[…] awful month it has been for the Labour Party, but, hey it seems to have been worse for the Tories - we’re back in the lead according to Populus: leading the Tories by 37% to […]

Anthony,

Given that most recent polling from YouGov, ICM, Ipsos-MORI and ComRes has shown the Conservatives ahead of Labour, anywhere from 3% to 8%, wouldn’t Brogan have been referring to this Populus poll, which shows things pretty much neck and neck, in a broader context? I understand it is not strictly correct to compare one pollster with others.

Populus, on the face of it, does, indeed, seem to suggest that things are tightening between the Labour and the Conservatives in that Labour’s lead has narrowed, albeit marginally, from 2% to 1%.

But looking at all other recent polling, it’s pretty difficult to conceive, at this point in time, Labour being ahead of the Conservatives at all.

Quite right Anthony although this poll will be heartening to Brown nonetheless as it suggests that the Tory momentum is not gathering pace. As I have said previously there is not an awful lot in terms of difference between polls that show a 3 point Tory lead and 1 point Labour lead. I would suggest the parties are very close with the Tories perhaps a couple of points ahead.

As for the polls settling down, that will not happen until the Libs have selected their leader. Until then, I would expect to see the polls proving inconsistent as the floating voter is buffeted by whatever the media feel like reporting as their issue of the day.

The political battle over the next 18 months is going to be as fierce as it was in 1991/2 with the outcome just as uncertain.

I am very sceptical about this type of poll. I have had three or four ‘phone calls in the last week or so from one company purporting to ask my views on television or some other topic who then slipped in a few questions about my voting intentions and views on various political issues. They never asked me any questions to establish a demographic profile other than my age.

How do they get a representative sample? (I should say that I have never been asked to take part in this type of canvassing before so I am not a serial “opinion maker”!)

Diablo - interesting. The fact that they kept ringing you back is a good sign - phone pollsters should do that to cut down on non-contact bias (i.e. if you only take those people who are in, busy people might have different views from those always at home).

For demographics, ICM or Populus would ask you if you were married, if you had children, what level of education you had, how many cars you had, whether you had been on a foriegn holiday in the last couple of years, whether you own or rent your house, whether you work full time or part time, what your occupation is, what your age is and how you voted last time. If you doing get all that sort of stuff, then it’s probably not going to produce very robust data - they should say who they are and give you a number to ring to check them out.

Anthony

“the Lib Dems are recovering from their awful ratings”

True in the very short term but only to where they were (with Populus) during the Kennedy / Oaten / Huges bashing which was … awful.

Although politically this poll result makes no sense, I have to admit that since Jan 06 (which is when I start comparisons with Weighted Moving Average) Populus has had no systematic bias in C lead and a Standard Deviation of 2.5 which exactly average. However their last poll (for The Times) turned out to be 4.4 out and this one is 3.8 out compared to the WMA and I suspect it is even worse in reality. Have they changed their methodology lately, or is there a shift in the political demographics?

Anthony , I don’t know if anyobe noticed that Populus did a poll for Daily Politics , fieldwork 17th Oct which included a voting intention question . Unfortunately the detailed data does not include the voting intention for Others but a reasonable deduction would give a probable published voting intention of Lab 38 Con 36 LibDem 15 Others 11 .

All this shows is that the summer and autumn periods, alternating with “Party” political maneuverings and leadership changes, is a bad time to predict the result of a General Election.

We are going back to square one: the probability is of a hung parliament as there is little to choose between them. Our future is largely determined outside the UK. All we can do is to sort out the problems these decisions create. Government changes in the way our Councils are run will be the most significant piece of legislation followed by our attitudes to citizenship of the UK.

Mark - I’m about to do an update and mention that poll as it happens, but I’m fairly confident that it would not have included a likelihood to vote question, so can’t be compared to normal Populus voting intention polls.

Anthony , fair comment on likelihood to vote not been asked , however we do have a direct comparison with the previous Times poll earlier in the month of weighted figures from a similar sample size viz Lab 264 v 269 Con 247 v 239 LibDem 111 v 79 which indicate a significant improvement for the LibDems between the 2 polls .

This poll is something of a disappointment for the Tories, the first in quite a while. Strange to see the Lib Dems recovering despite having no leader at the moment.

Does the fact that a party’s result can improve when they don’t have a leader say something about how we see Leaders of political parties? Should the Liberals postpone their leadership poll to next year?

Jack - obviously for most parties it’s taken as read that you have a party leader, but interestingly enough there was a YouGov poll last month on whether the Green party should switch from its current set up of having male and female principle speakers and have a proper leader. 84% said yes (though the answer is pretty meaningless - it is, after all, just the done thing for a party to have a leader)

Has anyone ever tried dropping a useless dead cat from a very tall building?

It does bounce but not very far and it is still dead and completely useless as well as seriously deformed.

If the real job of a Liberal MP was gaining executive power they would join either the Conservative or Labour party’s. They do not because it is not.

There job is making our democracy even more unrepresentative of the publics wishes then it already is. Which is incredibly unrepresentative indeed.

Someone once said.ie me

You can not fool all the people all of the time.
You can not fool a majority of the people all of the time. But you can fool a sizable minority of the people once every 4-5 years.

But in a 3 party democratic system you don’t have to do even this much.

You only have to fool enough of the people enough of the time.

Which in our democratic political system could be as little as 30,000 souls in marginal constituencies out of a general population of over 60,000,000. Which is a tiny .05% of the people.

In a truly FREE democratic country with a written constitution engraved by the gods on tablets of stone, the utter nonsense that is democratic politics would be of little material concern for ordinary citizens.

As we DO NOT and never have, it is a potential matter of life and death, we have perfectly no control over.

THATS A FACT

Speaking of Greens (and Australia).

The best analysis looks as though, whoever wins in Australia (most likely Labor according to all polls) the winning party will not win the Senate where the balance of power will be held by the Greens which will make life very ‘interesting’.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/06/2082603.htm?site=elections/federal/2007

The YouGov poll confirmed what we have known for a long time, that “Leader” is far more understandable than “Principal Speaker”. We are currently balloting our members to see if we can make that constitutional change, but it will require a 2/3rds majority.

Should the motion get passed, a Green leadership contest would take place next year, with Caroline Lucas, Sian Berry and possibly people like Adrian Ramsay all contenders for the position.

Atlas shrugged -
I don’t think any British politicians pretend that we have a real democracy - they just can’t be bothered to use the full phrase, “parliamentary democracy” which is a slightly more qualified description.

People living in constituencies of 30000 have more of a say than those in constituencies of 40000, but all are similarly atomised.

Since I was a lad the “third Party” has always stood for Proportional Representation, and might just be able to swing a Hung Parliament on its way to at least addressing the lack of real democracy in the system. Therefore, in my view, they have an important role.

One of the criticisms of Blair was that he tried to be all things to everyone. The “third way” was all about managing the hopes and expectations of all sides (worked a treat in Northern Ireland), his own side and his opponents. They all enjoyed kicking him which to me was an indication that he achieved what he set out to achieve.

Can I just add that ‘Atlas Shrugged’ obviously loves the much unloved writer Ayn Rand and therefore, by definition, speaks for for a very badly expressed part of the American population with crass right-wing views. The books are now not available in normal western bookshops. Why are they not in such bookshops? The novels are fundamentally unreadable and the views are fundamentally stupid. (Sorry. But if you choose such a pen-name, you deserve some reflection on the origin of the name.)

An extract from Wikipedia about Atlas shrugged-

The most famous review of Atlas Shrugged from a conservative author was written by Whittaker Chambers and appeared in National Review in 1957. It was unrelentingly scathing. Chambers called the book “sophomoric”; and “remarkably silly,” and said it “can be called a novel only by devaluing the term.” The tone of the book was described as “shrillness without reprieve”. Chambers accused Rand, a refugee from totalitarianism, as supporting the same godless system as the Soviets, stating that “From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: ‘ To the gas chambers– go!’” [94]

Oh well, sorry I know we should stick to poll analysis but I just couldn’t believe that anyone cared about such an abysmal writer (and I’m avoiding the politics- I’ve tried to read her novels, they are fundamentally awful).

A lot of American websites have Atlas Shrugged as the greatest novel of all time.

Andy Stidwill,

“A lot of American websites have Atlas Shrugged as the greatest novel of all time.”

Damned by faint praise……

Peter.

When an opinion poll comes along that does not conform to the general pattern and worse is not the message we want to hear then we are inclined-myself included-to dismiss it.We have been here before.Populus has always rated the Tories a few points lower than other polls -I am tempted to say this might be due to a higher incidence of people voting for others -although I have’nt checked that out-but those of us with long memories remember how MORI were derided in 1970 when on the eve of the election they produced a poll showing a 2% Tory lead whilst all the rest had the latter dead and buried. The Tories won by 2%.

Jack, have you even read Atlas Shrugged? I have and it is up there with Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm as one of the best political novels I have ever read. Those quotes you give are an awful review of the book, to equate Rand’s views with totalitarianism is like saying 1984 advocated totalitarianism. She advocates the complete opposite of totalitarianism, far closer to libertarianism than anything else.

Atlas Shrugged is a book I not only detest, it still gives me nightmares. It is an excellent piece of work but within its content lays a deeply disturbing message that all would do well to understand before it is to late.

Objective viewpoints in themselves are fine and wonderful principles but they have very great dangers.

When the industrialists the capitalists and the collectivists join forces individual liberty and we can I hope all see this now, WILL DIE.

The individual as an individual can not protect themselves from the vast power of collectivist money. She should have know this but seems not to have done. The big money and power is in the hands of the very collectivists she feared so much and it has always been this way. Not so much the industrialists or the capitalists. Also when the collectivists also print the money, its not in the hands of private individuals either.

This is what has happened, and not just here but all over the money controlled world. Which is virtually everywhere including the old and new Soviet Union.

Ayn Rand was a truly great thinker with an intellectual capacity as rare as rocking horse shit.

I am a right wing libertarian.

Rand was a highly smart incredibly selfish over sexed bitch. That also thought people like me were one of the worse things the gods ever created.

She liked, in fact almost defined freedom of the individual but hated virtually everything that ordinary people did with it.

BTW

I am sure the views of Ayn Rand have a large influence on the poll results in Briton whether any of the public have read the book or not.

I have read it and, as a novel, it’s total rubbish. You may like it due to its far-right wing politics but there are no grounds by which it can be defended as a novel; the characters are wooden, the dialogoue as bad as a soap opera… ‘Animal Farm’ is a stunningly well-written novel, ‘1984′ less so (actually it is much better as a film). So yes, you may like it for its politics, but it’s totally indefensible as a novel.

On another issue; here is a summary of the Conservative party’s Industrial policy in Australia–

The Federal Coalition has released its industrial relations policy, saying it would ensure parents could take up to 52 weeks of unpaid parental leave.

…including allowing workers to take double their annual leave entitlements at half-pay.

… new leave arrangements for grandparents if the Coalition is elected.

…All grandparents will be entitled to take one week of unpaid leave when a grandchild is born to assist the parents to care for the new-born child,… “Grandparents working in businesses with more than 100 employees will have the right to take up to 52 weeks of unpaid leave.”

Note, this is the Conservatives policy, I would be impressed if the Conservatives here argued for the same.

Jack,

Such policies as those proposed by the Coalition in Australia, would be more sincere coming from Labour than the Conservatives.

Family-orientated progressive steps towards better employment practices, for example, paternity and maternity leave, an extension of holiday entitlements, better child care provision, etc is pretty much in keeping with Labour values.

Labour has, since 1997, rightfully, followed a progressive agenda when it comes to employment rights and practices, associated with the Social Chapter, with the reactionary Conservatives opposing them every step of the way.

Labour’s approach, furthermore, relates fundamentally to quality of life.

I am making a comparison of policies from one country to the other. Both are western countries.

What applies in one country’s economy has an impact about the relative economic values applying to both. I certainly find it interesting (as I believe we in the Uk are too inclined to not look beyond our shores). I note the Australian position where the Conservative party (and don’t be coy with games like Australian coalition- the old few seats Country Party is an irrelevant ‘Farmer’s party’ (what would here be the ‘rural rump tories/ UKIP’ group - vote for the fox hunt).

I just find it fascinating that a western country can happily provide what is viewed here as Labour policies; but then the minimum wage was in operation in Australia since the 1890s (about), female vote for about 50 years earlier than 50 years …

’sincere’- in Australia all parties have always cared about the common person; they are sincere. Or is the previous comment implying that the Conservative party does not care about the normal working class? That’s how I read that comment. Is that why the Uk has fewer holidays than the rest of the eu? Less good working hours? Less good health and saftey? Yes, it makes the economy strong and vibrant-but then perhaps we should just go down the line of India nad have a totally impoverished working class.

The real point is that the Conservatives in Australia (anti-Kyoto, shove people into an illegal Iraq war) are losing but yet put forward industrial policies which the Liberals would be scared of doing here. You want family friendly policies - here is a way for the tories to do it and soar through an election.

Mind you, one can also look to another western country such as New Zealand and see how ‘old labour policies can win.

Jack
You make good points but miss the main one.

You think governments improve wages and working conditions because the media and educational establishments they control have brainwashed you into believing such a crazy thing. The main reason for improvements in W&C is the need for employers to attract good scarce staff and above all keep them.

Government only knows how to spend/wast money and most of it on controlling and brainwashing the masses.

For example the best way to increase living standards and above all wages for the common man, would be to completely stop immigration overnight.

If there where a shortage of workers you would be quite shocked to see how quickly your wages would be hiked possibly with out you having to even ask.

Immigration has a positive side but not for the common man. All the positives are for government revenue and multi-national corporate business interests. The only good thing for the poor is cheaper take away meals, and thats about it.

You may say this is inflationary. Which is what the politicians want you to believe but it is not.

Inflation is simply to much money chasing to few goods. Stop printing to much money and all is well in the garden forever. Until some bastard banker and their socialist politician mate deliberately buggers it all up again.

I have to say I am cynical about the moves from Australia.

In an effectively two party election when you are trailing you pitch for the other parties support, so it’s not unusual to see a party do this kind of thing.

Atlas,

Your starting to give paranoia a bad name.

Peter.

On Australia the Coalition (like Labour) can win an election with less votes than the ALP, and the polls are trending their way.

Atlas - wage inflation leads to more money pursuing the same goods, which in turn increases inflationary pressure.

The reaction to the novelist above (I haven’t read her) reminds me of my reaction to Kafka, who opined that any act adds to the futility of activity, including/especially acts which are designed to reduce the futility. The stuff of nightmares? Not if one relaxes, and appreciates that there is enough laughter in the world to disprove the theory.

Putting a cross on a ballot paper only makes you less free if you are inclined to feel less free.

John,

In addition if wages rise then as a principle cost of production it will feed through in to the price of goods, and therefore cause inflation.

Atlas,

You can’t just quote supply and demand as a reason why restricting immigraion would lead to higher wages and then rubbish the rest of economic theory that goes alone with it just because it doesn’t suit your argument.

Peter.

Peter -
i agree, and of course other issues contribute to inflationary pressue too.

However, if we stick to Atlas’ point about supply and demand, Poland’s average wage has gone up in recent years, leading to many emigrant workers returning there from here.

This would support the argument that a fluid international workforce is desirable, and that the movement of labour supply acts as a driver of wage growth at each end alternately.( i e Poland loses workforce to UK, so Polish wages go up, which re-attracts ex-pat Poles, which cuts supply in UK , which raises UK wages, which attracts Poles back, etc.)

John T,

Yes and No.

Where as I agree that the free flow of Labour (and goods and capital) can and does stimulate trade and competition, it doesn’t necessarily equalise it, as other factors can play a part. For example, free trade in agricultural goods and Labour still won’t let you grow Olives in the North of Scotland.

Equally we can’t actually say for sure if or how much the rising wage rates in Poland has been a factor in Poles returning home, many may have done so anyway or indeed might have found the costs of accommodation in the UK undermined the benefit of the higher wages.

In addition the flow of capital in to Poland from the EU, direct private investment and remittance home has hugely stimulated the economy, so job prospects have improved.

It does again raise the issue I mentioned earlier about an aging population.

Looking decades ahead, in a Europe with a free flow of people can we expect the young and economically active to stay in one place and pay high taxes to look after the old and economically inactive when they can just avoid the tax by going abroad.

I think that is an issue we should look at seriously now, but then again the UK doesn’t really do long term planning does it.

Peter.

My experience of polish workers in London is that they enjoy a long-established ex-pat community, and earn enough to send money back to Poland. They also pay tax here and are not generally “cash” types, but look forward to returning permanently one day. They certainly haven’t come here to avoid tax.

I’m not sure that any sort of Government planning will have the desired, or predictable consequences, but there are many factors connected with up-rooting and moving on, not least the immediate absence of family babysitters.

My ancestors landed from Ireland and stayed put more or less where they landed, and they did their best to ensure their descendants were equipped to look after themselves. The quid pro quo is familial - the youngsters send money to fill any gaps, if they like me have “emigrated” to the smoke. I agree that “remittance home” is a factor, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.

Oi, what’s immigration doing sneaking into this thread?
There’s a whole thread on immigration that I deliberately haven’t moderated to let people get it out of their system - don’t let it infect this thread, take it over there!

I was about to meander it back by saying that the LibDems preference for higher local taxation and spending would address some of the aging population problems Peter raised - he’s much more obsessed than I!

Anthony,

But I like it here… It’s too crowded over there and this threads half empty.

Of course people like you don’t want these comments, you’d rather send them back where they belong.

A few innocent asides trying to find a better home for themselves are seen as a threat to this topic and are told to go home.

Is this a sympton of where an “open doors comment policy” gets us.

I suppose if we let all these migration posts in we will run out of room here and this thread will be swamped, swamped I tell you.

Peter.

LOL Peter

No. I think I am giving paranoia a good name. It makes me rich. If you pay any attention to the media other then to suspect the opposite you will end up poor or poorer. If you have too much confidence in the BBC especially you will not only not understand anything you will end up bankrupt.

Politicians are salesmen at best and criminals at worse. They may not start out this way, but they soon find that their ability to change things for the better are so limited they might just as well make a few bob while they are there.

I am still a Conservative party activist, in fact I am of to a meeting tonight. Not because I think they have any better motivations then any other political party. Its because I know they could not possibly get away with robbing the ordinary person quite as much as socialism does as a matter of straight forward political ideology. The BBC would not let them even if they wanted to.

You can call it paranoia if you wish. I call it growing up and gaining real experience of life.

A Rogue Poll.

The Next Predicted Opinion Poll shows and I reckon on The Conservatives should be leading on Opinion Poll now on 43% with 11% Lead over Labour on 32% and Lib Dems on 15% the Other Parties on 10%.

The Scottish Nationalist should be reaching about 30% in Opinion Poll in Scotland I think and Labour will have 36% opinion Poll in Scotland leading 6% Lead over SNP in Scotland.

This is next Forecast in the Next Opinion Poll.

This Poll is Clearly a Rogue Poll!

Showing a Labour Lead of 1% is pure fantasy!

A Recession is on its way due to a Credit Crunch!

Cameron is Punching Brown badly!

Brown shows himself a weak Leader.

Atlas,

“If you pay any attention to the media other then to suspect the opposite you will end up poor or poorer. If you have too much confidence in the BBC especially you will not only not understand anything you will end up bankrupt.”

I take it you don’t believe Oil is $98 a barrel or the £1 at $2.10….

Just out of curiousity and for the record, which one am I, a salesman or a crook.

When do you cross the line from activist to politician, because I haven’t felt any different since getting elected in May.

Send the local Tories, in Wherevershire, my Love……..

Peter.

Answer

When you get into cabinet and start having real power usually. MPs are controlled by the whips office. But there is no point in whipping those that dont need to be whipped, some may enjoy it to much.

Or because they have no real power worth whipping them for.

You did not read my comment properly. Are you saying that you truly believe you can make a real positive long term difference to peoples lives? If so prove it.

Surly you are adult enough to know that in a vast vast majority of cases the only people that can help an individual it that individual themselves.

I suggest that a job in the church would have been a better move for you. Souls are a far easier thing to save then a person that has already displays an unwillingness to help themselves.

Which in my experience trying to, is not only almost impossible it is often very counter productive.

Otherwise why is it that your country after decades of socialist nonsense is in the god damned mess it is. When it could have been so much better, and has been in the past?

PC SNP

For a more polite answer, maybe this will help.

I dont know whether you are a salesman or a criminal. But for the sake of argument I will assume you are a salesman.

There is nothing wrong with a salesman. Cameron for example is the best political salesman I have ever seen in my entire life bar no one whatsoever and then some. A pure gods given talent that there are hardly words in the English language to fully describe. Churchill himself has nothing on this man when it comes to salesmanship.

What matters is whether the product is good and works for the amount of time it is supposed to. In short does it do what it says on the tin.

If you sell the sort of product you would buy yourself or for your own family then chances are you are selling a good product.

Only thing is that socialists sell a hole range of products they themselves if they had any choice at all would not go nowhere near.

So to help you understand the sort of products I am talking about, so you can correct me if I am wrong, how about off the top of my head the following.

State education, state health services, state child care, state employment agency’s, state lawyers, state housing, state benefits, state social workers, state jobs and general state interference in almost any and all aspects of the ordinary peoples entire lives.

But think these things are perfectly OK for the rest of humanity including those that know for a fact they are almost always perfect relative crap, and not even cheap or efficiently run or organized.

Ken Dodd was 80 yesterday, which more or less disproves everything Atlas says about anything.

I posted that before reading Atlas’ latest, but it still applies, and to explain…
Happiness is a gift to be enjoyed, not an idea to be pursued by means of deeds or cheap talk. Cynicism is anathema to anything that is valid and completely destroys any hope that others will believe what you try to tell them.

There are very real reasons why teh LibDems are not to be likened to a dead animal. Shrug away, but not near me thanks.

“State education, state health services, state child care, state employment agency’s, state lawyers, state housing, state benefits, state social workers, state jobs and general state interference in almost any and all aspects of the ordinary peoples entire lives.”

Kind of handy when you can’t afford private education, private health services, private child care, private legal protection, private housing etc though.

The point I struggle with is that Atlas seems disinterested in suggesting anything positive. We can all sit here in our ivory towers and proclaim that all politicians are corrupt and quote selective examples of why we believe that to be so. But if you truly believe that then why bother posting on political website devoted to polling issues? Polling, if anything, is the absolute representation of the political status quo in this country.

I would be more interested if Atlas ventured to suggest something positive as to what he would like to see happen. For instance, he decries the electoral system in this country for producing large majorities for parties who do not have majority support and he also lambasts the LibDems for making the disconnect even larger through tactical voting. Yet the corollary of his argument is that we should have proportional representation. I wouldn’t disagree with that but he doesn’t suggest it, preferring instead to stick to predictably tired negativism. (Also, being a Tory, I suspect somehow that he has a convenient excuse for not supporting PR on the basis that one day the Tories will need the first past the post system to retain power but I am happy to be disabused of that notion.)

I’m glad that Atlas has made some money from doing the exact opposite of what the BBC says. It’s a great lifestyle credo to adopt; to base your existence around the very organisation that you claim to hate. Hilarious!

Atlas,

All your sweeping generalisations aren’t worth a thing when they are posted anonimously.

So If you are, as you say, a Tory activist that was at a meeting last night, where was it and who are you.

I’d love to see how rank and fill Tory members reacted to your abolish state schools and the NHS credo if it was made public with your name at the bottom.

Peter.

Oh dear. Pity poor Atlas, carrying all the world’s concerns on his manly shoulders.

In part I’m unhappy that a usually intelligent blog discussing polls and related issues has been hijacked by some low grade right wing student style mock political philosphy nonsense.

In another way, it brightens my day. I’ve always had a good laugh at the rantings of the ‘Frothing at the Mouth We Hate Socialists’ branch of the political spectrum.

An alternative view of polictical history, and one which fits the facts slightly more accurately, is that slowly, over the centuries, through Magna Carta, the Glorious Revolution, The Chartists, various reform acts, and yes, Tolpuddle Martyrs and Trades Unions, individuals have found strength and power when working together to lift themselves and their societies out of harm and hardship. All the great achievments of modern social democracy, including education, health care, social and political rights, criminal law and justice, have come through working collectively, rather than as an individual. Down the years individuals have in fact found it singularly impossible to look after themselves without reference to the wider society.

I’m not making a party political point - all parties agree on this, but are arguing about very small nuances of what we all accept. The point I am trying to make is can we please ignore Atlas’s rantings and get back to discussing the polls in hand.

How far will the Lib Dems recover?

“…and get back to discussing the polls in hand.”

Gold star for that man.

I am (not) surprised that in all the comment on this poll no one has picked up on the answers to two of the less publicised questions.

According to Peter Riddell, 70% said they would favour the Liberal Democrats if they had a strong and credible leader,

and 64% said there was now so little difference between the Labour and Tory parties that only the Liberal Democrats could be a distinctive opposition.

Something like that was in a Times article to-day, but it said two things -

“70 per cent agree that if the Lib Dems had “a strong and credible new leader, many more people would consider voting for them”,

That’s not the same as 70% would favour LibDems, or consider voting for them.

The reason why it wasn’t commented on earlier, I think was that the actual Poll didn’t highlight it, and nor did Anthony.

I’m confused!

“and 64% said there was now so little difference between the Labour and Tory parties that only the Liberal Democrats could be a distinctive opposition”

This is interesting as it was exactly the line the LDs took in the recent party political broadcast. Clearly they must be doing their own private polling.

I’m struggling to get a feel for how any sustained LD recovery would impact upon the bigger picture. Many commented earlier that this would worry Cameron more than Brown, but the polls seem contradictory on this. I guess a stronger 3rd party must make the Tories overall task more difficult, but it might make Labour’s job of holding a majority also more problematic.

The wording I read was :

“64% believe that there is so little difference between the main parties that there is a real opportunity for the Lib Dems if they can develop some clear and distinctive policies”.

Which again is different from saying that only LibDems could be a distinctive opposition. I wonder what the real questions and answers were?

John T - it wasn’t in the original coverage. The Times quite often does that, keeps back some findings for Peter Riddell to base his columns on later in the week. Nothing on the Populus website yet so we can’t see what was actually asked.

Alec - more likely Populus took the line from the LD PPB too see how much people agreed with it.

I think the 64%, 70% figures highlight the difficulty and dilemma for the LibDems. They are being pulled in two different directions.

On the one hand they are against the focus on “The Leader” over the party and it’s policies, and want to stand as a party of principle and consistancy rather than one that is based on PR, spin and Focus groups.

On the other hand the poll results suggest the road to recovery is to go for “The Leader” over the party/policy and to come up with some eye catching populist policies.

That’s the LibDem dilemma, the way to show we are different from the other two is to copy them.

What they need is one of two things, either one of the most difficult things to do in politics find a new exciting and different way to say the same things as now, repackage continuity…..

That or an “event” like Iraq which highlights favourably an existing difference.

Without being overly harsh, I don’t think they can really rebrand themselves successfully as new and exciting while still the same, and the more the other two squeeze the middle ground the and they try to hold on to it the less opportunity there will be for real differences.

Right now they seem to be left with little more than,

“Vote For Us, We’re Not Them”.

I just don’t see that as being enough, although given the right of centre dance Brown and Cameron are doing, if I lived in England it might be enough for me ( and another 11% of the population).

Peter.