Crime and Lee Jasper have damaged Livingstone
Or at least, that’s the conclusion I draw from the ICM poll. If you look at all the other questions in the survey that asked respondents to compare Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone on various criteria, Livingstone is ahead upon nearly all of them: he has a 10 point lead on the environment, a 13 point lead on the buses, a 6 point lead on “getting on with the job”, an 11 point lead on understanding the needs of Londoners. 51% of people think, on the whole he has been good for London.
This looks like the profile of a candidate who should be ahead. There are two weaknesses though, and presumably these are why Boris Johnson actually leads. Firstly crime, where Johnson has an eight point lead, and secondly three questions where I can only guess that the Lee Jasper affair has damaged the mayor: honesty, where Johnson leads by 10 points, standards of public office where Johnson leads by 4 points, and picking the best team to run London, where Johnson also leads by 4.
Filed under: London
This raises the prospect of an interesting contest if this poll is correct. KL may feel that as the days tick by the Lee Jasper affair may dim in the minds of voters, but I’m sure BJ will work on that story as well as the crime issue. I expect both main parties to be very nervous about this – if Labour lose London it will cap off a dreadful 6 months, and may well be terminal for Brown. Equally, if there is a dip in support for Boris as polling day draws near it could be a sign that voters hesitate to elect inexperienced old Etonians when the crunch comes – this too could resonate well beyond May 2008.
Ah, wish we had this sort of thing in Australia – all in one place!
I agree with your assessment Alec, but with two privisos.
If Boris loses having given Ken a real run for his money, there will be much Tory dissappointment, but they won’t have egg on their faces. He will have made in roads into Ken unthinkable only a short while ago. Its important he doesn’t fall too short.
If Ken loses, its the stories that may come out after on the running of the office and finance etc that the Evening Standard will be only too happy to run with that may prove a more practcal problem than the general sense of the loss of power.
How can Johnson be ahead on ‘picking the best team to run London’ when he hasn’t declared who that would actually consist of?
Thanks to those who took part in the Electoral System Survey.
For those interested in Electoral Reform, if you haven’t already done so, please take a moment to take this survey.
http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB227MPV7FHRQ
Results Ratings after 90 entries.
Monotonicity 6.76
Simplicity 6.68
Later-no-Harm 6.54
Majority Criterion 6.10
Clone Independence 5.40
Condorcet Loser Criterion 5.16
Majority Loser Criterion 4.96
Strategy Resistant 4.48
Condorcet Winner Criterion 4.13
Rather interesting. Surprisingly strong feelings on Monotonicity. Simplicity as expected, and Later-No-Harm. Good support for Majority, nothwithstanding the pizza conundrum I exampled. Clone Independence and Condorcet Loser also score above neutral (5.0). Condorcet Winner brings up the rear.
There is only one system which passes the four most top-ranked qualities of Monotonicity, Simplicity, Later-No-Harm and Majority – and that is good old FPTP…!
However FPTP fails the next two most-favoured properties, Clone Independence and the Condorcet Loser Criterion, which voters also rated as above “Fairly Important.”
But for its occasional Monotonicity failures, the Alternative Vote (AV), and only AV, meets all the properties rated as “Fairly Important” or higher…
Monotonicity failure is the clear stumbling block for most people. Quite understandable, but I wonder if they could be persuaded to trade the possibility of a very rare (and relatively benign) Monotonicity Failure for the benefits of avoiding the far more frequent and pernicious Clone and Condorcet Loser failures.
Has anyone been asked about the Darius Guppy affair?
The one where Boris agreed to find out the address of a journalist so that fellow ex-Etonian (and fraudster) Guppy could have him beaten up.
Should the man who did that run the Met Police?
Giles McNeill
Those polled made the reasonable assumption that it would be hard not to pick a better team to run London.
Barry – Nope, no polls on it (presumably since Johnson’s opponents haven’t managed to get it onto the agenda despite, IIRC, questions about it turning up at some hustings).
This Guppy business is nonsense and everyone knows it (and ages ago). Johnson may have said something to please his friend, but didn’t do it. Unlike Ken doling out millions to bogus organisations run by his clients.
The other factor that is hurting Ken is that people want to kick Brown and NuLab (even more so as house prices slide and repossessions mount). They can’t kick them directly, yet, but they can, and will, kick Ken.
What gets me about the whole Livingstone / Johnson aspect is that both are ‘personalities’ but neither would you want to have as real Minister. I also have a suspicion the Tories should not view the vote for Johnson as good for them. I suspect his support is despite him being a tory and because he is ‘amusing / fun / hasn’t seen a hairdresser / has nice quips’ etc.
Someone is reporting on PB. that the ICM details are up, but they can’t make head nor tail of it.
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2008_april_london_mayor_poll.pdf
I haven’t tried. I will [lazily and wisely] wait for Anthony.
Should the man who did that run the Met Police?
Should someone who supported the IRA and courted its leaders run the Met Police?
Why didn’t Boris Johnson, after putting the phone down on his friend, convicted fraudster Darius Guppy, call the police and inform them of Guppy’s conspiracy to commit assualt against a journalist?
Enough now, it’s perfectly reasonable to ask if there’s been any polling on the question, this isn’t te place to argue about it (or indeed, about Ken’s past dealings with Sinn Fein)
I am at a complete loss when a poll states that 51% of Londoners think that on the whole that Ken Livingstone has done a good job.
My work ensures that I speak to a very large number of people, from various social backgrounds and incomes. Almost without exception the perception of Ken is arrogant,dishonest and devious.
Peter G,
“Almost without exception the perception of Ken is arrogant,dishonest and devious.”
You could say the same for Bill Clinton and most Americans would agree, but most Americans think he did a good job, there really isn’t a contradiction.
Peter.
We have been wondering for a while now why the BNP is being treated as a fringe party, given they come second or third and in some cases first in local elections. We hear about the the Greens who are included on your list – when hardly anyone votes for them, and the same applies to UKIP. What’s going on?
Anthony,
There is a new YouGov poll on Scotland in the times and Scottish Sun, I’ve posted the results under Scottish Voting Intentions.
Peter.