Lib Dem in Scotland when basically that country is and will for the foreseeable future continue to be a Labour vs SNP smackdown.
130. Correct. If only because Clegg is useless and appeals to nobody.
128 Yes I think this is happening - a lot of Labour voters drifted off to the Lib Dems in 2005 becuase of
a) Iraq, b) university tutiton fees and c) they thought Labour would win anyway so it didn’t really matter. Most of these people will return to Labour next time. What will be more interesting is what will happen in seats like Colchester or Lewes which are “natually” Tory - the Lib Dems are notoriously good at “incumbency” - will they be able to hold off the Tories in these places?
135, hard to say. They used to be notoriously good at by-elections too.
111.Flashforward
I think it’s worth considering why Brown is now “hectoring other world leaders on how to run their economies”. His new message is they should “spend, spend, spend”. If they all spend big-time on an unfunded basis this will put the World in an even bigger mess. Lets however give Brown his due. Brown’s objective may not just be to get favourable headlines. In addition he wants to give the impression that we are only suffering the same pain as other countries and he thinks it will reduce the sterling weakness and problems with funding the UK borrowing deficit if we are “all in the same boat” because of over-spending.
135 - I agree with your analysis. I suspect that for these reasons Labour marginals will be rather harder for Lib Dems to win than they think.
I also agree with your second point. Could Mark Oaten please hurry up and step down, so that we can have a really useful test Lib Dem/Tory marginal to calibrate our expectations by?
105 - Don’t rely on Derby North as a shoe-in. Lib Dems are now in control of Derby City Council (NOC) and having to cut council services / do a lot of unpopular things they would normally oppose with vigour, free of responsibility or consequence.
The natives of the key Derby North suburbs who have voted Lib Dem in large amounts aren’t happy (I’m told) with a eye opening ‘matrix moment’ reality kicking in appararntly.
Being the administration will surely have an effect on their GE support and knock a few percent back to the Tories (couple of thousand LD>CON vote swing most likely). That’s enough to make it a Labour / Tory scrap.
IMO etc, not trying to ramp - just telling it how I see it in Derby North.
Proof will be in the pudding, all conjecture at this stage. Of course, they may turn their position into something positive (fair play if they do), but if you scoot through the thisisderbyshire (Derby Evening Telegraph) newspaper website you’ll not see many positive stories / comments about the current administration.
135 - I think that it will be jolly hard to dislodge Norman Baker in Lewes, even if he is surrounded by Conservative strongholds. Actually, it’s not just the incumbency factor, although that is strong. It’s also the fact the Lewes is an unconventional sort of place in many ways. It has a somewhat anti-establishment leaning (eg Thomas Paine, and the famous Lewes Bonfire Societies).
131 Perhaps Kennedy boosted the LibDems in Scotland in 2005. It sounds reasonable. I wonder if we’ll see a similar Clegg effect in Yorkshire in 2010….only joking!
Here’s a bit of much-needed comedy as well as historical perspective to shed light on the media phenomenon of The One:
http://video.aol.com/partner/hulu/saturday-night-live-ask-president-carter/1RXsQMPJvD5Z0jNSydRYNKfR0yDGaXxu
In this classic Saturday Night Live skit from 1977 (just after Carter took office), you’ll see that the early portrayal of President Carter was that of a towering intellectual colossus (of course, spun in comedic form). Bill Clinton, in addition to being called “the first black president” by Toni Morrison, was also heralded as an intellectual and political genius of the first order. Now we have Obama, the next genius and phenom to grace the White House. So there we have it: the last three Democrat presidents, all heralded and worshipped as geniuses and heroes upon their election. What of Reagan and the two Bush presidents? Well, after all, what can we really expect from showbiz…
One of the worst things about the Liberal Democrats is their actual name, which I sometimes wonder actively leads them into the sort of wooly and irritating policy muddiness that turns true Liberals off. Plus, the Democrat part of their name is completely superfluous because all the three parties are democrats.
Why don’t they simply call themselves the Liberal Party and be done? Then they could stand up as a true beacon of Liberal politics. Yes, I know there’s probably some dull historical reason for it (cue someone to mention the non-entity that is the Liberal Party in Liverpool) but please, just sort it out Cleggy et al. Two word party names are rubbish and, deep down, you know it. It’s a bit like having a city called Brighton & Hove. It’s Brighton, live with it.
Just thinking/ranting out loud.
137 Of course. It’s a win win for Brown - if other leaders go for it (which is likely anyway) he can claim leadership again and co-ordinated fiscal loosening will mean the UK does not appear to be out on a limb and this will help to stop sterling falling too quickly. And a further fall in sterling will help mitigate the recession in the UK - it is not the negative that 111 implies unless it beomes a 1976-style rout, which is unlikely - devaluation was the key to recovery in 1992 and was also a significant factor in the early 1980s.
For those of you not convinced that Socialism has triumphed, this from Andrew Lilico on Conhome.
Six months ago, if the Labour government had proposed to respond to what was already then the impending economic downturn by introducing a subsidy of £2,500 for any company taking on someone unemployed for more than three months, and claimed that this measure would not cost the Exchequer money - indeed, would be more likely to save a bit of money - what would you, Dear Readers have said? What would right-wing bloggers have said? What would the Telegraph, Times, Daily Mail etc. have said?
I’ll tell you. We’d all have said that this was the Labour Party reverting to socialist type. We’d have said that such a measure would introduce distortions - encouraging firms not to hire people unemployed for less than three months and not to renew the contracts of staff on short-term (say, six month) contracts. We’d have said that the claim that such a measure would “pay for itself” was exactly the sort of thing Socialists always claim for government interventions, but that the reality is that in the medium term, as with the New Deal, few real jobs would be created whilst there would be large deadweight costs of the measure by subsidising lots of jobs that would be created anyway. We’d have said that it should be for private businesses to work out for themselves which are the best staff for them to employ, not for the government. We’d have said that this was further evidence of the trashing of Blairism, and designed to appeal to Gordon Brown’s backbenchers and his heartland voters.
Post-bank-bailouts, however, we live in a new age, and having supported the bank bailouts that ushered in the new socialist settlement the Conservative leadership is being flexible, adaptable in responding to this new age. Having said that this new Socialist settlement (though it could and should have been avoided by opposing the banking bailouts) was now inevitable, and recommended some principles by which the Conservative Party could operate in this new paradigm, I suppose I can hardly complain when our policy proposals are nakedly socialist. Fair enough. A socialist solution for a socialist age. But in twenty years’ time (if I’m spared) I’m going to be campaigning against these sorts of policies. Until then, I hope we rule competently, even if ruling well is, perhaps, infeasible…
142. I know I’m seeing this through the eyes of a lefty, but surely even you’d concede that it would have taken some doing to portray the second President Bush as a towering intellectual colossus, even in the immediate afterglow of his election?
135 / 140
I would be very surprised if Norman Baker was dislodged, he’s fairly popular, has a 10,000 majority and the local Conservatives havent got their act together
143. “Why don’t they simply call themselves the Liberal Party and be done?”
What they actually should have done is stuck with the name ‘Alliance’ in 1988. The electorate had got used to that for seven years and it seemed to be popular. Instead, they decided to baffle everyone for eighteen months by calling themselves ‘the Democrats’.
Jack Peterson - in terms of the Lib Dem impact on the Midlands, I didn’t really mean they would win seats themselves, but that they would take votes off Labour that will let the Tories in (if this is needed). A good example is Birmingham Edgbaston, the flagship seat for Birmingham. Labour had a majority of about 3,000 at the last election. Even the worst polls lately would suggest that the Tories would just about win the seat, but if polls worsen any more, then switchers from Labour to Lib Dem could still seal it for the Tories.
slam - It really makes my blood boil to see Brown going around the world lecturing everyone on how they should be running things. I mean I think there is a role for him, just as there is for former addicts who talk to the next generation of kids about the evil of drugs. Yet Brown doesn’t see himself as a sinner repenteth, but as the messiah. Who was supposed to be regulating the city for the last decade? Who allowed the banks to get so out of control that they needed this massive recapitalisation? (Bigger per person than any other country). Who willfully ignored any concerns about the inflated housing bubble and unsustainable levels of personal debt? Britain is as culpable for this mess as anyone else, yet Brown - financial commander in chief since ‘97 - just talks about global this global that, don’t blame it on me, blame it on those foreigners.
Quite what the rest of the world makes of his lecturing is anyone’s guess. I suspect they’d sooner be lectured to by Robert Mugabe on the benefits of democracy.
148. That’s very very true. Forgot about the Alliance name – quite nice (although of course it was nmever actually their name because at that time IIRC they were two parties with near identical policies)
146- It takes some doing, as far as I’m concerned, to portray any of the last six presidents as a towering intellectual colossus. My point is that the effort is made by the media and showbiz for only one specific subset of the group known as American presidents. After all, to only be asked one real question during an entire presidential campaign (and that being from a midwestern plumber with a high-school education) and to answer it by stating one’s desire to “spread the wealth around,” I can definitely see some serious potential for genuine lampooning.
Oh dear, it all goes wrong when the Tories try and bring out some actual policies.
Much better to let semi detached commissions produce reports that aren’t actual party policy, and wait until a couple of weeks before the General Election to unveil some real policies.
It seems that Cameron is getting a bit rattled. When the next poor poll emerges what will he do then?
152. “It takes some doing, as far as I’m concerned, to portray any of the last six presidents as a towering intellectual colossus.”
True, but everything’s relative, and for my money it takes considerably less doing for five out of those six.
152. The trouble for you and the GOP to grasp is that when people see losers in Wall Street being rewarded for failure on a massive scale, they quite like the idea of spreading the wealth around. I hate to break it to you S&S but the majority of people are not ideological conservatives, even in the US.
143- In Europe (of which I’ve heard the UK is a part), doesn’t “Liberal” as a political label connote a dedication to free-market economic policies (and usually also a generally right-wing social policy)? If so, “Liberal” would seem to be a very poor choice of nomenclature for the Liberal Democratic Party.
“…..because all the three parties are democrats.” Well except the Labour party
111. If Brown does go ahead with big reductions in personal taxation, I wonder what people will do with it? They might spend it with UK businesses to help stimulate the economy…but they might also:
Save it.
Use it to pay off debts.
Spend it on imports (now better priced because of the collapsing pound).
Use it to fund a holiday overseas.
It looks as if ratcheting up borrowing to give individuals more money isn’t going to be very effective in combatting the recession. Still, lots of people will be hoping for a cheque from Gordon to provide spending money for their skiing holiday this Winter.
S&S I sympathize. I remember seeing Matt Frei on the BBC declaring that America had washed away the shame of electing a President seen as stupid by choosing [b]The Editor of the Harvard Law Review [/b]. Of course. Because a grad student who commissions articles by other grad students is at the absolute pinnacle of intellectual life. Funny how an Ivy League/Oxbridge background is laudable in a leftist but a sign of unfair privilege for a right-winger. And funny how Gore’s low marks at college were a sign of youthful high-jinks but Bush’s higher grades were a sign of stupidity.
However, at least you can console yourself that this kind of Batsh*ttery doesn’t happen in America:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/wales/3439627/Council-warns-staff-not-to-use-the-word-British.html
145 Anyone who thinks the banking bailout “could and should have been avoided” is frankly living in cuckoo land. Had the banks not been bailed out we would be looking at a complete collapse of the economy with tens of millions of unemployed and rapid collapse of social order. The current falls in asset prices are a slight breeze compared to the whirlwind that would have been unleashed by a banking collapse. No serious politician, economist or commentator believes otherwise.
156. No. You can say economic liberal, but the general understanding of the word is one who is socially liberal.
160. But isn’t it about time Brown took some responsibility for the collapse of the system he has presided over?
“Spend it on imports (now better priced because of the collapsing pound). Well higher priced.
This poll even gets a mention on bloomberg.com
Labour’s support rose 5 points in the last month to 35 percent as the Conservatives slipped 4 points to 41 percent, according to a Populus Ltd. survey of 1,503 adults conducted Nov. 7-9. Asked who was best to lead during a recession, Brown led Cameron by 17 points. When voters were asked who they preferred after the next election, Cameron had a 10 point lead.
`Big Contrast’
“There a big contrast depending on how you ask the question,” said Anthony Wells, a polling analyst at YouGov Plc. “If you ask who’s best to deal with the economic crisis, Labour come out ahead. If you ask who is best on the economy without mentioning the crisis, the Conservatives are ahead.”
145. Is is really that bad? wow, how did this happen?
142. That video is unavailable for people in my region…
Got a link to a British friendly version?
Anyway, S&S, I was just watching the latest episode of Stephen Fry in America on iplayer. He’s travelling around the west, New Mexico, Arizona and Utah. It’s an absolutely beautiful part of the world. So much of America is completely unlike anything else in the world and contains some of the most beautiful environment on the globe. Yellowstone, Yosemite, The Grand Canyon, the list goes on. How the political cause of environmentalism has been unable to gain as much traction as in drab Europe baffles me. I blame environmentalists.
I think this Brown telling the world how to run its finances is overplayed to say the least in other countries.
As previously stated, the past 3 weeks I have been in the US, and watched a fair bit of CNBC and MSNBC, plus listening to CNN (and just for a laugh Fox) while doing some long drives. Not once was Brown mentioned, not once was the state of the UK finances or markets. There was a one single mention on Fast Money regarding what they saw as a slow response to this crisis from places like the UK, and one mention on Mad Money that the UK had done the right thing to cut interest rates (although he (Jim Cramer) saw Europe as screwed).
Yes there was the small matter of an election going on, and yes the US is very insulator. However, if Brown and his actions were so highly thought of, I would have thought he would have got more praise on the likes of Fast Money as a possible way to save the US / world economy. Nobody is listening to Brown in the US, and I don’t think they are going to start anytime soon.
Furthermore, Tony Blair used to get a fair amount of media coverage in the US, and they definitely would have had some clips of him congratulating Obama on his win. No sign of something similar from Brown (although I’m sure he did), just a quick flash of the Mirror front page (along with lots of other European newspapers headlines). It really was as if Brown doesn’t exist. For somebody of such supposed world importance, the US media certainly doesn’t even acknowledge it.
155- I have generally had high respect for you, but I don’t appreciate your attributing beliefs to me that I don’t actually have. I’ve observed that many lefties on this board are unfortunately very quick to resort to such style of attacks.
When have I professed a belief that people like, or are even indifferent to, wealthy Wall Street bankers being rewarded for failure? I have never embraced that belief (please quote me stating the contrary if you can) or attributed that belief to the majority of Americans.
I do disagree with your conclusion, however, that Americans tend to respond to that sort of behavior by clamoring for socialist redistribution policies. Rather, I think most Americans respond by clamoring for such excessive compensation to stop and a more functional free market system to prevail. I think many Democrats think like you do, though, and will misread the popular mood by pushing for a huge redistributionist leap to the left.
160. As above, how did this happen?
145: ‘…this from Andrew Lilico on Conhome.’
Wasn’t Lilico the one promoting the merits of arranged marriages recently. Don’t know his work myself but some people were saying he’s a controversialist and an attention seeker.
162 Maybe but when you see countries as far apart as Iceland and Argentina collapsing also you understand why the Tories have a hard job in persuading people that it’s all due to one G Brown. It doesn’t ring true.
161- Okay, fair enough.
N.B. There was until fairly recently a party known as Liberal Democracy in France, which was a decidedly right-wing party (and has since merged with the ruling UMP).
168. Spreading the wealth around is *not* socialist S&S. This is what the GOP does not grasp, and you perhaps do not seem to grasp either. Redistribution is not in itself socialist – in fact all governments do it to some extent or another. Socialism is from each according to his ability to each according to his need – a total levelling or the ambition to totally level. Obama’s policies are way, way short of that. Please don’t snap because I am not attributing views to you. I said that spreading the wealth around is popular with a lot of people, and is not in itself socialist. I stand by that.
172. And let’s not forget Nick Clegg’s great ally Vladimir Zhirinovsky!
Looks like the £ is heading south against the US dollar for a little while yet:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=avgR1aMMFE8g&refer=uk
,…”When have I professed a belief that people like, or are even indifferent to, wealthy Wall Street bankers being rewarded for failure? ”
I have never said you said that, nor that you hold that view… check what I read.
Many above seem to have not read 111. If the article is accurate then Brown has potentially in the short term 2 major problems:-
1. Having to ditch the idea of a fiscal stimulus through unfunded tax cuts or increased spending without owning up to the main reason he is back tracking.
2. Given the hugh increase in public spending which is inevitable during the recession having to explain a likely continued massive softening of Sterling coupled with a large increase in long term borrowing rates.
176…wrote!
172. Yes there are parties that call themselves Liberal that are of the right – including the Liberals in Australia.
172. The Liberal Democrats in Russia are seen as the ‘nasty party’ not an easy feat as they’re running against Putin. I believe the man who was considered to have assassinated Alexander Litvenenko was a member.
171.
Also turning rather nasty in Russia
Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) — Russia’s ruble fell the most in two months and stocks tumbled as the central bank scaled back its defense of the currency amid the country’s worst financial crisis since the 1998 devaluation.
Bank Rossii widened its target range for the ruble against a basket of dollars and euros by 30 kopeks (1 cent) to increase the currency’s “flexibility,” according to a statement posted on its Web site after the market closed today. The Micex Index plunged 13 percent, the biggest decline worldwide today, and won’t open tomorrow, spokeswoman Anna Cheryomushkina said.
“They’re going to move the line in the sand back a little bit, where they hope they can defend it,” while resisting a formal devaluation that would erode confidence in ruble deposits, Chris Weafer, chief strategist at UralSib Financial Corp. in Moscow, said in an interview today. “If people start to lose confidence in the banking system, we could have a massive run on the banks as we saw twice in the nineties, and then the game is up.
166- Sorry you can’t see the video, G. I’ll see if it turns up somewhere else. I think the failure of the environmentalist movement in the U.S. (at least as a political movement) can certainly be attributed to the stranglehold that the two-party system has here, relegating the Green Party to fringe status. As far as green ideology, that is definitely growing. But the independent and freedom-loving streak particularly to be found among rural-dwelling Americans who inhabit much of what environmentalists want to “save” causes a conflict of interest that the left hasn’t managed to win to the same extent as in Europe, where rural dwellers are much more of a minority.
181 Yes that’s the point - it’s frankly daft of the Tories to try to blame Brown for everything - like trying to blame Millwall for everything that goes wrong in English football.
Frank Booth 150. I share your views but also think Brown will shortly be in a corner. Some foreign governments will be well informed about the UK’s economic mess and at some stage will cease to be so diplomatic. See also 177.
“like trying to blame Millwall for everything that goes wrong in English football.”
Although in all fairness that would be perfectly reasonable
150 How dare you compare Robert Mugabwe to Gordon Brown?
Robert Mugabwe was elected.
Even if the poll is a 20% over-estimate for Labour in Scotland, they would still have 33% GB-wide.
173- Socialism, according to Wikipedia, is “the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which WEALTH AND POWER ARE DISTRIBUTED MORE EVENLY, although there is CONSIDERABLE DISAGREEMENT among socialists OVER HOW, AND TO WHAT EXTENT THIS COULD BE ACHIEVED.”
Spreading wealth around IS socialist. It is the very essence of socialism. I would hazard to guess that you refuse to acknowledge this primarily because you wish to avoid any association between Obama and the concept of socialism, since it is pretty clear on its face that “spreading the wealth around” is a socialist concept.
You incorrectly state that only “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” describes socialism. Rather, that phrase comes from Marx himself and is thus a marker of Marxism, which is only one strand of socialism.
187. Would the Cons not then go up by 2% or have you factored that in
?
What I don’t understand is why the Cons don’t highlight the annual amount paid in interest by each person in the country on govt borrowing - would scare everyone off more borrowing.
188. In which case all governments are socialist because all governments redistribute wealth to some extent or another. Rather than look at Wikipedia I prefer to look at what most people consider to be socialism – which is not Obama’s policies. In fact, if Obama was over here he’d probably be considered centre-right. More than half the Tories on here are Obama supporters so I guess that makes them socialists too under your definition. You are an ideological near-purist S&S, nothing wrong with that, in fact I rather respect and like it, but it doesn’t mean that anyone to the left of you is a socialist.
171: But it may start to stick given the UK’s specific financial problems - highlighted in 111 - which are likely to get much worse very soon.
190 People do not understand such concepts - they are not signing the cheque themselves. Anyway, all governments borrow - it’s been going on since at least the 18th century. Before that they generally just stole money from people.
157. Dumb post. Well below the standard we expect on here.
193. Quite. We live in a weird bubble here. I told my wife the other day how much we all “owed”. She said, ‘but we don’t actually have to pay that do we?’.
I said, “um, no I guess not.”
QED.
176- You may be surprised to discover that most in the GOP are just as disgusted as everybody else to see how the top management of banks is rewarded for failure. After all, rewarding people for failing is much more consistent with left-wing ideology. You may also be surprised to discover that powerful Senate Democrat Charles Schumer has long been one of the biggest defenders of those bankers and their profits (no coincidence that many of them are his constituents and campaign contributors).
194 But many people on this blog (including me) agree with the posting. So are we all dumb?
“You may be surprised to discover that most in the GOP are just as disgusted as everybody else to see how the top management of banks is rewarded for failure. After all, rewarding people for failing is much more consistent with left-wing ideology.”
Don’t agree with you, but eloquent pay off I must admit.
Have you seen how they elect their leader?
197. You don’t believe Labour are democratic? Of course they are – they abide by the decisions of the electorate like all the other mainstream parties. I sometimes wonder if people appreciate democracy at all.
199. As he was unopposed there was no need to have an election. Now I didn’t like it either, but it’s not undemocratic.
183. No, it’s like trying to blame the Millwall manager for Millwall’s crap season. There are other factors - the other teams’ performances, the referees’ decisions, the performances of the players, the money he was given by the owners, but ultimately it’s a reasonable charge to make. And there are very good grounds for holding Brown responsible for our performance. We are in a relatively shite position due to his shite economic management. We could be much higher up the table, and we were when he took control.
197. Oh and writing a dumb post doesn’t make one dumb. Just as saying something stupid doesn’t mean one is stupid.
159- You also hear nothing from the media about Biden’s mediocre educational background or his attempts to cheat his way through a sub-par law school. If Bush had had such a background, the media and comedians would be all over it.
Looking in, I’m surprised nobody has done the maths to answer the question precisely. Compared with the previous month’s Populus, Labour’s share has increased by 26 points in Scotland. As Scots are weighted here as a bit over 8% of the electorate, this means that 2 points of Labour’s bounce in Populus is down to Scotland. In other regions, Labour is up 8 in the SE, not at all in the Midlands (though Tories are 3 down), up 6 in the North and up 5 in Wales/SW. The small samples make fine-tuned comparisons between the English regions a bit silly (note that the odd LibDem finding for the SW and Midlands recurs in both months - perhaps Populus’s “Midlands” is larger than we think?), but the enormity of the Scottish change certainly suggests that Glenrothes had a huge impact there. Tories are down from 28 to 9 in Scotland, SNP down down 42 to 24, Labour virtually doubled from 28 to 54. I don’t think that’s likely to be sample bias. So what the poll represents is a massive Labour leap in Scotland and a moderate advance elsewhere. I agree with other posters that it was taken at an optimal time for us and the next Tory poll lead may well be higher - but not back to the mid-teens.
201 Classic post. So as long as there is no opposition, there is no need to have an election, and that is still democratic.
Like the communist party in North Korea.
204 - You won’t often see him quoted on here with approval, but Enoch Powell rightly noted that “A politician complaining about the media is like a sailor complaining about the sea.”
191- So, you say we should look at “what people believe” to be socialism rather than using an objective definition such as the one found at Wikipedia. Fair enough. Then which people have a worthy opinion on this heady topic? You? Okay, according to “you,” Obama is not a socialist. Therefore, Obama is not a socialist.
QED, indeed.
Sorry, but the guy advocates for increasing redistributionist policies, and he is a socialist. If “socialist” is a dirty word for you, I can’t do anything about that. And if this is merely a definitional argument in which you reject out of hand the use of any objective definition, this discussion is truly an exercise in futility.
Even if there had been an election the rules are amazing. The conference and NEC (though the leader ignores it) still have block vote with fiddled membership figures.
204 S&S - I don’t know whether you the Matt cartoon in the UK Daily Telegraph yesterday, but I think you’d like it. Picture of a fountain and basin outside the White House, with the sign “Please Do Not Walk On The Water”.
Today’s is also good: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
202 But this is the “we wouldn’t have started from here” argument - politicians always say that and it doesn’t cut much ice IMO. Voters expect the Tories to blame Brown - it’s just part of the game - they have made up their own minds, and at the moment the majority blame the bankers. The position of the Daily hate Mail is interesting on this one - they pride themselves on having their finger on the pulse of middle England and bankers are at the top of the hate list at the moment. They are, of course, pandering to the prejudices of their readers and their sales figures suggest that they usually get these things right.
Re the cost of paying interest on the borrowing.
It might start to mean something when you can equate it with the cost of something people do understand.
Someone [?] said something about the cost of it reaching the same as the education budget at its worst.
It don’t know if that is correct/feasible, but the general point stands.
I think people appreciate we will have to pay it back. I am not sure they appreciate how much it costs on an on going basis.
But I am a bit with Morus on this one. When the media have their narrative, they don’t want to listen to anything that contradicts it.
Cameron has to get his timing right and everything is running against him at the moment. It won’t stay that way and he has plenty of ammunition when they are ready to listen.
Plus, in the meanwhile we stay above 40.
I am not panicing - but off to a campaign meeting.
Those Tory sympathisers on here the other day - did you volunteer then? Well did you?
PB Home who of course got Glenrothes bang on! On Dale’s sorry Dave’s plan.
Tory Jobs Plan Won’t Work
Even many right-leaning panellists sceptical about National Insurance proposal
Andrew Rawnsley
PoliticsHome
In an attempt to seize the initiative on measures to help the economy, David Cameron this morning unveiled a new Conservative proposal.
The Tories would offer a £2,500 reduction in the annual National Insurance bill for businesses who take on the unemployed, the cost of the tax rebate to be funded by savings on benefits.
The Tory leader contended that this could take 350,000 people out of unemployment in a year.
Our experts and insiders on the PHI100 are highly doubtful that the plan would be effective.
Fifty seven per cent of the politically balanced panel reckon this scheme would not work. That’s more than twice as many as the twenty five per cent who think it will. The balance of the panel say they just don’t know whether it would do what Mr Cameron promises.
Left-leaning, Lib Dem and non-aligned panellists are all sceptical by big majorities. The right-leaning panellists are not all that confident either. The right are split with half of them thinking it would work, but as many negative about the plan or unsure.
62.”As regular posters on this site know I am a floating voter who would normally incline to Labour. I have to say however that I’ve found Brown and Darling’s performance is recent weeks abject. The main problem is that Darling doesn’t cut it! We’re in the greatest financial crisis of all time and who do we have as Chancellor? A man who was privately educated at Loretto School and later joined the Trotskyite movement Fourth International. Sorry, but for real people with real concerns a guy with that background sounds hopelessly out of touch! Brown needs to shift Darling and get a heavyweight - Charles Clarke perhaps or David Miliband - as Chancellor. (Darling can be Foreign Sec.)”
213
… so you latch on to one thing politics home got right and ignore all the tosh they spouted previously. Its akin to believing one poll. Yawn……………………………………
grouping wales with sw is stupid - but if plaid can achieve 10% hee, then it puts them on 20-25% in wales. I can live with that
189. No, unless they were also up 20% in Scotland. But it’s a pretty silly exercise, since all regions are likely to be widely inaccurate in their party shares, due to small sub-samples. The best strategy at the moment is to take the GB poll at face value, average it with all others from all reputable pollsters, and then make educated guesses as to the operation of the electoral system.
The bottom line is the 35% needs to be confirmed by another poll before the Labour trend can be said to have significantly changed for the better.
SaS - here in Britain we have experienced socialism and we know what it looks like. It definitely means a collectivist outlook and a mixed and managed economy; it generally means a strong central state, though some variants of socialism try to avoid that.
I note that Obama talks about spreading the wealth - not spreading income around, though I think he means the latter. The former is a longstanding aim of British Liberals and distributists. It’s about equality of opportunity. I don’t believe even Hayek would have had a problem with it. Redistribution of income is a slightly different matter but has been recognized as a desirable principle of tax policy in liberal thought since Adam Smith, and a guiding reality in most European democratic parties since the early twentieth century.
Wikipedia has many merits, but it is not a final authority on political theory!
217
You mean you dont know!
210- Thanks Richard, much appreciated!
I only know how to arrive at the best estimate…
218- I am entirely with you about Wikipedia, Jack. My effort was directed at finding SOMETHING objective to start with, rather than just bantering rhetoric around without being grounded in anything. If I were invited to a formal debate on the matter, I would certainly cite to better sources!
And it is also of course undebatable that forms of government redistribution exist in (to my knowledge) all modern nations. My use of the term socialist does objectively apply to Obama but also, more importantly, indicates the direction he wants to take the country (i.e., he plans to move in the direction of greater socialism). At least that use avoids the (probably worthless) debate over whether he is indeed a socialist.
Interesting that the highest figure for the Lib Dems is the Midlands, which isn’t usually thought of as a strong area for the party.
Omitting the Scotland figures would make it:
Conservative 44%
Labour 33%
LD 17%
Others 7%
On my rough calculations for seats in England and Wales only (added to the Scottish result run through EC) that would make the seat breakdown:
Con 315
Lab 295
LD 11
SNP/PC 9
Oth 2
NI 18
20 short of a majority and only 20 ahead of Labour.
Looks bad for the LDs on this but incumbency would alter this. Though on the basis of this Labour take 8 of their seats and the Conservatives 42!
For Nick Palmers interest on the basis of this the Conservatives would take Broxtowe but by less than 6% so his argument that local factors can help him hold starts to have some traction considering how small that gap is.
224. Others too low, but vote shares not a bad estimate. Seat forecast way off..
225
You mean you really dont know….
224. Even if this poll was replicated in a general election, Nick Palmer’s chance of holding his seat would only be in the range 20-25%. A likely higher swing in the Midlands would reduce his chances, but perhaps incumbency would offset that leaving the probability of a win at about the same 20-25%.
Due to variation in swing, even if the next election was an exact rerun in aggregate terms of votes as 2005 - in other words a zero swing to the Tories - Broxtowe would still have about a 20% chance of going Tory.
226. Tell me what you know, instead…
By the way, wasn’t there a YouGov that was meant to be imminent some time ago?
I recommend John Rentoul’s Open House blog to everyone this evening. Sorry I’m too dumb to link.
He reckons Brown’s “bonkers” on borrowing and that Cameron and Osborne are being prudent. The Tory panickers on this site might read it and reflect!
230, Cameron’s task is to point out firstly that debt is not 37%, except in Gordon’s fantasy world, and subsequently that piling up huge debt now for tax cuts might sound sexy, but once you take the policy home and remove the window dressing it’s actually a randy transsexual.
226
I know enough to know that I never read anything at all into one poll. Beyond that I never compare one pollster with another and I look at trends. Hence I await further polls before saying anything about Populus, but it does look as though there are some strange numbers within the detail.
Is that fair enough.
232 related to 228
New thread - Who’ll win the argument on tax cuts?
I think as well as this 37/43/higher figures of debt as a % of GDP, somebody has to point out the actual figure. People don’t relate to %’s, but can at least think wow that is a massive number. 37 or 43% of something doesn’t sound too bad. £1 trillion or whatever it is estimated at sounds just enormous.
145 I’ve never been entirely convinced by the argument that preventing a systemic banking collapse = socialist, and permitting such a collapse = conservative.
232. We are in agreement then…
225. Correct. Fed through UK figures rather than E&W
Which makes it:
Con 352
Lab 204
LD 15
SNP/PC 10
Oth 3
NI 18
I think….