ComRes show Tory lead down to a single point
A new poll by ComRes in Tuesday’s Indy tells a completely different story to ICM and MORI’s recent figures. The topline figures, with changes from ComRes’s last poll, are CON 37%(-6), LAB 36%(+4), LDEM 17%(+5). The poll was conduced between Friday and Sunday.
In recent weeks we’ve become used to polls showing differing results – methodological differences have resulted in some pollsters showing much larger Tory leads than other ones. However, until now polls have been consistent in showing the same trends – until last week the pollsters, despite differences in extent, were all showing the Conservative poll shrinking. The two polls published since the press reaction to the PBR, conducted by ICM and Ipsos MORI, both showed that trend reversing, with the Conservatives again gaining support. This poll is not just out of line with the figures other companies have been presenting, but also it’s the exact opposite of the trend ICM and MORI are showing.
Normally when polls disagree I look at the methodologies and try to explain the difference. There is no obvious explanation here. I’ve looked through the ComRes tables and there is nothing obviously freaky or wrong – the Lib Dems appear to have been weighted to a much higher figure than their previous poll – 12% of the sample said they voted Lib Dem in 2005, as opposed to 8% of the sample in ComRes’ previous poll – which goes a long way towards explaining the jump in the level of Lib Dem support, but not that of the two main parties: the overall shares of recalled past vote are pretty similar to those ICM use to weight their polls.
This is the first poll conducted since Damian Green was arrested, so theoretically it could be possible that the public reaction to it has been the polar opposite to the media’s, but that would be unusual. It could also be that the the increased Conservative lead we saw from ICM and MORI was just a reflection of the bad press coverage the PBR was receiving at the time those two polls were carried out, and the public reaction to the PBR now it has sunk in properly is actually more positive. The alternative possiblity is, of course, that either MORI & ICM, or ComRes are “rogue polls”.
I am cautious about the term “rogue poll”. It tends to get thrown around willy-nilly against any poll people don’t like and sometimes at companies with methodology people see as faulty. What is actually refers to is that the 3% margin of error commonly quoted for polls is at the 95% level of confidence. In layman’s terms it means that 19 out of 20 times the “real” figure will be within 3 points of the figure quoted in the poll. A rogue poll is that 1 in 20 where the figure is more than 3 points out. It is inevitable that these things happen, and happen to all companies – but realistically it is impossible to ever be certain whether a poll that looks out of line is a rogue poll, or the start of a new trend. We won’t know for sure until we see some other polls that confirm or contradict this one, but until then I will urge my normal caution against polls that show large changes in support, or sudden reverses in the trend.
Filed under: Communicate, Voting Intention
I am off to look for my passport
At first sight looks like very good news for Brown.
The key question is when did the field work take place. If after the Green affair broke then a very interesting result, if before it may already be old news.
Looking more closely the apparent sharp drop in Tory figures looks less convincing, it is more likely that the previous Com Res poll was an outlier because disregarding that poll, Tory vote has been consistent around 40% with Com Res since the summer.
More surprising perhaps is the sharp increase in Labour vote, which is out of line with both ComRes past results as well as more recent surveys, I would view that one with caution until more confirmation or otherwise is recieved from further polls
Now this will set a cat amongst the pigeons.
There now seriously needs some looking at the methodology for the pollsters as some are showing a small lead and other are showing a big lead.I cannot imagine, and I may be wrong, the public is changing its mind every day.Without looking to see if any economic questions were asked it does beg the question was the PBR as badly recieved as the press have had us believe.As Peter said on the other thread has Greengate(I hate all this gate stuff,Greengate is actually a place in Oldham) benefited Labour.Maybe the public have got a bit worn down with the negative overkill on the PBR and the governments part/non-part in Green and is getting some sympathy.
Maybe the lack of any economic alternative by Osbourne is filtering through,?
As I said in the last thread, that if after the 15% lead poll the next one showed a fall for a pollster that was then showing a Conservative lead in double figures, this would make it even harder to fathom the current trend. I didn’t think that the lead would more or less disappear all together.
Until the next poll, which on current polling random form will show the Conservatives about 25% in front,
the game is back wide open again.
Meanwhile over in Oracle World they are putting the coffing labelled Labour back into the cupboard.
I’m not going to be down-hearted by this one poll. I think getting hung up on one poll to the next is risking ‘wood for the trees’ syndrome. Will see what the polls over next 7 days or so and if then it’s back to single figures generally, then I’ll get my bags too.
PB posters are reporting Lab ahead of Con in the SE in this poll and surely that raises questions on the accuracy of this poll (for me to cling to anyway)…
If you missed it on the other thread Guido Fawkes a right wing forum posted the above results as:
Conservatives – 48%
Labour – 25%
LDems – 15%
Nice to see that they are on the ball.
Yes that figure for the South East is startling, and I’d feel the same way about any poll which showed the Tories in the lead in Scotland or the North East. We just have to wait and see the next batch of polls to see who’s right and who has the egg on their face!
Scrapheap – there are somehow more Conservative posters on PB than here and many of them post on Guido as well.
Must of been one of them that was wishful thinking the ComRes result on Guido.
If Guido himself posted it well go over and laugh and point fingers. If one of his commenters did – so what? Every open posting forums attracts some people who are idiots.
Anthony – I wouldn’t let my eyes venture over there, I’m staying loyal to here.
I only picked up the Guido trash result off PB.
Scrapheap & Impartial Observer – strange things in regional breaks aren’t necessarily a sign of something wrong.
Polls are weighted to be representative of the country as a whole. They aren’t weighted to be representative within regions. Therefore, in theory a sample could have too few supporters of one party in one region and too many supporters of that party in a different region, and still be fine overall. As I said in the main article, the proportion of 2005 Tory voters in the sample seems to be fine.
Anthony. Is it possible for any poll to show – for Wales and SW – Cons 41% LD 7%.? Have I misunderstood something about the way polls work in the regions? the figures look totally corrupt.
Wow!
I notice that this poll was taken over the weekend and when the weather was particularly cold – could such things have an impact on the kind of people who would respond? (Some Labour supporters may scoff at such a question, please feel free to do so.)
In any case, I think it gives added significance to Yougov’s next poll. It’s certainly going to be a nail biting time.
For the Lib Dems this is another relatively good poll. And the Lib Dems are likely to gain most from a Hung Parliment.
Anthony. Correction – the Con figure is apparently 51%! Looks even more absurd.
oh well, there’s that hope dashed by Anthony. Thanks for the explanation – why do they bother with breakdowns like that then if it’s only the whole that is representative and not the parts?
I’m still in Victor Meldrew mode on this poll – at least for now. I don’t believe it.
Comres figures for Scotland are;
Labour 37%, Tories 17%, SNP 34%, Libdems 4%, Other 8%
Those figures don’t seem that unusual for Scotland and In line with what i’d currently expect labour back ahead, the SNP a strong second, with the Tories falling back a bit. The only odd one is the Libdems who at 4% have struck a new low in a long line of lows for the first time falling below the vote for others.
As I have said before these figures are only usefull for general trends so leaving aside the Libdems score if there is a problem with this poll it doesn’t seem to be in Scotland.
Peter.
The real question?
When is the next poll?
I just don’t buy that people are changing their minds so often.
The fact is the Tories have been above 40 for ages, except once before with com res and I just don’t buy into the idea that they have forgotten the debt figures because they got a penny off a Mars bar.
Nor do I think Green will help Labour, hurt the Tories.
None of the narrative fits with a major change.
The figures and the trend look off.
Bonkers.
When’s the next one?
Collin – if random chance gave ComRes a really strange and freaky raw sample – if, for example, they found loads of 2005 Tory voters in the South-West and hardly any in the South-East, it couldn’t necessarily produce dodgy figures overall.
Just because there are odd regional breaks the overall GB figures wouldn’t *necessarily* be out as long as the overall political make up of the sample was sound. That said, you’re much better off with a raw sample that isn’t strange and freaky.
‘That said, you’re much better off with a raw sample that isn’t strange and freaky.
I feel a potentially partisan comment comment coming on.
Is it the case then that we can expect a rogue 1 in 20 times [not pointing a finger at the moment, well waving it about a bit perhaps]?
It will make for some strained nerves for all concerned in the run up to an election.
Any chance that Conservative voters are trying to tempt Labour into an early election?
At least this poll puts a bit of fun back into it. PB forum seems to have exploded and the regional votes in the actual poll look a bit freaky, however with the closeness of the poll there should be plenty of posts on here tomorrow. Would love to see the face on some of the posters when they read this in the morning.
Anthony
If we look at 99% confidence intervals, do the margins of error change significantly? I’m asking about polls in general as well as this one.
For instance, if there’s no overlap between the 99% intervals for current polls showing 10+ points for the Tories and this one, at the 99% confidence level, then surely there’s some methodological problems for one of the polling companies?
Or am I wrong? My statistics knowledge is pretty poor, I admit.
These results are completely baffling.
this poll isn’t out of line with the last yougov poll though – and don’t yougov do the fieldwork for comres?
there may be some issues with the yougov panel. they may select an appropriate group with an eye on demographics but mori’s finding over the behaviour of public sector workers was interesting – there may be hidden imbalances in the yougov panel
Of course Anthony is right to say that we can’t read much into 1 poll. The Weighted Moving Average is now 41:34:16, that is a reasonably “safe” figure and unlikely to be out by more than 2.5%.
Where I must disagree slightly with Anthony is in this “3% MoE” figure, which depends on simplistic statistical assumptions which are not the case in real life. Of the 32 ComRes results that have been published since I started tracking this, 4 (12.5%) have been >5% from the WMA and 2 >6%. The empirical Standard Deviation of the ComRes results is +/-3.2% which is slightly higher than the other pollsters. An error in ComRes of just over 6% is not unusual, and indeed their poll on 19/9/08 turned out to be under-estimating the CLead by 6% as well.
@ Tony Jones – “Would love to see the face on some of the posters when they read this in the morning.”
My face looks like this :O and
O)
As I have said many times the regional subsamples in these polls are too small and not individually weighted and therefore do not give meaningful results .
The Comres data tables are particularly useful in that they break down how people say they voted in 2005 by the regional subsamples .. From this in this poll it can be seen that LibDems in Scotland Midlands and especially the South West were considerably under sampled in this poll and LibDems in the South East oversampled compared to the real votes in 2005 .
Anthony, can you suggest any reasons why both polls (say the Guardian’s and this one) could be right?
I can think of two, not unrelated. One is that public opinion really is this fickle, so even a correctly sampled poll with slightly different research dates can give hugely difference answers. Another is that public opinion is quite fickle, as is those saying they are likely to vote (is that filtered in both), and together this means the choices of those who actually intend to vote are very changeable.
I suppose a third explanation is that both polls are at the extremes of their margins of error, which would just about give you a swing of 12 points in the lead, wouldn’t it?
Amazing-
Big movements from last ComRes Poll 12/13 November are (+/- Con/Lab)
Females -9/+4
18/34s -10/+19
25/34s -16/+5
ABs -12/+6……..eh???
DEs -13/+17……these aren’t typical Public Sector are they?
South East -9/+1….??
….so young women; the upper middle class plus the working class-and people in the South East.
Cameron had better pack it in then!
This s a bit of a stunner. Reading the infromation..is it me or does it go what was stated in the last two polls. I think I will wait until the next poll out (isn’t there one this sunday?) before we can either describe this as a complete crashing of Tories (as a liberal I am happy that we had a slight rise), support or this poll is indeed a rogue. However may I argue that the ‘green’ afair should have no factor. Both Nick Clegg as well as Tony Benn all argued for Mr Green, so if the tories went in for overkill on the affair..then as Nick Clegg and the liberals are then guilty by association and sghould also be showing a decline in support…
James,
“My face looks like this :O and
O)”
Have you considered surgery…..
Peter.
Also, although it does seem unlikely the pubilc’s view of DG’s arrest is so much different from the media, if the public believe MPs have cushy lives and are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us (which they do believe) then I suppose a lot of influential people moaning about MPs being subject to police action might not go down well.
These wild fluctuations obviously have their reasons. Not just the polling sampling method used. Is there any chance for instance that support for Labour/Conservatives et al varies radically from one part of the Country to another but are not being adequately incorporated into the polling methods?
As we know Scotland and Wales for instance are not typical of England: and northern England may be radically different from the south. Other reasons are obvious including local strength of say a BNP candidate.
@ Matthew – the ComRes poll was conducted “between Friday and Sunday”. Green was arrested last Thursday and the story didn’t really hit the media until Friday. The BBC initially played it down until Sunday (when it became clear that it wasn’t going to go away, and the Mumbai story was fading, so they started paying the Green Affair a bit more attention). Ditto The Guardian/Observer. So I suspect that the timing and a slow, understated BBC response (particularly) meant that the story hadn’t gathered a full head of steam yet when the ComRes poll was taken.
If there is a Green effect, my feeling is that it’s more likely to show itself towards this coming weekend.
There’s only one way to know for sure, call a general election. It may be easy to discount this poll, but not long ago the Tories were down to a 3% lead. It seems that they are either 10 points up or about dead even, depending on .. well, whatever really.
On a different note, wasn’t it nice to see Ed Balls coming down hard on the officials at Haringey? I’m not a great supporter of this government but he showed much needed decisive action.
Doesn’t make me want to vote for them, but it’s nice to see some people in government are capable of action.
A bit radical, Mark! The polls seem at odds with one another….tell you what, let’s have a GE – just to settle an argument!
Seriously, i sense some logic in a rise for the LibDems and a drop for the Tories.
The public response to the PBR seems to be “not enough!” It’s hardly going to endear them to Osborne if he’s saying “irresponsible, all have to be paid back”, which can be interpreted as “too much!”.
A rogue poll is one so they say where one does not like the results. Well I don’t like the result of this one but I am reluctant to call it a rogue poll as others of my persuasion are too ready to do.
For the last month or so there has been a clear dividing line between one set of polls ( not necessarily the same polls) saying that the Tory lead is rapidly shrinking and another set which says it is pretty solid. Maybe all this conflicting evidence tells us not so much that the public are fickle but that due to the the financial turmoil this autumn voters are not thinking ahead to the next election . Instead they are focused on the short term and how to get through the week. Perhaps the pollsters should agree not to release any polls until February next year in the hope that things settle down one way or the other.
All this up and down stuff is not good for my heart!
Wow, not sure what to say… someone is going to be looking at their systems once the election is over. It was once pointed out that there seem to be a large number of people who just vote according to what they have read in the papers that day…. are people really that volatile?
This has made it all very exciting though!!
Morgan – at the 99% confidence level the margin of error on a sample of 1000 is 4%. Though I wouldn’t get too hung up on the specifics – margin of error calculations are from statistical formulas based on a genuinely random sample with a 100% response rate, they don’t really reflect real life.
Johnny H – no, YouGov don’t. ComRes is a phone poll, and the fieldwork is normally done by ICM.
John Charlesworth – it’s unlikely. At a regional level polls will be representative. They will always contain the right proportions of people from Scotland, the North, the Midlands and so on. At a lower level than that they could theoretically have something like too many urban and not enough rural people, but there is no reason at all to think they have, or obvious reason why they should.
The poll is the poll.
I for one would really appreciate the chance to vote sooner rather than later, so hope that this does (trick?) the current encumbent into an early election.
I would like to see (and please point me in the right direction if it already exists) what the strength of feeling is behind the answers that people give. I think the results would be startling.
[...] why are the ComRes figures so different. Here’s what Anthony Wells has to say at UK Polling Report: This is the first poll conducted since Damian Green was arrested, so theoretically it could be [...]
Nick: ‘A rogue poll is one so they say where one does not like the results’
I would suggest it is a rogue poll because it shows large swings for no apparent reason and is out of step with most of the other pollsters. This poll is both.We should wait and see what other polls suggest before we use the ‘r’ word but it does look it.
One thing I’m certain of though is that Labour’s friends in the media will be spinning this poll for all it’s worth, then more.
Anthony .
Some people are discrediting this poll on the grounds that some of the regional subsets look out way of whack. For instance the South East figures show a Labour lead, I believe.
I thought that the pollsters don’t pretend to have representative samples by Region and provided the national sample is representative then the poll is perfectly valid in its own terms. So there may be too few Tories in the South East but too many in the North. The margin of error on these subsets must be very high. I saw one poll which found only 6 Tories in Scotland for a 9% vote share whilst another one found a 21% vote share within a couple of days.
I note that the percentage of people in the poll who say they voted LD in 2005 is only 12%. Higher than 8% certainly but still incredibly low relative to their 22% vote share at the last GE. I thought MORI were the only major pollster not to vote on past voting record. However, if Com Res are doing so they’re not making a very good job of it.
Personally I think this is one of those 5% of the polls which is outside the margin of error but then I’m a Tory! The only thing that occurs to me as a possible boost for Labour is that voters are giving Labour’s VAT cut the entire credit for the massive price cuts which are being heavily advertised everywhere. Add these to the cuts in tracker mortgage rates and to the cuts in petrol prices and if you’re in work there might be a little bit of feel good factor running up to Xmas.
By contrast the Damian Green affair may be a bit inside the beltway for a lot of people especially given the Mumbai, Baby P stories running alongside it.
As ever we await the next polls!
[...] why are the ComRes figures so different. Here’s what Anthony Wells has to say at UK Polling Report: This is the first poll conducted since Damian Green was arrested, so theoretically it could be [...]
“there might be a little bit of feel good factor running up to Xmas. ”
Indeed, as I myself will be driving 800 miles or so and watching my mortgage go through the floor.
I just noticed that on the 26th October Comres produced a poll which showed the Conservatives on 39 while all others around that time were showing the Conservatives on either 42 or 45.
This poll is contrary to the trend of the last two polls it has been pointed out. And the fact the Comres has had a recent history of being out of step with others should cause us to treat this one with some skepticism.
This poll fits in with the trend over the last few months but not the trent (or blip) in the last two. Could it just be that there was a lot of churn over the last week that has now leveled off? But the first poll for a long time showing the Conservatives below 40%, if this continues will we have an election early next year?
that should have been “…but not the trend (or blip) shown in the last two polls.”
Interesting point made in the Independent:
“There are other signs that natural Labour supporters are returning to the fold. The number of Labour “identifiers” who say they will vote for the party has risen from 81 per cent to 87 per cent since last month.”
Could this explain the big change that is taking place?
Glad I’m not a politician trying to work out for each poll if it meant I still had a job if it was the real thing. I’d be giddy.
Seriously I think the way the polls have moved over the last year suggest something about the electorate-perhaps less voter loyalty than ever before which is leading to all parties coming out with increasingly attention grabbing policies rather than well thought out policies.
However the rapid spin of policies is making the electorate even less committed (or more cynical) and so increases their willingness to alter their minds because they don’t actually really believe in politicians any more. which then cause politicians…
The public love firm governments who show their firmness by arresting the badies! And who better to arrest than the Tories? Finally, they’ve got the right people! What a shame they can’t hold Green for 42 days without charge, that would be even better!
It may well be that the last three polls are all indicating actual voter shifts that are not incompatible but have been confused by sampling differences. It is clear that Labour has picked up significantly in Scotland, and I suspect also among traditional supporters in England. The PBR tax changes played better to these groups I suspect. The Tories are probably strengthening among southern voters, where the PBR debt issue and Green affair played badly. If opinion is getting more polarised then presumably sampling he polls could simply be accentuating these different but valid trends?
I’m not really sure this poll is unbelievable, but I think we need to adjust our conclusions of what the polls are showing.
The recent tax debate in the PBR was described as opening up clear water between the three parties and various different issues (security, social care, civil liberties, economics etc) are clearly affecting different interest groups in different ways, so I would therefore say that the different polling methodologies are identifying the different trends which are at play and that no current poll shows the true state of the parties.
I think the polling companies better start pulling thier fingers out to account for these differences because the next general election is definitely shaping up to mark a once-in-a-generation choice about the direction for the country.
I wish to repeat my advocacy for a plotted graph of poll results and my opposition to the WMA.
This is a very eye-catching result, no question. The headline figure for the Conservatives is the most surprising since over the last two-and-a-half months and 25 polls only 2 have shown them under the 40% level (both interestingly were ComRes polls).
I do find it hard to believe that the Conservatives have fallen 6% when the two preceding polls have suggested that their support has actually risen. I very much doubt that public opinion has changed that dramatically in a single week when press coverage has been fairly minimal.
However, we must wait for the YouGov poll before labelling this as an outlier. If the YouGov poll shows a Conservative gain then I think we can conclude there has been a gain of some kind. If not then I have no idea where we are.
Someone on ConHome is reporting a new poll:
Ipsos Mori Poll said…
New Ipsos Mori Poll shows Labour slump.
An Ipsos Mori Poll due to be released at 14:00 will show Labour support badly hit by the PBR.
Labour – 27%
Conservative – 46%
Liberal Democrats – 18%
Conservative lead 19%
Any truth Anthony?
just in case this post is a “rogue post” I will put the link to it:
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2008/12/stoke-to-debate.html
Sorry if this turns out to be rubbish. Sounds more like what I would (like?) to believe. can’t be rogue then!!
As far as I’m aware no. Julia Clark from MORI is also unaware of it, so either it’s nonsense, or it’s not from MORI.
Anthony
Any comment on my post a little further up? The so called poll result came from a troll on Guido’s site. It’s rubbish. Guido has had a bad couple of days what with the rubbish he posted about the Com Res poll.
If we get enough of these posts that refer to massive Tory leads from un-corroborated sources, does it follow that they will cease to be regarded as “rogue posts”, and accepted as “trend posts”?
A true rogue post would be if Anthony gave some analysis along the lines of “ave it!!!”, or Peter Cairns replaced his S with a B.
Or if the Oracle wrote something thoughtful.
Apparently it was on a Guido thread so it is probably rubbish, either wishful thinking form a Tory or strange misinformation from labour trying to excite Tories! Sorry if it is rubbish
Blue moon – you are right about the regional breaks.
On the past vote, the 12% is of the whole electorate, not those people who actually voted. In the sample as a whole there is something like 40% people who say don’t know, can’t remember or that they didn’t vote.
The 12% figure is pretty much in line with what ICM and Populus weight their 2005 Lib Dem voters to, so is no cause for concern.
It shows Labour ahead of the Tories in the South East.
It shows the Lib Dems on 7% in the West Country. Hmm.
I’ve never seen such a rogue poll as this. In a few week’s time this will stand out like a sore thumb.
My response to this POLL – “Yeah OK !”
Possible explanation – 2 previous polls had 2-3% negative pbr effect for Government which has now reversed (would be partial to suggest why?) Plus this poll being at extreme of error margin but not rogue.
First things first James Ludlow, don’t want to sound personal but if you do look like that you must have a fat nose.
Secondly, I spotted the trash Mori/Ipsos poll on ConHome at about mid-day.It said it was going to be released at 14:00 and now it looks like it is rubbish.I couldn’t understand Mori releasing another poll within two days of it’s last one.Either way, showing the volitallity of the current polls, even though it would have been a bit dissapointing, I wouldn’t have been surprised if there was a poll that showed the Conservatives 19% ahead after one also showing them 1% ahead.
Anthony, has there ever been a time recentley where the polls have been this so far apart?When is the next Yougov?
As Peter said maybe the Green issue has actually gone against the Conservatives, as someone posted on ConHome, maybe most of the public just read that a Conservative MP has been arrested, remembers what has happened before, and ignore the actual details.Maybe it is the Osbourne effect, maybe the press has completely underestimated what the public think of the PBR.
People seem to incorrectly say this is the only poll that has moved away from the Conservatives since the PBR.Yougovs last was actually done just after the PBR and that showed a similar result if you consider the MOE.
Mr Oracle, the irony is that my response to this poll was exacly the same as yours, though I think I meant it in a totally different way.
I think that people in general, view any breach of the official secrets act with the seriousness which it deserves so I cannot see how the Green issue could possibly be considered as anything other than damaging for the Tories. It may be reflected in this poll but we will have to wait and see.
Has anyone heard anything about a Tory Shadow Cabinet member resigning for having some past connection with the IRA? Might not be true so don’t quote me!
The polls are going to be volatile whilst the Country at large is in such a volatile state. I wonder if it was Mandy who was behind the Euro stories!!!… that would cause a few splits in the Tories (as well as Labour) if there really was a plan re the Euro!!! Sounds a bit mischievous to me!
Richard: Mandy – mischievous…never.Whether you love him or hate him,since The Prince of Darkness as the regulars on ConHome call him re-entered the cabinet the Conservative lead has reduced.He must know how to push some buttons right.
Is it possible that the first two post-PBR polls displayed the kneejerk press reaction to the PBR?
We know what the trends were before the PBR – several polls were into mid/low single figures. The 15 point lead is so remotely unlikely, given the current climate and performances, which should make us push it to one side.
It’s perfectly possible that people are walking into every shop and seeing posters advertising a VAT cut, and thinking that is pretty darn cool. We also know the top rate tax band is very popular across the whole political spectrum, and we’ve had a nice slice of Tory sleaze in the past week.
One point gap seems unlikely, however. I’d bet on perhaps 4, 5 points as a push.
You’re absolutely right Tony J!!! Maybe its been done to stop Ken Clarke pushing Osbornes front door button!!!
Having just read John Redwoods latest offering -
‘ The truth is that both the UK and the US have to CUT living standards ……. Living standards in both the public and private sector have to be brought down’
I am not surprised the Tory lead seems to be falling if this is Tory policy, we need a strong opposition not this dilly dallying with cameras at the ready for some ‘unannounced police raid’ and people being told the government shouldn’t be helping them and they will have to lower their standard of living!
Strewth come on, lets have some decent ideas from the opposition please – I bet this wouldn’t be happening with David Davis as leader.
Could it just be that people really are uncertain who to vote for in these uncertain times and possibly will go for whoever last said something positive or didn’t do something stupid yesterday.
It certainly is different from recent times when “the people” seemed pretty much certain who they wanted in power.
watch the trend… assuming we find one.
“I think that people in general, view any breach of the official secrets act ”
No doubt-but Green hasn’t been arrested under the OSA.
“they will have to lower their standard of living!”
This isn’t a “policy” statement-its a statement of the bleeding obvious.
Mervyn KIng told us all this very thing last February-in specific terms.He said “Britons have enjoyed a decade of high spending on luxury goods, holidays and second homes, fuelled by low interest rates, easy credit and near-record lows in living costs.”
He issued a stark warning that this period had “come to an end.”
He said the fallout from global economic turmoil would “take its toll on the spending power of British households.”
Don’t you understand any of this?
I have the impression there are two groups of polls here – it seems that the high and low Con polls alternate. Splitting the polls back to 25th Sep between the ones with double digit Conservative leads and the rest gives us two groups – the low leads are mostly ComRes and YouGov, and they have a marked downward trend. (from +9 on 25th Sep to +1 today, and it’s straight down with only one rise, of one point between IPSOS on the 16th and YG on the 25th)
The high-Tory ones are fluctuating around an average of 11 points lead. They’re mostly ICM and whoever the folks with the B are.
Colin, It has nothing to do with what I may understand, it is about what the electorate understands and that is a completely different ball game
I’m pleased you have faith in the Governor of the BoE, however I must say I’m not one for taking too much notice of what Mervin King thinks, he was after all saying that interest rates need to be at 5% not too long ago was he not, with clearly no vision of what was about to happen, unlike one of his colleagues on the MPC who was shouted down each month for the past year or so!
I’m sure Mr Redwood and his colleagues can offer some good advice about recessions, after all they have the most experience of them do they not?
I hope everyone takes his sound advice!
Its the overall picture which is the accurate one; not one poll or two polls.
And, overall, the Tories lead by between 6pts to 9pts.
Somewhere between narrow majority and hung parliament with either main party as biggest party.
That’s (still) where things stand.
Not sure about that ‘David in FRANCE’, I think the latest polls over the last couple of weeks give us an idea of the direction that the voting trends are going and the latest poll gives us an idea of how the voting would go ‘if there were an election tomorrow’. Always within that 3% margin of error.
Colin – Would be bit of a strange voting tactic for the public. Vote for us, you need a lower standard of living.
The public have always wanted it on a plate always up.Look at the recent polls, they want less tax, more spending. To then tell the public that we want you to have a lower standard of living is a political own goal, even if it is actually inevitable in the current economic climate.
What seems most out of line here is the CON drop to 37%, isn’t that the lowest drop for them in a LONG time? Even YouGov who have been rating the Tories particularly harshly in recent polls have still kept them above the 40% barrier. In fact as people have pointed out before, even with single digit leads the Tories still retain a lead in the low to mid 40s. A drop to 37 seems very unlikely and I’m confident that other polls will soon make a mockery of this ComRes one.
David In France – The problem is that the polls are not standing anywhere.On a daily basis they are running all over the place.
Based on Anthony’s figures from this website then if we go back to the conference season then the leads from Polsters for the Tories are;
YouGov; 19, 20, 10, 14, 10, 8, 9, 5, 4
ICM ; 15, 9, 12, 12, 13, 11, 15
Populus; 16. 15. 6
Mori ; 28, 15, 3, 11
Comres ; 12, 9, 8, 11, 1
What is clear from this to me is that Labour has closed the gap, something that we can all accept I’d hope. Yougov shows a start to finish drop of 15, ICM 0, Populus 9, Mori 17, Comres 11. ICM are the odd one out.
Next ICM have shown the least change, while Yougov, populus and Mori have shown the Tories more or less dimiishing over the period.
The biggest chage from one poll to another and the average change are;
Yougov; 10% (20 to 10) Av 3.
ICM ; 6% (15 to 9) Av 2.
Populus; 9% (15 to 6) Av 3.
Mori ; 13% (28 to 15) Av 8.
Comres; 10% (11 to 1) Av 3.
Now what this shows is that the big drop is a lot more than the average except with mori which seem more inclined to change than others. In some respects a big drop could be due to a gap in polling so that a gradual change was missed or a key event that changed things, a tipping point like Camerons 2007 conference speak and the phoney election.
However i’d be inclined to say that when a single poll jumps by substantially more than the average we should hold off on calling it valid.
The Yougov drop of 10% is three times the average drop and without it the average change is only 2% in what is the longest series of polls since the conferences. That drop was in two polls only six days apart but it was the week that Lehmans went to the wall and Brown took action, so I think there is a plausable explaination.
This poll with it’s drop of 10% again should be compared withan average without it of just 2% and although a smaller sample it still looks odd. This drop has taken place over a two week period covering the PBR but runs counter to other pollsters reaction.
That makes me think this on should be treated with extreme caution.
One final thing, the more I look at these figures the less I think the polls are currently erratic. It all looks pretty stable for me brown is up and Cameron down. The actual margin is hard to pin down but the tories are still ahead and it looks like Labour currently isn’t closing the gap.
To go back to an old theme, I think we are close to tipping point.
If people think it will be a close election they rally to a potential winner and the third party gets squeezed, while if they think it’s in the bag then the third party recovers at the expense of the potential loser.
For much of the last year the tories were seen as almost dead certs to win. recently Labour have made a recovery of sorts and that has squeezed the LibDems ( and SNP).
Where it will go from here I am not sure but I think it will stabilies on one side of the tipping point a narrow tory lead of 2-5% and a hung Parliament ( and possibly less than 10 seats for the SNP) or a good tory lead of 10-15% a Tory government ( and 15 or so seats for the SNP).
Ironically the more seats the SNP gets through this scenario the less likely it is that Alex’s hope for maximum influence in a hung parliament becomes.
Peter.
Peter,
With two equally undesirable potential winners I actually think the tendency for a third-party squeeze will be inverted (something which I’d've thought the SNP would welcome) – that is, unless a clear favorite emerges within the first few weeks of the new year.
“Look at the recent polls, they want less tax, more spending. ”
I,m looking Tony-are you saying the increased support for Labour is because the public believe the Government will provide”less tax, more spending”?
That would be bizarre indeed given that Darling has just announced more taxes & less public spending.
If you meant the last time people were asked about tax & spend policy-I’m looking at that too:-
IPSOS Mori 27/28 November 2008:-
“Taxes should be cut even if it meant increasing Government borrowing to maintain public services funding”
Agree-Weighted total 41%
Public Sector Workers 47%
Labour voters 54%
“Government borrowing should not be increased even if it means taxes remain as is & spending on public services is cut”
Agree:- Weighted total 52%
Public Sector Workers 45%
Labour voters 39%
It depends who you ask Tony.
A strange poll, for oft-quoted reasons. If I was [still] a Tory I’d ignore it; too many anomalies.
The one boon that Cammer’s can take from the poll is the Midlands. That is the heart of the battle – literally Middle-England! As Mike Smithson’s is wont to say, Labour are strong in their heartlands, but weak in the marginals.
It is sad to see that Peter Cairns finds solace in Tory woes. You ain’t gonna’ get independence whilst England is denied Her Voice…!
Thankyou Peter-that’s a very good analysis and -for once but I promise I won’t let it happen again-I agree with every word you said.
Nevertheless since as Anthony says regional variations should not be the suspect we seize upon when trying to explain away any apparantly roguish poll then we are still left trying to reconcile how the polls can produce such contradictory results given that the margin of error is supposedly what 3% either way? And especially if the two polls in question use the same fieldwork as is the case with ICM and Communicate.
However if we ignore the flucuating Tory leads and concentrate on the shares of the vote then this does indeed suggest that something may have gone wrong with Communicate’s polling methodology since the share of votes they have attributed to the Tories on more than one occasion this autumn has been below 40% in contrast to the other better known polls.
The local council by election results last week for what they are worth show no sign of any significant Labour recovery as depicted in some polls and I wonder if this is because a number of Lib Dem supporters have over the last few weeks switched their support at national level to the government in response to the banking crisis whilst continuing at local level to back the LIb Dems. If I am right then the question arises as to how long the government can retain the support of voters with little attachment to their party once the recession has been established for any length of time–and we may not know the answer to that question until sometime in the New Year.
Surely what we can learn from these polls is that government borrowing is a fantastic smoke screen – politically anyway.
I honestly believe that people would have resisted the growing public sector more if they’d had to pay for it with higher taxes (around £40bn per year).
As it stands, it is almost unfair to the Conservatives because most people don’t vote for what’s best for the country – they vote for what’s best for themselves at the time.
Any party offering higher spend without higher taxes will get support from lots of the ’selfish’ voters (NB I’m not saying which is right or wrong, just stating what I think happens) where as those who look long term will see the damage that can be done if spend is not balanced with taxes.
In 1997 the country probably needed Labour to come in and boost public spending. Unfortunately they’ve now built up a structural deficit that they seem unable to reduce – hence the need for the Conservatives.
Round and round the political cycle goes.
Mark M – ” most people don’t vote for what’s best for the country – they vote for what’s best for themselves at the time. ”
Do they?
The “self interested voter hypothesis” (that people vote for the party that would most benefit them personally if it got into power) is superficially sensible, but actually tends to be rejected by political scientists these days – it just isn’t reflected in how people actually vote.
The theory goes (though this is a rough and ready version from the top of my head – you should really go and read a proper critique of it) that it doesn’t make much sense anyway because one persons vote is so hugely unlikely to make a difference. If party B gets in, they might cut my taxes… but realistically, my vote doesn’t make a jot of difference to whether party B do get in.
If they don’t influence that choice, what DO people get back from voting? Why vote? Social duty, a feeling of being part of society and doing something positive for it.
In other words, because the chance of your vote making a practical difference is so spectularly remote, it’s more rational for people to do what they think is *right* and get the reward of feeling like good and responsible people, rather than what benefits them personally, the effect of which is negligible.
” it’s more rational for people to do what they think is *right* ”
Anthony
But surely what people think is “right” can be as informed by their personal & family circumstances and desire to improve them,as by the circumstances of other people.
I can see that there may be issues where a truly altruistic attitude to voting -socially responsible if you like-would overide all else-even the voter’s own best interest.
But I cannot believe that voters do not factor in a significant element of self interest when voting.
One surely votes to make things “better”.But if one is entirely excluded from the improvement there would not seem to be much point in it.
This might seem superficial, but isn’t intended to be:
The reality shows on TV draw an enormous number of votes. Clearly , family members apart, no-one chooses whom to vote for out of self-interest.
A desire for justice to be done is far more compelling , although I can appreciate it would be difficult to imagine Anthony voting for a party that promised, for example, to ban blogging about opinion polls.
Anyway, pursuing my idea above, I graphed’em on a common timebase, drew trendlines and computed the R squareds. If you take the Tory leads of 10% or above since September, there is no trend, but quite a lot of volatility. R2 = 0.00… If you take the Tory leads below that, there’s a sharply declining trend with R2 = 0.77. Interestingly there is no comparable effect in the high Tory leads – if you take the top ones they’re not trending at all. It seems there is a lot of thrashing, but the low points for the Tories are steadily getting lower.
Anthony Wells
I’m always led to believe in the “self interested voter” because every government announcemnet is followed by a section on the BBC detailing ‘what this means for you’.
To some people, constant exposure to this kind of journalism will result in asking that question every time. As this country swings on what ’some people’ vote, if you get them to only vote selfishly you can buy their votes through borrowing.
Irresponsible maybe, but it’s very good playing politics.
“The “self interested voter hypothesis” (that people vote for the party that would most benefit them personally if it got into power) is superficially sensible, but actually tends to be rejected by political scientists these days – it just isn’t reflected in how people actually vote. ”
Totally agree. Another twist to the ’self-interest’ argument, though, is that of party identification. That, by and large, people are aspirational and would like to see their choice of party (ie, their vote) transfer some of that aspiration to them.
The trick for parties (one which Blair learned – and Cameron too, though his front bench seem busy trying to unlearn it pronto) is to project an image which people can identify with and which they feel will reflect positively on them. It’s all about basking in a rosy glow – that’s why Theresa May’s categorisation of the Tories as ‘the nasty party’, while needing to be said, was extremely damaging to the Tories.
So, for me, ‘the self-interested voter’ is much less about economic self-interest and more about the benefits of association.
i am a tory.if i was polled i would say i was voting labour to bring an election sooner
the country can not,and never has been,able to function under labour.
this time, there was so much money in the tank in 1997 ,it just took longer for them to be found out.
this time, there was so much money in the tank in 1997 ,it just took longer for them to be found out.
FACTUAL ASSERTION FAIL. The budget deficit in 1996-7 was 8% of GDP…like it is now.
Alex – good point
Alex
Actual FACTUAL ASSERTION FAIL. The budget deficit in 1996-7 was 8% of GDP…like it is now.
The deficit in 1996-97 was 3.2% of GDP notabale as it breached the Brussels cap of 3% However this figure included PFI the 2008 published figure does not include PFI if it did we would have the 3rd largest deficit in the World
Am fascinated by the issue of selfish voters.
For myself, while I certainly vote on the issues which matter to me (so in once sense that is selfish because they are the issues I feel are important) I do not vote according to which party will make my life better in a short term or material sense… the issues of the environment, civil liberties or the union – which for me are far more important that the tweaking of the NHS or tax system – will be very unlikely to make me richer.
I guess it depends what you mean by “self-interested”. I vote for the party whose policies are closest to the sort of society I wish to live in – of the two major contenders, I’ll vote for the one which affords the most civil liberties and the least overbearing governance. It’s “self-interested” in the sense that the choice reflects my own preferred way of life, but not in the sense of “more money for me”.
Alex – well done.
James – “I vote for the party whose policies are closest to the sort of society I wish to live in”that’s exactly how I vote, but I use different criteria from your civil liberties/small govt ones. I suspect I’d be financially better off under a party I won’t be voting for.
I wonder if a question could be framed to discern trends in “selfishness”? Maybe the “what’s most important “list goes some way.
John T T, I tend to agree with you, I too could vote for a party that would (so they say) make me better off but prefer to vote for one that looks after those less fortunate (i.e. the latest announcement about mortgage protection). But I also know that I will be old and need looking after so maybe there is a little selfishness in my vote as well.
Speaking of the latest announcement about mortgage protection, it will be interesting to see how this and other moves to protect those falling behind in their mortgage repayments will affect the poll figures?
I plan to vote Labour despite the fact I will have to pay tax under the 45% income tax band introduced. However, Labour’s overall vision of society is closest to mine and also I don’t think the Tories are even committed to reverse the new band
Hi I think that the budget deficit was around 8% in 1993…
“I guess it depends what you mean by “self-interested”. I vote for the party whose policies are closest to the sort of society I wish to live in ”
Yes indeed James-that’s how I vote-and I guess it’s how most people vote.
The “sort of society” will include the whole gamut of things which affect us all ,to which we may attach different priorities relevant to our circumstances.
And as our circumstances change our priorities may change & so we may look at our society through a different prism.
Yes, actually I should say sorry, because I just checked. The PSBR as was *peaked* at £46bn, 8%, in 1993-1994 – it was down to £28bn by 1996-1997. But I think my point still holds; the current Treasury plans foresee it going to 8% and then coming down, too.
budget deficit was around 8% at the time of the last recession in the early nineties but was actually lower as proortn of gdp than it is now. unless the treasury’s optimisti forecast for 2009 and 2010 come to fruition we will be in unknown debt territory at that stage.
budget deficit was around the 3% level in 1997.
budget deficit was around 8% at the time of the last recession in the early nineties but was actually lower as proortn of gdp than it is now
how the fucking fuck can 8% of GDP be lower as a proportion of GDP than it is now?
A good article about debt on the BBC, record debt claims should be taken with a pinch of salt, http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7733794.stm
I like Paul will actually vote for the party that will tax me 45% because they are the party with views closest to mine on the way I think the country should be run. However many people do vote for the party who they think will be better personally for them.
When the borowing does have to be paid back do you think any of the parties will say that they are going to tax you because it will be good for the country to bring the borrowing down.I doubt it. Look at how Redwoods ” Living standards need to be brought down”.You are hardly going to enthuse the electorate by telling them you will make them worse off.
At the next election there will be backdoor taxes, political jiggery pokery and all kinds of sleight of hand used by all the parties to claw back the beniefit.
You don’y get many millionaires voting for the Labour party, a small minority may vote against them for political reasons.The vast majority do it to protect thier money, to say any differenct would be a bit of a porky.
Anyone know who’s poll is due next?
That was to claw back the borrowing above.
“You don’y get many millionaires voting for the Labour party, a small minority may vote against them for political reasons.The vast majority do it to protect thier money, to say any differenct would be a bit of a porky”
Tony and Paul, I won’t be paying the 45% rate (as I am not paid anywhere near that level unfortunately!) and i’ll be voting Tory. So, on this site at least, our ‘poll’ shows two ‘toffs’ for Labour and one ‘hard working family’ man for the Tories!
You shouldn’t read a book by it’s cover eh!
Approx average of all polls
August = Con lead +20
Sept = Con lead +16
Oct = Con lead +13.5
Nov = +8.4
Still smells like a February election to me if the polls continue this trend…..
Oh and I’m an ex-pat and in the 45% band…
Classic Tory territory?
Nope. I’ll also be voting Labour.
So how does the “site poll” look now?
Like Ivan, I will also be voting Tory, even though I don’t earn even 1/5th of the new tax band as I believe in lower government spending and lower taxes (I’m very glad they dropped the ‘matching Labours spending plans’. It was never a true Tory policy and smacked a bit of desperation. You should always stick to your guns.)
I’m very much a Friedmanite – lower taxes, for any reason, are a good thing and spending your money on yourself is far more efficient than government spending your money on you.
All I know after the next election is that taxes will be going up because the budget will need to be balanced, and you can’t make all the money needed from the rich so middle england is going to get nailed by them. I believe that unless there is an effort by government to freeze or cut public spending the tax burden will be too high and will delay the receovery.
Ivan, I may be paying the 45% tax rate but I am not a toff!!! A toff in my view is someone born into a wealthy family and privilege – not someone who has worked to get what they have achieved from a “normal” background. Without wanting to go too off piste that is one reason for my dislike of the Tories – especially with their attitude to inheritance tax they strike me as the party of the born rich rather than promoting a meritocracy
Stop!
No offence was meant. I used ‘toff’ and ‘hard working family’ as tabs for us only because they’ve been used by Labour in their campaign speak, it was only a bit of fun!
My message was just that sometimes very politisized folks like us start to see divisions in the world that, in reality for most people, just don’t exist.
Rich aristocratic Tories against working class lads for Labour…it’s just rubbish!
Lord Sainsbury and Sun reading white van man are testimony to this among millions of other examples.
What am I alledged to believe about inheritance tax anyway? It might suprise you but one of the reasons I vote Tory is because of a striong belief in meritocracy!
Uggh…I could write an essay, but this is wildly off topic now, appologies.
Ivan if my father who was a union official,plumber at the docks and my mother who was a council cleaner were both still alive I would ask them why we lived in a council house and I went to the local comp when we were toffs.
I would also ask them were did they put my application for Bullingdon and most importantly when we were skint why didn’t they sell the silver spoon that was hanging out of my mouth.
Anthony, I’ve noticed that when viewing a post the right hand column is missing.
Could that be political bias?
Tony Jones
Ask them ‘where’ your application is, not ‘were’.
You do know he was just joking with his ‘toffs’ line don’t you? There is a severe irony deficiency among the online community sometimes.
Is it that Labour bloke come here to crow & proclaim impending victory?
No, actually. This poll is very surprising to me since it is out of line with the 2 previous ones – even though not long before that the Tories were apparently in a pretty narrow lead in some polls. (Sorry, POLLS.) I would not get in any way excited about it. If however the findings are borne out by other polls any time soon that would be different again.
I wonder if the Government’s announcement today about relief for homeowners facing possible repossession, which has been widely applauded, will however help Labour somewhat. To me personally however if it helps to bring an earlier end to the recession – and surely it can do no harm – it will be better news still. Let’s hope so.
Gary – it’s deliberate – it means the page can be wider, and the right sidebar with the table of recent polls is actually quite heavy on the server.
I think the old theory of class voting is historically largely untrue (Akthoiugh there was a period between the seocnd world war and 79 when it was perhaps more true.
If it were the case that voitng was largely self-inetrested, I find it hard to see how a Tory party of the rich and middle class could ever have won an election under universal suffrage, let alone dominated proceedings in th 20th century.
Instead, I would propose that Tories have been able to appeal to aspects of people’s phsyche that are not so self-interested liek patriotism, and the celebration of libertarian principles and independence from the State. (That’s why they’ve always polled large amounts of working class supprt (not as much as labour, but still a lot), These values resonate extremely strongly even now with readers of that great working class newspaper, the SUn.
Labour has always polled far better in working class areas than the Tories, and vice versa in wealthy areas. The fact that there isn’t a perfect correspondence between class and party preference doesn’t mean there is no correlation at all.
I find it hard to believe that economic self interest plays no part in party preference. Perhaps people aren’t quite so cynical as to do it deliberately, but I suspect that self-interest often plays a role in what people judge to be right or wrong. Just take a look at the way people moan about the “injustice” of speed cameras after they have had a speeding ticket – some even feign a passionate interest in the technicalities of arcane legal concepts like self incrimination.
psbr.
you cant win this one lovies.
tories left 35% debt to gdp
labour will leave 67% thirdworld
where are the imf when we need them?this is much worse than 1979.they bailed out labour then.
Can someone explain why our national debt at (soon to be) 67% is viewed as third world when, as gordon brown like to repeat so often, france and italy etc all have higher debt/gdp?
I agree in so much as I believe it’s far too high, and if we’d paid it all back during 16 years of growth we would now have over £30bn extra to work with, but how is it ‘third world’ for us and mundane for them?
Do they count PFI and public sector pensions in their figures?
A word of warning to any Labour supporters who are tempted to revert to making class warfare statements and shouting toff at anyone who they think has been born rich
Chester and Nantwich
yes Nick that warning had already been heeded, indeed I have been saying the same in Labour circles.
Crewe and Nantwich?
1979 Mrs T. entered 10 Downing Street.
The results in most recent polls suggest that this is acutely out of line with public opinion. We need to view the polls over the next 10 weeks before being able to draw a reasoned conclusion.
@philip johnston
The economic problems of the 1970’s started under Heath. Labour steadied the ship before Thatcher plunged us into a recession that saw four milllion unemployed (twice as many as in 1979) and interest rates of twenty percent. That’s not to mention the other two recessions the Tories created during their 18 years of government.
In comparison to that, one recession in 12 years is looking pretty impressive.
Enough partisan argument please.
Anthony – Your yellow card idea is growing on me.
How about if posters who’ve had yellows have to say how many they have received at the start of their next three posts.
Yellows to be awarded for partisan comments, and retaliation.
General idiocy to be disregarded.
Immunity for the Oracle (waste of time!)
john t t, I’ll second that.
Surely a yellow card is a partisan Lib Dem sort of a card.
In the interests of non-partisanship, we should have speckled or stripy cards.
labour will leave 67% thirdworld..where are the imf when we need them?this is much worse than 1979.they bailed out labour then.
Should be 57%, which is less than France, Germany, or the United States of America.
And the IMF certainly didn’t bail out Labour in 1979!
Anthony,
introduce pay to post.
It won’t stop partisan posts but at least you’ll make moeny out of them. Of course being Scot’s you’d get a lot less imput from me, which might be another plus.
Peter.
Or a sin bin – people pay to be re-admitted.
(Others could pay to keep them in the bin – you make money at both ends)
“General idiocy to be disregarded.”
Don’t we all do this already?!
Otherwise, I concur with john tt.
Colin – I take that to mean you agree with everything I say , general idiocy apart?
I’d like to say same to you, only I actually agree with some of your rubbish!
Alex
“And the IMF certainly didn’t bail out Labour in 1979!”
You’re right – it was 1976 when Dennis Healey (Labour Chancellor) had to ask the IMF for funding.
“Colin – I take that to mean you agree with everything I say , general idiocy apart? ”
Yes-please do john-provided I can continue to define the “general idiocy” in your otherwise cerebral posts.
“Immunity for the Oracle”….totally agree there isn’t enough cards to cover his out of space comments.
If he did get a card could we have a picture of John McCain on it?
Surely someone knows when the next poll is due, we are scraping the debating barrel if we are discussing class politics.
Actually, it’s quite easy to scroll rapidy past any postings that one doesn’t like – and, apart from an occasional case of raised blood pressure, it doesn’t do too much harm.
In fact it is sometimes quite educational to see how closed-minded some otherwise quite intelligent people can be.
I just came across this site. Reading thru some of the ‘posts’,I was’nt sure at first if it was a chat room for frustrated tories.
To put the cat amongst the pigeons, I support Gordon Brown and will be voting Labour at the next election, as I told the nice lady from yougov when she phoned.
Just had a small wager that Dave won’t get an overall majority next time. Haha
Alex: That analysis is ingenious but I’m afraid lacks statistical validity. There are really only 6 data points in the trend (it was flat until the end of Oct) and all it really boils down to is that if the average is going down then the outliers will go down as well.
We’ll have to wait and see to be sure but so far it looks as if this ComRes poll is about 6.5% out, just like the ComRes poll on 19/9.
Valerie – er, no you didn’t, as Yougov are an online only agency.
Do not feed the troll.
When do you expect the next lot of polls, Anthony?
I expect one with a zero Tory lead within the next weeks two.
Alex – Populus’s regular monthly poll for the Times should emerge on Tuesday. While there’s nothing due, hopefully there will be something before then in the Sunday papers.
Anthoney, this is a great site and I feel like I am asking for jam on it. But would it be possible to have some sort of list of future dates for polls?
It would be good.. but sadly I don’t know.
The timetable for the regular polls is
Populus in the Times is normally the Tuesday after the first weekend in the month.
YouGov in the Telegraph is normally the last Friday of the month.
ICM in the Guardian is normally on a Tuesday, and recently the third Tuesday of the month.
ComRes in the Indy seems to be the Monday after the last weekend of the month.
MORI is monthly…but is a moveable feast depending on whether they secure a publisher for it.
For the Sundays, ComRes in the Sunday Indy seems to be the third weekend of the month.
YouGov in the Sunday Times is the second or third weekend of the month.
ICM in the Sunday Telegraph doesn’t seem to have any regular timetable.
On top of that, many papers commission other ad hoc polls at other times.
December will be particularly odd, since newspapers will often shift their timings about to try and get them away from the Christmas period. For example, if YouGov stuck to their normal timetable the fieldwork would be done on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day – so I’d be very surprised if it wasn’t either brought forward or delayed.
Anthony, thanks for that.
Mark M :-
“Do they count PFI and public sector pensions in their figures?”
No-nor the Public Sector Pension Liability.
If you include both with Net Government Debt, because PSPL is guaranteed by The State and fundable from future taxation streams , & PFI Liabilities because they are Capital Projects funded by “HP” agreements & so shouldn’t be “off balance sheet”.
You get :-
1997
GDP £790 bn ( ONS & BoE)
Net Government Debt £350bn-or 44.2% of GDP ( ONS)
PS Pen. Liabs £ 300bn ( Govt Est-Telegraph)-or 38% of GDP
PFI -just started in earnest-say £15 bn-or 2% of GDP
making a total of £665 bn -or 84% of GDP
2008-
GDP £1486 bn (ONS)
Net Government debt £640 bn (end Oct-ONS)-or 43% of GDP
PS Pen Liab.£915 bn ( CBI)-or 62% of GDP
PFI-£158 bn ( PAC answer Oct 2007))-or 11% of GDP
making a total of £1713 bn-or 115% of GDP
So-the combined Net Debt + PFI liability has increased from around 46% of GDP to 54% of GDP during a ten year boom.
In addition Public Sector Pension Liabilities have increased from around 38% of GDP to 62%
These figures exclude NR and all other Monetary intervensions & guarantees
The PBR anticipates annual deficits of :-
£118bn-2009
£105 bn-2010
£87 bn-2011
£70 bn 2012
These figures would increase Net Government Debt (excl PFI / PSPL/Monetary interventions) to just over £1 Trillion.
That figure is forecast to be 57% of then GDP-but it’s a figure which is reliant on how long & deep the recession is , and what GDP growth rates we return to.
PFI liability will continueto grow whilst Government uses PFI for capital projects-but figures are never very visible or available.
Public Sector Pension Liability is said to be increasing by £50 bn pa.
Net payment of PS Pensions out of current taxation is in the PBR at £4bn for next year-50% up on two years ago.It is totally unfunded .
No one knows if any of the Credit Crunch Monetary interventions will crystalise as losses & add to Debt.
150 posts? this thread has gone on too long !. I take it there is someone who is going to tell us the record for the most posting responses ?
I said some months ago that I would be surprised if Labour would average above 32 for any significant period of time. You will not perhaps be surprised that I do not regard this as a significant period.
We have been having a series of announcements of financial help, and in principle people welcome this. But as the latest promise falls out of focus so the polls will fall. And the government can only make so many announcements of financial support.
Also the VAT cut was not the most shrewdest of polictical moves. When retailers are reducing their prices by 25% to boost Christmas sales the significance of the VAT cut vanishes.
Where the VAT cut is noticeable the amounts are so small it feels like spare change tossed into the hands of a needy beggar.
The fact is that despite all these billions of borrowing it will over the 18 months to come not make much difference to most people. There will still be a recession and hundreds of thousands will lose their jobs.
“Also the VAT cut was not the most shrewdest of polictical moves. When retailers are reducing their prices by 25% to boost Christmas sales the significance of the VAT cut vanishes.”
I would say it has actually been an extremely shrewd move from an electoral perspective. There are posters in all the supermarkets (maybe other shops too, but I haven’t seen any) making a big deal of the fact that they’re passing the VAT cut on in full to their customers. They might as well be conducting Labour’s election campaign. Every time someone reads one of those posters they will be reminded that the government cut VAT and prices are lower as a result. They’ll also remember that the opposition vehemently opposed the PBR.
Sorry Anthony for straying off topic, but can I dispel a few myths…?
Alistair Darling PBR did not do diddly for small-businesses nor consumption. My cuppa-coffee is the same price as it was in November (so no multi-buys there)! Add to which my VAT has decreased by 5p.
That 5p is – deservedly – going to the franchisees profit-margin. However das Stat is not going to be out-of-pocket.
Why…? I now have less to offset against my VAT. So the 5p must now be treated as benefit-in-kind, on which I am taxed. Ergo, the little Darling has actually increased my marginal rate of tax…!
I am sure that Guido could think of a term for our Chancellor. Can you…?
On The Daily Politics yesterday, a journalist guest said that the 2% Bank Rate is being ” paid by no-one”-hence the inability of Banks to cut lending rates.
So millions of savers-many of whom rely on modest savings income-have seen it decimated ….for what?
For the substantial benefit of a minority of mortgage debtors with tracker mortgages?
There is something decidedly loopy about these reductions in a Base Rate which mainly disadvantages the thrifty, whilst businesses continue to have interest rates increased & credit lines reduced-prior presumably to making people redundant.
The so-called “counter-recessionary” policies now being introduced will very soon produce huge schisms in our society, each with quite different perspectives on those policies.
Presumably the Polls will reflect this-but underneath the headline figures will be a maelstrom of opposing forces driven by their new financial fortune or loss.
Coiln,
The banks ae being risk averse and lending less. they are also trying to increase there margins and long term stability by getting out of borrowing short and lending long at low interest rates.
For that to work and the system to satbilise and repair itself for the long term they will need for a number of years to lend less than before and make more on each loan while taking less risk.
The upshot of that is that where as when interstrates were 5% they would lend at 6% risjing all for 1%, now that rates are 2% they will be looking at 5% so that for the risk they will make 3%.
The Government talks about them passing it on and normal lending, but what the banks are doing how is normal lending it was the big long loans with narrow margins that was abnormal.
Knowing that post crunch banks will want and need larger margins all the BOE can do is slash rates to record lows to get the rate to businesses down to acceptable levesl. therefore where as before to bring the Libor down a point or two took a point or twos cuts now it is taking three or four.
All this talk from brown and darling about “passing it on” and “normal borrowing” is spin for the voting public. the reality is that the relationship between BOE rates and market rates has been forced to change and they know it.
Peter.
The problem for the Conservatives with the bank bashing that is going on is that it is against all it believes to actually do anything. How many months ago was Osbourne repeatedly saying that the banks should have less government interference.
Even yesterday on the radio he was struggling to critisize the banks for not passing on the bank rate and then blamed the government, for not giving the banks the ability to pass it on.
This issue will always seen as a political negative for the Conservatives as explained above in the class politics posts,many still see them as the party of the rich, so when the banks are facing pressure and Osbourne states its the governments fault for them not doing it, rightfully or wrongly, many will see this as proof.As someone else stated yesterday on the radio, “if the Conservatives where in power, do you really think that they would put this much pressure on thier rich friends in the banking system, especially as they are private companies”.
Does beg the question, would they have partly nationalised some of them considering that Conservatives and as said only a few months ago Osborne does not believe in Nationalisation or interventionalism?
I think this is one of the reasons why Brown/Darling beat Osborne/Cameron in the polls for the team taking the country out of recession. Some of the big decissions needed such as interventionalism is alien to Conservative policy and maybe the public don’t trust them to take them?Just a thought.
Colin – Thankyou for those figures. A real eye opener.
I was referring to whether other countries include PFI and PSPL in their debt figures, and whether this is the reason that our official debt % is lower than theirs even though our debt is referred to as third world and other countires not.
Mark M-
Sorry I misunderstood you.
It’s an interesting question about other countries.I don’t know the answer-but suspect PFI doesn’t feature much if at all. Would be interested to know how they deal with their State employees’ pension rights though.
Peter-thanks.
Yes I understand what the Banks are doing-and agree with you that Brown & Darling are making “soundbyte”-”vote positive” noises which they know to be empty rhetoric.
The capitalisation of the Banks was not enough to re-jig their Balance Sheets for the effects of bad debts &/or house price collateral value falls. So-as you say-they are continuing to re-build margins.
Yes I also agree that the Brown call for a return to 2007 lending levels is just plain stupid given the nature of what got us into this mess & the financial state of the Banks.
It’s just that since Base Rate-as opposed to LIBOR-seems so detached from commercial lending rates ( which are a function of wholesale rates) , dropping it by these huge amounts appears to hammer savers , without the desired converse of helping commercial borrowers.
The main gainers are a few mortgage holders.I don’t agree that this is the desired outcome-house prices will not rise because of it-mortgage lending will not rise because of it–and anyway house prices need to self-correct.
I cannot help feeling that Osborn has a point with his idea of direct Government guarantees of commercial lending.To save jobs we need to keep companies afloat & liquid.The quickest route to that end is surely not via the uncertainty of engineered consumption , but by normal credit to sound companies.
Tony,
In polling terms I think public perceptions are such that in the current conditions the public would be more critical of a Tory government even if it did exactly what Labour has done.
Even if Osborne had had no choice but to put money in to the banks like Darling did Labour and the press would have had a field day with “Tories bail out Fat Cat Friends”.
In a way Labour get off more likely because rightly or wrongly people see them as still less pro business and so the perception may well be that had no option because of the crisis and must have done it through gritted teeth.
Having said that if Brown had bailed out a manufacturer and it had been seen as being at the behest of the Unions the Press and tories would have gone for the throat with “Back to the Bad old days” and ” Union Barons Run UK”.
Peter.
Peter
re your last para I think we are in “watch this space mode” right now.
Mandelson is reputedly drawing up a list of the sectors which should & should not be supported!-back to the future!
The absolutely riveting spectacle of the Big Three CEOs -begging bowls in hand-being disected by the US Senators is but a glimpse of what may happen here-starting with Vuaxhall.
If I thought our politicos would apply anything like the forensic skill & gimlet eyed bloody mindedness that we can watch from Washington I would almost look forward to it.
It’s going to be the usual Mandelson stitch-up here I expect. But yet again as we move into the recession proper, serious politics is going to emerge.
I wouldn’t like to forecast how the voters will react to what’s coming next year-people & politics are going to become more divided & divisive I think .
Coiln,
I think the “King of Spin” is trying to make a virtue out of necessity.
This isn’t going to be over soon despite what Darling’s PBR statement says, so they will almost certainly come under huge pressure to support key industries through the slump.
Mandy is trying to prepare us for the inevitable by making it look like it’s all part of a “Plan of Action”.
It’s sort of ;
“Lets try and convince the public that what we have had no choice but to agree to has actually been initiated by us, by talking about the need for it before it’s forced on us”.
Peter.
And I thought I was given to cynicism Peter!
[...] http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1715 ▶ Comment /* 0) { jQuery(’#comments’).show(”, change_location()); jQuery(’#showcomments a .closed’).css(’display’, ‘none’); jQuery(’#showcomments a .open’).css(’display’, ‘inline’); return true; } else { jQuery(’#comments’).hide(”); jQuery(’#showcomments a .closed’).css(’display’, ‘inline’); jQuery(’#showcomments a .open’).css(’display’, ‘none’); return false; } } jQuery(’#showcomments a’).click(function(){ if(jQuery(’#comments’).css(’display’) == ‘none’) { self.location.href = ‘#comments’; check_location(); } else { check_location(’hide’); } }); function change_location() { self.location.href = ‘#comments’; } }); /* ]]> */ [...]
“That’s not to mention the other two recessions the Tories created during their 18 years of government.”
Which two would those have been then, in addition to
1980-81?
There was one other recession – 1990 to 1992.
No sunday polls? Bloody disgrace
Jakob,
Some retailers are using the VAT cut as a marketing ploy while some retailers are obviously not passing the cut on at all. Also as food and children’s clothes are not subject to VAT people will struggle to notice any difference when doing their weekly shop at supermarkets.
When my wife and I went to ASDA’s there was nothing to suggest that they had implemented the VAT cut. It was a matter of luck that we noticed that a £25 jumper had been reduced to £24.46.
We actually discussed this with the cashier. Her response was that Brown had done nothing for her and that he would definiately not be getting her vote.
went shopping today and noticed that a lettuce that I brought last week for 98p is now £1.09. VAT cuts may help the price reduction on some items but many are still rising. No reduction on gas/electric/food/childrens clothing
I despair when people base their political arguments on very crude economic variables. The economy does not reset every time a new government is elected, it has its own cycle. Moreover, if there is a global oil crisis there isn’t much that a UK government can do to avert recession, just as when the financial system collapses we cannot avoid recession. So arguing along the lines of ‘well we’ve only had one recession whereas you had two so therefore we’re better’ is pretty trivial. What you have to try and do is judge the effectiveness of what the government has done.
On another note I just cannot agree with those who believe that the labour recovery is going to continue and give labour the overall lead. What we have here is a prime minister who has average poll ratings during a recession and one of the worst poll ratings of all time outside of a recession. That does not seem to me to be a solid platform on which to stand and say “I’d like to have four more years as PM please.” From my perspective I think we’ll see the Conservative lead stay at 2/3 points up until either an election is called or the initial feeling of ‘crisis’ has passsed and then it will open up once again. Could be wrong but that’s my view.
The PBR Fiscal package has received a pretty bad Press today-by & large judged inneffective.
Worse-the Monetary interventions are now under critical review:-The mixed messages to Banks from Government-Buy more Gilts-but lend more to the public/ Pay 12% on Government Prefs but cut rates to borrowers ./-The damage to savers of a possibly precipitate reduction in Base Rate./ The resultant freeze on credit despite Government’s fine words-etc.etc.
The Mortgage Interest scheme looks like a hurried attempt to gain votes rather than a serious measure of help to significant numbers of people-it is even reviewed as a recipe for financial disaster in a falling house price market.
The dark clouds of company failure & job losses gather on the post-Christmas horizon.
Having read all of this a Martian would surely conclude that the Government would be hugely unpopular.
If the upcoming Polls don’t concur with Martian logic, I for one will begin to doubt mine.
Adrian’s quip about the lack of polls today is an imporant point. Indeed, leaving aside the political housekeeping storm, however important, about the raid on Damien Green’s office, there appears to be a general dearth of political, as opposed to economic, issues reported in today’s Sunday papers. This is particularly remarkable given that this is the first Sunday after a Queen’s Speech.
I have justed posted on a slightly aged “Early Election” thread to point out that traditionally a thin Queen’s Speech is a harbinger of an early election. One may also speculate that Labour thinks that “do nothing” will minimise their unpopularity following the economic crisis. Probably rightly as polticial news tends to be the result of Government mistakes, and several longer-term Government initiatives appear to be unpopular by general consent, the difference between Labour and opposition parites being in relation to their necessity.
Why this Comres poll should be out of line in trend as well as in the size of lead is beyond me. The problem with dismissing this poll as a rogue is that the variation between polls, as Anthony Wells indicates, appears in general to have increased recently. This isn’t just a matter of one in twenty polls being out of line.
The swing reported between this poll and its predecessor is unusually large, as others have pointed out.
Methodological issues may be one reason for recent discrepancies in polling results. I am afraid that another possibility, and I mean possibility rather than actuality, is that something or somebody is manipulating the data, with varying power over different polling organisations. I stress again that I have no evidence that any such thing is happening, but simply on the data being reported the polling organisations would be wise now to recheck the security of their own polls, and indeed that discrepant polls by other Polling Organisations are not the result of actions that will bring the polling industry into disrepute. I post this in principle, although I find it hard to believe that a poll published in “The Independent”, a paper for which I have a high regard, would be defective (excepting possible limitations due to comparative lack of financial resources).
I agree with Anthony’s commentary on this poll in relation to the Damien Green affair. More generally, this poll just does not feel right in relation to what people on the ground are saying in ordinary life. The ICM and MORI ones are more credible by the “gut feeling” test.
Peter / Colin,
With the Prince of Darkness one always has to be careful, but I think that the work he is doing in his official ministerial capacity ( as opposed to his behind the scenes media manipulation) is probably correct.
It would seem that Mandy’s stint as EU Trade Commissioner has actually taught him the importance of having a manufacturing base, hence he is genuinely looking at what industries are crucial for our country’s future, and which can be allowed to fold.
The tragedy (for our country) is that this is the first time in over 11 years that the government has focused on the wealth-creating parts of the economy – as opposed to their fixation under Blair with moving wealth around – or under Brown with redistributing it from productive to unproductive areas, or just simply consuming it.
However, while Mandy may identify the right industries worthy of “support”, I susect that the Gov’t will baulk at the most logical – and cheapest – reform of all – free them from regulation – and will instead resort to their usual ploy of throwing (taxpayers’) money at them.
We can only pray that Mandy gets this right – and that it keeps him so busy he has less time for his preferred media manipulation.
Generally I think it is an indication of our position within the long wave electoral cycle that polling popularity has become disconnected from policy, so there are plenty of opportunities for the sharp operator (which is probably why Mandelson is seen as a positive for the fortunes of Labour).
Adrian,
lettuce is a season vegetable so you should expect price variations over the course of the year, and as greens have a habit of becoming more expensive towards Christmas due to their unavailability you come off sounding like you are trying to beat the govt with a floppy middle-class celery stick.
Middle class celery stick. Love it. Does that mean that anyone who eats celery is middle class, or does that mean that Morrisons sell ‘middle class celery’ as opposed to ‘posh’ celery or ‘working class celery’. hahaha. If it can across that way then I apologise, what I meant was that in my work I buy alot of food, and the price of many items is still rising and that whilst we gain with the VAT cut, we lose with rising food prices. Better than losing with rising prices on both, I know, but perhaps the VAT could have been bigger or other tax cuts would have been better.
“We can only pray that Mandy gets this right ”
My God!-has it really come to that?-
‘Gov’t will baulk at the most logical – and cheapest – reform of all – free them from regulation – and will instead resort to their usual ploy of throwing (taxpayers’) money at them.’
Nope, industry must have regulation otherwise its sole purpose is to make money; government needs to intervene to ensure sensible policies on wages / health / safety / environment / national concerns etc are followed. Industry has no morality when left to itself as its sole purpose then is profit. One may argue as to what regulation is needed/ how much etc but regulation is needed.
This thread had hit new hights….the anti-Labour celery and the cashier who call the election.
Well I was speaking to a left handed screwdriver maker the other day and I interrupted him eating his clas A Iceberg, none of this working class crappy stuff from Lidl, and he said that he had collected all he pennies up he had gained from VAT, put it on the Euro lottery , won it and has give the lot to Labour, so I think that means that Labour will win by a landslide.
If we don’t get a poll soon, the posters on here will be looking at tea leaves to say the Conservative will win.
With regards Mandy, the mans a political genius. You can question him morally, but hey, that is a positive when you are a politician.
Adrian – Vat couldn’t be any lower, as it cannot go lower than the European limit of 15%.
Cue anti-Euro debate.
” government needs to intervene to ensure sensible policies on wages / health / safety / environment / national concerns etc are followed. Industry has no morality when left to itself as its sole purpose then is profit. ”
Evening Fidel.
How is the cigar business holding up in these difficult times?
Ha Ha, my thoughts exactly Colin!
Hey Jack, nature ‘regulates’ itself just fine without the use of any centralised bureaucracy.
Do you advocate a system to dictate to the Lion on what and when it can feast?
Without such control its ’sole purpose’ is to eat!
Terrible!
Colin,do you think there should have been no intervention for the banks? I’m sure those shareholders would have been extremely impressed if Darling was to say in a free market government should not interfere or regulate a private company.
Or do we bend our beliefs like certain Mr Osbourne who was only telling us a few months ago,repeatedly, that bank intervention and regulation is against everything a free market stands for.
Tony Jones,
food has a zero VAT rating, so it definitely couldn’t go any lower with or without the EU.
Are you the famous rebel independent cllr?
Jack
By your logic, people should only work for the minimum. After all, after they have paid for food and lodging, trying to earn more is just simply greed – like the profit motive. Can’t have that. No wonder Brown has to regulate people with Tax Credits to make sure they don’t try to get rich and greedy.
Sorry – but the profit motive is what creates weaklth. It applies to individuals as much as to businesses. For the government to interfere only holds back teh generation of wealth – which is hardly in anyone’s ineterst – excvept thsoe politicians who want to control everyone else.
Rant over, but deregulation would create more wealth for minimal public expenditure.
Famous or infamous?
They could give food away for free, but would people take it as it would be a state handout?
Paul H – so those banks that the government have intervened in should have gone to the wall then?
Paul H-J,
You’re setting up a false dichotomy between completely stifling the profit motive and allowing it to run wild. There is such a thing as a mixed economy.
What I took Jack to be saying is that the profit motive has negative consequences as well as positive ones, and it is wise for the government to regulate so that the negative consequences are mitigated.
Ivan,
” nature ‘regulates’ itself just fine without the use of any centralised bureaucracy.”
Nature doesn’t have money or trade either, do you think we should get rid of those too”…..
Peter.
Anthony
Tee hee
At least you read my message re the ‘you gov lady’-thanx for that
I think the polls have underestimated Labour’s support.
Over the summer I would have been a bit embarassed to say I was a Gordon Brown supporter, given the meeja onslought against him.
Now, I think his granite like features are more appropriate for this financial crisis.
I’m sorry, but the thought of boy george running the countryy’s finances just beggars belief. I don’t think I’m the only person who thinks that, by a long chalk.
This wait for the next set of polls is becoming interminable!
Or is this the hand of meddlesome Mandelson at work on the media, just hoping and waiting…. for the next sensationalist headline under which to bury the governments unpopularity… !!?
By the way, that was an attempt at satire, so no-one need take it too seriously!
“Colin,do you think there should have been no intervention for the banks? ”
I believe the Banks were in critical need of new capital & government was the only source of enough capital quickly enough to save them from collapse.
I believe that it was wrong of the Government to pretend that the recapitalisation would be a source of resumed flow of credit to borrowers. It patently is not.
The Banks & the Government are now engaged in a weird dialogue about being more prudent, but lending more-shoring up their capital base but lowering their margins-buying more government debt but supporting more private & commercial debt-helping people to borrow against falling house prices.
I don’t know what the answer to this is.
There is not, and never has been a free or unregulated market for most industries. Oil, coal, gas, nuclear, telecomms, space, defence, pharamceauticals, IT – all have been massivley subsidised by the government to achieve political or economic aims, and indeed many began as government programmes. The idea that industry can just be allowed to regulate itself is ludicrous. While we may debate the type or degree or regulation, simply deregulating industry would only put us further into the hole we are already in.
The ‘market’ is very good at optimising an existing situation, ie how to make money with the cards it has. It is not very good at long term innovation, or coping with social or environmental factors. I would have hoped that given the environmental catastrphy we are currently falling into, we could all agree on the need for balance in this area.
Anthony: Any way you can block some of the obvious Trolls? There is always a lot of partisan commment on here, but in the past it was obviously independent thought. I know Mike Smithson has some trouble with those claiming to be “possible floating voters” etc. etc., but i had hoped they wouldn’t start populating this site. The most stupid one to date is the IDIOT VALERIE who said she had received a call from YouGov!!!!!!!!
Nigel – I know you weren’t addressing me, but I must say The Oracle surely takes the biscuit rather than “Valerie”.
Calling people “trolls” and “idiots” only puts you in the same category and renders any opinion you have less valid.
Leaving aside the personal attacks, Valerie’s point that Brown is more suited to this financial crisis is one that I agree with and explains his improved standing. He’s a man for a crisis.
When calm returns, so (I fear) will his popularity ratings to pre-crisis levels.
I’m pretty sure that satisfies Anthony’s comments policy.
If you want to cast me as an idiot or troll, I’m sure that wioll say more about you than me.
john TT: “valerie” told a barefaced lie – so calling him/her an idiot (definition of someone who is without knowledge ) is perhaps less offensive than calling him/her a liar. Either discription could be true. You on the other hand just have a political view that, whilst I disagree with part of it (ie Gordon Brown being a man for a crisis) certainly is not offensive, and is for the most part relevent to the subject of polls. I look forward to continuing a discussion with you on other threads. Best regards Nigel
PS: Even though I am, as you may guess, right of centre, I too find many of M”TH O” Richardson’s posts quite ridiculous. He does, though, try to keep it relevant to the POLLS as he would wierdly say!
Tony Jones,
if that is you then I’m happy to meet someone I’ve shaken hands with in the real world.
As for whether you are famous or infamous, I’ve never been in your front room, so I couldn’t say, but anyone who can get national coverage for their assertion of independence is deserving of wider support, at least in my book – don’t say you’re having second thoughts now!
People will always take freebies, but we would be right to be suspicious of any strings attached and it would depend anyway on whether the assistance is actually helpful.
Our elected authorities have built up a large debt of mistrust, so I doubt the public will be as forgiving of well-intended stupidity as it has been till now and I think there is growing attention on ulterior motives.
I’ve been polled on the phone before and a week or so later when the poll comes out I’ve found that I’ve bben telling people it was ICM when it was Mori.
It’s a simple mistake to make as unless you are paying attention to who’s asking rather than the questions it’s easy to not care who it is.
So I am prpared to give Valerie the benefit of the doubt and say she just got the name of the pollster wrong.
Peter.