Should the Indy/Comres have heeded Sir Humphrey’s advice?
December 22nd, 2009Isn’t it all about how the questions are framed?
The above clip always makes me chuckle and although it’s from a comedy show and is perhaps a bit over the top it’s a useful reminder about the hazards of non-standard polling questions.
So what are we too make of the poll findings from the ComRes survey that the Indy is leading on this morning.
The first non-voting related question asked whether respondees agreed that “A Conservative Government would mainly represent the interests of the well-off rather than ordinary people” to which there was 52% to 44% agreement
This was followed directly afterwards with “A Labour Government would protect frontline public services such as health and education better than a Conservative Government would” which produced a split of 47% to 46% in agreement.
Finally, ComRes asked without referring to any party whether the sample agreed that “The threshold for paying inheritance tax should be raised to £1 million”. To this 55% said they agreed and 38% said they didn’t.
Surely, as Richard Nabavi suggested on the previous thread a more neutral approach would have been to ask:
“Which party has the better policies for health and education?”
“Which of the Labour and Conservative parties is more appealing?”
At this stage the party strategists want data that will help them frame their approaches better and I don’t think the ComRes/Indy formulation is helpful. Taking too much notice of any of the responses, including the IHT one, could lead to flawed conclusions.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
first
Mike, first and have you been reading my mind? - see fpt 273.
273.everyone forgets Deborah Mattinson runs comres. Deborah is Gordon’s pollster. Comres can always be trusted to come up with a friendly poll to Gordon when the chips are down.
Polling organizations are businesses that expect to be paid and they get paid on 2 things
a) accuracy and b) getting the result their customers want
At the moment a) is not so important - it will be close to the election, b) is more important. If b) is in conflict with a) there are many ways they can change things - see the excellent exposition of how this is done in ‘Yes Minister’
The BPC is like the PCC - it’s a self-regulatory body run by the pollsters.
It can’t be reasonable at the moment for a telephone pollster to phone a 1000 people and get just 190 tories to respond - but that’s what happened recently.
Firstflight - I’ve deleted your post that was #2 because it is factually incorrect and possibly defamatory.
Deborah Mattinson DOES NOT run ComRes and when she does poll she will endeavour to get accurate results - not numbers to please the client. There is no point in parties spending huge sums on polling if they are going to be misled.
OK Mike, sorry you’d better delete 273 from previous thread as well…
Let me repost the other part…
Polling organizations are businesses that expect to be paid and they get paid on 2 things
a) accuracy and b) getting the result their customers want
At the moment a) is not so important - it will be close to the election, b) is more important. If b) is in conflict with a) there are many ways they can change things - see the excellent exposition of how this is done in ‘Yes Minister’
The BPC is like the PCC - it’s a self-regulatory body run by the pollsters.
It can’t be reasonable at the moment for a telephone pollster to phone a 1000 people and get just 190 tories to respond - but that’s what happened recently.
define well off in this question.
had it been framed. “do you think the tories are more concerned about those who work for a living than those claiming on benefits then the answer would probably be in the affirmative.”
or even “do you think labour is concerned sufficiently about those out working for a living, as well as those who are claiming benefits?”
firstlight40: “It can’t be reasonable at the moment for a telephone pollster to phone a 1000 people and get just 190 tories to respond - but that’s what happened recently.”
That’s a very different criticism to the one Mike’s making, and I don’t think it’s right. If the Tories are at around 40% in the proportion of the sample who care one way or the other and pass the likely voter screen, and there’s a known effect - that pollsters compensate for in various ways in their headline figures - where more Labour supporters answer the phone and agree to be polled than Tory ones - pollsters who are doing their job properly should occasionally get something like that kind of number of Tories in their sample.
The approach most British pollsters seem to be taking is to ask their standard voting intention first, and make a sincere effort to get the most accurate answer they can with that one, then let their clients do their Sir-Humphrey-esque tinkering with the minor questions. Seems like a reasonable trade-off to me - though the upshot, like Mike says, is that you should take the results of the minor questions with a big pinch of salt.
Wouldn’t these questions have been chosen by The Independent? A newspaper wants different things from a political poll than ‘party strategists’.
Richard Nabavi, as usual, is right. However, the leading questions have some use, because they show that the public can be led, particularly on the question of who the Tories would govern for.
The question about “appealing alternative” should send a chill down Labour strategists’ spines - the relevant figure is not the 49% who say no but the 45% who say yes. If the Tories poll 45% next year, they will run rampant. Anyone who thinks that the Tories are an appealing alternative will seriously consider voting for them.
7 - antifrank
I thought the November ICM finding that: “…53% would be angry or disappointed at news of a Labour win” was the clearest election message I’ve yet seen from the pollsters.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/16/cameron-closing-deal-icm-poll
6 Why didn’t the Indy just ask “those bastard Tories, they eat babies don’t they?” if they want to reinforce their own prejudices…
I’m all in favour of a range of political views in the newspapers, but the Indy (which I used to buy, back in the day) has just become a parody of a paper. It won’t be mourned by the Right or the Left when it folds in the New Year…
9 - The government buys a lot of advertising. Perhaps this is marketing?
Any lessons learned after last winter?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8425718.stm
As I said the Independent is not Independent it’s s filthy Labour rag!
Questions were asked with that poitical bias in the background and mainly in Glasgow from those silly numbers.
The real position is, I believe C40/41 Lab25/26 L20
11 - My mother was stuck in traffic from 4-11 pm last night. (Reading)
More importantly, Amazon were going to deliver my Christmas presents yesterday!
The Indies another example of carousel PR that labour are having a crack at, after their last efforts around the Sun’s Brown tape (organised newspaper website comments, then use the quotes in your media response as proof of public opinion)
No doubt today, labour apologists will quote the Indie headline and poll as proof that its game on, despite, as Mike has highlighted, the clear bias in how some of the questions were set.
6. I made my original post in the last thread so I agree the comment about numbers of tories found does not relate to Mike’s point.
I’m sure ARS have been commissioned to be neutral and accurate and it’s possible their results may be more accurate as a result - too early to say IMHO.
Newspaper opinion polls are not necessarily commissioned to be accurate they are commissioned to frame an argument or position - no doubt the internal party ones as Mike says are different.
But polling organizations are not neutral bastions of integrity - people working within them have agendas as well.
Its a stupid question really when you think about it as so many “ordinary people” will still vote Conservative even if they feel it veers more towads the rich than them.It was ever thus.Its a stupid as believing that only so called “ordinary people” will vote Labour.
Alastair Stewart was 40/1 to host the first TV debate - those who backed Sir Trevor McDonald down from 100/1 can count themselves a little unlucky imo.
Do the polling companies ask the voting intention question first and then the non voting questions second? Or is it the other way round?
Leading question. - Is there any grit in the South East or is it just lacking in Basingstoke.
17 - Good result for you, was Boulton your big loser?
On the topic, these questions are their to give the newspapers some material, nothing wrong in that, although the leading IHT question was strange.
The big money is for those inheriting £2mllion not one.
As John McEnroe said “You cannot be serious!”
Since when has party political propaganda (from whichever direction) been a reasonable basis for a supposedly objective survey question?
This must raise questions about ComRes’s professionalism as well as further damaging the reputation of a formerly great newspaper.
It’s starting to look as if Tapestry’s allegations on recent threads might not be too far-fetched after all.
re 19. Tim - the Tory proposal is for a £1m IHT threshold not £2m.
Please stop repeatedly issuing your misleading figure otherwise I might think that you have an ulterior purpose.
9. Hasn’t the Indy just been bought by a Russian billionaire? I expect it has more than a few weeks left in it if so. Not that that means it will necessarily become a better paper.
17 - Sympathy from a bookie! I’m not sure if I should feel consoled or desperate!
Perdix whoever he might be, ahem, was suggesting that Com RES have quite close Labour Party affiliations. Some female personnage apparently in charge. Are we meant to start digging out who he means? It seemed like a big hint to me.
Except tim, the big saving of Dead Millionaires Tax is for those inheriting from an estate of less than a million…
Perhaps someone will poll the question “Do you think it is fair that only the estates of millionaires should pay a death tax?”
8 - Perhaps unwisely, I have been using that particular datum for some weeks to help me set my betting position. I would not have put as much weight on it if it had not matched exactly my own interpretation of the public mood.
Perhaps tim is getting confused by St Vince, who upped the definition of “mansion” from £1m to £2m….
Thankfully I didn’t enter that market - too many unpredictables. I’m still sore at the near miss on Mandelson for EUHCFA, who wasn’t even priced up when I visited my local Ladbrokes!
27 One thing tim isnt is confused, its absolutely deliberate.
21 -Leading question -” Under Labour the Osborne family get £1.3 Million tax free inheritance under the Conservatives it will be £4Million - is that the correct choice for Britain”
Depends what you ask.
But the ulterior motive (which I freely admit) is also the truth.
Tories plan to raise inheritance tax threshold to £2 million
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/2663564/Tories-plan-to-raise-inheritance-tax.html
All of these things depend on the general narrative, and with Zac and Ashcroft playing at the same time the Tories know they have an issue.
On another subject, what do you make of the Lib Dems rise on the Seats market, they went up again last night on the debate announcement I see.
23, it must be irritating as hell though. Similar to those who backed bankers bonuses in the BUdget, yet Darling managed not to refer to them.
I have, as I said last night, little faith in the accuracy of the ComRes poll. Labour too high, Tories too low.
It’s also a very interesting thought that ARS may benefit from having a clear mandate to be objective and neutral. Leading questions are moronic.
22 David, hadn’t seen that before - although Lebedev has only entered into negotiations…nothing invested yet.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/independent-confirms-sale-talks-with-lebedev-1844467.html
Maybe the fate of the Indy will be to end up being given away free at Tube stations too…
3. Polling organizations are businesses that expect to be paid and they get paid on 2 things…b) getting the result their customers want
Don’t be a twit.
30. Tim. There is a danger that, after a few more hundred posts like that, you could start to become a bit boring on IHT.
On topic, I’d agree with those who assume that the questions were set by the client. They are leading but once the full list is available in the order in which the questions were put, there’s still value in the results.
The disappointing result for the Tories is the ‘protect mainly the well-off’, which shows that Labour’s campaigning is having some effect on that front.
The disappointing result for Labour (and a somewhat contradictory answer compared with the previous question - in fact, especially after the previous question) is that Labour is only barely ahead on the ‘protect frontline services’, which given how Labour has slurged mightily over the last few years, suggests that many of the public think it hasn’t had much result and that there’s scope for significant efficiency savings or that the Tories won’t cut or that even if the Tories would, Labour would do just as much. As the Tories have already begun the mood music towards less spending, Labour should be worried about that finding.
Tim - no more mentions of the £2m threshold please.
The effective LD Spread is 53-55 and that is about the highest it has been.
I will bet my EVEN Ranch on 54- and anyone sensible can have 55+.
I’m here all week !
32. Ah right - that was the story I’d heard. I thought it had gone further than that. Thanks for the clarification.
37 - Ladbrokes are still offering 8/1 on the 70-79 seat band, which has to be cracking odds.
35, yep, users of frontline services have noticed, I suspect, that the money has been spent on the staff rather than the users.
A propos, it’s a mystery to me why benefit leaflets are printed in so many different languages. We speak English in this country. If you don’t speak it well enough to understand how to fill in a claim for benefits, you don’t speak it well enough to work so you aren’t entitled to those benefits.
The direct and indirect savings from a simple reform along these lines will be worthwhile.
Ah! Smithson’s golden rule in evidence this morning, rubbish any poll that does not agree with ARS.
Nice juicy story from the Mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237621/The-sleazy-mystery-deepens-Lithuanian-blonde-WAS-escort-girl-police-WILL-question-Camerons-tycoon-pal.html
It is crucially important to know whether the stupid leading questions were asked before the voting intention one.
And IF the leading questions were asked first, it partly negates the headline question and would give rise to the suspicion that firstlight has a valid point.
Can we find this out?
41 - So now Cameron is sleazy because of suspicions that one of his friends is?
Desperate.
Mike - in the Zanussi of spin that makes up much of pb.com’s posts in the run-up to an election, I’m not sure why you keep singling out tim (three or four times in the last 24 hours). The factual position is that the Tory proposal is for a threshold of £1m for single people, creating a £2m threshold for couples (because the Tories also propose that the first to die can transfer the full £1m allowance to ther partner). The Telegraph was the first to point it out. Obviously tim is being partisan in harping on it, but no more than peoople going on about Bower’s opinion of Brown or Labour getting money from the unions.
39 Even if Cruddas holds his seat shouldn’t Labour put him forward? Seems a better candidate than Ken especially for the country generally who will watch the mayor as a national figure even if they didn’t vote for him.
45 - If he holds his seat it would be more sensible than if he loses (depending on how he compares to a national swing).
I quite like Cruddas to be honest.
39- I am a bit like the Paul Whitehouse character, the man in the pub who agrees with the last person who spoke; except that I always disagree with the last person who spoke !
I have a bunch of people over here telling me “Lib Dems 60+” and another bunch over there saying “Lib Dems 50-”.
My own investigations incline me towards the latter view but the danger is of getting caught up in ones own feedback.
38. My understanding is that Lebedev is a Labour supporter. There has been a marked change of editorial at the ES since he bought it.
48 - There’s less of it
44 Nick, perhaps tim gets stick because he is deliberately trying to distract from the Tories’ popular position on IHT, which is that it should only be paid by the (rich) few. Unlike Labour, who have IHT paid by the many - most because they have been caught up in the property price bubble which Gordon Brown promised to prevent.
Isn’t it standard practice to ask the voting intention question first, or very near to the beginning at least?
Stop whining nick
46 I don’t think that if he was beaten that should stop him running for Mayor. Most people including London Labour would simply chalk him up as a victim of Brown’s Leadership with it being nothing to do with him individually. Many Tory MPs who were personally popular were swept away in 1997 regardless.
Tim.
Something you might want to ask yourself, when IHT was introduced how much revenue did it bring in, secondly how many households were effected by it.
Then ask how often this tax been index linked to changes in asset prices under Gordon Brown?
On the other hand is this tax actually taking up the time of IFA, accountants and lawyers who could be doing other more productive things than finding ways round Brown’s crazed tax system?
49. The ES certainly has it in for Boris. That’s quite a turnaround.
24. Given that Mike refers to Deborah Mattinson at post no. 1, I think you can safely assume that she’s the lady in question. As to why she might not automatically be the first choice to run a nonpartisan polling organisation, I suggest you check the archives at Guido’s blog, especially anything to do with Opinion Leader Research and the Smith Institute. For example -
http://order-order.com/tag/deborah-mattinson/
However, Mike is saying that she doesn’t run Comres and even if she did wouldn’t do anything to damage the firms reputation, so I’m not sure how relevant any of this is.
44. Ever heard of indexation, and fiscal drag?
I see tim is trying to prove his £2 million IHT threshold stance by constant repetition and using one story from the telegraph, reminds me of all his other fantasies.
Comment from Nick Robinson’s blog
At 08:47am on 22 Dec 2009, KL wrote:
As someone who lives in Gordon Brown’s constituency and has the opportunity to vote for or against him, I do want the debates to be shown in Scotland. I don’t understand why the SNP aren’t happy with debates in Scotland - they don’t field any candidates outside Scotland, they don’t vote on any issues which don’t relate to Scotland at Westminster, and Alex Salmond isn’t even standing as a Westminster candidate.
The Scottish debate could have Jim Murphy, David Mundell, Alistair Carmichael and Salmond. It could even be broadcast nationally if it’s shown on Sky News or BBC News. It would allow a clear and close examination of issues in Scotland which are relevant to the Scottish people - or is that what the SNP want to avoid?
Good Morning Triple Debate Voters For Nick Palmer Worldwide
Meanwhile …. URW upthread and last night …. why URW ?? often I think of lavatory plumbing - where’s the URW pipe ?!?! …. I digress old chap.
The notionals for the Lib Dems run at 67. For the past few months I’ve run slightly ahead of the spreads in the mid 50’s. More recently I’ve re-evaluated that score and moved it to 60. Today I’m moving that score north again to 65 on account of the debate news.
I’ve said before but it’s worth repeating. UNS is useless for yellow peril seats. Look at them individually to mark their overall score.
I don’t give this advice lightly. My present exposure on this and other political markets now runs north of £50K with my potential spread win/loss ratio not factored in.
60 Indeed Jack W. The debates alter affairs but I would not be surprised now to see a slight decrease in vote % but increase in seats. What do you think.
61 Punter. For the Lib Dems ?
47 - I decided some time back that I am hopelessly confused about Lib Dem prospects in general and (aside from a minor foray where I backed them at bands from 30-59) I’m confining myself in relation to them to specific constituency seats where I have more of a feel for what’s going on. My two - not particularly earthshattering - conclusions are:
1) The Lib Dems will not make sweeping gains from Labour
2) Good Lib Dem MPs have a much better chance against Tory challengers than bad Lib Dem MPs
My bets are placed accordingly. As for the rest, I’m open-minded.
56. However, Mike is saying that she doesn’t run Comres and even if she did wouldn’t do anything to damage the firms reputation.
Now that’s a complicated sentence.
Analysis
QUESTION - Does Deborah Mattinson run Com Res or not? Surely that could be given a straight answer. Whether people support Conservatives or not is opinion. But surely who manages the pollster should not be a question requiring opinion or analysis. That one requires merely a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’.
As for Mike is saying etc, I think it’s well known that Mike Smithson is not keen on facing down libel suits, and he avoids criticising people. In fact, as I have seen, every time he sees an ass-hole, he runs over and kisses it. It’s the secret of his great success in an otherwise casualty-strewn business (politics). Mike saying nice things about people means nothing.
Mind you Guido slagging people off is not always proof positive of their guilt either.
VERDICT - further research required.
62. Yes.
59 When the SNP have a chance to win 25% of the seats in the HoC then they would have a legitimate case for appearing in the main tv debates. But at present they will only put up candidates in a small part of the country, just 8%….. Regional party = Regional debates.
David Rod @42:
“It is crucially important to know whether the stupid leading questions were asked before the voting intention one.”
They weren’t.
http://www.comres.co.uk/page1901365733.aspx
60.JackW. My full name is U.R.Wochuwyz, hence the URW.
My ‘thang’ is that I listen to everyone worth listening to and the world is my punter. My speciality is massive turnover with a tiny margin.
I am not a directional player and ideally like to hold my biggest positions for less than twenty seconds.
My investigations tell me that the Lib Dems are not favourite to beat 54 Seats and I can bet that way and *prove* it to small stakes.
Nonethless I have to respect the views of the man I voted for as pb.com Tipsterer of the Year in 2008.
61/65 Punter. I think not.
I was working on a starting base of 20% for the Lib Dem to increase 2-4% during the campaign. I think it likely the starting base will now be 1-2% higher and with the campaign/debate bounce will have a wider range of -2% - 6%. The latter broader range caused by the debate potential for greater harm or loss.
Thus my corrected Lib Dem range is now 19-28% - A huge range. Lots of betting opportunities.
The seat range is also now much broader 50 - 80 !! …. as I indicated upthread 65 is my present position.
The Mail, (love that paper) more-n-more convinced its beloved Tory Party is firmly under the control of a bunch of coke sniffing playboys.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1237651/Mr-Austere-flips-Mr-Sunshine.html
Now is the season to be jolly etc etc.
70. If the Mail aren’t careful people might begin to think they have an agenda….
16 - Re “ordinary people” the Tories would never have won so many elections in the 20th century without millions of working class votes.
44 Nick you should concentrate more on trying to keep Anna soubry’s majority below 10,000 and less defending an odious little smearer who seemingly spends every waking hour on PB smearing people instead of talking policies.
Defend your party giving away 1/3 of our gold reserves
Defend your party for trashing our savings, turning our bank shares into junk bonds
Defend your party for lecturing us about saving enough for retirement when you have robbed £125 billion from the pension funds of the private sector while nicely topping up the final salary schemes of your pals in the public sector.
In my case my Standard Life fund is now worth 2/3 of its value when John Major was in Government.
your lot deserve to go down and go down for good and your former leader should be in the Hague facing war crimes charges.
71
They have! its to get Stephen Glover invited to all the, ‘best’ parties, ‘cos if you don’t.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1237638/COMMENTARY-But-greatest-mystery–Earth-leader-Her-Majestys-Opposition-doing-party.html?
You get a great write up.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100020499/now-gordon-brown-wants-to-police-the-entire-world-how-controlling-can-a-freak-get/
Quasimodo in Number 10, hunched, scowling over his desk, has devised yet another plan to police, to increase surveillance, to indulge his obsession with extending his short-lived control over as many people as possible. Gordon Brown, who now seems to have lost his last tenuous grip on reality, wants the European Union to police the carbon emissions of the whole world. That is the leitmotif of New Labour – and, by extension, all Westminster – government: control, bans, observation, intrusion, diktat.
Balked of a legal agreement on imaginary manmade global warming at Copenhagen, Quasimodo and Nicolas Sarkozy are working on plans to create a “European monitoring organisation” to oversee different countries’ actions on carbon emissions. Barack Obama – the leading control freak in the liberal pantheon – has suggested spy satellites could be used.
68 URW. Bloody hell, that’s some scrabble score of a name !!
54 seats is a perfectly reasonable assessment. All I’d ask you to look at is how you get there. Which seats in gains/losses get you to 54. It might be instructive.
Also “hold my biggest position for less than twenty seconds ….” ???? …. It reminds of something, long ago !!
Jack W is 107.
70 Which would be what? I’m mystified as to what the agenda of the supposedly Tory-supporting Mail and Telegraph is these days.
While we’re slagging off pollsters, I don’t know if anyone’s posted this piece by Mark Blumenthal about Strategic Vision, the US pollster who appear to have been making their polls up.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/mp_20091221_3652.php
[The source] recalls his frustration. “Most of these questions have been out there since 2004 but no matter how many times it was pitched to first local, and then national media, no one would write about it,” he said. He also points out polls the firm conducted early in an election cycle, especially in Georgia, had real-world consequences. They helped shape elite opinion and candidate fundraising.
“The most troubling fact,” he adds, “is that if Strategic Vision had simply responded to AAPOR [about a routine inquiry into primary polling errors], the press would still be covering their polls.”
69 Good points. WRT Debates Jack W Although I agree Cameron is running a risk I do not concur that Brown isn’t either. I don’t subscribe to the idea that Brown only has to show up to score an advatage for him. I feel he is quite capable with his disdain of opponents of doing a GHW Bush looking at watch moment. I also suggest that he is at least as much at risk from Clegg starring as Cameron is given his lower popularity. YS has already suggested some urban seats with 10-20% majorities over Clegg’s party are behaving not in the usual way. I wonder if Clegg stars and reminds them there is a not Labour but not Tory party out there this could add to surprises.
GDP revised up to -0.2%.
53 - That is why I look at how he compares with the rest of the Brownian victims rather than just dismiss him if he loses.
Morning all.
72 – Well said Easterross…And agree that it is most odd that PBs most recognisable apologists for this wretched Government never discuss their own policies.
68 Jack have you factored in the loss of up to 6 seats in Scotland including possibly 2 to Labour!!
79-That still means we were in recession technically doesnt it???
- “Isn’t it all about how the questions are framed?”
My own personal favourite of this genre was the recent ORB/Scottish Conservative Party poll. This particular question is a classic - they ought to put it in a Market Research Society booklet on how not to conduct an opinion poll:
- “Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree that the SNP stand up for Scotland but are
ineffective when it comes to Westminster?”
Now, as it happens, 74% of respondents agreed with the statement, but guess what: this was spinned by the Unionist press as a terrible result for the SNP!! Errr… why?
Note the way that they pose the positive aspect first, and then the wee negative, snipey subclause at the end. They know that the vast majority of Scots consider the SNP to be pro-Scottish and to stand up for Scotland (even the voters who do not vote for us), so they know that nearly everyone’s first instinct will be to say ‘Agree’. So simply pop on the negative ending and Bob’s your uncle: yet another anti-SNP story spun out of thin air.
Can I nominate this question for some kind of award?
Do the MRS and BPC care that their members are behaving in such a disgraceful fashion? ORB ought to be kicked out of the BPC for this behaviour.
http://www.opinion.co.uk/Documents/ORBScottishVotersTables.pdf
79 - IIRC Most analysts had been expecting a large upward revision.
JackW, I hesitate to take issue with one of PB’s titans, but in what circumstances could you see the Lib Dems getting to 28%?
I should note that if the Lib Dems poll 28% at the next general election, I have undertaken to Irfan Ahmed to upload to YouTube film of me riverdancing to B*witched’s C’est la vie while wearing a ginger wig and a stars and stripes shirt. So I do have a keen interest in your answer.
85 - larger…only -0.1%
66 - Excellent, thank you.
So another wild alteration from one of our pollsters. The opposite direction to Mori.
It’s all very odd at the moment.
75 Jack W, me thinks URW is taking the mickey.
U.R.Wochuwyz = You are what you is
The Guardian are reporting the recession “all but ended”…
That is a bit like saying that South Africa “all but won” the cricket.
They didnt and it hasnt.
79. Yes not much joy for the bunker there - market had expected an upward revision to GDP growth to -0.1% or even a flat reading.
In the details, while contruction was revised up a lot, the other production industries were revised down slightly, and surprisingly so were services - especially business services. I’d say these details reduce the chance of an eventual revision to positive territory somewhat.
Smithson on Mattinson HERE.
She is referred to as Labour’s polling adviser. Mike sees the Golden Betting Rule as being largely a result of her influence……except the GBR went horribly wrong at Glenrothes. Polling gave 43% each to Labour and the SNP, and as we know, Labour trounced the SNP. Did anyone ever find the missing register?
FINAL VERDICT - It does seem, from Mike’s comments added to Guido’s (and Perdix) that she is, indeed, the eminence grise of the polling world.
No appeals permitted. (libel risk nil)
John O. Yes, bbc news this morning, even mentioned that we might find out we had been out of recession for a while.
Come on Gabble and Tim.
Put your spin on the economic news..
Of course, the “end of the recession” does not mean “we are back to where we were before the recession started”. I do not think this is pointed out clearly enough on the news.
Awww, the ‘amended’ statistic still shows recession.
92, they’re reconstructing the register. No idea if it’ll occur before the GE but I’d guess not.
In praising Richard Nabavi’s eagle-eyed spot, at the end of the previous thread I asked the following:
“Please can Mike or someone else please confirm whether the wording or order in which these questions were asked had been modified over say the past year to suit the requirements of the client commissioning the poll?”
Were it the case that a pollster had indeed changed the wording of a particular question then that would be very telling, at least in my eyes.
‘The Office for National Statistics said the revision came as a sharp upgrade to construction output was offset by weaker services and industrial production output’
That last part is very important. until our service sector starts growing, we will remain in recession. It is worrying that this sector was weaker than first thought.
Questions have to be asked about whether labour actually know how to grow an economy when they can’t rely on house sales and public borrowing.
What annoys me is that the news agencies will have had this news ahead of time even though it will have been embargoed.Therefore to have been prattling on this morning about us having come out of recession is disingenuous and factually incorrect.
97.Mike Smithson - “Deborah Mattinson DOES NOT run ComRes and when she does poll she will endeavour to get accurate results - not numbers to please the client.”
In that case Deborah Mattinson is an honourable, professional market researcher. So, what does that make Gordon Heald of ORB?
Such people should be kicked out of the Market Research Society. They bring the industry into disrepute.
91
“In the details, while contruction was revised up a lot, the other production industries were revised down slightly, and surprisingly so were services - especially business services.”
Not good at all.
Re the polls. I’m not much surprised that they are all over the place. The time to get a clearer idea of what is happening is after the New Year when the average voter is left alone with their thoughts and the credit card bills
Anyone found yesterday’s PM podcast yet? It’s not on YouTube or No 10 yet as far as I can tell.
As it was a complete car crash, I do hope someone saved it for posterity
72
Ah! but you’ll soon be able to wreak a terrible revenge.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/kill-the-poor%2c-says-cameron-200912212328/
I have noticed that the FTSE is looking quite chipper, your always quick to point out the opposite so thought I’d just mention it.
p.s.
Don’t worry I’m organising a whipround for, ‘Distressed Scottish Gentlefolk’
101 - Stuart, be careful that you don’t get vertigo on that high horse. One question was asked that you didn’t like (I do have sympathy with your view of it, by the way). I’m not sure that’s an expulsion offence.
60 The great risk in the debates for the LibDems is that they get stuck in Cameron’s “vote shadow” - that whilst their potential voters might agree with much of Nick Clegg’s approach, they think Cameron can actually deliver more. Cameron only has to do sightly better than Clegg to mop up a lot of votes - purely because Cameron will be seen as the choice of PM versus Brown. However, to shift votes, I would suggest that Clegg has to do far better than Cameron.
Cameron would have feared being in a debate with Kennedy. He will not fear Clegg.
That is not to say that Clegg cannot take votes from Labour. He could do that quite effectively.
On the “jarhead scenario” of Cameron being tripped up by a question about drugs, I suspect that Cameron would handle that quite deftly. Something like:
“Look, we’ve all done things which we we later concede was unwise, with the benefit of age. Well, Nick has admitted to his; I’m not so sure that Gordon has ever admitted to any errors! But the point is, we all grow up; and as we grow up, we accept responsibilities - of being a husband, a father, and yes, a politician. Are there things in my youth I regret? Of course. Would there be things I’d do as Prime Minister that I’d regret? I’d hope not.
But this isn’t anything new. Shakespeare captured this matter brilliantly, some 400 years ago, when he wrote of the transformation of the feckless Prince Hal into Henry V, the victor at Agincourt…”
100
It’s called ‘lying’…
100 - I’m not sure that will have been the case with ONS stats, though I may be incorrect.
Plato. I watched the hostage tape on the bbc news websitey yesterday afternoon. It was a classic.
108 Ok even if your scenario is correct it is obvious that the govt have been briefing that we had emerged from recession to be able to set this mornings news agenda.
It is quite refreshing to find that Comedy Results is still living up to its name.
103, think this is it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gy8OJi4eyF8
15. firstlight40 - “But polling organizations are not neutral bastions of integrity - people working within them have agendas as well.”
Spot on.
I could list several examples of pollsters routinely applying the wrong name to my political party, or not listing it on the first page of responses (only Con, Lab, LD, “some other party”), in order to discourage respondents from giving it as the answer to the voting intention question.
Many other snidey bits and bobs in polls are anti-SNP, and the biggest clangers are when companies like YouGov ask if “the government” is performing well on eg. health or education. Well, yes, our government is performing well on these issues, however the government in London (which is in charge of the English NHS and the English education system) is a completely different kettle of fish.
I wouldn’t have thought that market moving financial stats would be released early to news organizations on an “embargoed” status. I think it is felt that one or two unscrupulous dealers might take advantage of the situation.
96 There is a tendency for GDP data to be revised upwards in subsequent years. Perhaps in about 5 years time, we will discover that the economy was in fact flat in the July-September quarter, although that’s cold comfort.
44. The reason that Mike kept picking him up on it is that his statement was incorrect. The Conservatives’ proposed IHT threshold is £1m, just as the current threshold is £325,000. People who are married, or widowed (in most cases) when they die, get a double threshold.
106. antifrank - “I’m not sure that’s an expulsion offence.”
Maybe. Maybe not. But a letter of complaint to the professional standards committe of the MRS is certainly in order.
ORB should be taken to task for their behaviour. Because it is just such behaviour that makes the market research industry the subject of public ridicule.
re 59 no thank you we don’t want to see a debate about Scottish issues. We are not voting on Scottish issues, even the Scots aren’t voting for representatives who can do anything about Scottish issues. I could understand the SNP’s ire if there were a Scottish election at the same time, but there isn’t.
114-So isnt the govt briefing that we have emergeds from recession just as bad as leaking embargoed ststistics to the market.
I thought that was also illegal..
108. The way it used to work was that the journos got the numbers half an hour before the official release but were locked in a room and not able to call their editors until 9.30 or whenever. they could write their story in the meantime but not send it off.
95. “Of course, the “end of the recession” does not mean “we are back to where we were before the recession started”. I do not think this is pointed out clearly enough on the news.”
Quite right. I’m certain that most people don’t realise this. They think end of recession means back to where we started whereas in our case it will mean ~7% down from peak.
110 - Indeed, which is why they look like chumps this morning….but not half as they did when the initial figures (-0.4%)were issued a few weeks back. You might recall that Labour had prepared a huge campaign based on the theme, “Wrong about the Recession, Wrong about the Recovery” when they and many other so-called experts were confidently predicting 0.3% growth in the third quarter.
I believe that those negative GDP figures (confirmed today) was the point that the Conservatives finally “sealed the deal” (I know we all hate that phrase).
95
119
It’s like “halving the deficit”.
Some peopel think that means halving the debt…
I miss the scenes from old films where a room full of journalists get some news and rush out into the hall to get to the phones on the wall first.
78 Punter. All those points are possible. It’s why the debates are potential game changers.
86 antifrank. 28% is the outlier of the spread. Starting the campaign in the low twenties and then getting a double bounce from the campaign and the debates.
89 Plato. Indeed but I still like my toilet U bend !!
106 MM. “JARHEAD” - surely a work of utter fiction !!
82 Easterross. Factored in the 50 seat spread scenario old thing.
121. To be fair it’s hardly surprising the public are confused by this, when both the government and the news organisations repeatedly confuse the two concepts in public comments and broadcasts.
I heard the BBC suggest the PBR laid out plans to ‘halve the public debt’ 2-3 times shortly after the PBR was laid out. It’s inexcusable ignorance.
115. Its now the worst recession on record since the war!!! Q2 is revised DOWN AGAIN to -0.7%.Now brown, gabble and tim cant hide in the 80s
‘While this quarter’s GDP was upwardly revised, the UK’s economy is now 6% below its Q1 2008 peak, down from -5.8% in the second round of estimates. This is the largest percentage drop on record — although there was a slightly smaller 6% drop in Q2 1979 to Q1 1981. The revision from -5.8% to -6% is due to further revisions on Q2 2009, from -0.6% to -0.7%, and Q3 2008 which is revised from -0.7% to -0.9%
123 ““JARHEAD” - surely a work of utter fiction!!”
Insofar as it has the LibDems holding Solihull, quite so!
(Cue PtP harrumphing
)
126. link
http://www.automatedtrader.net/real-time-news/27600/uk-q3-qtrly-gdp-revised-up-to-_02-qq–unchanged-at-_51-yy-__-ons
121:
good point. If voting was restricted to people who understood the issues though, there’d be about 500 electors per constituency…
127 Harumph!
44. NPMP - “… peoople going on about Bower’s opinion of Brown…”
But it is not just Bower who has a low opinion of Brown:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2004/oct/09/highereducation.politicalbooks
I am a little cofused [and away from a TV] trying to follow this discussion.
Have the Govt announced we are out of recessionbut we aren’t?
127/130 MM/PtP. No one can “Harumph” quite like old fish net Pete ??
A most merry Christmas old fellow !!
126
So Q3 wasn’t as bad merely because Q2 was worse so we started off with lower GDP on July 1st.
Brown would have preferred -1.0% in Q2 and +0.1% in Q3, even thogh we’d have ended up in exactly* the same place.
(*yes yes pedants, almost exactly )
I’m willing to be corrected but I seem to recall that the ONS has recently and unexpectedly developed a backbone as regards independence. This has discomforted the government.
136. Yep, so mr no more boom and bust has managed to create the largest bust since records began in 1955!!! Though to be fair, at least he got half this policy right, which is quite an achievement for this man
106
The biggest risk for Clegg is that he goes into PMQ mode and cannot help himself attacking the tories to the exclusion of attacking Labour. Vast numbers of people want to vote against Labour, and in that scenario only Cameron will be seen as the change candidate, with the Lib Dems looking like possible allies of Labour in a hung parliament
It’s back to “vote Yellow get Brown”. This will surely be a hugely potent message for the tories unless Clegg can rein in his natural Senioresque Lib Dem tory-hating tendencies to focus on labour.
137 You’re not wrong. They have had a couple of spats with HMG. One was over the ‘misrepresentation’ of crime stats.
Oh well that ’s a MAY election as near a cert as possible.
And Gordon goes down in the history books - longest UK recession since records began. And biggest one..
138. Brown’s economic policies are like American beer - they give you a hangover without a previous high.
Gee i have just read the revision to Q2.
What a disaster.
Come on Gabble and Tim
Lets be avin you..
123. “Some peopel think that means halving the debt…”
I’ve noticed that deficit and debt are frequently confused by commentators and interviewers on the radio.
Halving the debt? God knows when we’ll manage that. If it peaks after 2014, which seems likely, and passes ~78%, which also seems likely, then even with a Herculean effort it will be somewhere around 2030 or so before we get back to the low point of 2001, assuming of course that all future governments make debt reduction a priority. The 2040s are a more probable target.
JonathonD “hostage tape” APPLAUSE!
Morris Dancer - thanks for that, no wonder it’s not on the Number 10 website. I heard it on the radio and it was truly awful before seeing the video!!
Clegg might have the most to gain from the debates but he also has the most to lose.
The other two pary leaders already have a large public profile, whether good or bad, and unless there is a real disaster that is unlikely to change significantly as the US debates since Kennedy seem to demonstrate. There are too many other sources of perception over a long period to make that a likely scenario. For these two the debates are likely to reinforce previous perception or slightly modify it. The machines will be read in ‘the spin room’ to change the reality as soon as possible.
But Clegg is a cypher. He has no public hinterland. For many people Clegg and his party are known but not as a complete canvas.
He cannot afford an ‘OK’ performance as it will make the relatively unkown becoming the relatively disregarded. Another gaffe such as pensions or conquests and he could lose himself and his party the benefits they had before the debate as a ’safe’ vanilla home for protest votes.
Is Clegg capable of performing in such a way that he avoids the gaffes, appears as competent and credible as the other leaders - he is after all offering himself as an alternative PM - and convinces current supporters of the other parties that there is a positive reason to vote for his party rather than as a a ‘none of the above’ option.
I don’t think his track record makes success particularly likely especially as Brown and Cameron will have one thing in common - a common enemy.
The pressure will be immense.
71. “If the Mail aren’t careful people might begin to think they have an agenda….”
I’m sure it’s entirely unconnected to Brown and Dacre being friends.
141 “141.Oh well that ’s a MAY election as near a cert as possible.”
Why? This is only a revision to Q3 2009 - if as expected Q4 is positive, Gordon will still take that as total vindication of his policy of getting us a trillion pounds into debt. He could still leg it to the country in March - before the economy dips again in Q1 2010…
Despite having had a mild go at Mike earlier I do think Tapestry at 64 is being quite extraordinarily offensive about him - and completely wrong. Mike is blunt about lots of public figures. He just needs to avoid the site being sued because people post nutty conspiracy theories, but nobody should mind that, should they, Tapestry?
148. I agree - we will have the same ramping up of early election speculation around the Q4 figure. I still fancy March.
149. Haven’t you got anything postive to post Nick? Engaging in sneers at fantasist/nutcase posters can’t be a productive use of your time.
No surprises here then - Gordon plays the scary Tories card
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2009/12/the-fear-factor.html
151 Quite right, Runnymede, and it’s good to see somebody standing up for the Site fanatasists and nutcases.
Now excuse me while I go and find some more productive use for my time.
Merry Christmas everybody!
For all those (for the most part because they fully agree with the SNP that the SNP will be disadvantaged by the omission) determined to stop the SNP having ANY inolvement in the leadership debates, do you really believe that the people of Scotland do not want to see a debate between Brown,Cameron,Clegg (who wish to rule Scotland from London) and Salmond (who wishes to rule Scotland from Scotland)?
Such a debate, for broadcast IN SCOTLAND ONLY, can easily be arranged-only political machinations, clearly intended to undermine the SNP, will try and stop this.
The debate should be thought of in game theory terms. It’s a truel - each wants to be the one who wins.
We need to ascribe probabilities of being able to sell a positive message for themselves. I suggest the following:
David Cameron: 60%
Gordon Brown: 50%
Nick Clegg: 40%
We also need to ascribe probabilities of lethality to each of them. I suggest that if each were to concentrate all of his firepower on their chosen victim, the odds of causing an effective attack on his opponent would be as follows:
David Cameron: 85%
Gordon Brown: 50%
Nick Clegg: 65%
From the perspective of each, damage to which opponent reaps more rewards? I suggest the following:
For David Cameron: Gordon Brown 90%, Nick Clegg 10%
For Gordon Brown: David Cameron 90%, Nick Clegg 10%
For Nick Clegg: David Cameron 60%, Gordon Brown 40%
I am not wedded to any of these probabilities, but think they’re all reasonable enough. If you disagree, rerun the calculations with different probabilities.
With this information, what should each of their strategies be?
Clearly David Cameron should spend his time attacking Gordon Brown when not bigging up himself. He gets 85% x 90% value if he does so (81%, rounding up), but only 85% x 10% value if he goes for Nick Clegg (9%, rounding up). This is a no-brainer.
Similarly, Gordon Brown should attack David Cameron. He gets 50% x 90% value from doing so (45%), but would only get 50% x 10% if he attacks Nick Clegg (5%).
Nick Clegg should go for David Cameron. He gets 65% x 60% value from doing so (39%), while he would only get 65% x 40% value from going for Gordon Brown (26%).
If this goes according to plan, who can we expect to win? The damage suffered will be as follows:
David Cameron: 45% damage from Gordon Brown and 39% damage from Nick Clegg, but 60% shine from himself.
Gordon Brown: 81% damage from David Cameron but 50% lustre.
Nick Clegg: no damage and 40% burnishment of his own image.
If my odds are remotely right, Nick Clegg should win, then David Cameron, then Gordon Brown.
152 If I were a Labour strategist, youth unemployment is not something I’d want to draw attention to.
There was an article from the Times about Julia Goldsworthy’s seat in the 2005 GE. One of the sketchwriters attended a debate-style hustings with the three main candidates (remember it was a Lab-held, key Tory target). The piece dismissed JG’s performance as very lightweight and coming across as a bit of a “too nice” goody-two-shoes student pol, before concluding that only the Tories had any chance taking the seat off labour.
Of course JG won the seat and is now reasonably highly thought of.
My point is that the vast majority of people aren’t obsessed with politics like we are. The secret of the Lib Dems’ success, in my view, is that vast swathes of people actually really want a very nice, earnest, local councillor type with no highfaluting ministerial ambitions, who will devote their time to helping constituents whose roads haven’t been gritted.
The risk for Clegg is definitely in the “what happens in a hung parliament” scenario, but lots of people on here assume that Clegg being ‘exposed’ as ‘nice third boy of UK politics’ equals EPIC FAIL for the LDs. I don’t necessarily agree.
In the last recession, 1991-1992, government revenues fell by 8%, which is not untypical of the 1-2% recessions of earlier times.
In 2009, however the recession has been a pumping 5.5% downturn, and government revenues fell to GBP 496 billion from 2008 GBP 606 billion, close to 20%, about pro rata.
Where Madasafish might be right, is if the recession kicks into a second leg as soon as the US Congress brings Quantitative Easing programmes to a halt. If the British recession goes into a second dive of 5%, which is quite possible, government revenues might fall possibly another 10% to GBP 450 billion or lower.
As spending in recssions at the same time is on a rising trajectory, with a GBP 200 billion gap between revenues and spending opening up this year, the thought does occur that there might be a GBP 300 billion gap to fill in 2010-2011, especially if more banks find that their debtor books have more nasty holes in them.
At some point the whole thing could simply rip apart, and there might be no cash to pay government salaries and pensions.
Just to cheer you all up for Christmas.
Liam Byrne on BBCNews talking about how rosy the UK economy looks…
*searches for baseball bat…*
Morning all.
Woke up this morning to the Beeb Parliament channel reminding me that Labour had an opposition mp arrested.
with that thought I look forward to Labour getting an absolute kicking at the next election.
145, the video adds a brilliant, 1970s bad sci-fi feel.
157, there’s a large difference in scale and importance between a single constituency hustings and three nationally broadcast debates between political leaders (and Nick Clegg).
The election is about the next government. Cameron will say the Tories should be it, Brown Labour. Clegg may try and say Lib Dem, but he just won’t lead the largest party. However, he could play second fiddle in a coalition. If he’s unclear on this then tactical voters from both sides of the spectrum might avoid voting Lib Dem as they could back the ‘wrong aprty’.
156 Sean Fear
Very true. I imagine that now we know there was no recovery in Q3 the Tories will attack much harder on the UK being the last major economy out of recession. Before the final revision they probably didn’t want to be too negative in case it came in as 0% which would no doubt have been spun as a sign of Gordon’s economic genius.
155
You seem to ignore the fact that there are 3 debates, 90 mins each. There must be some time for Cameron to have a couple of digs at Clegg without detracting from the mostly attack Brown strategy which I agree with.
Also, like PMQs, it will surely be about 2 or 3 killer soundbites. No reason why all bases can’t be covered by any given leader.
And I think never attacking Brown will be a mistake for Clegg, people will want to know if he will support Brown in a hung parliament - if yes, this will put a lot of people off.
158
All you need to scare the markets is plan for 3.5% GDP growth. It’s very unlikely to happen for years.. So revenues do not rise and you have to cut costs, cut costs and cuut costs year after year.
Fra better to do an Ireland and do it straight away. Anyone who has run a business knows the sooner you cut costs and make savings, the more money you save. It’s hardly O level logic.
159
Liam Byrne is a man who knows better but lies as opposed to most ministers who are just ignorant.
antifrank yes, although much depends upon the definition of ‘win’. There will be levels of ‘win’ in the same way as there are forms of surrender. It is all conditional.
I suggest that is different for each participant. and each has a range of win through to good win to trouncing the others.
Brown will win if he doesn’t look a complete bore and comes across as human and knowledgeable.
A positive message may not be the real aim. Perhaps things are so bad for Brown that he needs a very negative message. That seems the way things are going. That will be his core winning position. The top end will be managing to trip Cameron up.
Cameron’s core definition of winning will probably be to come out as he went in -the human one with a message of change. His top level win will be Brown and Clegg crashing and burning.
Clegg on the other hand can only define win as improving his profile in the public mind and giving a positive reason for those tending towards other parties to vote LibDem.
So he has the most difficult job of the three.
163 - I accept it is crude, and that there are differential probabilities of a successful attack on each of the three party leaders. But I wanted to get the ball rolling on people thinking about this with some degree of rigour rather than just saloon bar prejudice. I would be happy to be corrected.
I do stand by my general comment that Nick Clegg to win the first debate at 7/2 is terrific value and even allowing for the crudeness of my model and the public’s preconceptions about all three, I would make him no worse than evens.
144. I’ve noticed that deficit and debt are frequently confused by commentators and interviewers on the radio.
I think we’ll find this confusion miraculously clears up once the Tories are in and the BBC are then spinning that it’s their debt.
At that point, we’ll be left in no doubt that this, that, or the other cut will make next to no difference to the debt. This being so, we’ll be assured that we might as well carry on spending, because to do otherwise is wanton Tory cruelty.
The BBC had better bloody watch it IMO.
164. To scare the markets you need a hung parliament or a Brown win.
madasafish
I wonder how much damage the government’s continual deferral of pain to the future is causing. Everybody knows there is pain coming but we’re not clear where the cuts are going to come or who is going to be taxed more. This will affect individual spending and company spending as they can’t plan for the future.
Long term economic damage for short term Labour political gain.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/dec/22/britain-still-in-recession?CMP=AFCYAH
‘Britain mired in longest, deepest post-war recessionRevisions to official data reveal the current slump to be worse than that of the early 1980s when the decimation of manufacturing resulted in a 6% output decline’
Cue Gabble to say it’s merely ‘moderate’
113. That latest Youtube clip with Brown is awful. His words are all out of sync with the visuals, it still makes me wonder how seemingly intelligent MPs could have ever backed him.
I had thought at first that it had been edited by Blair, or Guido. It does not bode well for live TV ‘debates’. After 2 minutes I had to save myself from further punishment by turning it off.
A PRE NEW YEARS DAY MESSAGE:
When people wake up on new years day, look out of the window
Its pissing down
Their credit cards statements are awaiting despatch
The economy has been f4cked by the most useless government in history
VAT has gone back up
Rail fares have risen excessively
Petrol prises and fuel bills up
THE PROSPECT OF AN ELECTION AND THE CHOICE:
“Gordon Brown 5 More Years” ?
Quick get the hanging rope out or vote for change vote for THE CONSERVATIVES !
NOT A DIFFICULT CHOICE REALLY IS IT ?
I believe the Q3 GDP figures mean that we are in for a period of stagflation. The size of the economy is around 6% down on where it was before the recession started and will take at least into 2012 to get to where it was. Inflation as measured by the RPI will be approaching 5% by April, not only in time for the election but also the most important date in the wage round. This all assumes Quantitative Easing can be halted and then reversed without causing turmoil.
149. He just needs to avoid the site being sued because people post nutty conspiracy theories, but nobody should mind that, should they, Tapestry?
You know what, Nick? For once I agree with you. All that electoral fraud Tapestry keeps banging on about isn’t a conspiracy.
It’s just good old Labour corruption.
It’s the trade union block vote updated for the 21st century.
What a shame for you Broxtowe isn’t one of Labour’s rotten boroughs, like Glenrothes!
Still, there are three months till the election. If you fill in 100 postal votes a day between now and then, Nick, that could be 5,000 votes in the bag! - that’s assuming public sector levels of output natch. And if that doesn’t work you can always nick the register!
173: Agreed. The pain has been deferred (using QE etc) until the point where inflation takes off, and interest rates will need to rise. Then the real pain to householders and workers will be felt.
OT
URW
Could you give us a phonetic way to pronunce your family name?
169
I compare the situation to CO2 emissions. If the Government were serious, the Cabinet would set an example. By pledging to reduce their own personal flying and other discretionary CO2 emissions.
After all, the easiest way to cut emissions is to cut discretionary travel or other activities that burn fossil fuels.. (like heating the garden at barbecues).
By themselves, Ministers would save little in the overall scale of things but would set an example.
But then that requires Leadership.
165. “Brown will win if he doesn’t look a complete bore and comes across as human and knowledgeable.”
I dissagree with this because most people watching will not be the kind of obsessive politics fan-bois that you get on here who already know about Brown. That is why debates are important. Everybody will be coming with a reasonably clean slate because this will be the first time people will have listened to them at length. If Brown is only slightly better than his normal self then he will loose, badly. Personally I expect by the third he will not fake it any longer and people will get their ‘Brown Epiphany’.
antifrank in betting terms a ‘win’ will have to be based on some measure of public perception. In US debates, as in PMQs, the immediate judgment of the crowd is often different later on.
So in any market it is important which and when polling will take place.
This definition of win is, of course, different from the participants, as they will be looking at their performance as part of a large campaign. Unless there is some dramatic foul up or policy announcement, the public response as recorded may not have that much effect.
176 - I think Plato already gave us that at 90
82 “agree that it is most odd that PBs most recognisable apologists for this wretched Government never discuss their own policies.”
Its not odd though is it.
Why would they want to repulse even more voters?
This has been the worst government in my lifetime, possibly of the last 100 years (so in Jack’s lifetime!)
Aren’t we all getting ahead of ourselves a bit, in assuming these debates will actually take place?
179 “Settled on the first You Gov poll published after the first Live Sky News debate involving all three leaders specifically on who won the debate.”
The election is over.
Go home Tory boys.
Cheryl Cole has slammed Conservative party leader David Cameron, calling him ’slippery’.
http://www.whatsontv.co.uk/reality/the-x-factor-2009/news/cheryl-cole-david-camerons-slippery/7830
94 ” bbc news this morning, even mentioned that we might find out we had been out of recession for a while.”
Beeb news 24 were most certainly saying we were still in recession this morning.
154. do you really believe that the people of Scotland do not want to see a debate between Brown,Cameron,Clegg
Who cares what the people of Scotland want?
You are English subsidy b1tches and we‘ll tell you what government you can have.
183 - Th market relates only to the middle debate.
There’s room for the other bookies to put up one for the first debate.
183
I get the impression that YouGov have the most politically aware (and partisan) panel out of the pollsters, so it seems likely that the winner would simply be the leader of the most popular party at that time.
159
echoing his remarks on R5…
187 - Or even, if we’re lucky, to have markets on each debate. Though I guess those would only emerge much closer to the date of the election.
184, hehe.
“She said: “David Cameron. Brrrrr. Slippery isn’t he? We’ve always been Labour in our family, it just feels wrong not to be. Better the devil you know.”"
Tribal voter backs tribe. Oh noes!
Is her opinion weightier than £1,000,000,000,000 of debt?
chris strange I was talking about Brown’s definition rather than the public who are watching. You opinion on how he would lose to the public perception is completely possible, but would it last as an impression in the middle of a dynamic campaign?
Well, yes probably, as the negative perception of Brown is well entrenched, but the campaign probably cannot deal with that. Damage limitation surely will be their aim while trying to undermine Cameron particularly, and Clegg occasionally.
184
Anyone who marries Ashley Cole is of course an example of sensible thinking.
94 Floater
It was a comment by one of their business people at the end of a section at about 8:50.
191 “Is her opinion weightier than £1,000,000,000,000 of debt?”
Interesting question MD. The probable answer is yes.
Happy Christmas to you and your crazy libertarian tribe.
antifrank the time lapse between debate and poll could be critical and is not defined so far. The ’spin room’ will be creating such centrifugal force after each debate that it will probably hover over the city. That should confuse the issue. Who won or who spun best that they had won?
And what of the other debates, and the overall impression once they are all finished.
http://www.showbizspy.com/article/54661/cheryl-cole-has-a-crush-on-david-cameron.html
171 - I managed 3-4 minutes before I quit. It’s not just the dodgy video link but the rambling content and the dreary monotone delivery. All I remember is there was a list of 5 things but what those 5 things were I don’t know.
192. OK Brown might think that he was the best … actually he will almost certainly think he was the best, since he always thinks that he is the best! That could then give him the energy to mount a new offensive, and some of the mud he throws at Cameron could stick taking a little gloss off his image.
I just don’t see how a man that has always been terrible at interviews, so much so that IIRC when he was the heir apparent to John Smith studios stopped taking him because all they would get is a bunch of sound bites, is going to do well to the public in this kind of format. Brown hasn’t faced any real public hostile questioning in a decade!
Cameron on the other hand has been preparing of this using Cameron Direct for 2 years now so will know exactly what to say to get the voters in the marginal seats going. Clegg has been doing something similar as well.
I expect that Clegg is going to win big in terms of public opinion, Cameron is going to cement his lead, and Brown is going to further alienate the marginal voters. Highly conventional thinking I know.
“You can’t help the fact that some kids are just not going to be as bright as others,” agrees Cole. “If you’re sitting with people who aren’t as bright as you, you’re going to get frustrated. And then people wonder why there’s so much truancy. They should definitely bring back grammar schools. Then you can say to low achievers: you can get there if you work hard.”
And if you’re really really dense, you can marry a footballer.
201 - Marrying a footballer strikes me as a pretty smart move for a young woman without any great cultural pretentions. The money’s good, the sex is probably top rate and you get Saturday afternoons shopping without any complaints.
149. If I overstep the mark I usually get a quiet email! I am sure Mike would prefer not to be too closely associated with my viewpoint, as he likes to stand aloof from partisanship. And you never know. He might have a sense of humour.
I hope you’re not feeling too sensitive, chaps, about my enquiries into poll-rigging, and the strange tendency of the usual suspect pollsters to slavishly follow the Labour election planners’ narratives. If you are, there’s still the economy to think about.
I make the current government borrowing figure 15% of GDP, which is the tops of the world. Greece is only 12-13%. As our economy still recedes, and the world might kick into a second leg recession as QE is slowed, we might see 25% of GDP and break all the records for a developed economy. That would be Brown’s lasting legacy.
http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2009/12/brown-leads-world-in-something.html
“And Roberts chips in: “I know there are programmes on late at night, aren’t there, when they have like debates and stuff. But young people are not going to sit there and choose to watch them. It’s boring. No 18-year-old wants to watch Gordon Brown doing his whole speech - turn it over! They need to make it more interesting.”
201 Better than marrying a journalist I suspect!!
202 You fancy Wayne Rooney. Admit it!
Britain’s Banks Downrated due to Debt - Well Done Gordon!
Standard & Poor’s on Monday lowered the collective rating of Britain’s banks in anticipation of “high credit losses”. By slashing the “banking industry country risk assessment” (BICRA) from group two to group three, the UK’s financial system is now considered less secure than those of Italy and Belgium, and on a par with Chile, Portugal and Austria.
“We no longer consider the UK to rank among the most stable and low-risk banking systems globally in the light of the weak economic environment, the reputational damage to the industry, and the increased dependence on state support programs,” S&P said.
It added that UK banks had no option but to reduce their debt, which “will lead to an elevated rate of loan losses for the next two years [and] will weigh on the growth prospects for the UK relative to many other large mature market economies”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/6860765/Britains-banks-to-hold-back-recovery-warns-SandP.html
205 - Without a doubt.
Though I can’t imagine the intellectual level of the conversations a footballer and a WAG must have.
191
People voting for a party simply becasue their family always have really REALLY winds me up.
Stupid bint. Has she not got a brain of her own?
Oh silly me…
206 - I will admit that when I was younger I did date a professional footballer for a while (lower league, so David Roe can put his chequebook away again). Nice guy, not the brightest, all the sports stuff was really boring.
Actually I am guilty of tarring all with one brush. There are plenty of witty and intelligent footballers and former footballers. I actually rate quite a few who now work in the media. I’m sure many of their wives are also jolly intelligent and thoughtful.
I also know plenty of people in other fields who are not
“But the news for future Labour leaders is none too heartening, either: there is some confusion about Gordon Brown’s identity. One of the bandmates is convinced the Girls have met him, while the others assure her that, in fact, Reid is the one they met. So much for the Chancellor’s popular appeal.”
200: That is funny.
She should do one of those questionnaires where you agree/disagree with certain policies, without the party whose policy it is being revealed, then see how “Labour” she is then…
Mind you the tories have given up on grammar schools too
209 Interesting. Are there any openly gay footballers in the public eye and in a civil partnership?
Are there any prominent HABs out there? Hope so.
211 - LOL
I can’t believe it’s the 22nd. Christmas seems to have sneaked up.
Remind me to fill up the car with petrol at the end of the week
207. The loan losses S&P predict for UK banks in that report look very high, at around 5%. If they are right we are going to have a banking sector that is severely undercapitalised for some time yet.
213 - Sadly not. That is why Gareth Thomas coming out at the weekend was the big story it was. He’s the first major star to come out for years. And the sad thing is, even he could only do so near the end of his career after 100 international caps and a couple of Lions tours.
Many will still be suffering with the hiding.
209: Bet he had good legs though.
213 - I don’t normally move in footballer circles, so am no more well-informed than you. He wasn’t openly gay and it would have been a big problem for him to be openly gay. I don’t believe there are any professional footballers in civil partnerships yet, though I have heard of a lower league footballer (not my ex) who is openly living with a male partner.
213 - No out gay footballers.
The Gareth Thomas story has highlighted that as have Max Cliffords comments that he’s advised footballers not to come out.
217 - His body was to die for! Bettered only by the bodybuilder I dated for a while. But I digress.
202 Though you might get beaten up, from time to time.
216 - This guy was a real groundbreaker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Roberts_(rugby_league)
219 - I do feel that those comments said a lot more about Max Clifford than they did about professional football.
207. See the smoking ruins of the British economy, and weep.
Gareth Thomas has come out to sell a book. He was known to be gay for a number of years, nobody thought it was that big a deal. He has turned it into a big deal to sell his book. Fair enough, he will be retiring soon and deserves a decently funded retirement.
220 Dated any politicians? If so, worse or better than footballers?
224 Spent your £50k yet?
222 - Indeed he was but I was restricting my comments to people in the UK.
If a really big, admired top player came out fairly early in his career it could be a really major step forward against homophobia in sport.
But it would take a sportsperson with a hell of a lot of nerve to do it. They would win my undying admiration (unless they played for Man Utd obviously
)
225: One can’t blame him for that. Most books won’t sell or even get written unless theres certain things of interest in them, or if the person has done something special in their field.
226 - No, hell will freeze over before I date a politician. As a very general rule, my experience has been that the further up I have gone up the so-called social scale, the worse behaved the partner. The very worst-behaved partner I ever had was a Roman Catholic priest.
225 - Don’t be silly
His book came out nine months before he did.
228 Spot on - it’s such a shame/appalling that after all these years, it’s still a dont-go-there subject.
230: Besides which…how many good looking politicans are there.
It’s not known as show buiness for ugly people for nothing.
230. Ooh naughty
230 - were you not a bit old for him ?
233 - I was going to mention that, but I figured that you’d all think I was shallow enough from the comments I’ve already made. But thanks for drawing attention to that deal-breaker!
235.
ouch
235 - I wonder if Stuart Dickson has a spare high horse that I can borrow?
235
Hilarious!
227. Happily, most of my income flows from abroad, and is paid in dollars and euros, so the ruination of the UK does not affect me so badly.
When you are all eating grass in Regent’s Park, I will pop out and offer you cookies and kartoffelsalat.
Either the spirit of Christmas has been consumed in large quantities today or PB.com now sponsored by ‘Hello’ magazine with additional cooking recipes by SeanT.
Most bizarre.
240 I suspect they will be smoking it.
So we are best placed to weather the recession are we? We are leading the world out of recession are we? They are following our fiscal plans to combat the downturn are they?
Meanwhile on planet earth as opposed to Planet Labour (Or space station BBC)
DAILY MAIL
“Labour’s economic credibility was further damaged today after new figures revealed Britain’s economy remains mired in recession.
While France and Germany came out of recession in June, the figures reveal Britain’s economy shrank by a worse-than-expected 0.2 per cent between July and September.”
Even the left wing papers join in…….
THE GUARDIAN
“Britain mired in longest, deepest postwar recession. Revisions to official data reveal the current slump to be worse than that of the early 1980s when the decimation of manufacturing resulted in a 6% output decline”
Of course the BBC spin for their Labour masters is hilarious if it were not so sad. (note the first sentence !!! would it be like that if it were a Tory government??)
BBC NEWS
“UK economy remains in recession . There are some indications that consumer spending is picking up.
The UK economy shrank by 0.2% between July and September, figures show, an upward revision to the previous estimate of a 0.3% contraction.
It means that officially the recession has not yet ended. Analysts believe that fourth quarter figures will show the economy returning to growth”
Brown and Darling have now been proven to have failed miserably and are now just covering up the huge scale of the problem in the vain hope to protect votes and cling to power rather than do what is right for the country.
It is time for a general election.
The last score or so posts show how some people who post here are divorced form reality. All seem to think how trendy and cool it is to be gay yet bemoaning the fact that so few major sport stars come out.
Surely if, as we are told, everyone is as right on about homosexuality it would not be a problem.
Fact it seems to be an issue shows how not everyone has a gay friend to wheel out at parties to impress and be seen to be cool.
If a really big, admired top player came out fairly early in his career it could be a really major step forward against homophobia in sport - and why would that be desirable. Can there be anywhere left where one is not subject to continuous gay propaganda? I admire Peter Tatchell. Let’s face it, he’s won. Only hope is Sharia or the Ugandan Law. I prefer Kampala.
243 THE GUARDIAN - “Britain mired in longest, deepest postwar recession.
Are you there, Gabble? It’s in the Guardian, Gabble, your little spot of local economic difficulty….even worse than Thatcher, Gabble…
* sound of Gabble’s head exploding *
Get yourself an intelligent man Cheryl, and one who doesn’t **** *******. (Auto-moderator intervention). Or do you fancy Gordon, maybe? You wouldn’t be the first, but he’s very boring apparently and spends all the time saying how much he is going to spend on his next shopping trip, but then can’t find his cheque book.
Cameron’s too normal for you, I can see that. But please dear, don’t confuse your hunger for attention, with any perceptiveness worthy for the world to hear about. You can call 10 Downing Street any time until about May.
245. tumbleweed from coldie, gabble and nice but tim - they are waiting for tomorrows revelations in the Mail about Lithuanian call girls.
247 - Due to recent PB brodcasting restriction my posts will be typed by an actor.
Morning all. Quite an interesting and varied thread this morning. I look forward to antifrank’s memoirs with increased anticipation.
On thread: It does seem surprising to me that pollsters are not more careful of their reputations. Integrity is not divisible; it seems to me that a pollster can hardly expect to be considered 100% unbiased and objective in their headline figures, if they are clearly not so in the subsidiary questions.
On Jack W’s interesting take on the LibDems’ prospects: I understand the logic of his top end 28% vote share, although that clearly requires everything to go extremely well for them. But it seems to me that, on the reverse basis, his 19% lower limit is far too high. After all, for the past two years they have rarely exceeded 21% in any polls (just a few 23% shares in September, and one 25% in May). On the other hand they have frequently been down in the 16%-17% range. Thus his lower limit of 19% is roughly the typical share they have been getting in polls over the last few months.
It is easy to argue that they may well end up well below 19%. Their strategy is confused. All their effort seems to be based on persuading people (using crude Labour dog-whistles) not to vote Conservative, rather than to vote LibDem; that means they are contributing to their own squeeze. Nick Clegg’s performance is patchy; he could easily come over badly in the debates. They are allying themselves (in the public mind, if not in reality) with Brown and the deeply-unpopular Labour Party. Their policies are all over the place. Vince Cable keeps contradicting other senior LibDems’ positions. Increased scrutiny and exposure thus may not be to their advantage.
So if we are to take Jack’s 28% as the absolute upper limit, we should I think assume that the lower limit is far less than his 19%.
Of course, what is more interesting is not the (unlikely) extreme positions, but the central forecast. Clearly one needs to make a political judgement here; mine is that they are stuck in a band of 18% to 21%, much as the polls show.
Some very nervous people on here, judging by the debate comments
Lembit Opik caught up in expenses row.
Always wondered what a ton of bricks would look like
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237649/Lembit-Opik-weathergirl-111-880-taxpayer.html
“Lembit Opik lived with his then girlfriend Sian Lloyd while renting out his taxpayer-funded London home to his friend and party agent.
Over seven years, the Liberal Democrat MP claimed £111,880 from the taxpayer for what he told Commons authorities was his second home.
But the Daily Mail has learned that for some of the time while he was claiming on the flat, Mr Opik was living with TV weather presenter Miss Lloyd at her London home.
During the first part of their four-year relationship, he is understood barely to have used his property - which was rented out to his friend and agent, David Selby, 56.”
Strange how coldstone only reads the stories that mught be negative for the Conservatives….
so is britain’s’s recession OFFICIALLY worse than ireland, iceland and norway?
murhpy? now is the time to come clean upon your party’s economic failures!
the arc of prosperity is a touch more successful than murphy’s ark of chasing the flood.
Brown’s latest Youtube video is in fact an out-take from Solaris - the Director’s Cut deemed to obscure for general circulation. The cosmonaut, Comrade Brown, is in orbit around a distant planet whose reality keeps changing in response to his unconscious dreams.
251 - I love that phrase “But the Daily Mail has learnt…” as though it had conducted a detailed investigation into Mr Opik’s living arrangements during the period. The fact that they were bespattered across the Daily Mail’s pages at the time is neatly glossed over.
249. Richard - we have to remember that pollsters are commercial entities and thus subject to the same commercial pressures that any other firm is. While it’s nice to imagine that all firms behave all the time with an eye to maintaining a high level of esteem in the eyes of the public, it generally isn’t so.
I think there are a number of perverse incentives currently driving some pollsters to test the boundaries of objectivity. The most important is that many of the obvious customers for their wares are not actually interested in getting an objective view. The discussion upthread about leading questions misses the point a bit - political parties and pressure groups want results that can be spun ‘their way’ when considering these issues.
There is also a lack of said customers, relative to the number of pollsters. So the pollsters are clamouring for attention, and given the biased nature of many of the customers, it’s the outlier polls that might get most attention.
I’ll also repeat my point from the other day - it’s in the interest of pollsters to talk up how well their polls ‘react’ to news and events (as Bob Worcester has recently done). It’s the same principle as claiming your product gets things whiter than white, but less open to objective testing given the infrequency of general elections…
Just in case people didn’t know about this, so they can judge the above clearly.
“MPs in Uganda will debate today a Bill that proposes the death sentence for gay sex under certain conditions.
Draft legislation calling for the death sentence for “aggravated homosexuality” was introduced in October by David Bahati, 36, a Christian member of the ruling party. The Bill is being debated despite outrage from gay and human rights activists in Europe and elsewhere. It calls for the death penalty for those having gay sex with anyone under 18, or while infected with HIV/Aids, or with someone who is disabled, or for being what the Bill terms “a serial offender”. Stating that “same sex attraction is not an innate and immutable characteristic” the Bill proposes life imprisonment for consensual gay sex.
A person convicted of an “attempt to commit homosexuality” would get seven years in jail as would anyone caught “aiding and abetting homosexuality” or promoting it. Failure to report a homosexual act to the authorities within 24-hours would be punished with up to three years in prison. The Bill, which will probably be voted on in the new year, also allows for Ugandans to be tried for having homosexual sex while abroad. “
Snowing yet again. Brrrrr.
Stupid weather. Dog likes the snow though.
I’m most surprised the Gareth Thomas “news” hadn’t leaked before. Whilst it wasn’t common knowledge it was reasonably well known in higher circles of the UK rugby fraternity. Perhaps it’s a credit to the ethos of the game that it remained ‘in house’ for so long.
Whether it encourages the Scottish gay in the village to pop out is another matter, let alone the very high profile and long standing English international. Would be a bold move.
Also, learnt an important F1 date: first testing is on 1 February. Well worth checking the testing results now and then before putting medium or serious money on drivers and teams.
They’re not called ComedyResult for nothing.
249 Richard Nabavi - Sense from you as per your usual.
The Lib Dems are set to take one helluva beating at the hands of their erstwhile Muslim voters of 2005.
This however is not a key feature in Seats they already hold but IS a key feature in Seats they hope to win from Labour.
My prayer is that they will lose some funny ones to Labour……ROCHDALE O LORD !
Peter2′ it is a problem precisely because of bigotted nutters like you.
249. Good analysis Richard, to which I would only add that the LibDems’ main problem is structural: they are a party of and for sanctimonious little holier-than-thou pipsqueaks.
This sets a limit on their possible support not only in itself - the pipsqueak vote is only so large, after all - but from the fact that their leader is, unvaryingly, the shrillest, most nugatory and most punchable little pipsqueak of them all.
Let’s just remind ourselves of the LibDems’ leaders.
Thorpe: Turd-burgling “Bunnies can and will go to France” buffoon.
Steel: Chicken-counting “Goo bark to yurr constitchencies and preperr furr goverrrnmunt” Smackistani buffoon.
Ashdown: Pants down secretary-nobbing adulterous incredibly sanctimonious buffoon.
Kennedy: Drunken, lying ginger Smackistani buffoon.
Campbell: Senile, urine-smelling slap-headed buffoon.
Clegg: Who?
Not one of those useless, useless twunts would ever have been even selected to fight a seat as a Tory. Thorpe might have made it into Labour. As a public-school-educated white married ostensibly heterosexual middle-class male, he’d have been seen as leader material, a sort of John the Baptist to Blair’s Jesus. But when the wheels fell off, it would all have been over.
So the best performance any LibDem leader can aspire to is to obtain all the votes of every sanctimonious tossy-arsed mediocre nonentity in the land. Even then, this means they’ll never get above about 19%, because the other 81% of voters - quite reasonably - just want to punch their stupid leader hard in the face.
But this structural inability to gain power isn’t a problem, because sanctimonious to55ers like the LidDhimms don’t actually want to win. They want to pontificate and tut-tut moralistically from the sidelines, and applaud themselves for having taken a moral position despite there being no prospect of power.
It is exactly analogous to people who bought Betamax instead of VHS, or 8-track instead of cassette.
If power ever beckoned, it would kill the rationale for being a LibDem in the first place.
256 - If we’re going to mention gay news from Uganda, this newspaper headline from earlier this year has to be given another airing:
http://www.thevoiceofreason.com/uk/WorldsFunniestJokes/HeadlineOf2009.htm
I do have gay Ugandan friends. As in many African countries, crackdowns on gay men are a useful distraction activity for unpopular governments.
@256:
The Ugandand President has already said he would veto the bill, presumably because he’s been threatened with being kicked out of the Commonwealth if he signs it.
Cheryl Cole coming out for Labour is surprising. I always had her pegged as a BNP fan:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1168147.ece
256. Draft legislation calling for the death sentence for “aggravated homosexuality” was introduced in October by David Bahati
What’s the bill called? Boom Bye Bye in de Bahati Boy Head?
Tell me “Bahati” is pronounced “botty”. Please, please, please let this be so.
263
Why don’t you tell us what you REALLY think of the LDs and stop pussyfooting around?
@265:
I imagine Pastor Kiwewesi would be thrilled to have it on official record that he has a “monster whopper” suitable for buttock-terrorizing.
What odds on a civil partnership between Peter2′ and John R by the end of 2010?
263 John R. Your festive rant has run out of stuffing as I think you’ll find all those yellow peril gentlemen took on ‘Conservative’ seats and er …. won.
@270:
Delighted to see you’re still chipper after your recent drubbing, what what?
269 - At the Old Smithy, Gretna.
Don’t be such a stuffed shirt, Passmore.
You have to admit that a bill outlawing homosexuality being brought in by a man whose name may conceivably be pronounced “botty” (or even “batty”, Buju Banton stylee) is bloody funny.
I’d laugh just as hard if the BNP elected a bloke called Blackman as leader.
All of PBC’s assembled gaylording ponceyboots in a violent scrabble to catch the bouquet.
275 - Not I, I’m getting hitched next year already.
271. There’s no accounting for boundary changes, Jack, and as I’ve always said, anyone stupid enough to vote for a LidDem MP deserves to be represented by one.
253. Nah - even the out-takes of Solaris were better than that (and I walked out of Solaris).
278 The original or the remake?
I actually quite liked the remake.
223. Max Clifford knows what he’s talking about and his advice holds up a mirror to society (or at least a large part of it). I can well understand him advising footballers to remain in the closet. The various FA’s have a lot more work to do on homophobia though given the success against violence and racism, it’s work that can be successfully done.
275. No sign of Coldstone yet though..
249 Richard N. You’ve missed part of my point old thing.
The debate fandango has changed the essential footwork between the parties. Forget who you want to win and how you believe the participants will perform. Look at how the bones of the political dance have changed.
Clegg has been given a chair at the top table. The oxygen of publicity, normally excluded from the Lib Dems, will course through their campaign. The dynamics of British elections has changed. Whether the Lib Dems take advantage is another matter ?!?
Going back to the Leaders debates. If Clegg is not properly briefed on simple matters like all the benefits levels not just old age pension he will look a right idiot and be pulled to pieces. You can be sure he will be asked about all this.
John R at 277. odd sort of remark, have you had too much Christmas pudding, you are talking about hundreds of thousands of people, after the next election probably more than lasst time.
282 More likely people will just be reminded, looking at Clegg, of why the LibDems are the third party.
Can 80% of the voters really be wrong?
Cheryl Cole has come out for Labour/Gordon before.
The fact that none of you seem too remember is an indiaction of it’s impact.
277 John R. “Boundary changes ..” !!
I think the sherry trifle has taken its toll. Might I suggest you stick to Ugandan Poofery - You at least make a discernable, if utterly misguided, point.
I didn’t know who Cheryl was before today.
285 - Or, just conceivably, her increased fame.
Anyhow, Dave is rugged, not slippery.
It won’t stick.
284, I agree with whoever it was upthread who stated that Clegg’s a blank canvas, which gives him the best chance to make himself a contender, but he could equally well ruin his hopes.
I think he’ll do moderately well.
On the original topic, surely the comparative questions are not about the actual results but looking at how people react to the various attack lines. For example, we have multiple polls showing the Class War to be a failure for Labour, yet if you look at this poll you might conclude that the Class War is a valid attack line. Again, look at the public services question and it seems that this protection more than the Tories line could easily backfire as the country is split equally.
That’s not to say that these question aren’t leading, but as an analysis of attack lines they may have some validity. It would be an interesting exercise to do this with the top three lines from each party and then re-ask the political voting question after as well as before. Would like to see if it shifts many.
283. It’s an entirely rational remark David, kidding aside.
There are two types of vote possible at a GE.
1/ Pro-Labour.
2/ Pro-Conservative.
Elect a Labour or Conservative MP and that MP can influence the party in power. We’ve seen via Osborne’s performance that a Conservative MP can control government policy even when the Conservatives are not in power.
Anyone who votes for a LibDem MP is stupid, because all they are doing is casting a pro-Labour vote but with less or no influence over any Labour government which results.
It is equivalent to abstaining. It makes a point, but at your own expense.
O/T:
I am surprised that Mr Roe has not linked to these really rather clever Sun adverts (taking the you know what out of the iPhone):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVMnmTFxAjA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ1QwExp0_g&NR=1
263. John R - tis the season to be jolly…….la la la la la la la
la!
Mike agree with your analysis and then the Indie went on to create a ludicrous straw man either/or argument in its comment. The Indie are a marginal paper losing money and don’t represent mainstream ordinary peoples views in the UK. No wonder they are playing games.
284. In respect of the Tories can 62% of the electorate be wrong? Every party in the UK represents a minority - not one comes close to representing the majority.
294 Goupillon. See more of John R’s jolly la la’s at 292 !!
You couldn’t make up that level of political arrogance unless you worked in a bunker !!
254 Antifrank - surely “the Daily Mail has learnt” plus a couple of references in the article is meant to indicate the Daily |Mail were told by someone, someone previously close to Lembit, possibly someone with a professional interest in sunshine and showers?
276 Congrats on your impending nuptials
282- I don’t know about all that, the Lib Dems strike me as being similar to Everton fans. They moan for years about how unfair everything is, and when they get a chance at glory they fail miserabley.
It’s all really very simple. If you don’t look at the world in the same blinkered, binary way as John R, you’re a fecking moron. Anyone who can’t see that is either a gayer, a LidDumb or most probably both.
1. I am afraid I am still not convinced the debates will happen. The story comes on the back of Gordon agreeing. So far I have only heard Adam Boutlon say there will be no legal difficulties and I suspect he has done nothing more than listen to Labour spin Drs [who would say that, otherwise the dramatic effect of the announcement that Gordon has developed a spine would be pointless]. Laura K was surprising bad in her reporting last night describing is as mainly a risk for Gordon. Unusually dim of her.
2. BBC reporting on the radio that the growth figures were ‘better than expected’. Better than who expected? Certainly not Darling/Brown.
289. lol. Save that last time she came out was a matter of weeks ago.
301 - They are a revision up from the original ONS estimate of 0.4% contraction, and later ONS revised estimate of 0.3% contraction, but down on quite a lot of people in the market who thought the final figures would be 0.1%. How boring is that answer?
296. the consensus against the LDs consistently and substantially outweighs that against the rest, however. Indeed, inasmuch as the LDs can hope to pick up tactical votes from people who don’t agree with them, their true support levels may actually be overstated by GE results.
I struggle to think of many LD policies or ideas which have become absorbed into the thinking of any mainstream party over the last, I dunno, 30 years. If these people weren’t the sanctimonious marginal buffoons that I maintain they are, they would have been able to exert an effect on the major parties’ policies in the same way that the BNP has done to Labour (BJ4BW).
Minority parties can’t hope for power but they can hope to damage the main parties enough that their agenda gets implemented (or at least adopted) anyway. Militant did this, the BNP have done this, UKIP still trying. In fact, though I may be mistaken, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that aspects of the Monster Raving Loony Party agenda had been adopted.
What success have the LDs had in either getting elected to government or getting government to implement their agenda? Basically none.
I leave it to the PB massive to opine whether they’re irrelevant because they are buffoons, or can be considered buffoons because they are irrelevant. They’re still buffoons either way.
OK, I am coming-out!!!
After three-days of lurking - spiced-up with consuming [sic] this week’s double-issue of The Economist - I have to say: ‘Enough’!
#1: I am getting extremely embarrassed at the postings of so-called ‘English-Nationalists’. It’s easy to take a pee out of the Jocks, but we should listen to their gripes (if only to titter).
#2: Sexuality; not bothered. A little more reading of posts, and a lot less focus on commenting, might help to understand the ‘bigger-picture’ of whom people are on this site. Betting-insight is of more interest to moi.
#3: Recession:URGHH!!!
[Src: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession ]
I am the first to admit that media and/or publications - notably The Economist - have misused the expression technical-recession to re-define the correct version. [Lardy Adam Boulton is the worse!] GDP-growth in CY2009Q4 could be cancelled-out by negative-growth in CY2010Q1. Only history will tell.
So let’s put the polls to bed for Christmas, and be nice to each other. ['Tupac excepted.] If not I’ll have to take my lurker-shield down again…!
@296:
Absent a condorcet method, we can’t know if any particular party represents a majority or not.
We just don’t have the data to make that assertion.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1237679/A-migrant-minute-registers-GPs-Huge-increase-puts-doctors-pressure.html
“Immigrants are registering with a GP for free healthcare at a rate of more than one every minute, it was revealed last night.
Analysis of NHS research shows that 605,000 people who arrived from overseas registered with a doctor in England and Wales last year - up by 50 per cent in only seven years.
Campaigners say this places a significant ’strain’ on services and could force patients to wait longer for appointments and treatment.”
@307:
How does “registering” create a significant strain?
‘That’s not to say that these question aren’t leading, but as an analysis of attack lines they may have some validity’
Indeed - but isn’t that what pollsters are supposed to do in private polling commissioned by the parties, rather in their supposedly standard public, published polls?
304. John R - I hope you are feeling better now. You seem to be the Tory equivalent of Colin W.
304. The only reason that either Labour or the Tories have been in Govt, despite representing a minority, is because of FPTP. It is rather odd to rely on a distortion of the popular vote to ‘prove’ endorsement of a policy position. Off the top of my head, I can recall the policy of giving independence to the BofE was in the LD’s 1992 GE manifesto and didn’t even appear in Labour’s 1997 manifesto. Post 1997 GE Brown adopted the policy and has often cited it as one of his best decisions.
307 - Registering wouldn’t. I imagine the point they are making is that in times of streched budgets we are gonig to be pressed to provide services to ever increasing numbers of people.
Migration watch stated
‘In present financial circumstances it is surely obvious that we do not have the resources to cope with the extra ten million people now officially projected over the next 25 years - seven million as a result of immigration”
I know for a fact that maternity services are badly stretched.
I seem to remember that education authorities have made similar claims re numbers of recent migrants.
Why are people so surprised that Gareth Thomas is the only out rugby player? A genuine question.
What evidence is there that if x% of the population is gay, then it must follow that x% of any given profession are also gay? Does that follow? And what is “x” anyway?! in my experience, it’s very low.
To my knowledge I have met 5 gay men ever, and 3 lesbians (two of those at the same time…) so 1 rugby player out of a hundred or so “famous” ones sounds about right to me percentage-wise. But I get the impression that people think there “must” or “should” be more. On what is this based?
And why do we care anyway? I don’t think many people do any more.
264 John R
Whilst I am sure your post was intended for amusement only, parts of it appear libellous. I was thinking particularly of the assertion that Ming Campbell is senile and smells of urine.
Would you like to withdraw that, offer evidence, or volunteer to meet the costs should OGH be sued and the facts not support your assertion?
Cheers.
When Migrationwatch says “seven million as a result of immigration” are they saying that there will be seven million immigrants and their children or that there will be seven million immigrants plus their children?
Meaning immigration would account for more than 7 of the 10?
Nothing like a massive inflationary increase to help the Royal mail
Ist Class up about 5% to 41p Second class almost 7% to 32 p.
Its outrageous and absolutely unjustified.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8426538.stm
BTW Iain Dale looking for people to cast votes on his “end of year awards”
most hated politician???
I think I know who that might be.
Instead of the usual drivel, surely it’s time for some sensible Ugandan discussions on pb.com
315 I’d rather pay twice that rather than have no idea what sort of stamp I have to put on an envelope.
When you could put the equivalent weight of a housekey in the post - either slow or less slow, I got it. Now I actively don’t use the mail as I haven’t a clue/don’t have the right sort of stamp handy.
313. Whilst I am sure your post was intended for amusement only, parts of it appear libellous.
I was thinking particularly of the part where you took offence on Ming Campbell’s behalf, but not on anyone else’s. This could be construed as you agreeing that, eg, Kennedy was a drunken liar.
Would you like to withdraw that, offer evidence, or volunteer to meet the costs should OGH be sued and the facts not support your assertion?
Cheers.
Floater @312, if Britain’s debt problem is as bad as people here are saying it is, the country has no option than to bring in millions more immigrants. If you don’t have enough tax revenue to pay the interest on debt, you’re going to need to import a bunch more taxpayers.
320
You are of course assuming immigrants bring a net benefit to the country.
There is zero evidence of that: Gov’t stats were lies…
“Its outrageous and absolutely unjustified.”
Come off it. Royal Mail is losing a fortune. It’s long overdue, and could arguably be higher.
OT, Salmond is dischuffed at the SNP’s exclusion from the debate. If he takes legal action, could this give Cameron and Brown an “out”, making them appear willing to debate but being able to balme others for its collapse?
320: What? Only if theres the economic activity for them to generate. We do have 2.5m unemployed at the moment you know, which aren’t generating anything.
320 - there is a slight flaw in your argument, I wonder if anyone else can spot it too
319. John R - cheerio, cheerio, cheerio……
322
“Come off it. Royal Mail is losing a fortune.”
Royal Mail profits almost double
Royal Mail worker
Plans to part-privatise the Royal Mail are continuing
Royal Mail has seen its annual profits almost double, as all four parts of the business went into the black for the first time in 20 years.
The state-owned firm made a group-wide operating profit of £321m in the year to 31 March, up from £162m a year ago.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8049808.stm
266-Shocking! About time we wound up the Commonwealth then.
322
Nonsense
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8405404.stm
319 Eh?! You alright, John?
329
Amazing how those who support the Post Office appear not to have any idea of what they are talking about.
It’s the education system…
59. Scott, why should the Tories get any air time in a debate in Scotland , they have one MP. If there is to be a Scotland only debate it should be the 3 main parties as per the London debate, ie SNP, Lab and LD’s.
“Amazing how those who support the Post Office appear not to have any idea of what they are talking about.”
Wooo, hang on, just pointing out that we’re overdue a rise in the price of stamps and that a rise isn’t “outrageous” doesn’t make one a “supporter of the Post Office.”
333
“Come off it. Royal Mail is losing a fortune. It’s long overdue, and could arguably be higher.”
can only be described as “support of the Post Office”.
US Q3 GDP growth revised down unexpectedly from 2.8% (annualised) to 2.2%. The initial print was 3.5%…the year ending on an uncertain note.
332-By 2005 votes L, SNP, LD, C come in at 39.5%, 22.6%, 17.7% and 15.8%, so much less difference between 3 and 4 and even 2,3,4 than seat tallies indicate.
332: Oh here we go again….
The SNP will no, and cannot form a Westminster government. Even UKIP, the Greens or the BNP would have more right than a little regional party.
332. Why should there be a debate in Scotland? It’s an irrelevant and parochial backwater subsidised by England.
Why not have a debate in the western half of London? Similar population to Smackistan, but it actually contributes rather than simply spends tax.
“can only be described as “support of the Post Office”.”
For this particular point. “Supporters of the Post Office” makes one sound like some sort of lefty union member.
154. Tom, Correct , it is just another London centric manipulation of the voting system. How the Tories on here can spout so much rubbish when they are the smallest party in Scotland wit h1 MP and should not have any debating time in Scotland.
340: Hint for malcom
this is politicalbetting.com, not scottishpoliticalbetting.com. In terms of the Westminster elections, scotland is just another region, not a special snowflake.
336-338, The herd speaks, but cannot get away with the point that the Tories are the 4th party in Scotland and should get no airtime in Scotland. You cannot have one set of rules for London and then change them for Scotland, ooops yes you can its called the union dividend.
341, The herd grows, soon be a stampede.
283 Jack W - Certainly I would agree that the debates might give the LibDems a significant boost, if they go well for them (of course we don’t yet know the full details of the format). But that does depend, as you say, on Nick Clegg grasping the opportunity. My doubts on this are two-fold:
(a) I’m not sure that he will in fact come over well; he sometimes hits the nail on the head, but often misses badly.
(b) I continue to think that the LibDems have made a significant strategic error in their approach to this election, and in addition that they have been shambolic in their policy formulation. Those two factors will make it harder for Clegg to perform well, even if he were an ace media performer.
So, yes, they have an opportunity, but their recent record suggests that they may well fail to make anything of it.
315…if the increases result in declining revenue then it just goes to show how thick these public service regulators really are. i need no convincing of their ineptitude.
342: Malcolm…I’ll try again to get through your whisky-addled brain.
This is an election to elect representitives for governement of the the United Kingdom. Scotland is part of the United Kingdom. There will be implications for Scotland who leads the governement of the United Kingdom.
Cameron, Brown and Clegg all (to a lesser or greater extent) have a certain probability of being that leader
Alex Salmond does not.
@321:
Over 50% of immigration into the UK are those on student visas. Those people pay nearly 70% of UK Universities’ tuition fees.
In the future, since Britain no longer makes anything or provides any services anyone wants to buy, immigration may be our only route to sustainable GDB growth.
346. Who knows? perhaps he will defect.
342 Scotland is a geographical expression, malcolm. Take away the English money and it wouldn’t exist.
You’re lucky we tolerate you. If it weren’t for the English funding your dole, smack, and lager, you’d still be covered in woad and worshipping the fire god.
Father Finton Stack returns from two hours on Oxford Street without the correct present for Mrs Stack, but not to worry - I have a convincing narrative and if there’s one thing I’ve learned round here it’s that the narrative is all-important
346 – Slack, there is no need to insult MalcolmG, if he has not cottoned on by now to the basic facts you highlight, then there is little point in discussing the matter further.
350 - I’d watch out for the swingback if I were you.
351: You’re right, I’m sorry for that. It just irritates me to no end how people cannot grasp the simple fact. Even UKIP, the Greens and BNP have more right than the SNP to be present as they are at least (potentially) putting up enough canditates to form a government.
351
Malcolm is practising his case for the court .
based on what we have seen, he will?
#346 Slackbladder
Alex Salmond could be the leader of Scotland. As I said before, it is more likely that the SNP will win a majority of Scottish seats at Westminster than that Clegg will win a majority of UK seats at Westminster.
Therefore the leader of Scotland could well be not Brown, not Cameron and not Clegg, but Alex Salmond.
Therefore one potential leader of Scotland IS Alex Salmond-and he is being totally omitted from the debates-unacceptable.
For tag-team-tim this story must have Tory connection somewhere. Get the off duty bot working, now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8426028.stm
353. I wish the SmackNits would put up candidates in England. I really do.
They’re thinking in a very unimaginative and linear way in assuming that Scottish independence requires winning a referendum in Scotland.
It could as easily be achieved by winning an expulsion referendum in England.
That way, when an independent Scotland turns into East Germany, the locals couldn’t vote to rejoin the union so as to refill their pockets with English money.
If they’d actually been expelled from the union, their rejoining would be subject to a further English vote.
So the SmackNits should actually prefer an English expulsion of Smackistan, because unlike a Scotch referendum it would be irreversible.
Of course we’d still allow regiments of Scottish sepoys in the English army. Their ethnic costumes are so colourful.
Excellent, another thread dies a slow tortuous death at the hands of a minority, single issue rabble.
355: Ok…look I’ll make this clear.
We are not electing a leader of scotland, or representives for scotland. We are representing a leader of the United Kingdom. It does not matter who or what has seats in scotland in isolation. It’s just another region.
You rabbiting on about a ‘leader of scotland’ with respect to these elections makes about as much sense as talking about the Wurzels being the ‘leaders of the West Country’.
As it’s a bit quiet - how about a spec of controversy about that oracle of all known truth Wikipedia…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100020515/climategate-the-corruption-of-wikipedia
355 - oh, dear Lord.
Can I just say, on behalf of all the non-SNP supporting Scots, we’re not all this frighteningly, dribblingly dense? Please, please don’t judge the rest of us by their yardstick.
359 Well said Slackbladder.
Could someone with fiscal knowledge elaborate on this please. Is it good or bad news?
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5BL2CI20091222
361
As an ex Scot I must agree: not all Scots as as thick as the nits.
But hey, they are noisy and persistent.
Anyone would think they want independence.
As far as I am concerned they can have it: and their share of the National Debt. And all UK defence facilities in Scotland closed and moved to England.., English jobs for English workers..
John Rentoul:
“Tories slump to, er, 13-point lead”
http://johnrentoul.independentminds.livejournal.com/232721.html
363. Good news I suspect - the Bank should have made money on these purchases which it will now cash in.
359- surely Mebyon Kernow should be involved too!
Can I borrow the combined wisdom of pb?
I’m considering buying a car. I’ve never bought a car before, apart from a few total old bangers in my 20s which I drove into the ground.
But now I’m looking at spending a fair chunk of money. Maybe £15k. I want the car to be reasonably funky and cool, but not embarrassingly youthful (for a thriller writer in his early middle years). I want it to be reliable, but nicely fast, and big enough to cart my daughter around - but definitely not a people carrier.
Smaller is generally better, as I live in London. And I want it to be NOT French, on principle.
Any ideas? I’m thinking maybe the new Fiesta or the new Golf. Should I buy new? My friend - a car dealer in his youth - says I should buy NEARLY new, and save thousands. I suspect he might be right.
All advice gratefully received. Thanks.
#359Slackbladder and others
“We are not electing a leader of scotland, or representives for scotland. We are representing(sic) a leader of the United Kingdom.”
I see the cyberBrits are becoming a touch hysterical, not to say abusive, but I am sure I will survive
You are not under the UK constitution doing any such thing (assumming you mean something like “electing”), which many on this site (not just SNP supporters) have pointed out
365 - Not one of John Rentoul’s finest posts. The average of polls tells us something, but it would be wrong to conclude that the average is inevitably more accurate than any individual poll. The ComRes poll could be precision-perfect or the ARS poll could be dead on. Averaging polls does not provide more accuracy. It is most useful when pollsters are in the same sort of ballpark and least useful when pollsters are fundamentally divided.
What is apparent at present is that different pollsters are picking up very different levels of Labour support (Tory support is much more consistent across all pollsters). We don’t know which methodology is most accurate. Averaging does not help us draw any conclusions.
369. Tom Robinson: You are not under the UK constitution doing any such thing
In theory, yes, but not in practice.
368
SeanT
May I suggest you pose your question on Honest John’s site,, the Discussion thread, You will have to join but it is free.
You will get lots of detailed sensible answers..
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/threads.htm?f=2
There is also a car by car breakdown telling you all you need to know on each car and road tests…
The problem is whilst all the Scot Nat moaning on the issue is very tiresome, under the terms of the Representation of the People Act and similar, given how tightly drawn up electoral law is in terms of media bias during election campaigns (too tightly in my personal opinion) there must be a reasonable prospect of a legal challenge succeeding and putting the kybosh on any TV leadership debates.
370. Not just that Antifrank, but some pollsters are showing much more volatility in the Labour share than others as well.
Adam Boulton looks back at his predictions:
Predictions For 2009: The Results
http://blogs.news.sky.com/boultonandco/Post:bd5e761d-49c8-4d40-98e5-6ba6f26a1559
MTF
Way back at the start of the Credit Crunch, before Quantitative Easing, there was Qualitative Easing. This was when the BoE exchanged AAA Gilts for poorer quality company bonds. The idea being that while there was fear and panic regarding the worth of various company bonds – effectively making mark to market and company valuation impossible – no one doubted the worth of a government bond.
It looks like this is the BoE starting to reverse Qualitative Easing which indicates an increased market confidence in the worth of company bonds, ie. We’re getting back to business as usual.
Good Afternoon,
Well I had gone to sleep politically for the year and then this bombshell drops. I presume previous threads have covered why leaders debates will change everything about General Election campaigns for ever so I won’t bang on. However Nick Clegg should be saying a prayer of thanks to the God he doesn’t believe in. He fact he should probably commission a new Cathedral or endow a monastic order. The moment he stands on a podium on an equal footing with Cameron and Brown then he banks a large cheque. It’ll turbo charge the boost the party nearly always gets from equal air time which under the formula used means less unequal air time than normal. It also takes an axe to the “wasted vote” argument. The result of the last election was Lab 36% Con 33% Others 31%.
What on earth have the two established powers done institutionalising third party parity in what will be the centre pieces of the election TV coverage? If I were a PPC in a Lab/Lib or Lib/Con marginal I’d be incandecent.
And that is before Nick is any good. Of course he may not be very good. However what if he is? you could easierly see a “Wobbly Wednesday” when some post debate polls had a surge into the high twenties only 7% or 8% behind the tories and Labour in third. It might all be statistical chaff because of the coverage but it would blow open the media coverage.
Its a hell of a set of Dice to roll by Cameron and as the person with the most to lose it was always going to have to be him that vetoed.
All proffessions are conspiracies against the laities. The comming election is the best chance for “Others” since well.. I don’t know when. Surely the biggest worry for Cowley street over the last year has been the extraordinary way that disatisfaction with the big two has passed over the Lib Dems and gone straight to the fringes.
These debates institionalise the voice of “Others” in the process. They deconstruct punch and judy and the despatch box. They culturally reinforce plurality. Nick Clegg can if he wants hoover up the “Others” if he does well enough.
Trying to seek order from chaos my mind wonders if this isn’t like a 19th Centuary Reform Act. Judicious expansion of the franchise in an attempt to forestall revolution. Lets make the Big two the Big Three for fear that the system shatters completely.
I really do think david cameron has just made his first big mistake of his Leadership.
He has offer Nick Clegg Excalibur.
We will have to wait to see if Nick Clegg is worthy enough to pull the Sword from the stone.
374 - That too. It is pointless looking at the average of the pollsters at present. We know that there is a problem assessing the true level of Labour support. It may be resolved before the election, it may not. Averaging, however, is not the way to do so.
369: Misprint. Indeed we are only electing representives. However in doing that we are also deciding who forms the government of the United Kingdom. NOT Scotland. The United Kingdom.
Salmond will not being forming that government. He will not be Prime Minster.
368 - SeanT. Two years ago I purchased my first new car, which was a Golf MkV Match. It has been a superb bay. The Golf is a little dull in some respects but it is a good drive and extremely well made. You can get nice little touches, like an iPod connector for your tunes which connects it into the stereo. The new Mk6 Golf has had some seriously impressive reviews and they have now introduced a diesel version of the GTi. In summary, I can’t recommend the Golf highly enough, but be prepared that it costs more to service than equivalent cars. The Focus is also a good drive whilst the Astra is a little more fun, but feels quite a bit cheaper inside.
368. Second-hand Honda FRV or CRV. Loads of kit, phenomenally reliable, hold their value and lots of room for a little one and her stuff in the back. Plus you don’t bugger your back bending triple to strap them into the kiddy seat, because the seat’s about two feet higher up.
379 - Come to that, he will not even be an MP.
361. To be fair, I think the SNP have good grounds for complaint. It’s hard to see a solution that is both fair and practical though.
You could say that the whole subject highlights that devolution is an unstable and unsatisfactory fudge. But then I don’t suppose the SNP would disagree with that.
322: Scott, why should the Tories get any air time in a debate in Scotland , they have one MP. If there is to be a Scotland only debate it should be the 3 main parties as per the London debate, ie SNP, Lab and LD’s
That is, to be frank, a weak argument. The Conservatives have few seats in the North East. Should Tyne Tees not broadcast. Labour is not overwhelmed with seats in East Anglia. Should there be a differnt broadcast for Norfolk? This is a NATIONAL election. If the SNP wish to contest it on a purely parochial basis that’s entirely their prerogative but that does not change the national government outcome. Please do grow up and don’t be so chippy.
368.Seant, go visit one of those big care warehouse type places which sell new and second hand, you can check them out online before you go. Oh, and take a very honest friend who knows about cars with you for advice, and listen to them when you fall in love with the cool car instead of the sensible one.
385.Sorry Seant, no pun intended, I meant car not care warehouses.
370/374/378 - I tend to agree but posted it for it’s interest. I’m becoming a bit of a fan of his little blog posts as he seems to be a reasonable voice of reason and as one of the last standard-bearers for Blairism. The polls have been too volatile this month to discern much in the way of trends beyond a confirmation of the slight easing of the Tory position down to the 40% mark, Labour’s support has firmed up (perhaps more in certainty to vote than in number) and the LibDems continue to hover around 20%. One other notable feature (to me) is that Others have slipped back a bit. Wether they will be that large at the next election.
As to the Labour support level variations, this is the most puzzling aspect. I do hope that things will become clearer in January/February.
368 Sean T - Golf = snooze. You could get a new-ish Mini Cooper S for the money, which is small and hilarious fun to drive, but the image doesn’t suit everyone…
377
Everything I have seen of Nick Clegg convinces me he is not leadership material.
I shall be very surprised if he makes any electoral headway through the debates…I see no evidence of political empathy.
383: Doesn’t change the fact that realistically UKIP, The Greens and the BNP all have a logically stronger arguement for being included than the SNP.
383 - I actually think there are some fairly easy solutions around a separate debate in Scotland (TV broadcast is set up to allow it) and possible cutaway segments/prepared statements in the main debate.
Salmond isn’t an idiot. He knows the case is very weak - Clegg would be doing fairly poorly not to get 5 million votes next year. The winning party might well get 10 million. 500K would be a fairly good SNP result. But if he puts a weak case strongly enough, he’ll get concessions on the other points. Fair enough; that’s negotiation.
366/ 376 ty both
377 YS cameron has been calling for it in public for years. Trying to back down now would have made him look weak, indecisive and brought down the wrath of the media who would have felt led up a hill just like they felt with Brown and the non election. Cameron simply had no other choice now. The Broadcasters wanted a high ratings event and would have savaged the Party Leader who pulled the plug on it.
Also see 79 I’m not sure the it’s Cameron taking all trhe risk line and Brown has nothing to risk and everything to gain is right. You mentioned those urban Labour seats those could be heavily affected by this as much as any.
391
If Salmond gets to speak so should Nick Griffin. He will poll more votes.
369: SeanT
Fiesta is very good for what it is, but not quite your image I would have said, a tad young if you go for the sportier ones, or a tad school-run-mum if you don’t. Also quite cheapo inside IMHO.
Golf is OK, a bit predictable though. And expensive
Audi A3? Bit old design now though.
Honda Civic maybe?
Paul Waugh on Mayor Mandy:
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2009/12/mayor-mandelson.html
He points to an article on the Guardian website where Ken is quoted as:
“My assumption is that by this time next year we should be on campaign,” he said. “Until you see the outcome of the general election there is no point in having a plan. If you have a labour government you still struggle to beat Boris in a fourth Labour term.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/dec/20/peter-mandelson-london-mayor-2012
Which is interesting because Ken is looking at the Mayorality as anti-govt vote (v Blair the first time) and Boris (v Brown in the third vote) which conveniently misses out the second vote where Ken won comfortably when he ran under the Labour banner.
389. I’m not going there this afternoon however your use of the word empathy is I fear very perceptive.
However if I understand anything at all about what drives a section of the Lib Dem vote ( I expect heckling ) then he doesn’t need to be that good. The minute he walks onto a stage with parity of esteem with Cameron and Brown he wins big.
Its not the kind of thing to admit to on a political betting site but i’m just astonished that “they” much more Cameron has agreed to this.
#383 MichaelK
“You could say that the whole subject highlights that devolution is an unstable and unsatisfactory fudge. But then I don’t suppose the SNP would disagree with that.”
Thanks for making a sensible point-even though I assume from your tone that you don’t support Scottish independence.
I am though unclear why there cannot be a debate, broadcast IN SCOTLAND ONLY that involves Brown, Cameron, Clegg and Salmond.
389.The other half used to love the mini in his younger days, was his favourite car. Now, he reckons they are a girlie accessory similar to a handbag.
395 - I’m not sure he will and Salmond will definitely win more seats (as will Plaid). I wouldn’t be against having cutaways to people like Griffin, Lucas and Pearson, but nothing more than that is justified. But given TV is capable of regional variations, there is some merit in having Scottish and Welsh debates for those who want them.
361 / 364. Thank God for that.
To hear them wibbling on, you’d think the SmackNits already had 100% Scottish support.
In which case, why haven’t they seceded yet?
I reckon Cameron will announce a referendum sometime during his first term, and it will bugger the SmackNits for another 20 years.
SeanT - ex demonstration models are a great bargain. And I’ve had several Golf GTIs - they stick to the road like they’re on rails and great build quality/reliable.
re 342 malcolmG I’m not a Tory, and yes of course the Tories should get a debate. Your argument is a complete fallacy. Should the BBC SW bleep out all Gordon’s words because they don’t have any seats in the south-west? How do we get this through to you - we are ONE nation with small regional bits - Scotland is no more different than the West Midlands. This is a UK election.
368 SeanT, where are you going to park this car? And where are you going to be driving it? If parked on the street in London and mostly for driving around London, my advice is get another banger, preferably one that looks a bit bashed about. That way, when gadding about in London traffic, people will look at your car, assume you have nothing to lose and let you in - rather than bump their own. And if they do, you won’t get remotely wound up.
If you are only occasionally going any distance to say Cornwall, then rent something really smart. It will prove better value all round.
378 Yellow Submarine
Is there not a risk of the exact opposite? Many people have happily thrown their votes in the Lib Dem protest dustbin before, safe in the knoowlegde that they won’t have any real power.
Now however the spotlight will be on them, and their policies, in a serious way, really for the first time ever. The party that hitherto could have promised a trolley dash round Harrods and a free half hour in the sack with the supermodel of your choice in its manifesto for all the difference it would make in the real world…has suddenly got to be a proper grown-up party. people don’t vote Lib Dme thinking that lib Dem policies will result. They vote Not-Labour or Not-Tory.
I think they will wilt under the scrutiny and people will think twice, threee times before possibly imbuing them with some real power in a hung parliament which is theoretically more likely in a 3-party world.
Tories just need to hammer home message vote Yellow get Brown, and they are home and dry.
399 - There may well be a Scottish debate, but Cameron, Clegg and Brown would put up alternates in practice.
re 399 because of the simple argument that there is not a Scottish election.
399 - Why should any party leader standing at the UK general election debate with a party leader who is not standing at that election?
I think the Civic suits the funky but small criteria.
A Focus with extras or a Golf are also a good city car.
The new Fiesta is nice but bit girly.
378 - Possibly. It will give Clegg a good platform but the public are quite used to hearing from LibDems now with equality of coverage on the news and programmes like QT. I still think that the only person with nothing to loose is Brown. He is expected to be defeated at the next election, so he can go up (possibly). The problem for Clegg is that if he is seen as irrelevant in the debate in terms of the arguments put forward then it could do enormous damage to the LibDems. No doubt Brown will try and portray it as a vote for Clegg is a vote for Cameron. We know the Tories are doing the reverse in many constituencies. What he needs to do is to pick up two or three themes and push them hard. It’s when they go single issue that the third party seems to get most traction.
I do agree that Cameron has more to loose than any other leader. If he fluffs it, then it could loose the floating voters. He again, needs to focus on the details that Brown will tractor-stat and target them relentlessly. In the end, large chunks of the population will have decided by the time the debates come around. It is only the floating voters who will be shifted by them.
On another thought, the final details have to be worked out. If that drags on, then a March election is called what are the chances of them not happening or them being concertinad into one with a three-person panel from ITV/BBC/Sky. We’ll end up with the X-factor politics after all.
399 - Salmond is not a candidate.
Who will the SNP put up who is a candidate?
370/374
If you average the poll shares for the month or so before the last three general elections, the Conservative vote everytime has come in one point +/- that figure. The problem comes when you get to the other two. Labours polls average has always turned out higher by several points (7,7,3) than their final election result. The Libdems have been twice higher on election day and once the same (3,3,-).
So my take is that the Conservative average figure is just about right, the Labour figure lower and the Libdems may or not be a tad higher than their current average figure.
The average figure is no less likely to be right than any individual poll and when the polls seem to be bouncing around, as the way they are now, the safe approach is to look at the averages.
266 I doubt if Uganda would get kicked out of the Commonwealth if the law was passed. Nigeria has sharia law across half the country, under which a death sentence can be imposed for sex outside marriage, yet remains a Commonwealth country.
Most Commonwealth countries are actually pretty horrible places.
405. I agree with an awful lot of that actually and although they’d never admit it/use that volcabulary so does campaigns because thats what so many of our campaigns are designed to harness.
Where we disagree is wether or not the extraordinary ammount of extra publicity Clegg will get from a tripartite debate will help or hinder the process you describe.
308.antifrank, totally agree with you. Within 12 months of that debate we will be going to the polls again in Holyrood, and this would give Salmond a rather unfair advantage over his opponents in that Parliament in much the same way he claims that the SNP would be here. I think that Salmond has serously weakened his argument by stepping down as an MP when it comes to these debates.
Anyhoos, those that want to watch them will, and those that don’t, won’t.
Personally, I am not convinced they will go ahead, or that Brown will feature. Nor am I sure that Clegg is automatically a winner before they even start, now if it was Charles Kennedy with a valid and long held view that had been cleverly interwoven into the Libdem’s flagship policies like student fees…. He did seem to be able to sell the Libdems in a very unique way.
399. Tom Robinson December 22nd, 2009 at 3:16 pm
“Thanks for making a sensible point-even though I assume from your tone that you don’t support Scottish independence.”
Actually I am mildly pro-independence. By “mildly” I mean that it’s not a particularly emotive issue for me. I just think independence is the best option (for everyone concerned) that is practically possible.
415.Sorry, that should have been 408.
Thanks for the advice! Am looking at the Civic. Hmmm…
#411 Tim
“Who will the SNP put up who is a candidate?”
If there is (not conceded) to be a representative for the SNP other than Salmond then it would clearly be their Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, the MP for Moray.
For those who have never heard him (or even of him) he is a polished performer on TV.
As i posted last night i am far from convinced that the loser in the debates will not be Clegg.
The parallels to be drawn are with the London mayoral debates where Paddick was marginalised and the vote became a straight fight between Boris and Ken.
Why can the same not happen here?
Seant - If you haven’t owned a car in London for a while then you’ve got to realise that parking and driving restrictions have changed of late, and are now very expensive if you get it wrong.
I’ve weighed out £320 in the last 24 hours on parking in the wrong places when both times I was certain I had the right permits. Expensive and a pain in the a…
Personally I think the new golfs are a bit tinny. If you push the panels they pop in and out. All new cars seem a bit plasticy compared to older ones.
Whatever preconceptions you might have, I’d definitely have a look at the new Minis. Very funky interiors and fun to drive. Oh, and go for a diesel too - much quieter and more economical.
I think Yellow Sub’s right that Clegg wins just by walking on stage with the other two. I also think, judging from recent PMQ performances, that he will do reasonably well. But even if he performs quite poorly, he is a winner from this.
419 - It has to be him, Salmond is not standing.
Can anyone think of an example anywhere in the world where the election debates would include someone who wasn’t a candidate?
419. Hate to be boring Tom, but please remind us again why Salmond should appear in a debate among contenders to be the Prime Minister of the UK.
423. Good God.
I agree with something timbot wrote.
422, Clegg has the most opportunity to increase his electoral chances, but he is often (maybe two-thirds of the time) woeful at PMQs. Mr. Gosh-I-Am-Angry is a rubbish, petulant approach and he has the common Lib Dem trait of being a smarmy, holier-than-thou, ever-so-earnest arsehead quite often.
However, if he can tap into certain moral issues, where he has shown good judgement in the past (Green, gurkhas, ID cards) he could do well.
Turning up gives him credit, but he could easily lose that and more besides for a shit performance. Whatever Brown and Cameron do they’ll still lead the big parties tussling for Government. If Clegg cocks up he’ll damage Lib Dem hopes and make the election even more into a two horse race.
I was always amused by a sub set of canvasing interviews ( of defs and probs) when I was standing for reelection to my council seat. ” I’d love to vote Lib Dem but its a wasted vote” ” If only you could win round here” ” You work so hard locally but I need to keep x/y/z out”
I then remind people I’m an incumbant ergo the wasted vote argument doesn’t play.
” Oh of course Cllr Submarine! Your shamanic powers over dog poo and broken street lights are mythic and will sang by our children’s children. of course we’ll vote for you.”
The biggest inhibitor to people voting Lib Dem is the belief, most often accurately, that they can’t win. This is drawn primarily from the hard wiring that its a two horse race.
Tripartite TV debates featuring Clegg will at a subliminal , subconcious, non verbal level beam a dodgy bar chart into the mind of every viewer.
One with three columns on it all equal.
This is the Lib Dems very own Christmas miracle.
414 YS - Let’s suppose you are right, and the LibDems get a big boost from the debates. This is a zero-sum game, so the question is: from whom does that boost come? The Greens, perhaps, but their share isn’t large enough to start with to make a huge difference.
Surely the most likely losers from any LibDem boost would be Labour, rather than the Conservatives? I would suggest that this election is shaping up to be Conservative fiscal discipline vs ‘Let’s muddle on as before and hope everything turns out OK despite the massive deficit’. If the LibDems do well, it surely must be at the expense of those still hoping for money to keep appearing from nowhere.
Clegg does not win by walking on stage.
His ill thought out populist policies actually come really into focus.
He could be taken apart.
420 - That’s a weak analogy. Firstly, appearing between Livingstone and Johnson doesn’t make you look like a political player, it makes you look like a panel show host. Secondly, the mayoral debate was never big news and few people watched it or even saw highlights (fortunately for Bozza as it happens - he was fairly poor).
I think people are underestimating the significance of these PM debates. They will be absolutely the centrepieces of the campaign - the whole narrative of the campaign will be built around them and a huge amount will ride on the build up, the events and the post match analysis. Until now, British election campaigns have been all phoney war with few set piece battles - bizarrely, the only time leaders DON’T engage with each other is the only time people are vaguely interested in seeing it.
426.Morris, Clegg in many ways has the most to lose. He is going to be asked THAT question three times, and he better have the right answer first time and stick to it for consistency or he will be toast. Surprised no one has mentioned that massive elephant trap for Clegg or the Libdems.
It dominated the Libdems Scottish elections campaign drowning everything else out.
427. That’s one possible outcome.
Another possible outcome is that people will look at Clegg and remember why they don’t vote LibDem.
“Isn’t he the one who went out with one of the Cheeky Girls?”
The reason I say the SNP has good grounds for complaint is that they are serious contenders in a whole swathe of seats. It makes no sense to talk or even think about Scottish politics with them out of the picture. By contrast, UKIP and the Greens are serious contenders in precisely one seat a piece.
Also, I’m surprised that Tory sympathizers, some of whom fantasize about “Labour meltdown”, are not aghast at a format that will exclude the main challenger to Labour in many Scottish seats.
Cameron’s biggest risk in these debates is to be side-tracked into attacking Clegg - he must focus his attacks 100% on Brown.
431, um, by that question d’you mean who he’d prefer to support in coalition?
And I remain to be convinced that the debates will actually occur…
Re Clegg
I just analyse my own responses to the leaders as follows:
Brown? Tries to act natural and fails.
Cameron: Tries to act natural and succeeds.
Clegg: Does not try to act natural.
I do not have any vibes of human warmth from Clegg. Mo spark of humanity.. He could be a doll.
Maybe I’m at fault.
On the debate issue, I think people are forgetting a few things.
1) 2009 has been the worst year for politics I can recall
2) This General Election comes on the back of the lowest turnouts in General Election since the universal franchise was first granted
3) There is a recession going on and people are not in the frame of mind for the nuances of political debate
4) This is the first time any British TV Company has attempted such an event and as such chances none of them are going to get it right.
It could turn out to be a non-event or a farce in which any or all the candidates could come out of it worse for the experience. I do think people here are raising to higher expectations. Chances are the three debates will be damp squibs.
I’m not saying these debates aren’t wothwhile, just that TV Pilots rarely set the world on fire. All they do is decide whether the series is worth making or not……..
Cameron will have to remember not to send Clegg off to fetch toast, or shine his shoes, or wax his cricket bat, or anything.
Every time he looks at Clegg he must be reminded of that 11-year-old fag he had when he was at Eton. Something like that could just slip out.
Perhaps if they have a commercial break, Clegg could leave 5 minutes early to go and warm the seat up for Dave.
I think Cameron only chummed up with the Latvian Ess-Ess to look hard.
434 NOA - He won’t make that mistake. In fact, I imagine he won’t do much direct attacking at all. It will all be about what a Conservative government would actually do to address the country’s problems.
434, that’s a risk but I don’t see it as a huge one. Unlike Clegg, who has less firepower than the big boys yet insists on splitting it anyway, Cameron’s never really gone for savaging the Lib Dems. Clegg’s more likely to be lovebombed.
436, possible they won’t, but I think they will.
427. YS - in that case why do the Lib Dems not do markedly better in elections that don’t use FPTP?
#419 John R
“Hate to be boring Tom, but please remind us again why Salmond should appear in a debate among contenders to be the Prime Minister of the UK.”
There is a serious constitutional issue involved here in that no-one is electing the UK Prime Minister in law-and it is the law that must be paramount here.
If the SNP gain a majority of the Scottish Westminster seats then de facto this will have made Salmond the most significant politicaian in the United Kingdom as far as Scotland is concerned.
While it may irritate people in the rest of the UK (why-they don’t have to watch the debate) it is entirely reasonable for the Scots to watch a debate involving the potential leaders of their country-and these are Brown, Cameron, Clegg and Salmond.
434 - I disagree, there are a lot of Lib Dem seats the Tories need to (re)gain at the Election. Some firepower needs focussing on Clegg, the LDWs and a message that voting yellow will get you Brown
443, explain to me how Salmond will become PM in the GE?
443. Nope, I can’t see an answer in there, although I did love this bit
If the SNP gain a majority of the Scottish Westminster seats then de facto this will have made Salmond the most significant politicaian in the United Kingdom as far as Scotland is concerned.
I’m sure I don’t need to say why. Tee hee!
428. Richard,
I entirely accept that it could be a disaster. I don’t think I need list the roll call of communications disasters that befell the first 11 months of the Clegg leadership. His personal ratings only began to turn after the Gurkhas. The best predictor of human behaviour is past behaviour. We don’t really change that much. The biggest known unknown for the Lib Dems over the next 6 months is Clegg’s ability to say really stupid things and then be mildly petulant about it.
However I genuinely believe that the default position for the party is that he wins a bit by walking on stage. Its the Oxygen of Publicity.
443
epic fail
Salmond is not being elected.. he has zippo to do with Westminster elections so he has no legitimate reason to be on TV.
End of debate..
443 - If the SNP gain a majority of the Scottish Westminster seats then de facto this will have made Salmond the most significant politicaian in the United Kingdom as far as Scotland is concerned.
Salmond is irrelevant as he won’t be in the Westminster Parliament.
433.Why, Salmond is not planning to be our next PM. This type of leadership debate for a GE is going to be ground breaking, but not in Scotland. We had a round of leadership debates in the run up to the Holyrood elections in 2007. We also have Holyrood elections the following year up here, the SNP as the government get tons of media attention up here, and Salmond is FM. He would recieve a very unfair advantage over his opponents in that election should he get to appear with Clegg, Brown and Cameron in this debate. That is why I feel Salmond’s argument has been weakened, he is not even standing for Westminster, where as in 2007 he was an MP standing as an MSP and pitching to be the FM of Scotland.
Its a mess, but one where Salmond and his party had a choice, they chose to put their eggs and their leader into Holyrood.
It could go either way for Clegg but he has to be delighted he gets the chance. It is something that 3rd party leaders have wanted for years. An opportunity to portray themselves as a future prime minister - sure it might backfire but you’d want to roll the dice.
Now just imagine if it was Ashdown or Kennedy being given this opening. They really might have been able to grab it.
449 - “Salmond is irrelevant as he won’t be in the Westminster Parliament”
Exactly Tim, there’s a first time for everything
447 YS - Yes, but my real question was whether, if the LibDems get a boost, is it Labour or the Conservatives who would lose out as a result?
I have to agree with those who are saying the BBC spin on the economy is astonishing. I listened to the radio in the car and couldn’t believe it. It was totally divorced from reality and the actual figures. In one clip they were also talking about Ireland and completely failed to explain the risk of sovereign default and what might hit us and our debts. They were trying to use Irleand to say all is well in the UK!
448 Perhaps Salmond could appear in a debate on his own?
Traditionally, many Scottish thinkers can be found sitting in a pool of urine in a shop doorway, drinking Special Brew at 8am, and arguing with themselves.
I would be happy to provide Salmond with a pool of urine.
435.Morris, yep, coalitions. Sorry I am multitasking and typing in between doing 101 other things today. Hung Parliaments have been very much in the minds of the media and the narrative, that will come up for Clegg in particular in these debates. And it really was a nightmare for his party during the Scottish elections last time, cannot remember anything else that Nicol was asked or selling policy wise from that period. Its what will make the headlines, guaranteed.
The biggest problem for Nick Clegg in the debates is he is not the most well known or visible Libdem. Chances are a lot of people who might take a look will ask where’s Vince and compare Clegg with Cable (IMO not good for Nicky boy).
I absolutely agree with Yellow Submarine that this is a golden opportunity for Nick Clegg. Why has David Cameron agreed to do this? Perhaps because it is the right thing to do.
As for who will benefit most, my analysis is set out at 155. Both David Cameron and Gordon Brown stand at a very substantial handicap.
442.
We’ve gone down the regional list/d’hont road which
- destroys the Incumbancy/local champion motif through constituiencies too large to breed affection.
- PR destroys the wasted vote argument we decry in others but use ruthlessly ourselves.
- The party hasn’t even begun to adapt to campaigning in elections where you need people who agree with you to vote for you rather than people who don’t agree with you but hate the other lot slightly more.
- 3 decades of ruthless targeting means the Lib Dems don’t operationally exist in half the country at least.
451. What was special about Ashdown and Kennedy? One was a sanctimonious petulant adulterer who was fooled by Blair, and the other was a sanctimonious petulant drunkard who’s best remembered for appearing on Have I Got News for You.
They were self-important buffoons just like Clegg.
445 #Morris Dancer
“explain to me how Salmond will become PM in the GE?”
I never said that he would, did I?
Perhaps you could explain to me how we, any of us, are electing a Prime Minister of the UK?
If Labour wins, say, and Brown drops dead shortly after his unexpected victory due to shock, will we get to choose the next Prime Minister of the UK?
NO NO NO
443. By the SNP’s logic, the Labour First Minister of Wales should also have a debate with the main 3 UK party leaders.
455
John R
Your frequent derogatory references to Scots do yourself no justice. You post more than tim, much more objectionably than tim and frankly are becoming much more tiresome than tim - who at least has some insights and a sense of humour.
Please desist
456,
Surely he could defuse it easily?
1) Ally with the party with most votes (consistent with PR fetish)
2) Do so on a case by case basis, PR referendum essential etc.
Simple.
#450 ChristinaD
But why would your argument (not conceded) rule out Angus Robertson?
461, party with most seats gets to be Government, leader becomes PM.
Salmond isn’t standing to be an MP, his party isn’t standing in 90% of the country so can’t be the next Government.
If Salmond thinks he’s going to be the next PM, I’d like to also put forward my good self.
As the Supreme Queen of Capricornia, I have a global audience of almost 140k, I think that makes me equally qualified to represent interests outside of Westminster
460 - they were recognisable big name politicians well suited to presidential style campaigns. As others have said Clegg’s biggest problem is nobody knows who he is. This may be his opportunity to overcome that or it might have everyone asking ‘where is that Cable guy?’
565 - It wouldn’t.
Salmonds position is analagous to the leader of the Basque Nationalist Party which does not put up candidates outside the Basque country so did not participate in the debate between Zapatero and Roy
That one is a non issue.
Salmond would not even be eligible to debate with the Scottish leaders as he is not a candidate in the election concerned.
Robertson with the other Scottish Leaders is the only logical position for you to take.
458. antifrank December 22nd, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I believe debates in the US have sometimes been used as a platform for the challenger to demonstrate his normality and safeness to the viewers - am I thinking of Reagan in 1980?
I can imagine that Cameron might see these debates in that light. He knows there are still voters who might lean his way but fear the Tories are unreconstructed Thatcherites. If he can allay those fears he can benefit. To do so he needs to appear amicable and moderate for a few hours on TV - and he’s good at that.
465.Tom, these are leadership debates with a view to assessing the men who might be our next PM. With the best will in the world, Angus Robertson is head of a band of 7 Westminster MP’s and is not going to be pitching for the job of PM. As I keep saying, Salmond switching to Holyrood had weakened the SNP argument substantially here, he would be getting a boost that none of his opponents in Holyrood would have before a Holyrood election within 12 months too. They might rightly feel aggrieved at this.
Look, I am not even convinced these debates will even happen.
462. Presumably so should the leader of Sinn Fein, as should they win a majority of Ulster seats, presumably the said person would be ‘the most important politician in the UK, as far as Northern Ireland is concerned’.
469 - Logic and Scottish nationalism? Tim, you make some farfetched suggestions sometimes, but that takes the biscuit.
466 Morris or put another way….
Cameron/ Brown / Clegg - 60 million potentially affected viewers
Salmond/ Robertson - 5 million potentially affected viewers.
Says it all really.
I see the SNP and Plaid are going to sue if they are not included in the televised debates.
Huh, if ever there was a reason to privatise the BBC, then this is it.
ITV and SKY, both being privately owned broadcasters, can invite who they want to take part, and if they so chose, could exclude the SNP and Plaid for whatever reason they could dream up, and there would be nothing anyone could do about it.
But, the BBC, being taxpayer funded have a duty to include all those who seek to represent us in parliament.
Certainly the 2 nationalist parties are completely within their rights to pursue this, even through the courts if neccessary. Personally i think they are being petulant, but they are within their rights.
SO, ONCE AGAIN, the BBC has proved to be the issue. When when when are we going to wake up to the fact, that especially in this day and age, we simly do not need a publicly funded broadcater. Their mere existence is absolutely outrageous, and now, at last, we can see that they are an affront to democracy.
Sell it off. NOW!!!!!
458 “I absolutely agree with Yellow Submarine that this is a golden opportunity for Nick Clegg. Why has David Cameron agreed to do this? Perhaps because it is the right thing to do.”
AntiFrank I agree. I think Cameron agreed to a debate because he is a gentleman. The British people are still remarkably susceptible to that if they think it is genuine. It is also why, when the time comes, the Prince of Wales will prove a far more popular King than republicans hope.
The 10 O’Clock BBC news also showed why Cameron agreed to do it. We got 20 secs of Cameron saying why it was time for a change and Gordo issues a WRITTEN statement saying how delighted he is to have the opportunity to appear and debate etc. So confident is he about his style before the camera that he needs to dictate something to send to Nick Robinson.
453.
My instinct and its nothing more than that are that the two Clegg debate chances are
- To provide a lightening conductor for all the “Others” static in the atmosphere. I never thought I’d say it but he needs to dust off the Mark Littlewood “Spikey” memo.
- he needs to nail down the group that are causing all the bizzare Lib Dem/Lab swings in the polls wether they exist or not. Something statistically is going on it that reasons hence the bizzare results. of course now he has put ” savage cuts” on the quote archive that’s difficult to do.
Thats where I see extra vote share comming from.
Of course Cowley Street will be full of satans offering bread to the fasting Christ. They’ll tell him to gang up with Brown against cameron and try and protect the southern marginals.
468 - I think people forget that Kennedy was very, very low profile until the 2001 election. It was a major concern to some Lib Dems at the time, and a source of amusement for opponents. Many of these characters acquire a kind of weight with hindsight. Ashdown too is given a semi-mythical status but was widely derided as a pompous lightweight at the time.
476 - If he follows the Cowley Street satans, that’s the surest way I can think of to ensure that the 45% who see the Tories as an appealing alternative to Labour all vote for the Tories.
476, exactly right, Mr. Submarine. I suspect, however, Clegg will dilute his attacks by attacking both the Tories and Labour. If he goes all angry that might turn people off.
469. tim December 22nd, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Not necessarily. It depends on whether the debates are being held between party leaders or between the senior members of the parties that are standing in the election.
I don’t think we need be bound by the Spanish precedent either.
However, it doesn’t seem that this is the big issue. It seems the SNP wouldn’t insist on Salmond, they just want to participate.
476 - “They’ll tell him to gang up with Brown against cameron and try and protect the southern marginals”
And that would be the kiss of death for Clegg, south of the Humber.
476.Cameron didn’t agree to this debate because he is a gentleman, he did it because its the kind of more open political debate he wants to see. He has done all this before back in during the Conservative leadership campaign, he is an advocate of open primaries etc for selecting candidates, and just look at his Cameron directs over recent years. The guy has got consistent form for backing this type of form with his actions, if these debates go ahead, the biggest winner is the electorate and politics rather than any particular politician.
New Labour - New Dumbing Down
“The age of the traditional three-year degree could come to an end after universities were today ordered to devise two-year fast-track courses to cut the cost of higher education to students and the public purse.
Lord Mandelson, the business secretary who is also responsible for universities, wrote to the funding council for universities asking them to develop proposals for more flexible degrees. “Over the next spending review period, we will want some shift away from full-time three year places and towards a wider variety of provision,” he said…”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/dec/22/fast-track-degrees
Clegg gameplan
Debate 1 - successfully attack brown
Gains Lab votes and polls show LD in 2nd
Debate 2 - successfully attack Cameron
Gains unconvinced Tories and moves into the 30s
Debate 3 - portrays himself as the only opposition to the Tories and a PM in waiting
Gains Greens and ‘anything but tories’ labour backers and amrches into downing St
Too easy
“I absolutely agree with Yellow Submarine that this is a golden opportunity for Nick Clegg.”
However, the other side of the coin is that LibDem policy proposals are rarely heavily scrutinised in the way that Tory or Labour ones are. One can imagine this working to the disadvantage of the LibDems in a debate if there are too many “mansion tax”-type proposals.
Gaffe-wise, Gordon Brown has done nothing as bad as “The old age pension ? That is £30 isn’t it”.
478. YS - thanks for your earlier list of why the Lib Dems don’t perform better in non FPTP elections. I’m still a bit confused about your thinking though - how does the said list square with your earlier view that ‘they can’t win here’ is the biggest barrier to people voting Lib Dem?
You appear to be arguing that even if this barrier is removed, there is a host of structural reasons why it won’t actually deliver any more votes. So isn’t it just a red herring?
476 YS - That makes a lot of sense, but surely it contradicts your original point about why did Cameron agree to debates with Clegg being a full player?
If the LibDems do prosper by nailing down those Lab/LD swingers, that damages Labour - and thus helps Cameron. I appreciate that’s a simplification, and the effect will depend on the area and individual constituency, but it’s not obvious to me that Clegg gaining from the debates is necessarily bad news for the Conservatives - rather the reverse I’d have thought.
Tonight I have to go out drinking at a party in Soho. Last night I got hammered at a party in Westminster. Christmas Eve is going to be centred around drinking in north London, and I expect to be sloshed at a family do in Kent, all day Christmas Day.
The dipsomaniac festivities will recur on Boxing Day evening, followed by a large boozy lunch for the Cornish cousinage on the 28th.
Jesus, my hangover is a bitch, and I’ve only started. I wish it was January already.
On the subject of the wording used in polls, I’ve just completed an ARS survey via the Springboard panel, and noticed the contentious “who would you support in your constituency?” question has been reworded to say “who would you vote for in your constituency?”. Wonder whether that will give rise to different results.
John R
I’ve deleted your post @ 264 which is a disgrace. Your right to instantly-publish has been suspended.
I also have doubts about the email address that you have provided and I’m carrying out a check.
by
Mike Smithson
December 22nd, 2009 at 16:23
Tonight I have to go out drinking at a party in Soho. Last night I got hammered at a party in Westminster. Christmas Eve is going to be centred around drinking in north London, and I expect to be sloshed at a family do in Kent, all day Christmas Day.
The festivities will recur on Boxing Day evening, followed by a large boozy lunch for the Cornish cousinage on the 28th.
Jesus, my hangover is a b1tch, and I’ve only started. I wish it was January already.
476
That is exactly what he is doing - Clegg is always attacking the tories even in PMQs!
To me Clegg is hugely unimpressive, at least Brown has a kind of gravitas. Clegg is a no-mark.
We’ll see - my view of Blair was ALWAYS hugely negative and millions disagreed with me in 1997!
oooooh, what did he say?
John R is often a bit fruity, but still. “A disgrace”??
484. Christina D - what you say may or may not be true but the bottom line is having banged on about it so much Cameron had to say yes. He had no other choice. If he didn’t he would have been open to all sorts of accusations about ‘bottling it’ and so forth and he has ‘bottled it’ on too many things (localism, referendums, democracy, reducing quangos etc) lately to risk it.
483 Christina I’m sure you are right about openess. I just think that, if he were looking at it from a narrow partisan persepective, it would have been less risky to kick this into the long grass. He seems willing to do the “right” thing even if that is not in his own immediate bests interests.
His approach to the public finances seems to me to be on a similar line.
I am probably hopelessly naive in thinking this of any politician but I do think that Cameron has the potential to operate in the national interest, in a way that Brown could not dream of.
494, I think most politicians are far, far better than Brown when it comes to the national interest. Brown is simply the epitome of a despicable tribal tosspot. He is space cannon fodder.
486 Reflecting some more, I think it would have helped the LibDems a lot if Charlie Kennedy was still their leader.
He had the right kind of affability, seriousness and wit that comes across well on telly. I am not at all sure that Nick Clegg does.
Surely, the reason that Cameron agreed to the debates was that — looking at his opponents, Clegg & Brown — he reckoned he could win.
In Cameron’s position, no-one but a complete fool would agree unless he was very confident that he could beat the competition.
492 He said rude things likening senior LDs and others to characters in Little Britain ~IIRC~
492
Just childish insults about Lib Dem leaders IIRC. At least I think that post’s missing now - the homophobic ones are apparently OK to leave up…
484 Pleased to see David Lammy has learnt New Labour speak so well. The Gverment is cutting fundin, wants to cut down degrees to 2 years and Mr Lammy declaims “Tough choices are inevitable… We are absolutely clear that a high quality student experience with excellent teaching is vital to maintaining the world class Higher Education we enjoy in this country today.”
486. I’m sure that you are entirely correct about the scrutiny question. Each GE the Institute for Fiscal Studies undertake a very thorough analysis of each party’s manifesto commitments and associate spending implications. I recall at the last election the that analysis was based upon an assessment of the progressive nature of the revenue sourcing to fund the commitments made. The LD’s came out of the analysis as well as the other parties. At this election all parties will have their revenue and spend proposals analysed in detail and with Cable’s influence the ‘menu with prices’ approach should stand up to some scrutiny.
490 You lead a hard life.
O/T but I’m interested that quite a lot of recent polls are giving the Conservatives and UKIP a combined vote share equivalent to that of Labour and the Lib Dems. When you consider that the latter led the former by 24% in 2005, that’s quite a shift from left to right since then.
The fundamental problem I still see with the effectiveness of the debates is Brown. People just tune out after about 20 seconds of the man. As soon as he starts speaking, they will start channel surfing…
500. Should read I’m NOT sure that you are entirely correct…
502, or it could be youtube car crash brilliance from the pdocast dance machine.
John R
The email verification has failed. If you wish to continue posting there is further detail that you will be need to provid. Please email me.
494
Acting in the national interest will likely see the tories 20% behind in the polls 2 years from now as public spending is gradually reduced by very significant amounts.
We will see if he has the bottle.
486. Gwynfa,
Again I agree with you. And if the party were bigger and at a more advanced stage in its development then that would be a real problem. However sadly/thankfully according to taste its not. The game is in 95% of circumstances gaining 50 to 75 seats with the jack pot being the “Runnymead Senario”. However to most intents and purposes the game is getting the national vote share as close to the Iraq or even 1983 high so the rising tide flaots the boats of the Ground war campaigns in the only 90 seats we are really bothering with.
The people who do or are most likely to vote Lib Dem at the moment aren’t that bothered about hard policy. Its why frankly many of them vote Lib Dem. I’d hoped that we’d move passed that in this parliament but we haven’t. However a debate is a gift in terms of moving towards our current glass ceiling.
490 “490.Tonight I have to go out drinking at a party in Soho. Last night I got hammered at a party in Westminster. Christmas Eve is going to be centred around drinking in north London, and I expect to be sloshed at a family do in Kent, all day Christmas Day.
The festivities will recur on Boxing Day evening, followed by a large boozy lunch for the Cornish cousinage on the 28th.”
And you’re getting a car why, exactly?
Oh dear - swine flu ramping falls under investigation.
http://subrosa-blonde.blogspot.com/2009/12/who-to-be-investigated-by-council-of.html
502. Not only that but given the dire financial straights the country is in all any of them will be offering is different shades of a dreary dark grey (there ain’t going to be any sunshine). My guess is that these debates will be the most uninspiring dismal exemplars of British politics you could wish not to see……
507. The Runnymede Scenario? Is that one of mine?…I forget…
Dale is doing a vote on various ‘of the year’.
For those who think the Peer of the Year shouldn’t be the man of Darkness, can I commend tim’s fave Baroness Warsi to you…
506 Oh I quite agree. It will also be another test of the good sense or otherwise of the British people as a whole. They have always done pretty well in the past ( I think it is Finklestein who claims they haven’t got an election wrong for the past century?)
Trust the people used to be a Tory slogan. It might be our epitaph. We shall see.
511. I suggested Eastbourne Pier should be nominated.
O/T A Dem congressman switches to GOP
Parker Griffith (Alabama 5) announces today his switch to the Republican party, giving the GOP its first representative of this district since Reconstruction.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30896.html
Griffith, a prime example of DINO, has voted against both the Health Care bill, Caop and trade and the Stimulus.
So the real balance of the House won’t really move.
Presumably we can expect the final poll of 2009, YouGov/Telegraph, tonight or tomorrow night?
512 I’d say they got 1945 wrong, and they gave Labour far too big a majority in 1997.
516 The people did not give Labour their majorities; the FPTP system did without any regard to whether the represented the majority or not.
Another soldier shot in friendly fire incident according to BBC
488. I’ve no doubt a lot of my own Lib Dem neurosis is being projected onto my posting and response to this development. I just don’t even begin to see why the big two would have conceeded so much institutional space to the upstart. If I were the Conservatives i’d be doing what they have been doing. Running the campaign as a simple binary referendum on the question ” Do you want rid of Gordon Brown?” with themselves holding the exclusive franchise to the NO column. Adding Clegg to the debates turns a referendum into a preferendum.
516 Whilst I would without question have voted for Churchill in ‘45 I think the NHS, the basic welfare state and the Council house building programme stand to Labour’s credit and were right for the country. They were morphed out of all recognition by Wilson et all in the 60’s which is for me when Labour went bad.
514- On the other hand, he’s a freshman Dem elected with Obama, so this one has to sting.
346, Slackbladder, Resorting to personal insults does not help your case, still only 1 Tory MP in Scotland, a minority party who should have zero airtime.
522 - Maybe they can black out the Tory bits of the debate in Scotland, just for you.
487. That deserves a response. However I’m not sure I can think of one at the moment.
510. Yes! I’ve turned one of your favourite propositions into the title of a Tom Knox thriller and did a few posts on it about a week ago.
520 I think that essentially, a number of economic decisions were taken between 1945-50 which served the country very badly for decades afterwards.
I am unconvinced that either the creation of the NHS or the expansion of the welfare state (which had grown up really since the 1900s) were particularly good ideas.
495 - well said MD!
509 Two things I read about the US debates struck me.
1 according to Drew Westen (who analysed debates extensively in his book The Political Brain), “we are not moved by leaders with whom we do not feel an emotional resonance”.
I think that in last election Howard was probably the one who showed little empathy, Kennedy, despite his “tiredness” and inability to clarify policy showed the most. The Lib dems got their election boost.
2 Debates didn’t really change minds - unless there was a big error, but one that played back to empathy. So Bush looking at his watch - no empathy, Reagan “there you go again”, we could all empathise as Carter went on and on and on, “I knew Jack Kennedy, You are no Jack Kennedy” resonated.
Looking at the debates from that angle one expects Cameron to do better, he listens and leans towards questioners, looking them in the eye . Clegg though? He does seem over-eager to make his point, breaking in and interupting, sometimes rather loudly. Gordon? depends whether he leaves YouTube Gordon at home or not, I have seen him do well in terms of engaging and equally completely fail.
519 Yellow Submarine
Seems to me that everyone should be more honest about the debate question. As in every election, every party will look to maximise their own advantage and disadvantage their opponents.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee like to present elections as “choosing the next PM” (a phrase so often posted here) because it’s good for them. Quite why they let Clegg take part is unclear - but I’m sure Lab/Con didn’t do it to help the LDs!
357. John, Your constant rubbish on Scotland is far from funny after seeing it a thousand times, your input is puerile and we treat it as such.
498-And why should they be removed?
More importantly, on 469-tim made a couple of interesting points. I presume Roy is not Roy Mason but Rajoy?
Actually, the PNV does (sort of) field candidates outside the Basque Country. In Navarre (part of the Basque Country to nationalists) it does field joint candiadtes in a pan-Basque nationalist umbrella party called Nafarroa Bai. Of ocurse, in the Euros it also fields candidates nationwide as part of a Nationalist (but not pan-Basque) Coalition.
And in France it does field candidates at several levels in the French Basque Country.
520 I was canvassing with our PPC at the time of the Lib-Dem election and asked him how much difference he thought it would make whichever of them won. He said it would make a “huge” difference and that Clegg was very dangerous for us. I thought he was talking rubbish and Clegg has not turned out to be much of a threat so far. However I wonder if this represents Tory high command now underestimating Clegg, having overestimated him to begin with?
361, you are a big hit for yourself, stick to grovelling.
Election night continues to be under threat…
“At least 100 seats may count general election votes on Friday”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/dec/22/general-election-friday-count
364, Mad you are well named , don’t you realise we put in more money than we get back on the MOD, take your handful of poxy labouring jobs as soon as possible and give us our money back. You were never a Scot , you just like to pretend.
519 Yellow Submarine see 393.
520: “The Council house building programme stand to Labour’s credit and were right for the country.”
It was Harold Macmillan as Minister for Housing and the Conservative government that delivered this, not the post ‘45 Labour government.
369. Tom , exactly the clowns do not even understand that we elect a party not a PM. You can tell by the hysterical insults that they are rattled.
373. michael, first sensible person to respond today, refreshing to see rather than the usual donkeys spouting absolute rubbish and falsehoods.
malcomG, are you attempting to refute every single comment posted since you last logged in?
522 malcolmG
Like arguing religion (great fun, but ultimately pointless) there is a difficulty with these debates on primarily English blogs.
People get upset and angry when their belief system is challenged. You and I recognise that there is a separate Scottish political system, and that is how it should be. Brits from Scotland recognise that there is a separate Scottish political system, although they would prefer that there wasn’t.
Many Brits from England, being reasonable people, understand that there is a separate Scottish political system, and don’t have a problem with that.
For some Brits from England, however, it is challenging and threatening that their previously unquestioned sense of political “Britishness” is at risk.
401. John , like yourself , Cameron will not have the courage to have a referendum , too scared he will lose.
536. Very fair point. I have always taken that to prove that Conservatives are more efficient at relieving poverty than Labour.
535,393. I do take that point. However just because he has consistantly supported something over the years doesn’t mean he actually has to do it. He’s going to be Prime Minister.
Anyway its so uncharacteristic for me to be bigging up Lib Dem prospects for an event I may have got a little excited. More melancholy soon.
539 Indeed - the quoting of a post number implies that all PB readers have a photographic memory of the original
540: Many Brits from England, being reasonable people, understand that there is a separate Scottish political system, and don’t have a problem with that.
Indeed, and that is why you have the Scottish parliament (vile, and rapidly aeging piece of design by the way). This is a noational election. We really do understand the difference. MalcolmG though has a comprehension problem on the point.
“16.Its a stupid question really when you think about it as so many “ordinary people” will still vote Conservative even if they feel it veers more towads the rich than them.”
Zactly zo. Always been that way.
Simplified, the split in the view is something like:
1) If there was a depression and you and your kids were starving in the road then the Tories will drive past in their roller and throw a cigar stub at you out of the window whereas (original) Labour would help you out.
versus
2) If there was a depression and you and your kids were starving in the road then the Tories might try and run you over in their roller but Labour are more likely to *cause* a depression because they can’t count above ten with their shoes on so even if you and your kids were starving in the road and they wanted to help they’d be standing there with empty pockets. Wheras the Tories might not help you but they’re more likely to create conditions where you can help yourself.
The split is heavily weighted between unskilled and skilled (hence why centre-right parties throughout the western world are so thick importing masses of cheap unskilled labour without considering the long-term voting implications).
It’s also why the big hit for the Tories (imo) was the ERM and not Thatch’s recessions because a lot of people assumed they did those deliberately as a way of getting the unions. In a way it actually fed into the idea that the Tories know what they’re doing when it comes to the economy.
The two strategies centre-right types can use with people who you might think would be more inclined to vote Labour (actually three) tie in a bit with the above split view.
1) Fluffy bunny especially over the NHS = nudges say c40% of Laboury people into being more likely to stay at home.
2) Hardcore economic = nudges c20% of Laboury people into being more likely to vote Tory.
So it’s probably works out roughly the same except the first option would be liked more by al Beeb and less by hardcore Tories and vice versa for the second.
Anyway, original point was there’s two counters to “Tories only care about the rich”: one is being more fluffy bunny than Labour, the second is taking it on the chin and saying rich people support us because they trust us with the economy and therefore all their vast piles of wonga. Still might be too soon from the ERM though.
545 Mat
“This is a noational election.”
I like your neologism! - a combination of “not” and “national” I presume? Sums up the election for a multi-national state rather well.
543 I see your point. But he has been so publicly, so loudly and over such a long time in favour the press would have gone for him for betraying their expectations much as they went for Brown over the non election. Blair never was behind by much to the Tories at any point until right near the end of his term. Had he been he might well have called for one and been trapped by his own commitment. I’m sure for instance that he’d have loved really to have junked the Euro referendum commitment and just gone for it by legislation. But he couldn’t. Sometimes they are just hemmed in by past commitments.
547: the dangers of using a German keyboard….
545 Mat
Alternatively you might have meant “notional” election. Also a good description of a system where two unprincipled parties have conned so many people into thinking there is much to choose between them.
545 :”This is a noational election.”
Perhaps you mean ‘notional’?
(New thread i know but as this is mostly thinking alound i couldn’t be arsed.)
536 “It was Harold Macmillan as Minister for Housing and the Conservative government that delivered this, not the post ‘45 Labour government.”
I read that recently and had a little private bet with myself that it did him no good at all with the Labour voters of the time but it probably helped get Thatch elected a generation later.
542 “Very fair point. I have always taken that to prove that Conservatives are more efficient at relieving poverty than Labour.”
At the end of the day the only way to really help people long term is to help them help themselves. If you take over bits of their live to *help* them you actually make the problem worse long term. That’s why c*mmies always make things worse imo - what they really want is power and control so the form their *help* takes is always the kind that turns adults into children which makes everything worse.
Anyway its so uncharacteristic for me to be bigging up Lib Dem prospects for an event I may have got a little excited. More melancholy soon.
by Yellow Submarine December 22nd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Cheer up. It is true that, unusually, your posts today on the debates seem to be filtered yellow. They are, however, still interesting and clearly argued but splashed in yellow paint. But the perpetual Tory pot is moaning at the very occasional yellow kettle in that sentence.
The potential benefit for Clegg and the LibDems is balanced by an even higher risk.
He may expose the reality of the LibDems, whatever that is, and put people off even using his party as a protest dustbin.
But even more of a risk is pisssing off his core supporters. He has been quite good at that but it has been smoothed over as it is at conference or in relatively unreported venues.
Who cares what LibDem policies are except their members and the anoraks? Well not many of the people who vote for them on the basis of the ‘feel’ or the vague image of a third safe alternative.
The Labour and LibDem people love to say that it is time the Tories came under scrutiny, as if they aren’t already. In the debates the boot will be on the other foot. On prime time he will really be held to account for the first time.
What is your real policy Mr Clegg? Will you refuse to deal with the deficit and debt? Are the policies at your conference the same as in your manifesto? Would you support Gordon Brown’s minority government? etc etc
This could be the time the LibDems become a clear policy choice for the first time and I would suggest that for many people it will not be an positive experience. Their comfortable belief in the LibDems match their views may well be seriously damaged. Think, for example, of the south west and its Euroscepticism. Clegg only has to go EuroBonkers once and the votes will gallop away.
The covers will be off, the lights on, the detail demanded while two other leaders who equally detest the LibDems will be doing everything possible within their overall game plans to make Clegg look Clumsy.
I suggest that may not be difficult.
552 Mostly, the housing that Macmillan encouraged was private housing.
The big expansion in council housing that took place post-war actually killed off the Conservative vote in a number of inner urban areas - although, decades later, council house sales boosted Conservative chances in the New Towns and London overspill estates.
“Mostly, the housing that Macmillan encouraged was private housing.”
That is incorrect. The peak years for council house construction were the early ’50s. Precisely the years Harold Macmillan was charged with - and achieved - a target of 300,000 units a year.
As to whether they were electorally significant; the Conservatives increased their majority in 1955 and 1959.
The increase in private housebuilding did not really get under way in high volume terms until the 1960s
558. True GeoffH but the housing was poorly constructed (build ‘em quick’ build ‘em cheap) and led to much of the problems associated with council houses later on.