Guest slot from Patrick on the impact of turnout
December 30th, 2009
Do the Tories do best if more people are voting?
The chart above shows the actual number of votes cast for all parties from 1979 to 2005 and also the total of votes not cast (the paler blue line) from within the overall electorate each year.
For 2010 I have assumed the current state of the polls CON 40%: LAN 28%: LD 19%: OTH 13% (at 75% turnout). Two shapes leap out:
This suggests that the long-term key electoral strategy for the Conservatives must include a big element of getting the vote out, engaging the electorate’s wishes and keeping the political centre right happy. Maybe the UK is an essentially conservative country – but one which struggles from time to time with the Conservative party! The Tories are not fighting Labour or the Liberal Democrats but apathy.
For the political left it suggests that Labour and the Liberal Democrats feed off each other’s votes and that their success strategies should focus heavily on competing to attract each other’s voters. The trends suggest it is as if this fight is independent of the Tory fight against DNV. Maybe this is something of a long running civil war within the political left - and therefore more based on leftwing ideology and less on addressing what the non-voters actually want (as that may not jive with the ideology). If true, it might explain the falling trend.
No wonder Cameron is love bombing the LibDems – every vote they get eats into Labour alone and increases his chances of getting a majority.
Note that the Tory absolute vote result is intimately connected to turnout - equal to turnout in % divided by 3 and then minus 11.5 million (essentially the Con + DNV trend line) to within 2% for every year apart from 1997. 1997 was thus the only election year out of 8 in which the ‘Left’ (Lab + LibDems) takes votes (in absolute numbers terms) away from the ‘Right’ (Tory + DNV) – well done Tony Blair. DNV has a core vote of about 10 million and it seems as if pretty much ALL ‘returning’ votes at higher levels of turnout go to the Tories.
Also noteworthy is that the total vote of the ‘Left’ is a lot less than the total vote of the ‘Right’. DNV has been much the largest political party for over a decade and correctly understanding and influencing their desires and behaviour is the key determinant for the outcome of general elections.
Polls would be much more useful if they also stated an assumption of turnout, as the DNV element is clearly a core driver of results and polls and turnout are not independent events. Models for predicting election results in terms of seats won should use both poll data and turnout assumptions.
I think the 2010 general election is going to have a big turnout – and that will result in a big Conservative victory.
Patrick is a regular poster on PB - this is his first guest slot.
MessageSpace Advertising
Thirty Million?
Sixty-Five Percent?
1. JohnLoony
A ransom demand?
Congratulations Patrick on your first guest slot. An interesting perspective and one that certainly adds to the debate. I can only speak anecdotally but I have really struggled to drag myself to the polls sometimes to vote Tory as frankly they didn’t seem to want to win. If I am of one of many, then I believe your article has merit.
However, my one area of query might be when you look at the Don’t Knows/Won’t Says in many polls, Labour tends to do slightly better in those figures. Would this have an impact on the DNVs theory above?
As an aside, it does depress me that 75% is considered a high turnout. When so many have died in the fight for democracy, you would have thought that people could get themselves down to a polling booth.
Very interesting Patrick. I will look in tomorrow but now I really must go to bed.
Belated congrats to Richard N and YS, both of whom add hugely to the site in their very different ways.
Patrick
A really great debut. Worthy of the greats from your alma mater, Hannanesque in its impact. Isn’t it time for you to return from the colonies to take office?
Something I’m not sure about here: part of the Conservative poll lead is down to greater certainty to vote amongst their supporters. The higher the turnout on the day, the more people from the lower certainty brackets are actually voting, which would presumably negate part of the Conservative lead?
Put another way, if 100% turnout were guaranteed then pollsters could ignore certainty to vote. Afaik, if they did that it would tilt the numbers in Labour’s direction?
Anecdotally what you say rings true but … well …
It’s a very interesting graph, but I do think the assumptions are a bit bold, especially assigning all non-voters to “the right” in British politics. In general I think it’s true that Labour and the LibDems fish in the same pool, but not true that the DNVs are a vast sea of reluctant Tories. If you look at attitudes to issues in secondary questions that don’t relate to specific parties or leaders, Lab/LD voters are normally quite similar and Tories quite different, with DNVs somewhere in between.
The more usual theory is that there was a Tory voter strike in 1997 which coincided with a relatively modest Blair boom. In 2001, the shine had worn off Tony so some Labour voters went on strike too (note that Lab and LD shares declined together in that one), with the Tories still on strike. In 2005 the LDs gnawed at Labour with not much happening elsewhere.
The current polls show a Tory increase that comes roughly half from Labour and half from DNVs (with churning beneath the surface, of course). In the current climate, I really wonder how many of the latter will actually vote, and that 75% figure looks very optimistic to me. So although Patrick is right that if the Tories can get out all the pissed-off voters in their column, they’ll do really well, it’s a goal that may prove elusive, since the polls that weigh certainty to vote show Labour doing better in the low reaches of certainty. The Tories may in fact do best if there’s widespread voter apathy, so that people on 1-6 certainty to vote in generla don’t bother.
Patrick
Very interesting. I’d take issue with your “Maybe the UK is an essentially conservative country” however. The polls don’t include Northern Ireland, and Scotland is certainly not “Conservative” in political terms.
The polls are dominantly English, and your conclusion that England “is an essentially conservative country” won’t surprise anyone. New Labour moved to the right of the Tories and captured a large chunk of the Tory vote in England. The scales seem to have fallen from many English eyes since Brown became monarch.
4. 9. The graph of course shows the overall effect of DNV and its relationship to the Tory vote. I have no doubt some on the Left move to the Right and vice-versa, but the overall effect is as if returning voters go overwhelmingly to the Tories. And there are only about 5 million non-voters who might vote (Tory if history is anything to go by). Another 10 million will never vote, ever - and can pretty much be ignored.
10 The scales seem to have fallen from many English eyes since Brown became monarch.
I don’t think people have any idea quite how big a mess Britain’s finances are in. The PBR was whitewash, in which Darling overlooked the fact that revenues had fallen by GBP 50 billion since the annual forecast was made earlier in the year.
He chose only to ‘notice’ the fact in December without any announcement after the PBR. Known borrowings are not 12% for 2009, but 18%. There are probably other elements not reported. 2010 could well see 25% of GDP annual deficit.
Spending in 2009 was 58% of GDP.
If people knew the truth (they don’t due to government subterfuge) far more would be motivated to go out and vote Conservative.
Just wondering where the assumption has come from where turnout goes up nearly 14%. Given the widespread digust at politicians of all stripes I would have thought that keeping it at 61% would be a bit of a triumph.
Iirc the dnv party actually ‘won’ something like 550 seats at the last election!
The central idea that how the dnv’s move/stay in 2010 is spot on and what makes the. Coming election so volatile and thus difficult to predict
8 - I have a theory that when usually Conservative voters don’t vote, they decide not to vote for a specific reason some time in advance of election day, so they don’t figure at all - when the Tories have alienated their vote, it stays at home and that’s that.
Labour and Lib Dem voters are much more inclined to kinda sorta yeah totally plan to vote, then not make it. They’re also, of course, more likely to slip off the register completely - move house more often, rely on others for registration, live in unregistered housing, deregister due to poll tax issues (historical one, that, obviously)
So there’s a difference in impact between low turnout which is predicted and the result of political choices, and low turnout which happens on the day because of apathy, weather, or whatever. The former is generally bad news for the Tories, the latter more often good news.
14 I tend to agree. ‘De-alienating’ or ‘de-toxifying’ has been Dave’s big theme for an age now. It has worked so far too (huskies, hoodies, blue progressive themes, etc). I really do believe that the ‘vote strike’ will end in May as that grouping really desperately want to see the end of Labour, and we will see a 75%+ turnout. If it’s a sunny day too maybe a landslide will follow???
History suggests that the ‘Left’ vote consistently - just switching between Labour and the yellow peril. A good LibDem result is good news for Dave.
Patrick
The strength of the chart is in the questions it raises rather than the answers it provides.
Your deduction that there is a missing Tory vote from the 1997 to 2005 elections that can be recalled with a 75% turnout is visually clear. Yet it is contradicted by the Sir Bob Worcester’s post a few days back wherein he argued that the higher the turnout the higher would be the Labour vote. NPMP partially follows Sir Bob by pointing to the Labour bias in the low certainty to vote rankings and by claiming your chart does not depict voter churn.
I really hope this is a long running thread as you have certainly shown a new perspective through which to view upcoming the General Election. The combined power of pb.com here may well turn this into a big story that travels well beyond the blogoshere. We just need to prove your theory by establishing links to the known knowns.
12 Tapestry
It’s quite difficult to understand a different political system when you only have blogs and the media to go on. However, I get the sense that in England, the Tories’ problem is that people do understand that things are bad, but they are not convinced that the Tories will be that much better.
Oddly, in Scotland, we have Labour briefing that the Scottish economy is a disaster area. The Scottish Office says that Scotland runs a deficit in public funds - £23.5bn since 1980. Of course, they don’t mention that the UK has carried a £353.2bn deficit over that period, and Scotland’s population share of that deficit would have been £31.79bn.
So, on your argument “If [Scots] people knew the truth (they don’t due to government subterfuge) far more would be motivated to go out and vote SNP.”
15 Patrick
Yes but the real driver of turnout must be the realistic prospect of a ‘change’ election. That means a discredited government which voters want to remove and an acceptable but not necessarily postively supported alternative. The counter argument for 2010 is not that these conditions don’t apply, but that Tories = Nurse and we may not want to take the medicine.
I’m hoping for a 70% turnout but realistically it may be closer to 65%.
In 1992 the Tories were expected to do badly but their actual number of votes went up in most constituencies. By contrast, I find it difficult to believe that the Labour vote will not fall by at least 2-3,000 in most seats this time round. If that’s correct Labour will struggle to keep above 30% in the popular vote.
Patrick, this is genuinely fascinating. Thanks.
Interesting, Patrick, but… I am inclined to side with Nick Palmer´s views on this.
In 2001 the NV share went up, but the Tory and Labour both votes fell considerably, and the Lib Dem vote too to a smaller extent.
If/when these votes come back, there is no reason whatsoever to suppose they they will all go to the Tories.
Great graph.
Martin Baxter’s piece on tactical voting seems to be finding the same behaviour. Conservatives vote, or abstain. Leftists vote Labour, or LD. (LD also pick the “don’t know” vote).
“…It appears as if Labour supporters are quite ready, if Labour is trailing, to vote tactically to support the Lib Dems against the Conservatives. But Conservatives are less inclined to vote Lib Dem to stop Labour. So tactical voting by Labour supporters could be worth about 10 seats of the gap. Testing with a tactical unwind of 5% for third-placed Labour supporters in the election simulator confirms a change of 9 seats in the gap.
It is hard to estimate the amount of Lib Dem tactical voting against the Conservatives, if any. “
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/conlabgap.html
I don’t know if Patrick’s assumptions about reluctant voters are correct (my guess is not) but the biggest problem I’ve got is with the assumption of a 75% turnout. How on earth do we suddenly get there after 59% and 61%? Because it’s a ‘change’ election? We didn’t even get 75% in 1997.
Or is this the Portillo theory, ie. an expectation that the polls will tighten and consequently the result will still be in doubt when people cast their votes, a la 1992? But this is a very different country, and a very different electorate from 1992 and previously. You only need to look at the relatively huge turnouts in the 1980s when there was no doubt at all about the result. There are clearly underlying reasons for the recent dramatic falls in turnout that have got nothing to do with the lack of close elections.
23
75% is a fairly typical post ww2 pattern.
http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm
Given the financial hole UK plc seems to be in, and the very high dissatisfaction with an overly-intrusive British state (PoliticsHome poll), a high turnout seems very likely.
24. “75% is a fairly typical post ww2 pattern.”
Exactly - a pattern that’s now been comprehensively broken.
“and the very high dissatisfaction with an overly-intrusive British state”
I wish that dissatisfaction extended to some of the most obvious features of that intrusiveness, such as the ludicrously high number of CCTV cameras - which are now starting to bark orders at people, in true Orwellian style.
A very thought-provoking post Patrick.
FPT. Endlessly fascinating to see how much common ground US Republicans and Thatcherite Outlaws find with the Chinese Communist Party when it comes to a “gut” issue. They’ll find themselves fighting the corner of Kim Jong-Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad soon enough.
It might be interesting to see a similar graph for Scotland GE voting patterns including the SNP.
As I understand it, the SNP Westminster seats are traditionally Tory, but the SNP is a leftist/big government party.
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2006/12/scotlandalone/
SNP collapse ahead?
25
“a pattern that’s now been comprehensively broken.”
I don’t see where you get that. 2001, and 2005 stand out from the pack as outliers.
28. I would inform you of the recent poll figures for the Scottish Tories but I suspect you’d want to hide behind the sofa first.
But for your information, only four of the seven SNP seats were previously held by the Tories, and in all but one of those four cases the last time the Tories won the equivalent seat was in 1983 - when they were on 28% of the vote in Scotland, and the SNP were on 12%.
29. “I don’t see where you get that. 2001, and 2005 stand out from the pack as outliers.”
Good grief! On that basis, the last eighty years of general election results can be seen as mere “outliers” for the Liberals.
31. Tosh.
28 - Quite a lot of Green Council seats around the country used to have a big Tory vote and now barely have one at all - look at South Oxford for one. There’s more than only anti-Tory tactical voting goes on…
32. “Tosh.”
Funnily enough, that was going to be my summary of Patrick’s wild assumption of a 75% turnout figure, but then I thought I’d elaborate a bit.
A very interesting graph. I like the idea of making assessments based on total number of votes, it seems somehow more predictable.
A rare breed of tory voter will turn out in May, the largely apolitical small ‘c’ conservatives that Tony Blair was so successful at keeping away from polling stations. Gordon will not be as fortunate.
I also have no issue with the idea that most returning reluctant voters will vote tory, that is precisely what happened in the London mayoral elections in 2008. Perhaps fear of a tory government might send a few the other way but Cameron is not a scary prospect, he’s not even as scary as Boris.
Turnout will undoubtedly be dulled by the expenses scandal so 75% is a bit of a reach. 70% however is entirely possible.
33. On the previous thread, I believe it was suggested that Brighton’s changing demographics had worked against the Conservatives. Would that also be the case for South Oxford?
I had thought that a rise in the Green Party vote would most strongly correspond with a decline in Labour/LD.
35 Diogenes
Expenses could affect turnout both ways - you might go out of your way to vote to get rid of your local trougher. Though I suspect overall, you are right.
It would be a very interesting set of supplementary questions in any marginals poll:
- How do you feel your MP has behaved with regard to his or her Parliamentary expenses? Answers: Excellently, Good, OK, Poorly, Extremely badly, Illegally, Don’t know
- Does your MP’s behaviour make you more or less likely to vote in the general election? Answers: More likely, less likely, don’t know.
Patrick this is a really excellent article, and I’m grateful to you for writing it.
I’d suggest one slight revision - rather than ascribing ALL DNVs to the right wing, I’d only grant them the ones who do sometimes vote but mostly don’t - that keeps the Tory/DNV symmetry, but allows the possibility that the NeverVotes might be of mixed political complexion related to the ‘Other vote.
Most of the DNVs who occasionally vote you have shown us belong on the tory side of the fence, whilst the Lib/Lab voters are a fixed amount who simply change internal composition - I just think the NeverVotes/Other are a third block.
Agree that turnout could be crucial for the reason you give - might be worth assembling the Mori likelihood to vote data (independent of party affiliation weightings) and tracking that to get a turnout estimate prior to 2010.
Really fantastic article, thanks.
36, that’s the instinctive ‘common sense’ explanation, but it doesn’t seem to be borne out. Sure, studentification helps the green vote in certain parts of Oxford, but there is also anti-Labour tactical voting, and a fair contingent of votes which can be categorised as “anti-development”, and would go to the Tories all else being equal, but can get their key demands from the Greens. It’s dangerous to assume that local Green voters are voting based on the national ideology of the parties.
So lots of Labour-Liberal marginals, lots of Labour-Green marginals, a few Tory-Lib Dem fights (or would be if the Tories got their act together) but generally Tories in fourth place where the Greens are in contention, notwithstanding that these are areas where they won a couple of decades ago, and a constituency they lost only narrowly in 1987.
23 James Kelly
You are blinding yourself by dismissing Patrick’s assumption that the DNVs are Tories. If you accept the assumption then a 75% turnout is feasible (although for the reasons given by Diogenes I prefer 70% as the top limit).
So, if the 70-75% falls then it is not because of the 1997=2005 turnouts, but because Patrick’s base assumption is incorrect.
Even if we accept the assumption, some thought should be given to the impact of UKIP splitting the right.
40 correction
1997=2005 = 1997-2005
40. Seth, I get the feeling you and a few others have the notion that the last three elections were a strange aberration in what is an essentially conservative country, caused partly by millions upon millions of stay-at-home Tory voters. I think that’s a fantasy, but it’s evidently a belief genuinely held.
However, I was completely stunned by Patrick’s 75% figure, and I think your 70% is more than a touch bold as well. I’d be very surprised if it tops the mid-60s.
40. “some thought should be given to the impact of UKIP splitting the right.”
Lord Pearson doesn’t seem to have had a flying start
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1239030/JAN-MOIR-talks-Baron-Pearson-Rannoch-gloriously-eccentric-accident-prone-new-head-UKIP.html
and the election countdown clock is running down.
James, I am absolutely certain the last three elections were “a strange aberration” but the fault is not mine but other voters.
England is undoubtedly an essentially conservative country and it may even turn out that Wales is too.
However, none of the above colours my response to Patrick’s excellent and provocative article. He has clearly demonstrated a relationship between actual Tory votes and DNVs over the last seven elections and drawn a similarly clear relationship between the Labour and Lib Dem votes. He has suggested a plausible explanation for the relationships and thrown open his theory to debate on pb.com.
It is now for all of us to try to understand the causes of these relationships better. The more we leave our prejudices behind the better will be our analysis.
P.S. What year will Scotland turn blue?
40
The 2001, and 2005 elections, the two lowest turnouts since ww2, are also the only two occasions when a Labour government has been re-elected.
43 Dave B
That is a wonderfully affectionate article by Jan Moir on Lord Pearson. Especially so as Moir needs to win back her readers!
It is unspun honesty and a caricature that would do credit to Wodehouse.
OK, so it is not going to win too many votes for UKIP and the politicos will be sniggering in their corners, but the loony right are just as much entitled to their existence as the loony left.
The 2010 election will gained much needed colour from UKIP under Pearson.
God bless him.
Turnout in many London seats can never be anwhere near 100% as turnout is calculated on ‘register as published’. In Hampstead & Kilburn c10 000 voters are EU citizens so cant vote.
So even if all 75 000 who could did vote turnout would be 88% - well short of the 85 000 for 100%.
Why cant turnout be based on who can legally vote - rather than the notional total electorate?
Only silver lining is the legal maximum election spend is based on the ‘register as published
44. Seth, if England is an essentially conservative country, how on earth has Labour won a majority of English seats in eight out of the seventeen elections since 1945? (Feb 74 is the only occasion Labour won despite the result in England.)
45. A creative redefinition of what the word “re-elected” means, which conveniently leaves out three of the five post-war occasions when a Labour government has been re-elected (1950, 1966, Oct 1974). In any case, I’m not quite sure what the relevance of Dave’s observation would be, even if it had some basis in factual reality.
Has everyone seen this nice little play in the Economist?
Gordon Rex OR the men in grey suits: a TRAGEDY
http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15111272
44. “P.S. What year will Scotland turn blue?”
Depends how long you think it’ll take Labour or the SNP to decide it’s high time for a rebranding. After all, with the Tories out of the way, the very Scottish colour of blue is more or less free.
48 James
Paras 3 & 4 of 44 contained my substantive argument.
The rest are but bubbles in a glass of champagne.
51. Knew it had to be the drink speaking, Seth. We’ve all been there.
49 Wibbler
Shakespeare is very difficult to parody and The Economist has not succeeded. The cartoons by Morten Morland though are excellent, particularly that of Charles Clarke.
52 James
Far from it. I’m smelling the coffee.
Labour and the Tories are the yin and yang of English politics. The yang makes the money which the yin then spends. As cyclical as the waves in a pond.
53. It’s a good effort but Labour are of no interest now.
The Economist might concern itself with its incorrect borrowing statistics for the UK (inside the rear cover). If we want to buy parody, there are other publications. We turn to the Economist these days for information as their politics has become so poor. Now the information is incorrect as well.
http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2009/12/uk-government-spends-58-of-gdp-in-2009.html
Burgerman John Gummer MP is going to retire
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/goldlist/2009/12/john-gummer-becomes-the-latest-suffolk-mp-to-announce-his-retirement.html
56 The only surprise about Gummer is that he has stuck around until now.
On topic, if Patrick is right - and my instincts are generally in alignment with his - then Gordon should convene the Cabinet, and tell them he is calling an election for late January - the first Thursday after the economy comes out of negative growth - in the hope that the GE coincides with a bout of atrocious weather…
Another interesting aspect is perhaps how the DNV total fares in actual change elections. The DNV is low in 79 for Thatcher’s election, but its next low point is not 97, as you might have expected, but rather 92. This looks like there may be another factor in play with DNV - not only change elections, but also a strong vote to PREVENT an outcome (in the case of 92, to prevent Kinnock becoming PM). If this really is a factor, then there may be a perfect storm for Labour - “time for a change” coupled with a desire to PREVENT Brown keeping his hands on the levers of power. Which may help justify the high “others vote”.
The one quibble I have with the table is the notion that in a high turnout, the LibDems will actually poll half a million more votes than they did in 2005, when they were boosted by the anti-Iraq War sentiment. I remain to be convinced that is a feasible outcome.
56-Good, another pro-EU Global Warming nutter leaving parliament.
Patrick. I’m disappointed that your first thread doesn’t centre on your first love-putting the spotlight on fat ugly and badly dressed (mainly Labour) politicians-but good effort anyway.
Unfortunately I can’t make head nor tail of your graph but it certainly looks the business. Rod Crosby eat your heart out!
A most fascinating piece from Patrick, which makes me wonder why he wasn’t right up there this year in the contest for POTY 2009 as his posts have been of a consistently high quality.
Along with both Robert Smithson and Rod Crosby it’s certainly “neck on the block” time in terms of his credibility, so bravo for his having the cojones to state his case so unequivocally, especially at a time when the perceived likely result appears to have been edging away from the Tories.
Whether, as he believes, they achieve an overall majority in excess of 100 seats, a truly gargantuan ask from where their starting position, remains to be seen. Certainly Ladbrokes have halved the odds on their failing to do so from 2/3 to 1/3, and the spread-betting markets are currently indicating a Tory overall at around half this level.
He has convinced me however that we are likely to see a significant increase in turnout in the forthcoming General Election, possibly to above the 70% mark, but almost certainly in my view to above the 65% level.
Surprisingly this close to an election, Ladbrokes appear to be the only bookmaker so far with whom one can bet on turnout. Yet despite the absence of competition, I believe there is great value in betting on both their 65%-70% band at 2/1 (53.8% of the total stake)as well as their >70% band at 5/2 (46.2% of the total stake) to produce combined odds of 0.62/1.
Were Mike to take up my suggestion in allowing PBers this New Year to select their ONE favourite political bet for 2010, this one would be mine!
If Patricks theory is correct, then it demonstrates very clearly that in terms of getting your natural vote to vote for you, William Hague is the worst leader of one of the main two parties in political history.
But we knew that anyway.
61 Hague had the misfortune to come up against Blair before the mask had slipped…
50. James. I thought SNP had already taken the Blue ( saltire ) already , Labour realising far too late that their red,white and blue was the wrong colour to back and belatedly trying to change.
62 - According to Patricks graph, Hague drove more light blues away than any leader in Tory history while Labours vote declined.
53 - Difficult to do indeed, and I agree they don’t quite get it right.
Not that I’m one to talk (*issues apologies to Sir John Mortimer, Keith Olbermann, Harold Pinter, Carol Ann Duffy, AA Gill…*)
Interesting graph Patrick and good article.
O/T but Boucher is out. 2 to go.
62
Perhaps Hague’s misfortune was, he was Hague!
I think we can honestly say that Heff. will not be warming to Cameron in 2010.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/6909729/David-Camerons-campaign-suggests-a-belief-in-nothing-except-money.html
Newsweek interview with Cameron, including an “aspiration” I hadn’t heard before - he seems to single out certain countries for favourable status when it comes to student visas
http://www.newsweek.com/id/227738
If that is true, it’s quite smart positioning, though not particularly fair. There is significantly less hostility towards Chinese and Indian immigrants than towards Pakistani and Somali ones.
It is the modern version of Thatcher’s statement that Hungarians and Rhodesians would cause less community tension than Viatnamese. Not really justifiable on any ‘logical’ basis, but nevertheless true at the time.
Newsweek interview with Cameron, including an “aspiration” I hadn’t heard before - he seems to single out certain countries for favourable status when it comes to student visas
http://www.newsweek.com/id/227738
If that is true, it’s quite smart positioning, though not particularly fair. There is significantly less hostility towards Chinese and Indian immigrants than towards Pakistani and S0mali ones.
It is the modern version of Thatcher’s statement that Hungarians and Rhodesians would cause less community tension than Viatnamese. Not really justifiable on any ‘logical’ basis, but nevertheless true at the time.
Very interesting article, Patrick, and thanks for putting it forward.
The central argument is one that’s a bit like Mike’s Golden Rule - it makes little logical sense but the corrolation is too close to ignore.
The two main reasons why it doesn’t make much sense are that:
(a) there was definately a large part of the population that switched from backing Major’s Tories in 1992 to Blair’s Labour in 1997. Yes, Labour did pick up some Lib Dem support (even more than the figures suggest given the tactical Labour votes lent to the Lib Dems in some constituencies, which were really anti-Tory votes aimed at increasing the Labour majority), but there was a very real move across the groups identified as well.
(b) The lowest turnouts are now in Labour seats and in Labour-supporting areas in other seats. It’s highly unintuitive to lump these voters in with the Tories.
That second point isn’t necessarily an endorsement of Bob Worcester’s analysis, which runs contrary to Patrick’s and suggests a high turnout will help Labour. Many of these people if pressed in a poll respond as low-enthusiasm Labour voters but in reality, they’re floaters and could be persuaded to the ballot box by a wide variety of parties. Some will certainly never vote one way or another but I’d be inclined to align them more to Others than anything else, as Morus suggested earlier.
The final comment I’d make is that the is British polity isn’t a static system. Belief in what politics is and what it can achieve has changed since 1979 (compare Yes Minister with The Thick of It for example). The monolithic voting blocks are nowhere near as reliable as they were thirty years ago.
Excellent pice.
Reading ‘The Guardian’ this morning and the cabinet papers from 1979, I am struck by the situation facing Mrs T then, and what it will be like in May 2010- much worse, I fear. What was the deficit in 1979 as a per centage of GDP compared to now?
Mrs T had immense difficulties cutting public expenditure, and the Tories added to inflation by hiking VAT in order to lower income tax. I have a feeling Osborne will repeat these mistakes. Surely his goal should be that over a Parliament, the tax system should be simplified? Isn’t there good evidence that low, simple, compulsory taxes lead to higher reveues? Our tax system is now fiendishly complicated. If VAT, income tax, corporation tax, capital gains tax were all 25%, and allowances (e.g. on pensions) were abolished, wouldn’t that lead to a big increase in revenues?
The Tories should also aim to get rid of national insurance: a regressive income tax in all but name.
A most fascinating piece from Patrick, which makes me wonder why he wasn’t right up there this year in the contest for POTY as his posts have been of a consistently high quality.
Along with both Robert Smithson and Rod Crosby it’s certainly “neck on the block” time in terms of his credibility, so bravo for his having the cojones in stating his case so unequivocally, especially at a time when the perceived likely result appears to have been edging away from the Tories.
Whether, as he believes, they achieve an overall majority in excess of 100 seats, a truly gargantuan ask from where they are starting, remains to be seen. Certainly Ladbrokes have halved the odds on their failing to do so from 2/3 to 1/3, and the spread-betting markets are currently indicating a Tory overall at around half this level.
He has convinced me however that we are likely to see a significant increase in turnout in the forthcoming General Election, possibly to above the 70% mark, but almost certainly in my view to above the 65% level.
Surprisingly this close to an election, Ladbrokes appear to be the only bookmaker so far with whom one can bet on turnout. Yet despite the absence of competition, I believe there is great value in betting on both their 65%-70% band at 2/1 (53.8% of the total stake)as well as their >70% band at 5/2 (46.2% of the total stake) to produce combined odds of 0.62/1.
Were Mike to take up my suggestion in allowing PBers this New Year to select their ONE favourite political bet for 2010, this one would be mine!
On thread - up to 2001 the Tory v DNV pattern looks strong but looks to me as if in 2001 it was more Labour voters moving to DNV with perhaps a few DNV moving back to Conservatives in 2005, but a large element of DNV is now ex Labour. Think Patrick would have been right on a high turnout up to the day the Telegraph published the first Expenses story, that changed behavior and while I expect some increase since 2005 I don’t think it will exceeed 70%.
Off thread - “The recession is over says Gordon Brown” article in the Times has a truly awful pic of Gordon. Good summary though of the theme of Labour’s campaign (the one that was meant to start after Q3 figures to build on the Conference Fightback narrative). Are people ready to take the medicine of austerity to eventual sunlit uplands or will Gordon’s promises of an easier path, hard on the wealthy, be preferred? Are they believable?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6970926.ece
70. Son of Thatcher as I suspected. We need to hear more of Cameron’s prejudices before the election.
73. well worth repeating!
Isn’t the relationship between turnout and the degree of political turbulence at the time.
Feb 74 - who runs the country? / miners = 80% turnout
2001 - Alls fair in the land of Blair / baldy with baseball cap = 60%
Its a measure of how much voters feel that making the effort to vote will make a difference
And there are a lot of dnv’s in safe Labour seats, and not just Tories whgo know they are wasting their time
Turn out been on the slide since the world war 2. The MPs who have been involved in the expenses saga by see turn out go up a lot in their seats.
O/T South 9 down with Ntini about to come in.
70 Basing an immigration policy on enlightened self-interest, rather than letting people settle here because we feel sorry for them, seems sensible.
71 I tend to agree, although the Conservatives’ victory in 1979 was based on a big increase in the Conservative vote (up three million on October 1974) rather than a decline in the Labour vote (which was up slightly).
72 The deficit was nothing like as big in 1979 as it is now. OTOH, trade unions were a vastly bigger problem in those days. We’ve only had a few years of economic mismanagement from Labour, so I think it can be put right.
72 - “The Tories should also aim to get rid of national insurance”
You realise it takes in the guts of £100bn? You’d nearly have to double income tax rates or more than double the VAT rate to replace it…
77. In general, turnout very closely reflects the importance people place on an election. Broken down, that can mean:
- How close it is: the closer, the higher the turnout.
- The issues at stake: the more divergent, the higher the turnout.
- The ability to implement the policies.
72 80
Personal NI and Company NI both to be eliminated?
Makes no economic sense…
75: “Son of Thatcher as I suspected. We need to hear more of Cameron’s prejudices before the election.”
Excellent! There’s hope for the country, then.
O/T England beat SA by innings and 98 runs.
Cameron does not have the balls to be another thatcher.
78 its all over Swann gets 5
83 - “Son of Thatcher”
Is Cameron like Mark?
Careful.
Very interesting article, Patrick. The central question is whether we are looking at cause or effect. My guess is that it is effect, but that may well not matter for betting purposes this time.
My own view on turnout is that it will be up a bit but not much. The disillusionment following expenses will be counteracted by the dynamics of a change election. I reckon that a turnout of 60-65% is about an evens shot, making Paddy Power’s turnout market very attractive to me.
Some real world consequences of Labour’s class war
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1239312/PC-Brigades-threat-service-Harmans-equality-drive-hit-middle-class-areas.html
88 - Splenetic fury from the Daily Mail isnt a consequence of Labour’s class war - the Mail has always been like this.
An interesting article but I think it’s a flawed one that finds a strong correlation that really isn’t there. If correct, you’d expect turnout in the past three elections to be most dramatically down in areas with a high historic Tory vote. If anything, the reverse is true.
Anecdotally, it surely is the case that some of the reduced turnout in recent elections has consisted of disillusioned Tories staying away, and the hope for Cameron is that some will come back. But much of it is wider disillusionment with politics and the fact that there has not been a competitive election in a while, which impacts Labour and Lib Dems just as much as the Conservatives.
89 Neil
But it’s great that every Labour decision can now be legitimately viewed through the prism of class war.
Gordon Brown, desperate for a win at PMQs, decided to bring up “the playing fields of Eton”. He will be paying for it from here to the election.
Cameron should adopt some of the best Obama rhetoric in response: “I don’t want to be prime minister of rich Britain, or poor Britain, but of Great Britain”.
88 - Good Daily Mail spin on “Fire Services to take risks of fire into consideration” and you’ll note Lib Dem support.
‘70 Basing an immigration policy on enlightened self-interest, rather than letting people settle here because we feel sorry for them, seems sensible”*
And it’s so Tory. Exactly the sort of thinking which made the country (albeit briefly) feel cleansed when they were booted out in 97.
91 - Yeah, but like the Mail’s article that has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of the issue. If you want to view every decision the government makes through the prism of class war that’s up to you.
94 Neil
The equalities bill is useless.
There is a real case for equality of opportunity to be greater: I think this includes a small, temporary amount of positive discrimination in order to ACCESS opportunity: for example, targeting poorest areas when designing university outreach programmes.
When it comes to fire and police services, it is just idiocy. If the poor are at greatest risk of fire because they don’t have smoke alarms, surely the solution is to provide subsidies for smoke alarms for those eligible for benefits and tax credits instead of closing fire stations in middle-class areas.
It is class war for no good reason whatsoever.
94. “If you want to view every decision the government makes through the prism of class war that’s up to you.”
Thanks to Gordon.
95 - “instead of closing fire stations in middle-class areas”
If that was the actual effect of the Equality Act then it’s true that would be absurd. But it’s just another Daily Mail fantasy without any basis in fact.
96 glw
Exactly. As I said, every Labour policy will now be scrutinized to see if it has any angle, however tenuous, which could lead to it being labelled part of Labour’s class war.
It smacks of core vote strategy, so despite the good reception at PMQs “the playing fields of Eton” stuff is actually an admission of total defeat.
On Topic.
The ‘Do Not Votes’ have some additional options this time around in most constituencies. This leads me to think that the 75% ceiling is a little high.
At the risk of gross over-simplification but simply to make the point, it could be said that UKIP is a Tory DNV, Green is a LibDem DNV and BNP is a Labour DNV.
We know that the share of ‘Others’ is higher now that previously, although falling. The question is how many of these DNV’s will continue to go ‘native’ or will revert to type on polling day.
-
Moving on, Patrick has made the simplistic point that the Anti-Tory vote is Labour + LibDem. But if you take this further, the Anti-Tory vote is actually Labour, LibDem, BNP, UKIP & Green. In the marginal constituencies, this might
a] reduce the Conservative’s chances or
b] split the Anti-Tory vote 5-ways, in which case Cameron’s crew will come-up-the-middle.
In these circumstances, the Tory’s best plan of attack is to campaign positively, whilst opponents campaign on the same negative meme on the basis that ‘Only x can stop the Conservative’.
That’s why Cameron’s ‘Good Clean Fight’ message this week is Shrew Tactics as well as Good Politics.
95 - Surely you are not saying, as Caroline Spelman apeears to be doing, that fire resources should be concentrated in the areas of lowest risk?
Fascinating article Patrick. I am inclined to agree that the striking voters are largely Tory.
Between 1992 and 1997 the Labour vote improved by 1.96 million, whereas the Conservative vote fell by 4.5 million and the LibDem vote fell by 0.75 million. This possibly suggests that 3 million Tories simply didn’t vote, and I recall Lord Tebbit making this point at the time.
We should also remember that Labour received fewer votes in 1997 than the Conservatives did in 1992, and that by 2005 the Labour vote was reduced to less that what the unsuccessful Conservatives achieved in 1997.
88 Is the implication of the Mail’s piece that the Queen is “middle class”?!
Good Morning England Cricketing Voters For Nick Palmer Worldwide
Meanwhile …. Young Kellner in the ‘New Statesman’ says optimistic Labour supporters need to replace their rose tinted polling specs :
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/01/labour-lead-government
BTW …. belated congrats to Nabbers and Subbers on their joint PotYship …. let’s hope they do not fail in the duties and end up as a receipient of my Grand and Most Noble Order of the Cracked Chamber Pot - How the mighty Poty is fallen ??
70-There is significantly less hostility towards Chinese and Indian immigrants than towards Pakistani and S0mali ones.
Perhaps because the former two are not known for blowing themselves up or armed robbery.
Hungarians and Rhodesians would cause less community tension than Viatnamese. Not really justifiable on any ‘logical’ basis.
Not sure where the Hungarians come in, maybe there had been some immigration post 1956? In any case, whisper it to the PC brigade but Europeans share many of our cultural traits. But how can the (white) Rhodesians not be logical? Most would presumably have British passports, speak English, and have family in the UK. It may not be logical for Labour in that they may not vote Labour or that they are not unqualified. Or it would not be logical if you wanted to turn the UK into a multicultural hell hole that breeds suicide bombers.
101 - That’s a classic example of begging the question, Gadfly. Your conclusion (that the stay-away voters were Tories) is implicit in your assumptions (that stay-away voters didn’t impact on other parties). So it’s fatally flawed logic.
On thread : Thanks Patrick, I offered Mike an article on turnout some weeks back - However I came up with a dog’s breakfast of conflicting summaries and said masterpiece ended up in file 13 !!
Anecdotally, when looking at a number of people who don’t normally vote “It makes no difference” quite a few have (small f) fascist style views, and their main interest would be in penalising some group or groups in society who they believe is affecting their welfare / the good of the country. I have noticed that some of those will vote in Euros, where there is a voting system and parties with some chance who correspond to that type of analysis. In many elections, the Tories don’t appear right wing enough for this group, and so they don’t often vote in a GE.
BUT, Patrick, these are not all of your DNV group - and a large number would be people who are floaters, or even a number of lefties who consider the party choice unsuitable for them, and above all, those who don’t understand how politics at all links with their lives (these are analogous to many non-churchgoers, they have rejected the idea of relevance of voting). I am sure that the idea of a Tory vote strike after the fiasco that ended the Thatcher - Major years has a lot of truth in it also, and of course, these have been returning to the voting fold since about 2001, and prob more so since Cameron.
100 tim
If the problem is lack of prevention, then the solution isn’t more cure.
‘Fascinating article Patrick. I am inclined to agree that the striking voters are largely Tory’
Without the slightest evidence…. Who is to say who is a Tory voter if they don’t vote? I would say most people apathetic enough not to have voted in an election have probably in the past voted for multiple parties. Most people I know have voted more than one way in the last 18 years.
104 - Surely attracting gay immigrants is the best policy as they are less likely to have children who command benefit payments, put less of a burden on schools and have no record of involvement in suicide bombings.
I think you may be on to something.
Headline on BBC website Cameron’s Year - Uncertain polls show Tory leader still has work to do.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8432955.stm
I suppose Brown has mountain to climb wasn’t even thought of as an alternative.
I don’t think turnout will bounce back to the high figures of old but will bounce back a bit to the 65% to 70% level.
The graphs are interesting but I would not agree totally with Patrick. The DNV and Conservative bulges do not “mirror” each other. They are similar but the Labour and Lib-Dem votes also dropped when turnout dropped, perhaps by not as much but there is a clear trend.
I suppose the turnout will be around 68% and the Cons majority maybe around 60.
So. Conservative landslide, then. Three figure majority.
The scales have now fallen from the eyes of all except Labour’s core - and the FT, of course, who will catch up eventually. Public disillusionment at Emperor Brown’s hideous nakedness (and that of all his sycophantic, self-serving courtiers) is turning to disgust and rage. (And it’s still only December.) Come the day, the ex-DNV will be waiting impatiently in long queues at polling booths, except in Labour heartlands where people will be watching football in the certainty that The Machine will have rigged the postal vote. An unstoppable Throw the Bastards Out tsunami will sweep the Tories to power and, with any luck, all but destroy the Labour Party which will come third - and fourth in some of the weirder constituencies.
And then what will we all bet on? Wait - here’s one: Caroline Lucas vs. Ed Miliband for EU Climate Commissar after the next GE.
108 - I think you’ll find the root issue with fire risk is housing density, the Mail has added its spin and Spelman has leapt at it.
Although I look forward to Mountain Rescue Services being relocated to wealthier and flatter parts of the South East under the Spelman doctrine.
54. If it has a chorus and a messenger speech and Rex in the title I am guessing the target is Sophocles rather than Shakespeare.
It certainly isn’t very good.
Great article - pb at its best. Thought-provoking and controversial, with a potentially unexpected conclusion (that might lead to value bets).
Of course to simply add the numbers up as Patrick has done misses the underlying changes (people do switch directly between ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ - and even more pertinently people die and turn 18), but as antifrank says @ 87, that doesn’t necessarily matter.
However there is a danger that Patrick could fall into the same trap I believe RodCrosby has - finding a statistical correlation theory from what is actually a small sample and theorising (for betting purposes) that it will continue.
What happens if you extend the analysis back a few elections (say to 1964?) 1979 is a tempting but potentially misleading starting point…
114 tim
But urban areas with high housing density already have greater access to local fire service, not to mention much greater access to other nearby fire services.
It is daft to use the Equalities Act to determine how fire service resources should be allocated. I speak as someone who lives in a very urban area who would no doubt benefit from the resulting greater fire service provision.
110-Interesting, but although under represented in the suicide bombing community, they are over represented in other law breaking communities.
And although they would not put a strain on school budgets, would they have put a strain on the NHS, certainly in the past? Don’t think those retro-viral drugs come cheap.
IIRC The Fire Service provides free smoke alarms and fits them too - they certainly do where I live.
Labour promotes graffiti by infants:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5670431/for-all-his-faults-gradgrind-was-right.thtml
116 The Andy Cooke article on swingback
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2007/12/23/guest-slot-do-governments-always-recover-in-the-polls/
suggested a change in behaviour in the 1970s.
On thread - great article Patrick.
I’m with you about 80% of the way, but think that the fragmentation of the votes into UKIP, Greenies, BNP etc are also in the DNV group.
These people may not have had a candidate in their area or were previously anti-politics until one came along and tweaked their interest [BNP in particular].
The number of those previously striking Tories, now lost forever to UKIP will be interesting.
OT Besides being a terrible advert, what sort of sad vindictive git would want to use this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDs7gWO-ggU&feature=player_embedded
“EcoSnoop for iPhone is an activism tool that allows green-aware users to assist and encourage corporate green initiatives.
Q: How can I help using my iPhone?
A: Users locate and report on eco-offenders by submitting pictures and descriptions of blatant abuse and misuse issues.”
WTF?
123-For many years we have been encouraged to snoop and shop our neighbours. For those of us not previous members of assorted far-left groupings it is a bit of a shock.
Very good article by Patrick, much of which I find convincing. I think we have the London mayorals as a possible example of what can happen when the Conservative vote gets enthused. Big rise in turnout, going disproportionately to the Tories.
Labour should be worried about this as in that case, there was also a decent latent Labour vote to be activated - but that vote (especially its ethnic component) doesn’t exist in most of the country.
Also good news about Gummer standing down…hardly any of the Europhile mob left now…
Peter2′ go on provide the evidence for your latest bigotry. It probably is news to you that gay people have children and heterosexual people acquire HIV.
You can actually make a case for predicting spectacularly low turnout this time. Both the large parties have a problem.
Labour’s is well-documented: we’ve been in power a long time, lots of Labourish people have accumulated issues where they think we got it wrong, and voting for another 4-5 years of the same is something they’re reluctant to do. By and large this group remains anti-Tory, and we hope that they’ll rally to the flag, but we don’t know.
The Conservative problem is that people who’ve abstained for three elections running may well be “Tories” in no more than name - in reality they’re as apathetic as the “Labour” voter on a sink estate who hasn’t voted since 1992. Moreover, part of the Tory offer is so far vaguely sinister - they will be stern with us, in ways that they generally aren’t specifying. The Tories hope that the January policy-a-day blitz and general anti-Labour sentiment will change the mood, but they don’t know either.
Throw in the general revulsion over expenses, and I think we could well find unprecedented numbers of voters on both sides simply sitting this one out. A thread on the policy-a-day blitz might be interesting? - will it work, or just attract criticism as the media pick the less considered policies apart?
wibbler’s idea of a poll asking if people think their own MP has fiddled expenses and whether their view affects their likelihood to vote is a good one - getting the wording clear is tricky, though.
Of course there’s this alternative, (and more entertaining) version of future events.
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/01/labour-brown-election-cameron
Only a bit of fun folks, its your votes that count.
For those looking at Norwich South, you may be interested to know that my (not particularly extravagant) punt on the Tories at 7/2 has been restricted with both William Hill and Victor Chandler - incidentally, I’m doing this as a combination bet with the Greens, putting my faith in Bunnco’s post above, whose logic looks good to me. Since I have placed higher bets today on other constituencies, this suggests to me that these odds may be about to tighten.
126 - That isnt Peter2’s latest bigotry! That’s one of his core bigotries.
127 I disagree - the plague on all your houses would be significant if there wasn’t such a profound dislike of Labour and Gordon in particular.
And since many of the most egregious offenders are standing down, the desire to punish them will be lessened.
From the Daily Mash commenting on the Xmasday bomber.
Meanwhile Julian Cook, professor of Islamic Studies at Reading University, said Al Qaeda’s new tactic seemed to be at odds with the theological underpinnings of militant jihadism, adding: “One suspects the 72 virgins are going to be somewhat redundant if you arrive in paradise having blown your own cock off.”
Says it all really.
126-Of course they do. I did not suggest they do not have children. Whether they should or should not is another matter.
As for HIV, if it only affected poor Africans or drug addicts no one would have cared. It was not known as a gay plague for nothing. And if you think people would have cared had it only affected poor Africans, when was the last time you wore a ribbon expressing your commitment to fighting malaria, which kills far more people than HIV and can be cured far easier and cheaper. Inconveniently it is not a gay plague. When is World Malaria Day, and why does it not get the air time? When is World Methadone Day?
In the unlikely event you are passionately committed to the last two days, I apologise, but my point stands - the MSM don’t care.
132 - The 72 virgins is based on a mistranslation, its 72 surgeons.
130-No, I’m an equal opportunity “bigot”.
132. coldstone.
No-one ever said the virgins are female.
For about 98% of the country, voting for the tories is like turkeys voting for Christmas. Young impressionable turkeys might be seduced by the prospect that Christmas will be reformed for their benefit. But the reality is all of history is against them and they will continue to be slaughtered as December 25 approaches each year.
There are obviously new voters who have never lived through brutal tory regimes, who may equally be seduced by the empty promises and typical tory campaign rhetoric from David Cameron. Like those young impressionable turkeys though, they too will be slaughtered once their votes have been cast. At least for you it’s only financial slaughter!
137
So you are forecasting a 98% turnout for the next GE.
Impressive..
Sunny Gordon warns voters: Don’t wreck my wonderful economic legacy
134. Have you tried sh*gging a surgeon tim?
137 - A young turkey is called a poult.
The graph is interesting.
It suggests a Conservative Voter strike - accurate in my own personal experience.
It appears that Labour was popular. It just occupied a vacuum.
133 The MSM may have paid malaria more attention if Princess Diana had caught it.
I hold those who campaigned against DDT responsible for an awful lot.
Misplaced greenyism is much more harmful [rather like releasing top predators such as mink into the countryside]. IIRC even Greenpeace eventually conceded that Shell’s plans to dispose of the Brent Spar platform were less damaging than the ones they campaigned so loudly for.
Good analysis from the BBC - shame they’ve lost their perspective these days.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/218527.stm
140 It could be - I thougth it said Sturgeon
143 - The Islamist wing of the SNP in Glasgow Central believe they’ll get 72 Sturgeons.
Is there enough hairspray in paradise?
Kellner “If we correct the data to allow for the polls’ errors, we find that there was no significant government recovery ahead of the last four general elections.”
Well if there was to be one final move to oust Brown, this could be it.
But, the “fearless 5″ lack the courage.
137. Richie, the only slaughtering to be done on GE day is the killing of Labour as a force for some time.
And the only reason that Tory governments have (and only in Thatchers case so far) had to lay down the law, is because of the mess that the Labour Party left the country in after government.
This time the mess is worse and the damage greater. You have only your party to blame, Richie, and it’s about time you stopped blaming others for your own actions
138. I am not. Unfortunately the apathy and stupidity of the masses that the Tories rely on will shine through. It could even be enough to return them with a majority.
141. A turkey poult would be too young to vote, as is the case with children and teenagers.
147 - I think there are more fundamental objections to poults voting than their age. As for teenagers, I thought it was Labour’s intention to extend the franchise to 16 year olds?
136
What are you suggesting? That there are gay muslims, surely not!
More here
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/al-qaeda-to-wage-underpant%11based-war%2c-say-experts-200912292340/
The graph is very interesting.
It suggests a Conservative Voter strike - accurate in my own personal experience.
It appears that Labour was popular. It just occupied a vacuum.
For peter2: http://www.worldmalariaday.org/ I agree with him that it doesn’t get that much coverage in the British MSM, but
disagree with his apparent belief that this indicates some sort of pro-gay bias.
It’s simply due to a lack of MSM interest in other countries apart from America. There isn’t much malaria in Britain and people don’t worry about catching it, but many people, gay or not, have had moments when they felt the need to take precautions against the risk of getting AIDS. It would be nice if people were as keen to fight diseases that they won’t catch themselves, but…
Come to that, we don’t even cover our immediate neighbours, such as Belgium - hence the hypocritical MSM derision that the EU was picking a very successful Belgian PM whom their readers hadn’t heard of. Whose fault is that? In fact, the London-based media don’t even bother to cover much north of Birmingham, and if there was a Highlands Disease Day I doubt if they would tell us much about it either.
Richie Rich
I believe you live in Argentina.
In which case you clearly don’t fancy paying for your share of the debt that Labour has run up.
149 - There are plenty of gay muslims. I know one who is fairly closely related to one of the 7 July bombers. His political views are an assortment, to say the least.
The graph is interesting.
It suggests a conservative vote strike - accurate in my own experience.
It appears that Labour was NOT popular. It filled a vacuum
152 - “There are plenty of gay muslims.”
Who’d have thought!
Regarding the Brighton Pavilion poll.
Do we know if it is the only poll that has been taken in that constituency?
How do we know that the Greens haven’t commissioned multiple polls there but all the others have shown either Labour or the Conservatives leading?
133 - Its worse than that peter.
Have you seen the bias in the mainstream media towards interior decor, clearly run by the gay lobby.
Everywhere you look theres programmes about soft furnishings, curtains and design. Its gone so mainstream now that the heterosexual male population barely bats an eyelid when a sofa supplement falls out of a newspaper as it did with me this very morning.
It’s time we woke up.
137. “For about 98% of the country, voting for the tories is like turkeys voting for Christmas. Young impressionable turkeys might be seduced by the prospect that Christmas will be reformed for their benefit.”
The Turkeys obviously having a strange biological quirk of getting younger and more impressionable as they get older (older voters tend to vote blue).
147. “Unfortunately the apathy and stupidity of the masses that the Tories rely on will shine through”
So the inverse correlation between Conservative vote share and Did Not Vote shown so clearly in the chart with the article is just an anomaly.
154 - It was said with a certain irony. One of these days they’ll invent a way of transmitting irony over the internet (or I’ll learn not to try to use it).
150
But Stuart Dickson would, endlessly….
149 - Pleased to meet you Coldstone.
158 - I didnt think you were serious!
70 “http://www.newsweek.com/id/227738
We should look at our student-visa system and deliberately bend it in favor of highly skilled students from countries of the future like India and China and Brazil. ”
Cameron wants to favour immigration from Brazil, India and China?!?!
WTF!
Cameron is dangerous and must be restrained, then removed before he can damage Britain as Labour has.
150-You are right about the British MSM. How many EU PMs can most
people name?
Though like the idea of Highlands Disease Day!
Actually can imagine malaria was rife there at one point with all the lakes!
For those in search of gay muslims, the “men seeking men” pages of gumtree will meet all your requirements. This is not recommended for those with delicate constitutions.
163. Malaria used to be rife in parts of Kent.
164 - Sexist.
Richie Rich why are you not still valleyboy as you were yesterday?
Granted you talk twaddle in both identities but if you think swapping them about makes you more readable, then forget it.
Happily you have dropped the ’small red sausage boy from Argentina’ persona. That public display of your hangups was not attractive.
166 - It’s probably giving more away than I should to admit that I have not had occasion to review the “women seeking women” pages. Perhaps SeanT or The Screaming Eagles could comment?
165 And as far north as Archangel.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/414687_6
168 - Antifrank, having once ahem, reviewed, the classified sections of the Manchester Evening News, I have to say, the women seeking women doesn’t outnumber the men seeking men.
170 - I knew you were the right person for the job.
OT Gary Megson sacked.
155 another richard
If the Greens had used a reputable pollster like ICM previiously then the results would have been posted on the pollsters site - like this one has been
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2009_dec_greens_brighton_poll.pdf
171 - My motives were entirely honourable.
I was helping a friend come out. She was too shy to go to the village.
Actually the one thing that did outnumber the men seeking men, was the women who would see men, and the occasional woman, for £150 an hour, purely for companionship
Ritchie. I am a bit worried about your inconsistent political positioning.
So was Tony “terrible” or the ” the best prime minister this country has ever had“?. There does seem to be a slight inconsistency.
173 - Not if the Greens wanted it kept private. Fwiw I doubt there have been other polls, the Green party doesnt have that much money to throw at them (and I’d like to think I’d have heard about them on the grapevine whatever they showed).
Seeing the build up to Gordon’s big New Year’s Eve webcast - the world holds it’s collective breath.
The thought occurs is Gordon a fundamentalist extremist nanny?
1. He is always right
2. His opponents eat babies and are to be despised and must not be allowed near those under his charge
3. He leads the world on most things and those who stand in in his way are from the dark side
4. He must not be removed from his vital role as otherwise the future is bleak and austere
5. We should not just cling to him in 2010 but we should embrace him.
175 - LOLOLOL! Taken down by OGH there. Obviously Richie will say one post was “ironic” or a “joke” but the plain truth is that he is a trolling sockpuppet.
There are definately loads of ” Gay” muslims or more often ” Men who have Sex with Men ” Muslims. When I was a Councillor I had a standing invitation to the “gatherings” after Friday prayers. Post Iftar during Ramadan also seemed popular.
Neil
How much money does it cost to have a poll of 500 people in a single constituency?
176 Neil
I just checked the BPC rules. you are right.
180 - I dunno, it’s not a service I offer.
182 - What services do you offer?
127…Dr Palmer.i don’t think that you quite grasp the damage that NL has done to middle Britain.the voter turnout will be very high indeed and the result will be a very bloody nose for your people.
183 - If you had read the classified section of Manchester Evening News carefully then you’d know!
175 Skewered
185 - I’m re reading the classfied section now
167. Yesterday I was in Colonia, Uruguay on a delightful day trip. I still live half the time in Buenos Aires. And I still believe Las Malvinas son Argentinas. (The Malvinas are Argentine) I will be flying to the UK, temporarily should the Tories win, as soon as the election is called. I will be working night and day as a volunteer to help Labour win the most important election of a generation.
184 - The only problem with that theory, which is certainly coherent, is that (as Mark Senior has pointed out) opinion polls are finding no more certainty to vote at present than they found in December 2004. While I believe that turnout will increase because a change election is likely to motivate people on all sides to vote, the evidence that turnout will increase dramatically is at present lacking.
The excellent analysis in the OP, as I have noted before, is not a good reason to simply accept the bare statement that “the 2010 general election is going to have a big turnout”. The second statement is an assumption of the model rather than a result. This would be fine if the hypothesis were “high Tory vote causes high turnout”, but the hypothesis is “high turnout causes high Tory vote”, because there is a pool of Conservative voters without a protest option, so high turnout means they are voting in disproportionately large numbers. So the fact that the Conservatives are doing well in polls doesn’t support high turnout in and of itself. We could yet see low turnout and a high Conservative vote, in which case the model would have to be reconsidered.
My other opinion is that election turnout has been on a long-term downward trend across the Western world, as well as at local levels in the United Kingdom. Taking 1979 as the starting point of the analysis, of course we’re going to see the Conservative victories associated with high turnout on average and the Labour victories associated with low turnout on average, because all the Conservative wins are at the start of the time period and vice versa.
188 - You consistently fail to be funny, so why try?!
From the Telegraph:
“Britain’s debt now a ‘riskier proposition’ than Italy’s
The yield on 10-year gilts rose briefly above the 4.1pc level in intraday trading and spent most of the day higher than the yield on benchmark Italian bonds, as fears over Britain’s fiscal credibility continued to haunt markets. The news came as analysts warned that hedge funds and other “smart money” traders had been largely responsible for leading the exodus out of UK government debt.
The Treasury’s cost of borrowing has risen by more than a percentage point since March, despite the Bank of England spending £200bn on gilts through its quantitative easing (QE) programme. Experts put the increase down to worries that this and future governments will either prove incapable of reducing their deficit or will resort to inflation in order to erode it. The combined effect has been to catapult UK government bond yields above those of Italy and Spain in the past few weeks alone.
Although the yields on all government bonds have been pushed higher in part as investors divert their money into the fast-rising equity markets, the comparison between the UK and elsewhere shows that British debt has been increasingly shunned since the pre-Budget report at the start of this month, which was widely criticised for failing to unveil a more ambitious deficit reduction plan. With the credit ratings agencies having warned that unless the next Government scales down spending more radically, they are likely to remove Britain’s top-tier rating, many suspect 2010 could be the most testing year for government fund-raising in a generation.”
Things don’t look good do they.
18
“Labour toff non-dom interferes in UK election and supports Argentina over the Falklands”
makes a good headline.
188…RR,the Falklands are British,dear boy.
188 - Given how badly Brown has run the economy, we may well have to sell the Falklands to the Argentinians.
Now to whom do we flog Scotland off too? Would there be any takers?
188. “And I still believe Las Malvinas son Argentinas. (The Malvinas are Argentine) I will be flying to the UK, temporarily should the Tories win, as soon as the election is called. I will be working night and day as a volunteer to help Labour win the most important election of a generation.”
Is there any chance you could get Labour to adopt this — “Las Malvinas son Argentinas” — for the general election campaign?
My solution to the dispute between Argentina and the UK over the ownership of the Falklands and related territories is simple: Argentina should be invited to buy out Britain’s interest at a price to be determined on a willing buyer/willing seller basis. The proceeds could then be shared with the current inhabitants, who could then decide whether they wished to come to Britain (bearing a very fat cheque) or remain under Argentine rule (with a very fat bank account). It might also help defray the UK’s debt overhang, reduce Britain’s military spend and fits in nicely with the idea of selling non-core assets.
197 Well it’d get the vote out
155 another richard - Re: Brighton Pavilion, who can forget the ComRes poll COMMISSIONED BY THE GREENS just days before the Euro Elections in June, which showed them as having an unbelievable 15% share of the vote nationally, whereas in the actual result they won barely half this percentage. Those considering backing the Greens in this constituency should bear this carefully in mind - all too easy to let heart rule head. Personally, I wouldn’t go anywhere near.
Is it April 1st? I’ve just seen the lead story on the BBC is ‘Do not wreck the recovery, says Brown’.
Delusional doesn’t come close to this - this is Alice Through the Looking-Glass stuff.
I offer the hypothesis that muslim men disproportionately resort to homosexuality because muslim women are kept under lock and key. This was certainly Lawrence of Arabia’s opinion.
200 Surely the polling questions can’t be skewed that far can they?
Or are the Greens only publishing favourable outcomes? I’m torn between believing in ethical polling methods and what feels like ramping.
175.
Ritchie. I am a bit worried about your inconsistent political positioning.
by Mike Smithson December 30th, 2009 at 11:14 am
It is obvious that Richie is Bi-Polar.
We have a lot of these mentally deficients in this country. Mostly supporters of Labour.
Since posting at the top of the thread the only evidence given for a high general election turnout appears to be that the London mayoral election had it. This misses the point that it was Boris, for whom normal rules don’t seem to apply as regards where he gets his support (being almost seen as a reality TV contestant), it was also pre expenses and alongside elections where people knew that their vote would count.
So events and the electoral system tell us that 75% is going to be a very, very, big ask.
If turnout goes over 65% I will be very surprised but, if it gets there or beyond, it is likely that the people voting become disproportionately for ‘others’. A high turnout would help UKIP, Greens and BNP save some deposits and come closer in a seat or two.
200. PfP
I remembered that poll and wasn’t it one where ComRes mysteriously changed their sampling methodology?
I am always suspicious of any poll commissioned by a non-neutral body and my cynical nature suspected a possibility of the Greens commisioning multiple polls in Brighton Pavilion but only releasing the one most advantageous to them.
Anyone doubt that this poll will feature heavily in Green election leaflets?
Does anyone know how much a poll of 500 people in a single constituency would cost? And would the Greens get a discount for multiple polls?
With what’s at stake for the Greens I’m sure they would be willing to spend serious money to get any advantage they can.
204 Does that mean he’s into both sorts of penguins?
198. I’ve often wondered what UK passports would fetch auctioned on the open market. A very basic ” Fit and Proper Person” test to keep out War Criminals and Kiddie Fiddlers but the generally corrupt would be fine.
5000 a year to the highest bidders. Its would be hardly noticible in the context of general immigration and would raise a few bob. If it was a success we could sell more.
200. Agreed.
Furthermore, polls of this kind by any party should be suspect, and I’m surprised at Mike taking particular notice of this one.
If it’s for betting purposes only, he’s on a loser.
208 - Likewise, I never saw the problem with Cash for Questions, except that it shouldn’t have been MPs pocketing the money, it should be the state. Why not charge commercially for the provision of answers - MPs could still be able to ask questions for free on matters of public rather than private importance?
Similarly, what would be wrong in paying the state for honours? It would be a splendid way of the state getting money out of the very rich who would otherwise be looking to avoid tax.
208 Isn’t that the sort of thing Maggie offered residents of Hong Kong to move here during the handover?
O/T, just heard the latest campaign on R5 re the new line up starting on 11 Jan.
Victoria Derbyshire (the faux outrage and whiny inflection drive me wild)
Gabby Logan (The airheads, airhead)
Richard Bacon (Nothing needs to be said.)
So any recommendations of what to listen to between 1000-1600 instead?
A very interesting article by Patrick. The polls have been picking up the ‘Labour + LDs = a constant’ equation, but how do they detect ‘Conservatives + Do Not Vote = a constant’? Most of the polling is based on samples that attempt to replicate voting patterns in 2005, when the DNVs really didn’t vote. And (with the exception of Angus Reid), they enhance the apparent error by a ’shy Labour voter’ correction.
For some time now, my intellect has been telling me that the Conservatives will obtain an overall majority of up to 50 seats, while my instinct says that they will gain a landslide victory. Patrick’s analysis gives us some hard reasons why the latter may occur.
The Brighton Pavillion Green thing is straight out of the Lib Dem play book. Its just they have had the rather touching decency to pay a respected pollster to do the bar chart figures rather than just make them up. It doesn’t matter wether they are accurate its wether they’ll be believed and some one nearer to Brighton will have to comment on that.
What is also interesting is the small but entirely open goal that Lucas has in front of her. 3 debates with three male leaders chaired by 3 male journalists. If the Green press office can’t get some sort of traction and backlash out of that they don’t deserve to win.
Looking at Dec 2004, MORI polling showed that 52% were certain to vote, 64% were 80-100% certain.
For Dec 2009, the same polling shows that 51% are certain to vote with 66% from 80-100% certain.
Where is this evidence of increased turnout? Given that there is going to be betting on this are there really that many people ready to be relieved of the contents of their wallets?
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=698
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/poll_Dec09%20topline.pdf
(note that 70% were supposedly certain to vote just before election day, as per MORI, their polls tend to overestimate the likely turnout).
http://www.ipsos-rsl.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=458
212 I know - it’s awful. I can’t think of a single positive about either this change of line-up or the replacements they’ve brought in late at night.
Donal McIntyre is doing a good job of filling in for Rhod Sharpe between 0100-0400 this week and I was impressed with Max Whatsit who did an hour last week. Hope they give him a regular gig.
I still find it bizarre that two of the best are still filling in - Phil Williams and Asma Mir. Whatever happened to Brian Alexander - I think he got the Ed Stourton treatment.
I’m going to shift to R4 - its a real shame that Mayo has the R2 Drive slot as it means I can’t even switch over to catch him.
Blatant promotion alert:
If anyone would like to follow Ladbrokes’ Political Twitter updates, today might be a good day to start. Free £20 politics bet to our 1000th follower(must be over 18). 989 at the moment.
http://www.twitter.com/ladpolitics
Morning all. Thanks to Jack W at 103 for his congrats. I would promise to perform my duties assiduously, if I knew what they were.
On topic: Whilst I think a 75% turnout is very unlikely, I think Patrick has put his finger on a very important issue, which is that we should consider movement not only between parties, but also differential swing between the StayAtHomes and the various parties.
The idea of a Conservative ‘voter strike’ in 1997, gradually dissipating, is a convincing one at least in some constituencies - I’ve noticed it particularly in Con/LD battlegrounds in the South. Take for example the votes cast in Lewes:
1992: Con 33042, LD 20867, Lab 5758
1997: Con 19950, LD 21250, Lab 5232
Not much evidence there for massive tactical voting or a surge of enthusiasm for the LibDems or Labour, but a strong indication of former Conservative voters simply staying away.
Let’s face it, before Cameron came on the scene, there hasn’t been much of a positive reason to vote Conservative for quite a while; the party was in disarray, confused in its messages, and poorly led. It’s hardly surprising, therefore, that many Conservative-leaning voters simply didn’t bother.
What I would expect to happen in 2010 is a varied pattern where turnout increases in some seats (to the benefit of the Tories, because this will be mainly in the battleground seats), but falls in traditional Labour strongholds (with little electoral effect other than reduced Labour majorities in those seats).
So Richie Rich your true persona is ‘the small red sausage boy from Argentina’ and we are right to infer a psychological state from that moniker you chose for yourself.
Most of this article is complete folly!
206 another richard - you’re quite right, that poll from ComRes was inexplicably unweighted and despite Mike having found unequivocally in my favour, it nevertheless resulted in my not collecting on a bet from a fellow PBer.
Although ICM’s poll was doubtless weighted, the field sample was small.
I believe the Tories will win this seat.
R5 Crikey - just now - USA had intelligence that a Nigerian suicide bomber would attempt to bring down a plane weeks before it happened.
Oh dear… I thought it was bad enough that he’d been allowed onto a plane with no luggage and a one-way ticket.
ken wasabi: “Cameron is dangerous and must be restrained, then removed before he can damage Britain as Labour has.”
lol! Always nice to see Cameron’s progress in nurturing the cuddly new Tories.
103. Of course as a member of the Liberal Democrats I’m already a corporate holder of the order of the Cracked Chamber Pot.
210. Indeed. I think there is considerable scope for encouraging small scale philanthropy if we just admited that we sold honours ( which we do) and published the price tags. Equally if we are that cash scrapped I don’t see why the name of the local sports hall, library or school extension shouldn’t be up for grabs with a basic taste and decency threshold.
221 - The sample wasnt *that* small. I suspect the weighting is more of an issue - it was weighted to the seat’s demographics, a perfectly reasonable approach but one that is likely (in my view) to have boosted the Green’s lead. You should be happy with the poll - makes it more profitable to back your opinion that the Tories will win!
(After reflecting on the poll a bit more I think it is too close to call but that the Greens should probably be slight favourites.)
re 200 PfP This was a perfectly standard ICM poll with just one variation - the Greens were mentioned in the question as one of the parties that would be running in the seat.
I agree with Anthony Wells that this was valid in this case.
All the other aspects were standard ICM practice and as far as I am concerned it is fine. This is unlike the Green commissioned ComRes poll ahead of the June 4th elections which I raised doubts about when it came out.
218 - The Tories in Lewes may have been taken by a UFO.
Have you considered that?
The ICM poll is unreliable not for one but for a combination of reasons:
- relatively small sample
- in a small pool
- over a longish period
- at a difficult time of year
- without a past vote filter
- with a correction for demographics not usually used
None of these alone would make me too doubtful, but all together suggests this is not useful as any indicator for an election at least three months away.
Afternoon all,
212. Don I had enough of Radio 5 talk shows and all their nonsense a while back (I only occasionally listen to it on Saturdays now) and switched to listening to county and local radio. Whilst there is considerably less political content I’ve found I’ve virtually completely stopped shouting at the radio!
You might want to try it out for your area? You get the news without all the BS.
175. OK from the start. Tony Blair is the best prime minister we ever had. I have never known such optimism, energy, dynamism in Britain as we had when he was our leader. He wasn’t perfect, nobody is, but he’s just head and shoulders above everyone in terms of working tirelessly to ensure his government delivered on its promises. He delivered what Obama promised America: real change. He had the conviction that Obama lacks to make change happen.
I honestly don’t remember making that particular post. And even scrolling through all the comments it doesn’t really jog my memory. Maybe I was drunk, or maybe I was tired of being attacked for supporting the government at the time and wanted to get across a serious point. I’m going with the latter.
The fact that I felt the need to forcefully deny being a New Labour supporter in such grand terms says more about your site than about me. I think it has always been pretty obvious I loathe the Tories, and that I am full of admiration for most of what this government has done. But the way New Labour supporters get treated on here is absolutely disgusting.
At least now we can move away from the ridiculous accusation you levelled at me a couple days ago after I praised Gordon Brown. And branded John Hutton essentially irrelevant.
I can honestly say the views I express on here are mine. I come from a working class family who were practically put on the streets by Thatcher’s vile government in the 80s. I will never, ever support those vile bestewards even if it is in my financial interest to do so. They will never change. They will always delightfully make life as miserable as possible for the poorest in society, as long as it means greater riches for them and their millionaire/billionaire friends. They are the party of big business, government-sponsored monopolies and the filthy rich.
Labour has made mistakes without question. But they did what was necessary to form a government and have the ability to introduce things like the minimum wage. The minimum wage that David Cameron and his rich chums all viciously opposed before it was reduced. And the minimum wage that some Tories already attempted to eliminate using the recession as the perfect excuse to further enrich their friends. (a taste of what is to come in the future if they get back into power)
202. I have long suspected that one reason Muslim men have a tendency to gayness is because women in Muslim countries generally look like potatoes.
Why do they look like potatoes? Because they never have to reveal themselves, because of the hijab, burqa, niqab etc, so they just think What the Heck No one Can See, and they eat all the samosas instead - and consequently they blob out, bigtime.
Moreover, there is no evolutionary PUSH towards greater female beauty in Muslim countries, as there is no visual sexual selection by men of the prettiest brides.
i.e. In the west women are getting hotter and hotter as they are forced to compete for mates in a visually-oriented environment: miniskirts, bikinis, thongs and skinny jeans assist the men in making their romantic choice - a choice based mainly on looks.
Also western men get to tup these women before marriage, and so the men can make a truly candid and ruthless assessment of the marital merchandise - even in the sack.
The hottest women therefore breed more, as they are selected by the men, and the virtuous circle of hotness tightens and continues. Contrast this with Saudi or Egypt.
The upshot?
Eventually all women in the west will look like Scarlet Johansson, only sexier, and all women in the Muslim world will look like oversized King Edwards.
At this point even the most desperate and hetero Egyptian will find it physically impossible to impregnate his wife, thus causing Islam to die out as the Middle East turns completely gay.
I hereby nominate this post for the Rogerdamus Most Daring Prediction on PB Award, 2010.
227 tim - Very likely. Lewes is that kind of place. They are keen on crop circles as well.
231 - My sources tell me that the most exciting women’s lingerie is usually bought by Arab women. I’m not sure how you accommodate this within your thesis.
231 - Before the left accuse of being a racist.
I’ve never been intimate with a muslim woman.
So perhaps your thesis has some merit.
231 - My sources tell me that the most exciting women’s lingerie is usually bought by Arab women. I’m not sure how you accommodate this within your thesis.
by antifrank December 30th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
In which sizes?
note, only said for comedic effect. Spent 4 years in the Sultanate of Oman and can readily confirm that there are very many exceptionally hot Arabic women.
230
RR
But the way New Labour supporters get treated on here is absolutely disgusting.
Agreed. They are allowed to discus things. And make comments. In any normal
dictatorshipdemocracy they would be jailed and birched . in public.201 - Delusional doesn’t come close to this - this is Alice Through the Looking-Glass stuff.
In Gordon’s case it’s malice through the looking glass.
231. Very funny SeanT. You should put the whole post into the mouth of one of Tom Knox’s future characters.
231 - Here is a photograph of some Iranian women on a political protest.
http://www.studiolum.com/wang/iran/iranian-women-for-moussavi.jpg
Here is a photograph of some women from Basildon in a beauty contest.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/essex/content/images/2006/06/26/basildon_carnival_court_470_470×352.jpg
In Seans bipolar world I think I may rather prefer Tehran.
All the talk of a possible 75% turnout for the UK election reminds me that turnout here for elections is about 35-40% at most for mid-terms, and around 50% for presidential elections.
Run off elections are simply dire in terms of turnout.
Re: Fire Service Cuts
Risk of fire is a legitimate concern when assessing the allocation of F&R Services resources, but it is NOT the only, or even the most important, consideration.
1) Deaths and injuries from road accidents far exceed those from fires, and the F&R Services are also responsible for attending them. Thus, it can be argued that you should position fire stations near accident black spots. (I am not suggesting that doing so would be sensible.)
2) Risk of incidents must balanced against the expected cost of the incident. Shed fires on allotments are common, but cost little. Thus, it is illogical to position fire stations next door to allotments. Yet, allocating resources based on risk alone would lead to building fire stations on every allotment.
I hope that FRA’s take these issues into consideration, and ignore the political interference that has done so much damage to other public services over the last 40 years.
238. I am considering that: the next Tom Knox is about Atheism versus Religion so it would fit quite nicely.
Perhaps I shall have a maliciously cynical and sarcastic baddie who pokes nasty fun at believers.
Spectator saying his New Year message is going to be a podcast - tonight. I hope the production values are as good as the Copenhagen one, or that the facial expressions match the expenses YouTube experience.
242 - You could combine it with some of Philippe Magnan’s observations about the rise of China and the role in that process of Chinese women. Perhaps you could put those in the mouth of a beneficently positive goodie.
re 228. The poll was past weight voted in the standard ICM manner.
Read ICM description of how it carried out the poll before making such assertions.
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2009_dec_greens_brighton_poll.pdf
You are following the PB golden rule number 2 that defines a rogue poll as “being one where you don’t like the numbers”.
239. Of course, I was joking. Some Muslim women are indeed very tasty. Look at this lucky Muslim guy ogling his bird on the beach:
http://tinyurl.com/yjsalbg
239. Lighten up tim. We haven’t entered your puritan labour hell yet.
Richie Rich December 30th, 2009 at 12:13 pm “Tony Blair is the best prime minister we ever had. I have never known such optimism, energy, dynamism in Britain as we had when he was our leader.”
Political Betting Order of the Brown Nose 2009.
So good that you had to live somewhere else.
246 - I have a friend who travels a lot with his job who for years thought Lebanese women were the most beautiful he’d ever seen.
Then he went to Aden and won’t stop talking about it.
re 245. I should add on a personal note that the only circumstances in which I would vote tactically for Labour or the Tories would be to stop the Greens winning a seat.
The Greens are nasty authoritarian fascists. I loathe them.
250 - Awww, but we love you so much!
235 Miss World winners by country - not surprising India and Venezuela come top.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_world#Best_Performances_by_Country
231. All very plausible. But could the great Tom Knox rise to a paragraph such as:
“Our youths began indifferently to slake one another’s few needs in their own clean bodies … friends quivering together in the yielding sand, with intimate hot limbs in supreme embrace.”
Like most people I only read Seven Pillars for the ironic self-deprecation.
250. “The Greens are nasty authoritarian fascists.”
People should be reminded of this every time they think of voting for them as a cuddly lefty alternative.
252 - Miss World winners by country - not surprising India and Venezuela come top.
Well who doesnt come when they’re on top?
Oh
#151, by Nick Palmer MP December 30th, 2009 at 10:51 am
…and if there was a Highlands Disease Day I doubt if they would tell us much about it either.
I saw that documentary on Sky 301 a few months ago: Doomsday. Sky is the News Channel!
Meanwhile, back on the global warming we must do something front, President Szarkozy came up with a real winner: let’s TAX the polluters. So the French government came up with a bill that taxes carbon emissions, except for aviation, heavy industry and thousand of exemptions for the biggest polluters.
The French constitutional court has just thrown it out as unconstitutional, on the grounds that there were so many exemptions it made the bill unfair.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/business/energy-environment/31carbon.html
250, 254 - I may well vote Green at the next election (second favourites at present, behind the Lib Dems, but not far off the pace). I probably would not do so in Brighton Pavilion, however, because my aim is not to get the Greens elected when I vote Green, but to get the major parties to concentrate on environmental matters more. There is scarcely a single specific Green policy that I agree with. I very much doubt that my line of thought is unusual.
255 - TSE you remind me of the man who went to the “Premature Ejaculators Anonymous” meeting, but got there too early
258 - “but to get the major parties to concentrate on environmental matters more”
You dont think a first Green mp would achieve that much more effectively than a “wasted” Green vote outside Brighton Pavillion? Or you are worried that Caroline Lucas could take the whole system down if elected?
252 - All personal taste I guess.
When I was single and used to try and pull at Airports I thought it would make sense for check in desks to be arranged alphabetically, which conveniently for me would’ve led to Air India, Air Iran, Air Israel and Air Italy to be in a row.
For SeanT he seems to feel the same about Bangkok, Basildon and Billericay.
261. And Aer Lingus. Best name ever.
259 - I prefet to think of it as efficient time management rather than PE
Ritchie Rich, were you not the muppet banned from DefenceTalk and/or WorldAffairsBoard for talking twaddle….
262 - Reminds me of the Yes Prime Minister
“No, we don’t want alphabetical seating at the Abbey, you’d have Iran & Iraq next to each other, with Israel and Jordan in the same pew, we’d be in danger of starting world war 3″
260 - On this, I suspect I am a fairly unusual voter. In 1992 I cast an anti-tactical vote for the Lib Dems in a Labour/Tory marginal because I didn’t want to dignify either Labour or the Conservatives with my vote, given the campaign that both had fought. In 1997, I had a poster in my window that read “Don’t vote” (I went to the polling station and drew in my own box, writing against it the words “Vote Apple Tango”, on the ground that it had conducted the best campaign). So wasting my vote is not something that concerns me, indeed is something I quite welcome.
249-Lebanese pop stars I used to watch on Middle Eastern music channels were saucy enough.
258 antifrank - I am sure that is a very common reason for voting for minority parties. In the same way, a vote for UKIP is not necessarily a vote for leaving the EU, and a vote for the SNP is not necessarily a vote for Scottish independence.
I haven’t yet worked out what signal a vote for the LibDems is intended to send.
Will David Cameron follow the Thatcher line on this issue ??
Margaret Thatcher complained bitterly in private about the numbers of immigrants coming to Britain from south Asia, saying they were being given council houses at the expense of “white citizens”, it was disclosed today.
Papers released to the National Archives at Kew, west London, under the 30-year rule cast fresh light on the former Prime Minister’s attitude towards race and immigration.
269-Your point being?
270.
My point being what is Cameron’s policy towards immigration/asylum seekers being allowed into the UK and being housed at the expense of white citizens ?
In calculating turnout at the General Election I hope the returning officers will use the electorate eligible to vote rather than total electorate. Non-UK nationals cannot vote at UK elections and have the letter ‘G’ aside their name on the register. Some London constituencies have quite a high number of non-UK nationals on the register and always have a lower turnout percentage. In Dundee East we have about 700. If you just used total electorate it skews the actual turnout percentage.
271-Hopefully he’s against. Would be interesting to hear his point of view though.
272 ‘UK election’ should read ‘General Election’
271 - I would imagine that, like most normal people, he’d be very much against the idea.
The problem is that you’re trying to stir something which isn’t actually a problem; fewer than 5% of council properties in the UK are allocated to foreign nationals, and the first criteria for getting a property is that of ‘need’. This was not the case in the 70s, when Thatcher was talking about it. In fact, it was because of her that the rules changed to make the system fairer.
258. Relatedly, here’s my Christmas vox pop round up of British political opinion.
WARNING: INCOMING ANECDOTES, TAKE COVER
In the last few weeks I have socialised and mingled in lower middle class Kent, the haute bourgeois Home Counties, bohemian parts of the West End, notably lefty Camden, suburban Bristol, and all parts of Cornwall from posh Tory corners to working class holdouts. I’ve also bean leafletting with the Mebyon Kernow PPC for Truro.
My sense from all this is of a country (at least England) that is dejected by Labour. They don’t quite hate Labour as much as they hated the Tories in 1997, but they do find the government risible, pathetic and depressing, and some (left and right) have a deep personal loathing for Brown.
I sense that the Tories will win because Labour are rejected and reviled. Cameron is certainly not loved, he’s not even especially liked. Many people don’t care about the Tories. They just want Labour gone.
All very predictable.
However the more surprising upshot of my one man straw polling campaign is the widespread contempt for the whole Global Warming/Climate Change eco-hysterical agenda.
People on the left and right said to me - unprompted - how shocked they were by the email scandal, how suspicious they were of the AGW thesis, how they were tired of being lectured and hectored by rich “green” nitwits.
I did not encounter a single person who *cares* about environmental issues in a positive way, I did not meet a single person who “believes” in AGW. Some, as I say, were openly contemptuous. Left and right.
I must say this surprised me. The political classes are obsessed with man made climate change. Yet no one I have recently talked with is convinced it is even happening - as far as I can tell.
Was I just very unlucky in who I met? Or do the polls, which show green issues way down the list of priorities, reveal a truth?
If my hunch is correct Cameron would do well to back away from his windmill-erecting, husky-hugging bollocks. Only Guardianistas *care* about this. The country as a whole does not; and some voters are quietly but seriously hostile.
265. By contrast, when Scotland takes its seat in the General Assembly next to Saudi Arabia they’ll have plenty to talk about.
269 Source?
That looks like a conflation of two separate statements, one concerning possible riots or demonstrations as result of Vietnamese Boat people getting council homes as refugees in preference to white citizens and the other being that Mrs Thatcher thought accepting refugees preferable to further immigrants, mentioning in that case the one & a half million from South Asia.
276 - SeanT your sense of what the public of England think / feel about the whole ‘global warming’ coincides with what most people here in the US think / feel about it.
My daughter who returned from 3 weeks in England yesterday also made a comment about it.
276-I know no one who believes in the whole scam. If an opinion is proferred it is to say it is a scam and an excuse to raise taxes.
I admit my circle may not be typical as most also espouse views on a whole range of topics comparable to mine. “Bigots” to you elfties.
#230, Richie Rich December 30th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Feckwot:
Blair could not introduce real change: Brown would not allow it. Understanding politics may improve your appreciation within this site.
The fact that you choose to live in a neo-fascist nation, run by clans and crooks who employ chavista-like methods of employment shows you to a) to be no liberal and b) somewhat sinister.
Please forward your postal-code (in Buenos Aries). I am sure that the Royal Navy would like to - :cough: - post you a response…!
Happy feckin’ New Year…!
new thread
279-The whole hysteria seems to be concentrated in the UK MSM. I put it down to Tony’s desire to “lead the world” on the issue and the MSM taking the bait hook line and sinker.
I do not detect the same level of hysteria from news outlets from a whole range of other countries.
281. I thought textual analysis by OGH had revealed Richie Rich’s postcode to be SW1. That’s no reason to stand down the RN, though.
I don’t think its plausible to call Conservatives + DNV “the Right,” and certainly not to the extent that you could assert that “the total vote of the ‘Left’ is a lot less than the total vote of the ‘Right’”
All the Tory line mirroring the DNV line suggests is that there are *some* DNVers who can be convinced to vote Tory under certain circumstances. In all election years there is still a huge untapped reserve of people who did not vote who have never swung either way and may be just as likely to swing to the left if they were theoretically forced to do so.
Just because the Conservatives have a history of picking up DNV votes doesn’t mean that they can pick up all of them or even most of them - DNV is not a homogeneous group at all. While knowing that the Tories do have a history of leaking some support to DNVs could be useful for policy planners, there is still no basis for including DNVs as a part of some silent right-wing majority.
My sources tell me that the most exciting women’s lingerie is usually bought by Arab women. I’m not sure how you accommodate this within your thesis.
by antifrank December 30th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Do you not know the famous stories from the harem in Topkapi? And that in Turkey a cucumber is called simply ’something for salad’ (salatalik).
Apologies for spelling but I can’t find the code for the Turkish “i” without a dot on top. So it is Topkapuh and salataluhk.
Thank you, Patrick, for an excellent article and welcome to the Threadwriter Club!
253. In 1979 there was a Tory campaign badge which read ‘Put A Woman On Top For A Change.’ ;0.
From the chart it would seem that Labour in 1983 under Foot and the Tories in 2001 under Hague both recorded their lowest ever vote at about 8 million odd. So it would seem that there are about 8 million die-hard left or right-wingers no matter what the circumstances (although whether Brown Labour will go any lower than Foot remains to be seen!)
If you seriously think turnout will be 75% in 2010 you are delusional
Seems to me that the case could be made that a proportion of the blue vote in 1992 won’t be coming back because they are dead. Similarly a large part of that DNV section may well be made up of potential first time voters.