MORI give Conservatives a 20 point lead
Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor has been released. The topline figures, with changes from their last poll, are CON 48%(+4), LAB 28%(-2), LDEM 17%(nc). It was conducted between the 13th and 15th February.
We’ve seen the Conservatives re-establishing their lead over the past month, but this is the first poll to put them back in the sort of territory we saw last summer when the Conservatives were regularly recording leads of 20 points. If other polls back up these sort of figures then we are heading back into landslide territory, and it’ll be interesting to see if Labour start experiencing the same sort of internal problems they faced last summer. At the moment though, this is just one poll, so let’s wait and see. It is also worth noting that back in the Summer MORI were showing the largest Conservative leads of all the pollsters, so I wouldn’t necessarily expect other companies to show quite such a large gap even if this does signify a further movement to the Tories.
Also notable is the lack of movement in the level of support for the Liberal Democrats. As regular readers will know, in the past few weeks we’ve seen big leaps in Lib Dem support from ICM and ComRes, a smaller increase from Populus, and no increase at all from YouGov and now Ipsos MORI. We still aren’t really much the wiser about what is really happening to Lib Dem support, though it is worth noting that the Lib Dems were already on the up in last month’s MORI poll, so one can look at this as the Lib Dems consolidating an increase they saw in the last couple of months.
Filed under: MORI, Voting Intention
Seriously?
Hardly surprising. Will it last? The government is having a torrid time. More anti-Labour than pro Conservative, I suspect.
“More anti-Labour than pro Conservative, I suspect.”
No internal feuding, young/untarnished front bench, the occasional release of the odd good policy (freezing council tax/more powers to local people) and an underlying narrative of ‘less nasty than they were’.
What’s not to like?
For the average ‘unpolitisised’ voter I suspect the Conservatives are starting to look a very good alternative. Not just ‘anyone but Labour’.
Interesting. Can’t say I’m surprised. My feeling is that Labour is in full and irreversible meltdown now and polls will start to reflect this in the form of some fairly extreme results.
I must urge once again that we do not get too complacent. Remember we need to capture about 130 seats to even win a majority.
Saying that, if this poll was replicated in a GE with uniform swing it would give us a majority of 194 – an even greater wipe-out than 1997. However, that is not going to happen. In Scotland I think we will struggle to win 5 seats, so there is a lot still to do.
Swings from Labour to Conservatives from pre-2005 Election polls – ComRes 12%, ICM 9%, Ipsos 12.5%, Populus 10%, YouGov 8.5%.
If the swings in the polls were repeated in an election, the results would be CON 43.3%, LAB 25.5%, LD 18.1% for a Conservative majority of 142.
As always, it’ll be interesting to see what other pollsters say in the wake of the Sir James Crosby/Paul Moore saga. If that proves to be the link between Gordon Brown and the credit crunch that the Tories needed then Labour are in serious trouble.
Are we satisfied that the Brown bounce is over now?
Great poll for the Tories, but what is going on with the Lib Dems?
Very bad poll for Labour but I still have faith that the extra ordinary free ride from the press Cameron has enjoyed over his flip-policies policies and statements, the vagueness of his policies in a election campaign this lead will soon distingerate.
It’s been a common trend throughout his leadership any sort of scrutinization in Con policies and the poll lead drops i.e. Grammar schools and there response to the economic problems.
I still feel that Labour are being punished for the endless bad news stories about the economy and not necessary buying the Con message – hence the increase in others and Lib Dem share of the vote. If the economy recovers and the recession is not as sever as the gloom merchants predict (anyone stating otherwise is ridiculed) Labour should receive the benefit, even from this right-wing reactionary media.
Is this David Cameron finally breaking through the 45% barrier, something he thus far has failed to do?
Chris, I hear there is a vacancy for editor of LabourList, perhaps you should apply.
@Neil – Thanks for the advice but i’m aiming a little higher to turn the trend of this ultra right wing sensationalist media.
Good lord. I was expecting a few months of stalemate with the lead ~12-14% but all of a sudden the Conservatives smash through the 45% level. What’s interesting here is that the fall in Labour support has gone over to the Conservatives (partly) whereas the Lib Dems are unchanged. That’s the opposite trend we’ve seen from the last few polls.
Whether this is the start of a new trend and we’ll see the likes of Populus and ComRes show the Conservatives clawing back support from the Lib Dems’ recent gains is yet to be seen.
@Chris
Amazing, I honestly never thought I would hear the British media describe as right wing. A few papers and Sky aside we have a very left leaning media. The BBC dominates most medium apart from print and has more Labour members than all the other parties added together.
Still if you cant blame GB for the drop off in the polls or the Conservatives the media is the next option. Though you could always blame the electorate in true Stalinist style for not knowing what is good for them. In fact given the belief in targets and internally generated statistics why doesn’t GB set a target for the number of people who should vote for him and then announce he has achieved it according to his own data?
Surely that would avoid having to deal with the “right wing” media?
Chris,
Do you count the BBC (several national radio stations/several national tv stations) as part of the “ultra right wing sensationalist media”?
Compared to the Sun’s ‘Will the last person turn off the lights’ days the media are a pussy cat when it comes to Labour-bashing.
You’re just sulking. If you want to make a difference, quit the bile on non-political message boards and help out your local party handing out leaflets.
@Charlie
This myth of Labour supporting BBC is ridiculous – just because they are not in the pocket of foreign owned media magnates does not make them Labour leaning. If you compare the coverage of the BBC to say even ITV – to call the BBC biast crazy. Have you seen ITV’s tonight? or the Tonight with the Tory party as it should be know.
Anyone with a rational mind knows our media is utlra right wing driven – other than the Mirror and very occasionally the Guardian can you name other Labour supporting/Tory scrutinizing paper?
PS i’d like to see where you’ve got your statistics on Labour members in the BBC – Mail or Express?
Interesting. The Tories appear to be capturing new voters at a rate of knots. If you look at polls since the last election those floating voters have sloshed from one side to the other and back again repeatedly. At the moment the surge tide has swept them back into the Tory tally – will they stay or will they be swept elsewhere again?
i do find it amusing that having been reading comments on this site for about 6 months or so now the polls that showed a slosh over to Labour were generally considered wrong, and now the polls are sloshing back the other way the Tory percentage can be banked for the next election which clearly will be tomorrow.
Clearly people are abandoning Labour in some numbers as the message that this is a bad recession hits home – either to the Lib Dems or to the Tories depending on the week and the poll. Now does that mean that they are voting in favour of Cameron or against Labour? Wind the clock forward 15 months and where will these flating voters be then? What events and news narratives will we have seen then and what effect will they have on the voters?
Chris,
Thanks for the entertainment.
Have you considered going pro? Ricky Gervais has nothing on you.
As much as Id like to believe this poll, it seems a bit of an outcast to me. 48% is a bit much for me to believe right now, even with the tsunami of bad news highlighting Crash Gordon’s total incompetence.
If Paul Moore’s evidence is as damning as he would like to think it is though, then Crash really is finished over night imo.
Anyone remember the last months of Major’s government when we were regularly seeing MPs “crossing the floor” from the Tories to Labour
If we start to see this kind of activity again, then their number is well and truly up.
Perhaps David Freud’s actions at the weekend are a first sign of this?
I think that from A Conservative point of view, the best time for Labour MPs to start crossing the floor would be around 1 year before the election, continuing until about 1 week before. Wonder if this will happen, and if so, what effect it will have on public opinion.
Andrew Kennedy
Perhaps David Freud’s actions at the weekend are a first sign of this?
Bit too soon to tell, it wasnt that long ago that MPs were crossing over to Flash Gordons new “government of all the talents”.
Lets hope so though.
@ Chris
You make some interesting points. The problem for Labour is that the gloomy news is likely to keep on coming month after month after month.
And there is no sign that recession will be over by the end of this year. If Labour is being harmed by the economy (as you suggest) then I’m afraid they are heading for a heavy defeat next year.
As for the issue of the media -
The Sun has backed Labour for many years. They turned quite vicously on the Tories. Even now personal friendships with the Browns have ensured a relatively soft ride from The Sun.
TV and radio are generally impartial. The internet is a free-for-all. If Labour have suffered at all it is because The Mirror’s circulation has fallen off a cliff and is now 1m behind the Mail.
As for this poll – it’s a bit of a rogue. A bit like YouGov’s. I suspect this site’s average 42/29/18 is about right. Maybe 43/28/17.
I’ve moderated one comment that crossed the line from the thread. Can I point people who haven’t read it before at the comments policy please – especially newer posters who might not be aware of it.
It hasn’t been linked very clearly from the site for a while, now there is a link above the comments box.
@ Ian – the “slosh” over to Labour in the last year at most had them 1 point behind the Tories. Labour couldn’t even muster a single figure lead, nevermind 20 points. If we’re reading the tide of polls as significantly in the Tories’ favour, it’s because it IS significantly in the Tories’ favour.
@ Chris – I dread to think how far to the left you must be to consider the BBC and even The Guardian “right-wing”.
Chris said: “PS i’d like to see where you’ve got your statistics on Labour members in the BBC – Mail or Express?”
No Chris. It comes directly from the BBC. Sorry for the reality check.
http://www.google.com/search?q=bbc+admit+bias&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
@Anthony
Do you have any stats on MPs crossing the floor, ie time before an election, numbers, effects on polls, etc?
Former Observer commentator, Andrew Marr, who is connected with senior figures in the Labour Party, and the BBC’s former political editor, said there is “an innate liberal bias” inside the public broadcaster.
A survey of BBC employees with profiles on Facebook showed that 11 times more of them class themselves as “liberal” than “conservative”.
@James
I have never said the BBC or the Guardian as rightwing – think you’ve misunderstood my argument I’ve commented over the misconception of the BBC being left leaning, and when you actually look at their lead stories and ignore the Mail editorals, this clearly isn’t the case.
@Charlie and M – I don’t think Facebook and a unsubstantiated ‘this is London’ article is hardly supported evidence. I judge what they report and how they interview and I’d say they are neutral maybe even slightly to the right, but in relation to political views of the wider media they’re pratically Communist.
There is a list here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Members_of_Parliament_who_crossed_the_floor
There were 3 MPs who crossed from the Conservatives to Labour or the Liberal Democrats in the dying years of the Major government – but they were split 2 to the LDs and only 1 to Labour, so there really wasn’t a great flow of Con=>Lab defections. There was just Howarth. Interestingly there have been far more defections from the Conservatives to Labour while the Conservatives have been in opposition (Temple-Morris, Woodward, Jackson & Davies).
If one goes back to the end of the Callaghan government, only Reg Prentice came the other way.
At the end of the long Tory period in office between 1951-1964 there were no great crossings of the floor to the opposition (in fact Alan Brown went into the other direction between 1961-1962).
So no, looking purely at what has happened in the past, I wouldn’t actually expect some great swarm of MPs crossing the floor.
MONTHLY TREND AFTER MORI POLL
party vote% chg% seats
CON 43.0% +9.8 375
LAB 28.2% -8.0 209
LD 18.6% -4.0 37
OTH 10.2% +2.2 29
@Chris
I bow to you quite obvious independent analysis of the media.
When your great revolution occurs and capitalism reaches it natural end please do remember this rather than lock me up for disagreeing with you.
@ James Ludlow – yes I know that. And a 1 point Tory lead going into an election would have delivered a small but workable Labour majority. This is my point – the Tories have by no means sealed the deal with voters. Any lead they have at the moment is transient – the size of the lead not the fact that it is a lead.
As long as voters remain floating around changing their mind on a regular basis they remain open to change. And we have a lot of things coming up that may change their minds – either to give the Tories a massive landslide, or to swing back to Labour in the last 14 months (as with Major) or to split evenly.
It is pretty clear the true level of Lib Dem support is 17-18%. They have 18, 22, 14 and 18% from the four opinion poll companies. Obviously with the margin of error you can get 14 and 22% from 18%. The other two polls nail it. So lets stop saying the Lib Dems are surging. 17-18% is reasonable for them and with a GE campaign they will likely get to 20% but that is a drop from 2005 and they will lose seats.
@ Ian – I have a problem with a definition of “transient” that ignores over a year’s worth of polls and points to a single result narrowing the Tory lead to 1 point some months ago as somehow evidence that everything is still in flux.
We’ll see what the next year up to the General Election holds poll-wise but my strong suspicion is that we’ve seen the last of any significant fluxing. I just cannot see Labour recovering now – it had a shot when Brown replaced Blair and another when Brown saved the world. I don’t think it will get a third one.
I’m not sure what “sealed the deal with voters” even means. The deal will indeed be sealed with many voters but not with others. “Voters” aren’t a single entity with a shared brain.
Wow I am sure I shouldn’t be amazed, but that paragon of unbiased, impartial reporting, the BBC, has not thought to mention the latest poll. Oh, of course, they don’t do they, except of course the one before Christmas where Brown was only 1% point behind – but that was different wasn’t it, definately, err um
Oh Ian, the old “sealed the deal” soundbite!!! This must have been one dreamt up by Draper. Let us just get this straight, in the real world of business, demonstrably not inhabited by Labour politicians (evidenced by lack of due diligence for mega deals), no one ever believes a deal is “sealed” until it is done. In this case it will be the GE, so of course Cameron hasn’t sealed the deal. These are OPINION polls, and are only an indicator. What many of us would like to know is does Brown think he can “seal the deal”, and if he does he should call an election, but he won’t because he has never sealed a deal in his life.
Sorry for the partisanship Anthony, but roughly relevant to opinion polls!
@NigelJ – I suppose there wasn’t much coverage during last summer when the Tories were 20+ clear? Come on get real.
Media bias is in the eye of the beholder. As a Labour person it feels as if the BBC has had it in for Labour since Gilligan, but clearly Conservative supporters feel the opposite.
Yes, Labour has the Mirror but as has been pointed out, the Mail has much bigger circulation and its’ leanings (editor/PM frienships aside) are probably beyond debate. Add in the Express, Standard, Telegraph, Times and it’s hard to say the media are left leaning. Even the Guardian is a “critical friend”, more critical than friend these days.
The media hunts as a pack and through Murdoch’s influence likes to feel it reflects the public mood as much as it creates it. So it will give the Tories a fair wind but will turn on Cameron as quickly as it turned on Brown after “the election that never was”. He may not get through an election first!
I’d still argue these polls reflect some direct moves from Lab to Con, but plenty more from Lab to undecided and a few to “other” including Lib Dem. Labour thought it was in the bag pre 92 and it didn’t work out that way, thus the lack of complacency pre 97. Still 14 months to go.
Chris – i think you are confusing BBC reporting of the threat from Bananaboy with reporting on the polls. I do not recall once hearing form the BBC the situation in the opinion polls. The only publicity they gave to polling was to the poll that showed the “Brown Bounce” had brought them to within one percentage point. If you have evidence to the contrary (eg.any archived BBC website material )I would be very interested to hear it and happily retract my criticism
@Chris
That’s it keep up the facade.
I am afraid I, like most people apart from yourself, believe the BBC to have a left leaning bias. It all depends I suppose where your regard the centre to be.
You are the first person I have heard claim “Anyone with a rational mind knows our media is utlra right wing driven”
The BBC appears to have a liberal bias because hysteria sells and as a public broadcaster doesn’t have to make money it doesn’t need to sensationalise.
That means that compared to all it’s rivals that need to out sell each other a public broadcaster can take a more measured tone.
That’s not bias or even that liberal, but then if everyone around you is shouting;
” 13 Year Old Dad is King of Broken Britain”
any kind of call for a balanced perspective probably looks left of centre.
Peter.
Well said Peter – against the trend of media right wing driven sensationalism, the BBC is practically Maxist but the rational mind surely puts them in the centre.
I mean if the BBC broadcast programmes like ITV’s Tonight (I remember the week of the Tory party conference and they ran stories on Taxation, and so called shambles of public services) they would be slaughtered by the press and Ofcom.
@ Peter and Chris
I am afraid I disagree. Like most people I have no interest in poor sensational journalism but to equate that style of journalism with the right wing is convenient for your argument no matter how much your believe it to be true.
As NigelJ noted the BBC has gone silent on all polls
showing a swing away from the Brown bounce but was happy to cover the BB is all its short lived glory.
The majority of the journalists at the BBC have a deep ingrained dislike of the profit motive similar to people working at the Guardian and Mirror. It is this which I believe leads it to its institutional bias.
It comes down to what you regard as right or left wing. My view is this comes down to what you regard as the role of the state in an economy. It has nothing to do with sensational media. Just because this is a foul feature of our society does not mean it is right wing.
“I expect taht teh next set of polls will all show Tory leads in the teens, but that we could see leads of 20% or more within weeks rather than months”
Posted by myself on 23rd Jan. (3 wks 4 days ago)
As it happened, the subsequent polls hovered between Tory lead of 10-14%, but here we have a 20% lead.
It seems that in the past few days the life, or at least the will to live, has gone from the government. Not only is Brown looking increasingly exhausted and at a loss, but the Cabinet appears to have started planning for life after Brown – a sure sign they have given up on the election – which must occur within 16 months.
Peter,
A balanced perspective on the headline ‘13 Year Old Dad’? Maybe if we’re reporting from Africa!
You’ll forgive me for believing, as you come from a state where public spending is nigh on 70% of GDP (CEBR stats for uk gov Jan 2009), that your view of the world may be tinted through ‘red lenses’.
From where I sit, and from many other more impartial observers, the BBC is a liberal if not left-leaning institution.
“The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias”,
Andrew Marr, the Daily Mail, Oct 21st, 2006.
[...] Political Betting and UK Polling Report have articles on this [...]
Re crossing the floor. I think the disillusioned Labour MPs are ones who became politically active before their party lost its traditional roots in the 1990s. So they have been in Parliament since at least 1997 and are, again at least, well into middle age. If they change parties they frankly have few prospects of reclimbing the political greasepole (a good thing too), so they aren’t making such swaps.
However, it seems to me that there are several cases of Labour MPs (no names no packdrill) who are leaving prematurely, seeing that they are likely to lose their seats anyway, so that they can start making their way in the murky fields of careers connected with the political world, but outside the world of elections. There are also cases of MPs who are standing again in marginals they appear sure to lose who are putting their efforts into their post-parliamentary career.
The question for us pundits is whether the electors will identify the MPs who have jumped the apparently sinking ship, and whether the Labour Party will be punished at the next election in the constituencies concerned for what is effectively a vote of no confidence from the retiring MP.
The narrative is clearly moving away from Brown-and most elements of the media are following it.
In the end they have to follow public opinion.
The coverage of RBS bonuses today on Sky was illustrative.
Ken Clarke did a terrific job of echoing the outrage of the bloke in the pub, whilst managing to portray Brown & his team as dithering , indecisive-and worse-without the requisite conviction to act as majority shareholder & insist that bonuses for failure in a bust bank need not be paid-whatever the contracts say.
At a stroke he portrayed the Government as too tied to “the Bankers”.In the current climate where commercial credit availability is still curtailed despite GB’s panoply of interventions that is death for Labour.
GB can no doubt reasonably argue -as Mandelson has today-that these things take time, but that is rapidly becoming a currency which this Government is running out of.
Th repeated examples of a state pampered dysfunctional underclass , the continuing cases of Ministerial expense manipulation, the uncomplementary analysis of JobCentrePlus ; the defections & criticism from erstwhile favoured GOATS….
This is all beginning to look like an administration which is not in touch with the reality being experienced by the people.
Brown must halt this quickly or the Polls will destroy him.
I don’t know if it’s relevant but is there any history of seats where the sitting MP stood down as opposed to being beaten in a GE?
Also is there any difference in the “severance” terms available to MPs who stand down and those who are beaten in the polls? Arguably the former could be said to have “retired” whilst the latter have surely been declared “redundant”!
Ipsos-MORI does seem to give a slight bonus to the party to which the trend is favouring. At the height of the second Brown Bounce, they were the only party showing the Tory lead at one point.
@Chris – you keep telling it how it is mate. I haven’t had this much fun in ages (for your own sake I hope you’re joking, anyone who was actually that left would be…well far right)
You will notice in the BBC that corespondents like the “Political Editor” – you should like that title – have been repressed recently over growing allegations of Labour partisanship. So much so that they are now only blogging benign issues. So infatuated have some of the BBC been with their ability to talk directly to the spin doctors of the labour party that they have been held to account over it (you know who your are Mr Peston – who was recently told to stick to Business and not politics)
You may also not be aware but the BBC is not regulated by OFCOM in terms of political bias as this is left to the trust which itself has been accused of being too close to the corporation and therefore unable to carry out it’s mandate of impartiality – I got that after I complained to the Beeb who refused to accept that they were holistically left leaning even if some programmes were (mainly the political ones and the news me thinks)
Great Poll BTW
Ken Clarke did a terrific job of echoing the outrage of the bloke in the pub, whilst managing to portray Brown & his team as dithering , indecisive-and worse-without the requisite conviction to act as majority shareholder & insist that bonuses for failure in a bust bank need not be paid-whatever the contracts say. – colin
Thats why he’s super-Ken!
“Thats why he’s super-Ken! ”
mmmmm-yes I suppose so!
I was not in favour of his Frontbench return, but I have to say he gets on to the popular wavelength with consumate ease.
Also-there seems to be no Labour narrative against him-he must have something they can have a go at?
Their trouble is that they have too often used him as the “acceptable face” of Toryism when trying tp portray Cameron as “right wing”….hoist with their own petard.
Still-he is very much the Europhile, and a bit of a loose cannon-so anything can happen!
@Colin – I think this is where the current Tory policy is worlds apart from prior setups. In the new order it doesn’t matter if you have differing views as debate is good. It only matters that in general terms you are pulling for the party. It add to the rich tapestry of the next government (something Gordon’s GOAT’s failed to do Dave seems to be handling quite well)
Sorry potential next Government
Keir-yes indeed.
I’m in favour of different strands of opinion.It’s avoids myopic dogma & enhances the impression of a team.
It’s just that EU is such a big factor globally-at some point it will feature in policy.
Still if that is after a Tory win next year it won’t matter I suppose….not that I am assuming such an outcome at this stage.
For now though Cameron seems to have made a very shrewd move with Ken C.
Still-he is very much the Europhile, and a bit of a loose cannon-so anything can happen!
Not too much of a problem as Keir said, the tories are apparently in favour of debate condiuisive to good policies- crash-gordon seems to want a Stalinesque club of yes men surrounding him.
(Personally i agree with Super-Kens views on europe, so in a personaly note this is another reason for me that he is super)
@Dean Thomas – And this is what’s great. You can say that and I don’t feel like i’ve eaten marmite (do I love it or hate it). I’m allowed to be wherever I choose.
At least you have a veiw which is more than can be said for the current labour front bench who (until the last few weeks) have been peddling the same contrived claptrap week in week out.
Although it is easy to take this poll at face value, I do not think that is wise. We all know come the election the gap will shrink, this poll would suggest a conservative win obviously, but come the election I doubt the gap would be this big.
Sorry but are some of you suggesting that the BBC should be reporting every single poll that comes out? A big Tory lead is not new news – the scale of it isn’t shocking enough as yet to create any political eruptions which would be news.
As and when mutterings start in the Labour camp related to polls then they’ll go to town. Other than that opinion polls in this much detail only interest saddos like us.
I think the BBC is a particular variety of internationalist liberal left, which sets it at loggerheads with Labour quite often as well as the Conservatives. It’s sniffy about the white working class but celebrates multiculturalism like there’s no tomorrow. It also advertises most of its jobs in The Guardian, which speaks volumes for its employee constituency.
JackR
I think you are half right and half wrong.
Mori does seem to amplify the mood. I suspect this is because of their high turnput filter – although it’s worth remembering that this was their method of counteracting the polling biases which favour Labour and tend to do the opposite for the Tories – other firms use past voting weighting.
So in the sense that I think this poll has ‘turned up the volume on the mood, you are right.
But generally things are going to get worse for the Government as the bad news continues, the bad polls continue, the noises about Brown get louder etc.
So Mori may not be the correct on election day – but then Mori could get worse between now and then.
If the Conservatives are so far ahead of the polls why aren’t they doing better in local council elections?
They lost a seat in Enfield last Thursday, and even in Croydon where they put on an extra 2% share of the vote, Labour also increased its share of the vote.
These seats were last fought in May 2006 and since then the Conservative lead in the national opinion polls has increased by 5%. It has been an article of faith among many conservatives that the local polls show the true support for their party, as for the last few years they have done better in these than the national polls were indicating. Are we see the breakdown of this phenomena?
Are local conservatives under performing in local polls because of their poor performance as local councils, or is this a sign that voters are not signing up to conservative message as much as some commentators wish?
I suspect the Labour Party is now in dire straits and at this point a crushing defeat will put it out off office perhaps forever as it has over the last ten years shed all its previous politically motivated and idealist support . It may just about beat the libDems at any election in the not too distant future but I would take no bets on them doing so at the next one after that.
The situation in Scotland is extremely interesting as a huge UK defeat for Labour will have an astounding effect on the remnants of Scottish Labour support. There are already two significant socialist parties (not Labour ) in Scotland and the inevitable alliance of them
will finish Labour off. Both these socialist parties (who could probably at the moment muster up to 10% vote in a Scottish election) support independence for Scotland and a collapse of Labour and perhaps *ten socialists in the Scottish parliament changes the dynamic in the Scottish parliament completely.
* The Socialists put six MSPs into the first Scottish parliament then fell out, divided and put none in on the second election because of the split in their votes.
@JackR – sorry mate but generally Tories do better in an election than poll results and Labour worse
@Iain – No I don’t think people are suggesting they publish every one, but please show me where they show the 20 point lead for Con’s versus the amount of articles covering Brown’s big bounce
“And this is what’s great. You can say that and I don’t feel like i’ve eaten marmite (do I love it or hate it). I’m allowed to be wherever I choose.
At least you have a veiw which is more than can be said for the current labour front bench who (until the last few weeks) have been peddling the same contrived claptrap week in week out.” -Keir
Ha, I reckon you hate that mermite (…although I wish you loved it…:()
Still to JackR [sorry, I am not picking on you]
‘We all know come the election the gap will shrink’.
Er no. Mike Smithson has done some research on this and so-called ’swing back’ is something Tory admins have had the benefit of on a number of occasions – but there is plenty of evidence to suggest it’s not something Labour Governments benefit from.
The detailed data tables show substantial movement from the January poll to this poll from Labour to the LibDems and a negligible increase in Comservative support . Over the month Labour have lost 23 voters the Conservatives have gained just 2 and LibDems 18 .
It is the very restricive absolutely certain to vote filter that is responsible for the increased Conservative support but this is unrealistic as turnout at the next GE will be higher than the 46% of voters this implies .
Strangely this month it is the SNP who suffer most from this filter . 27 voters in the poll dwingle to just 6 absolutely certain to vote .
It should be pointed out that the detailed data always gives 3 voting predictions .
Those absolutely certain to vote Con 48 Lab 28 LD 17 Others 7
All those polled Con 39 Lab 31 LD 19 Others 11
Those with 6 -10 certainty to vote . This is the least publicised of the figures but the most meaningful
Figures this monrh Con 43 Lab 29 LD 19 Others 9
@Mark forgive me if I keep smiling anyway
Well, I hope the polls are reflecting public mood – but the almost scattergun approach to solving the crisis may find a hit – the economy starts to move in the right direction. What do you think will happen then? Back will come, if not ’saviour of the world’, at least, ’saviour of the uk and the polls will most definitely see a change.
Remember national trends do not translate into a positive picture up here in Scotland- we seem to be doing well to average on 18% / 20% – depending on which stats you use.
The Nats are declining remember, they have consistently slowly lost ground up here- current 27% (-1) last time i looked. If this contitnues and we break the 20% barrier suddenly angus etc open up…. so yes…even as a scottish tory i’ll keep smiling too
@Keir – Take your Tory blinkers off, never heard such a delusional and totally factless view this side of Tory HQ. Comlete lack of rational evidence, you could be a mail/express jornalist.
Anthony Wells arent you going to give our new uninformed reader about partisan irrelevant comments
Brian you relishing of the countrys economic problems is truely disgraceful, I mean hoping a solution is not found just so the government wouldnt receive any credit, im truely shocked.
Lets hope you dont lose your job and home, but with such any attitude I cant see any place in society for such an individual.
Surely the critical factor about the Lib Dem vote in polling is their geographical location. In Tory constituencies, currently few Lib Dems will be switching and floaters will be heading in the Tory direction to unseat Labour.
Conversely, in Labour seats where Tories are third, we’ll see strong shifts to the Lib Dems. Do the pollsters do geographic analysis by constituency (genuine question), or is this too detailed for them to get into?
Do some pollsters ‘poll north’ and other south? Is this a factor?
@Chris – one would hope that Anthony can see I am simply applying balance to your rather odd but perfectly permissable views
– If you’d like to shut me up, why not remove yet one more civil libity from me
@Chris I agree with your assessment of seeing the economies recovery as a political tool truly awful. I would like to see some Christian/Muslim/Buddist values applied here and get the parties working together
@Chris – sorry which bit was factless? Tell me so I can give a full answer to the critique. PS I have nothing to do with Tory HQ but did decide to become a member of the party 3 months ago when I thought enough is just about enough
Keir: “@Iain – No I don’t think people are suggesting they publish every one, but please show me where they show the 20 point lead for Con’s versus the amount of articles covering Brown’s big bounce”
According to many of you a Tory Landslide is a given when you consider How Many People Hate Brown. A 20 point Tory lead is not therefore news – it is indicative of a given. The Labour bounce ran contrary to both this “fact” and the political norm that governments do badly in recessions – THAT is why it was news.
Can we stop this silly argument about whether the BBC is biased or not – as Warren said miles up the thread and was sadly ignored, it’s in the eye of the beholder and is, anyway, nothing to do with this poll.
The BBC news guidelines for reporting opinion polls are here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/edguide/politics/reportingopinio.shtml
Generally speaking they don’t report them as stories in themselves, only if they are necessary to make sense of other stories (and please, I’m not interested in times people think they might or might not of broken them).
Chris – I’ve put an end to this silly argument, but “never heard such a delusional and totally factless view this side of Tory HQ” probably isn’t a partically non-partisan comment either….
[edited - Dean, this is not the place to discuss why you don't like Labour or what you think they've done wrong - AW]
Peter said I was being grumpy in a previous thread, but having read the feedback from my user survey a week or so back and seen the strength of feeling from readers annoyed by silly partisan comments I am going to be strict for a while.
If you want to discuss how evil Labour are or call Gordon Brown names, Guido has lovely comments sections full of like minded people. I am sure LabourList or LabourHome or whatever would welcome comments slating the Conservatives (though actually their comments are far more sensible, I’m not sure where one goes for mad Labour rants!). This is for discussing polls in the spirit of non-partisanship, not arguing with the order side. Read the comments policy.
Mike at 3.40 – Your statement that the LibDems are at 17-18% and all these polls are thus within the Margin Of Error of this figure is sadly fundamentally flawed . A poll rating of around 40% has a M Of E of circa 3.5% . A poll rating of 17-18% has a M of E of around 2% therefore 3 of the polls ICM Yougov and Comres are outdide the M of E by some margin ..
Yougov have totally different methodology to all the other posters , the telephone pollsters use basically the same sampling techniques but with slightly different ways of posing the questions and all have rather differing ways of weighting the poll results .
This is the reason why the end headline results are vastly different and averaging different pollsters does not necessarily give a more accurate poll forecast .
Indeed although we do not know whose methodology is the most accurate ( and we will have our own favourite interpretation ) the vastly differebt methodology makes it staistically more likely that either Yougov or ICM/Comres are producing totally wrong poll forecasts than that they are equdistantly wrong from the figures produced by averaging .
@Iain – “According to many of you a Tory Landslide is a given when you consider How Many People Hate Brown. A 20 point Tory lead is not therefore news – it is indicative of a given. The Labour bounce ran contrary to both this “fact” and the political norm that governments do badly in recessions – THAT is why it was news.”
How many of us on here know that the magic 45% for the Tories is a massive milestone even in a rogue poll. This IS news and has been reported on in no less than 5 major publications and innumerable blogg sites.
Couple this with Gordon’s -38 (I believe) rating versus NC and DC +9 it absolutely Massive. Add to that the approval rating of the rest of the cabinet is even lower it’s a MASSIVE story.
The polls don’t win election, they don’t assure victory, but they do provide the narative for the politcal parties and are seen by the parties themselves as Customer Satisfaction Questionaires.
To say that this is not as newsworthy a the 1 point gap (rogue poll misreported reported on the BBC – sorry Anthony) to the masses is ridiculous. What will make this even bigger news is if the Narative continues like this over the next few polls (although I do not believe they will show it this high for while consistently)
@Anthony – was that a partisan comment you just made me old mucka
@Keir
Will it though? TBH it is not entirely certain if it will. All previous polling data since sept 2008 indicates David Cameron is finding it extremely tough to get up to 45% and then hold thereabouts.
The interesting this mostly here is the Lib rating, they have apparently held the gains they’ve been making, now at a ‘no change’ on 17%.
The question ought to be this; “what if the libs continue to make steady gains in the polls and hold onto that gain?” In ten months time or so we could be seeing an extremely strong Liberal Democrat hand…
Keir – you are overegging this poll. It is a single poll, and therefore not spectacularly important anyway (by that standards almost the only polls that would be newsworthy would be rogue polls, which would be godawful atrocious reporting of polls). None of those approval ratings are particularly unusual at all, they are same sort of ratings that have been seen for months – in fact they are better for Brown and worse for Cameron than some other pollsters.
The BBC’s guidelines are, anyway, that voting intention polls aren’t reported unless they are necessary to understand another story. They are not judged on the newsworthyness of the poll itself. The newspapers and Sky have different guidelines so will judge it differently. Sky, for example, were given the figures exclusively by MORI, so it was almost a given they would pump it up a lot.
Now, can we please put this to bed.
I would caution Dean Thomson on reading too much into an SNP decline. They are still at a significantly higher position than they were at the last Westminster election but of course their strength is in voting intentions for the Scottish Parliament in which they have opened up a substantial lead over Labour.
I would also suggest that Scottish voting intentions have changed quite considerably over the last month at which I would hazard a guess tha the SNP gained at the expense of Labour and the LibDems but the only significant poll done exclusively in Scotland was on the independence question which showed huge improvement in the SNP’s position on that. The Westminster election in Scotland, whenever it comes, will I’m sure be dominated by tactical voting across the country supporting in many cases the candidate likliest to beat Labour. As the Westminster contest now has diminished constitutional significance for Scots you will find many Tories voting SNP to beat Labour (and I dare say not a few SNP votes going Tory in some seats for the same reason. The hate between SNP and Labour is overwhelming while the moderate and business friendly policies of the SNP has allowed a reasonable attitude to develop towards the SNP by not a few Tories – and vice versa probably)
I forgot to mention that I believe the recognisable improvement in the Tory position in Scotland (albeit from a low base) is coming mainly at the expense of the LibDems who were the major gainers from the anti Tory sentiment that dominated Scotland following Margaret Thatcher’s perceived indifference to Scotland’s needs and ambitions.
It looks like partisanship to draw an inconsistent focus in the headline, Anthony.
Either report the lead or the share or both. Switching between the two on apparent whim has the distinct whiff of spin.
This poll shows the story is the continuing decline of Labour, despite their best efforts.
I think it shows there is no real optimism or desire for a Conservative government. In some quarters I still detect outright scepticism and fear of the prospect!
Predictions of a tory landslide remain premature however, as they remain boxed-in by the desire not to upset the horses and the requirement to take decisive economic action – earlier sops to opinion, such as Osborne’s promise on IHT look far more dangerous with a little hindsight!
Anthony
Am I correct in thinking that Mori only include “certain to vote”? What percentage are these of their total sample? Does the whole response show a bigger or smaller Tory lead?
I can’t see why the Cons should have suddenly shot up 4%, and 48% is considerably high than the findings of other recent pollster. Also the ‘others’ are 5% lower than what the trend indicates (see Anthony Well’s recent piece on the subject).
Surely the average of Cons 43, Lab 28, Lib Dems 18 should be regarded as the most reliable indicator of where things stand at present.
I’m pretty confident that we will see a 3% decline in Labour’s support over the next 3 months as the recession gradually impacts more lives in Britain. By the end of May we will most likely see an average for the Cons 45, Lab 25 and Lib Dems 19.
WHGeer –
You certainly are. MORI include only those who rate their chances of voting at 10/10.
Normally just over 50% of people say they are 10/10 certain to vote – in this particular poll it was bang on 50%. The actual voting intention figures though are based on a slightly smaller proportion of the sample though, since don’t knows are also excluded. So, from a sample of 1001 people, the voting intention figures actually include 460 people (after weighting, that isn’t necessarily 460 individuals).
Almost without exception Conservative voters say they are more likely to vote than Labour supporters, so any and all filters or weightings by likelihood to vote favour the Conservatives. In the case of Ipsos MORI, the filter is so harsh (10/10 in, everyone else excluded) it favours the Conservatives quite considerably.
There is detailled discussion of it on the site here : FAQ-Turnout
Ivan the Terrible – you are wrong monsieur! Actually Scottish public spending as a % of GDP is not 70% as you claim. CEBR figures you (incorrectly) quote were 53% of GDP not 70% (Sunday Times articel on “McCuba”) and the CEBR figures actually diverge from the official ONS figures.
On a worst case scenario ONS publications have total managed expenditure (”identified” and “unidentified”) expenditure in or on behalf of Scotland (including stuff like Trident and Iraq war which we don’t want) at around 47% of GDP (excluding oil & gas related GDP in the denominator).
Including oil and gas GDP (Scotland has an 83% share of the UK continental shelf activity in its territorial waters) it falls to below 40%. The UK figure is around 43%. In other words we have either a slightly larger or slightly smaller share of GDP consumed by the public sector than does the UK. Around 25% of Scottish workers are in the public sector, so give them a break – and I speak as someone who has always worked in the private sector.
Anthony – hope this is not deemed partisan. Just sticking to facts here to counter an incorrect assertion made to Cllr Peter Cairns.
Best regards.
Mark – can you explain why one poll shows the Lib Dems at 22% when 3 others show them between 14 and 18% – which if the real level of support was 16% then all three would be in the MoE and the 22% poll is just an outlier. As mentioned in a previous thread why would the Lib Dems suddenly leap to 22% – no new stories helped them.
Weighted Moving Average 44:29:17 so Mori looks as if it’s running ratehr ahead of the facts. But when a shift like this happens the polls will always be behind the WMA – for example MORI’s last poll showed a CLead 4 points ahead of the WMA but retrospetively it was only 1 point ahead.
The 3rd Brown Bounce peaked at 40:34:16 2 months ago. So rounghly Lab is losing 2.5 pts per month of which 2 is going to C and 1 to LD. It may even be that the trend is accelerating – too early to tell. I think almost everyone in politics or the Civil Service thinks the game is up for Brown and Labour. See The Times on Tues.
Borderer,
“Just sticking to facts here to counter an incorrect assertion made to Cllr Peter Cairns.”
Eh, what, when, doh……I must have missed something.
Peter.
Around 25% of Scottish workers are in the public sector, so give them a break – and I speak as someone who has always worked in the private sector.
-borderer
Fair point, i’ve never had the experience in both so i will take your word on that.
“As mentioned in a previous thread why would the Lib Dems suddenly leap to 22% – no new stories helped them.”
Could it be for the same reasons as the poll tends to favour the Tories overly? Are the Libs more likely to vote than say, labour etc?
Whew ! i was getting bored reading all that rant about the media.
This latest POLL certainly has brought out a lot of comments.
Why all the excitement ? This POLL reflects what i said in my last 2 threads after the 2 previous POLLS – that the Liberal bounce was too much & the Tory lead was too little – this POLL is about right at the moment.
Nothing more to say – except, much more interesting and newsworthy POLLS are not too far away !
With appologies to Mr Wells for bringing it up but…
@ KIER “Couple this with Gordon’s -38 (I believe) rating versus NC and DC +9 it absolutely Massive.”
This was reported by the BBC – although it may have been after you wrote your comment.
With a Tory majority of 194 what would the seating arrangements be in the house?
Where’s John Snow when you need him?
Mike at 12.30 – Two polls Comres and ICM have had the LibDems at 22% in recent days not one . Yougov as mentioned previously has totally different sampling techniques to the relephone pollsters .
Mori and Populus are similar to ICM/Comres and you could argue that the range is 17 Mori 18 Populus 22 ICM Comres average 20 . However although these cpmpanies sampling is comparable the treatment of the results is not . The final published result will depend on the weighting . Hence Mori has 3 different results in it’s detailed data and there would be a 4th 5th and 6th slightly different result if Mori’s poll data were used by Comres ICM or Populus .
what is extra ordinary is that labour are not getting a bigger hammering in the media.
murdoch has just turned this week to the conservatives.
unbelievably late considering the meltdown the country is in.
full credit to nu labour for keeping the mirage going for so long.ruthlessness that is not in the tory dna,but may have to be learned.
This is the sort of lead the Tories need to rack up to stand a chance. However, I really don’t think this is a pro-Tory response, people seem to be just turning to them with a heavy heart and little confidence Cameron is any good. I think Labour can still win the next election if they play it right.
Stephen
“I think Labour can still win the next election if they play it right”
That’s faith for you! Whether its blind or not I leave to others to decide. But Stephen what do you mean by playing it right? What is the magic formula that the boys in Labour HQ are missing when they churn out their press releases? Please let them and us know.
Stephen – a 20 point lead = “standing a chance” to you?!!!
Stephen – the electorate generally (and in reality the floating voter) normally changes allegiance with neither a “heavy heart”, or great enthusiasm. They do so when something motivates them to believe it is “Time for a Change”. I don’t know who came up with the mantra, but it is a well established one that oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them.
No Stephen does have a point, the opinion polls on David Cameron’s ability to handle the economic mess are not high. This might as Stephen says be one possible example of voters having “little confidence Cameron”.
Actually people tend to change not because what they change to is better but because the position they are in is untenable (worth reading books such as “Who Stole my Cheese” for why).
I believe this is what we are seeing with the shift away from Labour as more people are finding it difficult to think about voting for them.
However, Labour can still win the next election (i.e. be the largest party) but lose the popular vote by some margin as many voters on all sides hold deep seated prejudice against the there parties. This means that each party has a core vote and Labour’s is very high following the voters anger at the Conservative rule in the 80s and 90s though as we have seen in some polls these people can shift to the LibDems
The Conservatives have worked hard as John Smith and then Tony Blair did to overcome the deep seated prejudice against their parties. Have they done enough? Only time will tell.
Labour could help themselves in the next 15 months by becoming less unpopular which I think they will do. So in my opinion it all comes down to who does enough to de-toxify their brand not who comes up with the best policies.
“So in my opinion it all comes down to who does enough to de-toxify their brand not who comes up with the best policies.”
Ye gods!-what an appalling idea.
I think what we should be looking for, in order to tell what’s happening, is a consistent picture from several polls, not one big lead in one poll. A few months ago we had such a consistent picture, ie that the Conservatives were well ahead.
At the moment the only consistent picture we have is that things are a little inconsistent. As always, need more polls.
@ Keith.
Agreed.
@Colin
I did not say I liked the fact but just that it is the reality.
Appalling as it is, that is politics in general. A few exceptions apart like Obama who create huge changes in allegiance we just do not attract enough talented people into politics in the UK.
I still fail to believe a 20 point lead could ever be achieved by the Conservatives. In 1997, they were incredibly unpopular and Labour only beat them by 12-13 points. David Cameron is no Tony Blair! We have to remember that come the election campaign the polls will change quite a bit, and of course the economy will be a major feature and only time will tell what the economic situation will be when the election is called.
In my opinion Gordon Brown isn’t half as bad as John Major was, and David Cameron isn’t half as appealing as Tony Blair was. If the election was held in a few weeks time after a good campaign by Labour I reckon it would be only a small Conservative majority. I don’t trust MORI polls as they always seem to give some extreme figures, I personally prefer YouGov.
I also ask myself if the next election is one to lose, not win, that’s only my opinion (i.e I don’t need a million comments telling me I’m wrong as its opinion not fact!)
Stephen is right in that the next election is by no means a given for a Conservative majority. I think it is safe to say the Conservatives look very like being the largest party (and at the moment seem to be heading for a considerable majority), but anything can happen. My concern is that Labour might “play it right”, particularly in relation to postal votes, where they have some history of playing.
@JackR – If Anthony won’t moderate you I will. “Gordon Brown isn’t half as bad as John Major” (give me some data to prove that) and “in my oppinion” no David Cameron is not Tony Blair – I doubt he will take us to war on a lie, I doubt he has designs on being the president of the USE (United States of Europe), I doubt he would set asside personal convictions to ensure that he can have a smoother ride in office (See Blair converts to be a Catholic), I doubt he would leave us with a lame duck when he finally retires from office in 3 terms time “In my oppinion”
It’s time for a change – everyone knows it, just some people are good at fibbing to themselves.
@JackR and I forgot to mention that this is a poll (rogue or not) not an election and in terms of polls, David Cameron has already achieved a lead of 20 points – it says so in the headline of the story, so start to believe
Also check back to last year when there was 1 poll stating 20 points and another at 28 points.
Why do you think Gordon’s cabinet is manouvering to replace him. Why do you think advisors are crossing the floor. Why do you think Nick Robinson has curtailed his reporting of leaks from Mandy.
@ Keith – but this isn’t just “one big lead in one poll”. Look at Anthony’s hand little list to the right of the page. The Tories have had a double figure lead in the last 10 polls, with several polls putting it at 14/15/16 points. The latest poll is a leap up to 20, certainly, but it’s a leap on top of what was already a substantial and consistent lead in multiple polls.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Anthony’s handy< little list
I’m saying nowt about Anthony’s hand.
@Anthony – Sorry Anthony I have just read your comments policy (should have done it sooner me thinks) – “Comments that talk about Zanu-NuLab, one-eyed Scottish idiots and so on are not conducisive to the non-partisan sort of discussion we want here and will probably never leave moderation. ”
Does anyone have a view on how much traction the current story about the complaint on J Smith not being in her London home most of the time. It’s seems to be getting quite a bit of media coverage at the moment (even from the BBC)
@ Kier
The devil is in the detail, and if you examine the polling data on “leaders most trusted to handle the recession” kind of questions you can see Cameron only now getting past Gordon Brown, even then it was only 2% above him (YouGov poll from Jan I believe).
All I am saying is Stephen is right that such a lead can and last year did vanish from a recovery re-launch. Like it or not Cameron still has not won people over on the issue of his being trusted to lead UK out of recession- and this might indicate a surge in tory polling beause of anti-Labour rather than pro-Tory reasons. Thus such a lead could easily vanish.
I urge caution.
Keir – yes, it probably was about time you did
Jack made a perfectly reasonable point and you replied with a partisan rant about Tony Blair. You can’t moderate people, so don’t get into arguments.
Not least, it was completely off the point anyway. Jack said he didn’t expect the Conservatives to get a 20 point lead in an actual election because it was larger than in 1997, and he didn’t think Brown was as much of an electoral negative as Major was, or Cameron as much of an electoral plus as Blair was. Stuff that Tony Blair did after 1997 is entirely irrelevant anyway, since it didn’t affect voters opinions in 1997.
(As it happens, I think Jack’s argument is wrong, if not his conclusion (I’d be bloody surprised at a 20 point lead at an actual election) – I suspect John Major himself was an electoral plus for the Conservatives in 1997, his approval ratings were not nearly as negative as those of the government as a whole (so are Brown’s now, but not by as big a margin).
I suspect Blair was more of a plus than Cameron is – it’s tricky to find really comparable figures. I’m slightly wary about using MORI’s figures, since they aren’t politically weighted so are probably favour Labour anyway in a comparison across parties. ICM are the only other 1997 pollster going now, but annoyingly they don’t seem to do “Best PM” anymore.
For what it’s worth ICM’s Best PM questions from April 1997 normally had Blair with a lead between 9 and 16 points (with the exception of that one poll that showed the Labour lead down to 5 points). YouGov’s regular best PM questions these days are only showing Cameron with an 8 point lead, though he did get up to 18 and 19 point leads last summer.
Mark Senior – thanks for your pedantic ways. Bottom line – do you think the Lib Dems are really at 22% or do you think they are mor ein the mid to high teens (16-18%). The consensus I would argue is that they are in the mid to high teens since they have not had much news coverage and when people want to remove a Labour Government they will vote for the principal opposition not the third party (or fourth in Scotland). So you can be pedantic about MoE etc but lets reality check the polls.
To pick up on de-toxification – There are two main things making Labour’s brand toxic – one is the length of time that Brown has been there, and the other is their links with the bankers that seem to have stuffed us up so thoroughly.
I don’t think people are as wound up about Iraq or ID cards etc. The objections I sense are that the Govt “isn’t doing enough” about the recession (ie not so much “doing the wrong things”, and that it’s “time for change”.
Brown’s challenge is to offer policies that can be sold as the changes people want to see.
He can’t really deny responsibility over the financial collapse, apart from to say he was not alone in being mistaken, and maybe that Osborne wouldn’t have instigated the controls that could have mitigated our economic suffering.
I distinctly remember Major and Blair being described as Job/Swap leaders – a socialist in charge of the Tories and a Thatcherite in charge of Labour.
The difference between their success rates was down to the degree of loyalty/discipline within their ranks.
It’ll be interesting to see how discipline is managed on both sides in the run-up to the next GE . The effect of the pull to the right within Cameron’s charges, and the pulls every which way among Brown’s.
Party polls and politician “polls”
I’d like to contrast 1996/7 and 2008/9
In both cases, polls report 20+ margins in favour of the opposition.
In both cases, polls report negative opinions about the members of the cabinet (even more so today)
However, in contrast, in 2008/9, polls do not report positive opinions about members of the shadow cabinet.
I’d like to suggest a thesis, and get comments:
The thesis is that this apparent contradiction is a result of Labour’s news management. It is my opinion (based on memory – I hope that someone knows how to get numerical data) – members of Labour’s shadow cabinet managed to get far more face time on TV than today’s Tory shadow cabinet. In contrast, Labour ministers have managed to retain more TV face time today than Major’s Tories did.
I suggest that party polls relate to the voters’ perceived opinion of the the economy, personal standard of living, etc, while opinions about individual politicians require the voter to *actually* see them. Because Labour has retained far more presence on TV than the Major Tories did, this would explain why Labour ministers are hated more (because they are seen more) while Tory shadow ministers are liked less (because the voter isn’t even aware of the MP’s name).
Comments, opinions?
@CynoSarges – I agree, it’s live by the sword die by the sword in this case.
@Anthony – Sorry
@JackR – Sorry
The tories seem to be avoiding direct confrontation within the media whilst the government continue to have a difficult time. They are storing up the big hits (see Ken Clarke’s statements recently) and avoiding any return fire. This has the effect of protecting their Shadow cabinet whilst doing what I believe is an acceptable level of annonimity in not touting their future stars. This will change once an election is called.
I believe we will see more 20+ margins over the coming months even if we cease to see many polls over 45%.
With regards to an election, voter apathy and depth of feeling will be crucial to this campaign. Labour will find it hard to motivate people to vote for them. People who will vote will want change. I still see a landslide for Tory/Libs/Other that will eclipse the labour machine for years to come.
“…eclipse the labour machine for years to come.”
Of course you see it that way Keir – it’s a waste of time saying so though, becasue we all know you see it that way. Don’t give yourself too hard a time over it, just self-censor the really obvious bits and you’ll escape Anthony’s trusty sword of moderation. You’ll cease to wind-up equally convinced people on other sides to join in with “I still believe, etc ” ad nauseam.
@ John TT
Good points on De-Tox re discipline. There is a fair bit of comment about Cabinet ministers breaking ranks and putting their hats in the ring on Politicshome but it does not sounds as convincing as last summer.
Ken C and David Davis seem to be Cameron’s most likley to break ranks but I cant see that happening in too damaging a way.
Charlie – Do you really think Clarke is a threat to discipline? The only thing I can think of him doing to rock the boat is to call for those on the right to be muzzled – and even then I can’t see him getting caught doing so publicly.
Clearly, Brown and Darling need a good budget in April – good enough to see them to the next Queen’s speech and Autumn statement. I can’t see Brown being ousted after then (though he might just go voluntarily in Jan 2010 if he senses he’s seen as the main problem)
@John T T – Anthony will not moderate my comment as it was my belief of how the current trend coupled with the current political narative is going. Having been affected with voter apathy in the landslide victory of Blair, I can see this now effecting several Labour supporting friends of mine – Yes it can happen – we even have a lib in the family but we don’t let her vote
On a more general note, what do you think the response will be over Gordon Brown praising Jade Goody for looking after her family – Will they : –
A, Think he is sincere and warm to him
B, Think it is a crass political point scoring move concerning a woman with only months to live
C, Not really care
?
@Keir
C not Really Care
but then I am not sure who Jade Goody is apart from some recent press about her
A point many of the contributors consistantly miss on this site is that as time goes on it always becomes progressively harder for the governing party of the day to motivate its lukewarm supporters-who number about 1 in 4 ot their total I would think-to turn out and vote. On the other hand the opposition supporters despite having an equal number of lukewarm supporters when they are in power become more and more determined to turn out and vote because of their increasing hostility to the government .
It’s a story as old as the hills.
If like John Major in 1996 Gordon Brown wants to stagger on until the last minute in the hope that Micawber like something will turn up he is perfectly entitled to do so but any Labour supporters who still think that the economy will recover sufficiently in the remaining 14 months or so to enable them to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat are deluding themselves. For a start the million people including many former Labour voters among them-who will lose their jobs between now and May 2010 are not going to vote for the government .
The game is up.
The headline figures quoted by Mori are based on those certain to vote. If one looks into the details, the “all voters” gives a much lower lead.
However, while 10/10 certainty may be pushing the filter, it is certainly the case that, notwithstanding where “opinion” or “preference” may be, actual votes cast will be significantly influenced by motivation (including work on the streets by the partes).
What will be a stronger motivator at the next election ?
Will it be the desire to keep Brown in office ?
Or will “time for a change” be more potent ?
For Labour to lose by a landslide, it is not necessary for their supporters to defect in droves. It is enough for them to shrug their shoulders and stay at home.
Between 1992 and 1997 the Tory vote fell by 4.4m.
The Labour vote rose by less than half that.
In 2005, Labour’s vote was 9.5m, 2m fewer than when they lost in 1992, and 4m fewer than 1997, while their lead over Tories was just 0.75m.
At the next election (2010), Tory leaning voters who stayed at home in 1997/01/05 have an incentive to vote, as will new converts. Disillusioned Labour supporters may either vote elsewhere or not at all.
It is not unreasonable to expect the actual Labour vote to fall further by more than 1m, and a Labour vote under 7m is conceivable.
Cameron does not need to push the Tory vote all the way back to the 14m recorded by John Major, or even the 11.5m “won” by Neil Kinnock, to secure a large majority, but a Tory vote of between 11-13m is entirely plausible.
Such a scenario is supported not just by this poll, but also the run of recent polls, with the gap widening. It is difficult to see how that basic position may change, and the underlying question is not whether Labour will lose the election, but by how much.
“He can’t really deny responsibility over the financial collapse”
I agree with you john-but he does try very hard to do so.
I have been listening to him very carefully over a few weeks-and he uses a very interesting version of the facts to avoid culpability.
Today’s Press conference was an example. Pressed on the failure of FSA to spot the “systemic ” risk developing in the dramatic growth of our banks’ lending , he said that “no one” had expected the “wholesale markets” to seize up.
This is a bit like saying that the drug addict who needed more & more fixes to feed his craving, collapsed & died because the drug supply failed.
He died because of his addiction, without which he would not have helped generate the drug supply.
The failure of the wholesale credit markets was a symptom of excessive risky lending ( traded ,securitised sub-prime debt) -not some totally unrelated & unexpected event.
This is the same argument used by the ex Chairs/CEOs of RBS & LLoyds in front of the recent Select Committe hearing.
The problem-they said-was the failure of wholesale credit markets-as though to say if only time had not been called on the bad loans we were making-we could have carried making more of them!!
Brown employed the same logic at his grilling before the Select Committee Chairmen.
He said that the failure of HBOS was not due to the failures of risk management which Moore alerted Crosby to-but their “flawed business model”.
But the business model-exponential gearing, funded by wholesale providers rather than depositors, in order to grow loans on property during an asset bubble-was the risk .
I don’t suppose any of this matters two hoots to those losing their jobs & houses-but I find it both interesting-and symptomatic ..
“I’d like to contrast 1996/7 and 2008/9
The thesis is that this apparent contradiction is a result of Labour’s news management. It is my opinion (based on memory – I hope that someone knows how to get numerical data) – members of Labour’s shadow cabinet managed to get far more face time on TV than today’s Tory shadow cabinet. In contrast, Labour ministers have managed to retain more TV face time today than Major’s Tories did.”
***************************************************
I woulnd’t neseccarily disagree with this however there is one other factor to take into account and that is the cynicism that politicians are held in at the moment. what the polls seem to highlight time and time again is that in actual fact the british public don’t like politicians and want something completly idfferent but in the absence of that they will go to the next best thing the conservatives
In terms of relative motivation may I suggest the key influence will come from local Councillors and other activists.
If there are very few they may feel they have too big a task to visit everyone in their constituency, whilst if there are a lot then the task becomes very much easier.
In other words if the Tories do well in this year;’s local elections the effect on Labour morale and its abillty to put feet on the streets at the GE could well be seriously damaged.
Obviously similar considerations will appy to the Lib Dems.
David D
Yes, local election success is an important support for GE campaigning – both in terms of footsoldiers and morale.
In the past few years Labour have consistently seen their number of councillors (and more importantly, Councils controolled) fallen, while the number of Tory controlled councils has risen. This has had a cumulative impact on party prganisation and ability to deliver votes on the ground.
However, this year’s elections are only for the County Councils (and then not all due to reorganisation into unitaries last year) and a handful of unitaries. These elections are thus unlikely to have a serious impact.
On the other hand, yet another set of bad election results, both at County and Euro level, will furtehr undermine party morale.
Finally, since the County Council seats were last fought on the same day as the 2005 GE, one can draw a direct comparison with likely effect on parliamentary seats – in those areas which have elections.
When you think about it, a government that has been in power for 10+ years, in a seriously bad recession, with an opposition leader who is reasonably presentable probably ought not to be doing very well anyway. Perhaps not to the point of being 20 points behind, but then that may be something to do with the current leadership.
Nick Keene – TIME FOR A CHANGE – Theres no greater motivator.
I would say theres several differant issues that mean we probably won’t see huge Tory leads;
1. The Lib-Dems. A very solid 15-18% of the electorate are now Lib-Dem supporters. With a Labour core of 25-28% this limits the Tories ability to reach 50%+
2. The Tories do still carry baggage from their 18 years in office. Cameron has indeed de-toxified the brand, but the negative perception has never gone away about the Tory years from 79-97. Fairly or unfairly a lot of the UK population believes the Tory years were one of never ending cruelty and unfairness. A lot of people still believe we were better before the Tories came to power in 79, than we were when they left office in 97. Remember, we have two generations who never knew what life was like in the 1970’s (other than from TV programmes like Life On Mars) and all they have go on is the myth and perception that life before Thatcher was rosy and life after was nothing but toil, suffering and misery.
3. The public are generally much more cynical about politics and politicians. This comes partly from the sleeze of the Major years, but mainly from the failure of Blair to live up to the publics expectation of him. The public invested a lot in Tony Blair and by and large he let them down. For the Tories, it may be no bad thing that they will be starting their new term in government with low expectations, at least it gives some scope for the public to be pleasently surprised.
One further sub point, people rarely look forward to having a Conservative government. There is a cycle that seems to take place every few years, which is Labour governments are elected on a wave of good will and general euphoria. They get themselves and the country into a mess. The Tories are then elected to do the painful job of sorting out the mess. After the mess is sorted out they are then booted out and cycle starts over again.
In the 75-79 parliament, despite all the general doom and gloom at the time, Mrs Thatcher was often subjected to media questioning about her performance as leader of the opposition and why she often wasn’t doing well enough in the opinion polls. This is something the Conservatives do seem to suffer from generally when they are in opposition and the reason is that a Tory government isn’t something the public wants particularly, but its something they need when things go sour.
@Anthony – I had a thought (sorry I will try to curb this habbit) – Could it be that the amount of Anti Labour (I won’t say pro tory) sentiments posted on this blog are not partisan but the current narative expressed. It’s like being at a football match when (in most cases) your team is doing well you cheer, when they flag a bit you cheer louder, when they look like they are on their last legs their own fans roar……..until the goal goes in and then they are quiet……by the second goal they are hurling abuse at their own side. Local and European elections will be goal one – GE will be goals 2,3,4,5,6,7….194 seat majority.
@Gin – it’s been that time for the past 6 years
@ Gin – you make some good points but you make some curious generational assumptions. Many people around my age (31) have had a Labour government for almost all of our adult and politically aware lives. For people in their 20s, the pre-1997 Tories are only a distant memory. The generational thing changes over time and, just as you have generations that barely remember or didn’t live through the 1970s, so do you now have a generation or two of voting age people to whom the bad Tory years also seem like so much ancient history.
Do we have historical poll numbers for early 1986?
I seem to recall big Labour leads due to Westland but a big Tory win in 1987.
@Jim Jam – Clutching?
“-as though to say if only time had not been called on the bad loans we were making-we could have carried making more of them!! ”
The problem with your thesis, Colin, is that the “we” you are talking about are neither under the control of the Govt, nor would have been under any Govt. The wholesale markets were effectively self-regulating (Redwopod agreed with that concept – his idea was to allow the Mortgage lenders to do the same, and sell up to the Far East if they fell over)
Brown is trying to avoid responsibility, true, but one look at, say, the path of the oil price over the last five years :
http://markets.ft.com/tearsheets/performance.asp?s=us@cl.1&ftauth=1235031951272
will tell you that it’s a bit more of a global issue than the simple “we over-mortgaged ourselves” thing.
Jim Jam – I don’t have them on the site, but someone asked much further up the thread. The Conservatives were down to 24% or something like that at some point during the 1983-1987 Parliament.
Jackr
“In my opinion Gordon Brown isn’t half as bad as John Major was”
I suspect that has to do with the amount of time spent waiting for an election.
After the ERM fiasco, Major hung on for 4 years dragging the Conservatives down so far that Labour swept to victory in 97 and 01, while the Conservatives have only just managed to become credible opposition again (poll wise at least, I’m trying not to discuss individual views here). Had Brown called and won the 07 election, we would likely be discussing a similar situation. Recently elected prime minister, has crisis, becomes very unpopular, clings onto power for as long as possible in the hope that something turns up to regain popularity with, ultimately destroying his own party’s chances for a decade or more.
What we have now is a crisis and an unpopular prime minister who is clinging onto power for as long as possible in the hope that something comes along. Could this destroy Labour’s chances for a decade? Ignore history at your peril.
“I also ask myself if the next election is one to lose, not win”
Funnily, Iain Martin did a satirical piece in the Telegraph recently describing Michael Howard imagining what life would be like if he had won the 2005 election. The piece closes with ‘perhaps the 05 election was one worth losing’. If you can find it, I’d recommend having a read.
“clinging onto power for as long as possible in the hope that something comes along”
I think he’s being more active than that – though if it keeps being spun that he’s just sitting there biting his nails and worrying, then maybe that will have an effect on public opinion.
The cones hotline was an example of Major trying to find something to do that wouldn’t blow up in his face like Back to Basics.
Brown’s deeds are rather more substantial, much more active, and I’m surprised Colin hasn’t pointed them out in response to the “Micawber” accusations.
Even the VAT cut was was more substantial (its effect is mis-interpreted by people who talk about 30p off the price of a DVD player, but even if it were that ineffective, it would still be more active than anything Major did)
Keir – asbolutely – I am a self confessed straw clutcher and I do realise Westland was exceptional
Can’t do much more as it is clear GB will hang on.
One small straw is the weighting system used by Mori and I await the next poll as a series above 45% for the cons mean game over and it is just about the victory margin (whilst the polls show 40-44con to 28-30lab range my straw is not so thin as a 4% swing back to an NOC is possible if not likely)
I still think there is a chance of a Labour recovery or more likely a drop to below 40% for the Tories with a consequential Lab/LD rise as Cameron is challenged more and Osborne (my view) exposed more.
As per Mark just above key target for Labour (may be not for GB) is to avoid melt-down.
FWIW – I am not too distressed by the thought of a Conservative Gov’t as just as 18 years or Cons rule entrenched liberal economics, 13 years of Labour has entrenched social change.
Cameron not just accepting but embracing civil partnerships for example and that Devolution is here to stay.
It is not all about Economics for all voters (pace Bridget Jones) and Cam has done a very good job of neutralisng the nasty party image, not yet beyond the point of return but a period in Government will do that.
“The wholesale markets were effectively self-regulating”
If you say so john I accept that-but it makes my point if true.
The surveillance ( to get away from the hackneyed “regulation” ) of our banks by the authorities failed to detect systemic risk ( or at least to vocalise it) in the exponential growth of lending & debt at NR, RBS, HBOS etc.
That this growth was funded from wholesale markets, rather than retail deposits merely emphasises how far & how rapidly these banks were departing from the “boring but safe” model.
To blame the collapse of the wholesale market-itself contaminated by securitised sub-prime-for the plight of over geared UK banks is to avoid the central issue which was & is the rapid growth & gearing of those banks and the asset buubbles they lent into.
RE Brown-yes I do agree that he has been “active” john. The charge he will answer to though is not the one he flings at Cameron ( inactivity)-but lack of effectivity.
This is what the public will judge him on-and I feel a little sorry for him because of it.
This recession is like the proverbial OIl Tanker, and stopping it-or even slowing it is very very problematic.
If we ever get proof of the Keynsian ( as interpreted) approach it will be in USA not UK.
Obama’s interventions make UK’s look puny.
And he is now proposing that the State erase/reduce mortgage debt to avoid foreclosure!
Imagine the debate that would engender here-but we don’t have the funds,or ,I suspect the cojones.
Total respect Colin, but the trajectory is more like a speedbost than a tanker, and very few people are saying with cast-iron certainty that it will take that long to turn around, or that effective action will not have any effect.
Cameron vs Brown = Incoherent vs Ineffective.
I agree that the “do nothing” attack should be replaced – perhaps with a “know nothing” one. From defending bankers at his conference to attacking them now from supporting the HBOS-Lloyds deal to attacking it now. It’s not re-assuring.
Turning mortgage payments into rents wouldn’t be such a costly idea. My next-door neighbour wouldn’t have been turfed out because of his landlord’s mortgage being foreclosed, and we’d all have saved a bit as he was on benefits.
Cameron vs Brown = Incoherent vs Ineffective.
Quite like that actually!
I realy think they have all been inchoherant to some degree-look at the ill-fated, much debated TARP in USA.
Who will be effective -and why-is the big big question.
RE Cammo & HBOS-I heard him on this-my understanding is that he doesn’t go back on his support-merely criticises the lack of due diligence given what we now know.
Actually when you see the comments by Victor Blank in the pre-merger Jeff Randall interview you begin to wonder about the people running these organisations.
At his Press Conference GB said LLoyds & HBOS had proposed the deal-nothing to do with him–they just asked him to waive competition rules.
I think GB is pinning a whole lot of Polling hopes on G20.
I think it’s a huge risk for him to expect to emerge as “saviour of the world” from it.
I can’t see the Yanks buying into his International College of Banking Supervisors-there are clear signs that his plea for no protectionism is going unheeded all over the place-Euroland has some major cracks appearing in it-ECB now ticking off those with annual deficits more than 3% !!!!
I can see no upside save unremarkable platitudes, and large downside in some awfull embarrassment factor.
Colin,
The BoE detected the systemic risk of over-reliance on short-term wholesale funding as early as 2006, but, since the responsibility had been transferred to the FSA, the BoE could not do anything about it.
Even if they had wanted to raise interest rates to constrain credit growth – which they would have had to justify in terms of CPI forecasts excluding housing – it is doubtful that it would have had the desired impact, since the imbalance was not driven by the cost of lending but by the availability.
It is for this reason that the recent drastic cuts have not had the desired effect of increasing new lending. The issue is not the cost but the availability of credit .
Unfortunately for Brown, this comes back to the fundamental flaw in his tri-partite regulatory system with surveillance of the banks removed from the body most able not only to carry it out, but to take action when needed.
The more the public learns about how the financial and banking system actually works, the less rosy Brown’s record as Chancellor looks.
“Unfortunately for Brown, this comes back to the fundamental flaw in his tri-partite regulatory system with surveillance of the banks removed from the body most able not only to carry it out, but to take action when needed.”
Yes Paul, that’s it.
I noticed with some surprise that , at his last Press Conference, GB stated that the system prior to the one he introduced was ” self-regulation of banks”.
Paul-I’m not so sure that interest rate hikes would have been the sole-or most obvious- solution for BoE.
The excessive gearing of Banks could surely have been constrained by appropriate regulation on Reserve/ Capital levels
John TT – Major was active during the last few years of his premiership. There were continued privatisations and the economy continued to do well. Remember the 15 years of good economic times started under Major. Major is also regarded as a good person who was well meaning. The same is not said about Brown.
I think it’s interesting that we show Incoherent vs Ineffective? Does that mean we have just misunderstood the message from Gordon? Is he so far out of reach of us normal quasi humans that we have no joint context from which to lauch his greatness? I do apologise for my crass ineptitude at not being able to understand the message “It’s a global problem”, I thought he just said it’s not my fault, you can’t blame me.
———————————————————————-
Gordon: – Mandy the big boys keep telling me I did bad…
Mandy: – you stop listening to them diddums, Mandy will spin you a nice bedtime story for you to f*!*!ing tell them…
——————————————————————–
or is it that he is wrong, was wrong and will always be wrong?
As to David Cameron being ineffective? How would you “Left of center” beings like Dave to improve?
Seriously as an opposition the conservatives are doing exactly what is needed to assume power at the next election. As much as we say that an election is lost by a government so too can it be thrown away by an opposition. Especially by oppositions who shout too loudly and push too hard.
Colin,
Precisely, but, under the system in place, interest rates were the only tool available to the BoE, since they did not have the authority to impose the type of controls / restraints that the FSA should have been using – but for various reasons, did not.
However, on onterest rates, the problem was exacerbated once Brown changed the inflation target from RPI at +/- 2.5% to CPI +/- 2.0%. While the CPI figure may have looked more “prudent” (i.e. anti-inflationary ), in reality it led to much looser policy than needed. Since it excluded housing, the asset price bubble building from excess liquidity was not a factor BoE were allowed to take into account for monetary policy. (Likewise the disregard of various monetary indicators which were Howe and Lawson’s preferred measures).
You may recall from one of my earlier posts my comments about the problem arising from fiscal policy being completely out of sync with monetary policy. In effect, any tightening of monetary policy was completely undermined by loose fiscal policy.
This of course was entirely Brown’s responsibility – and there is no way that he can argue that the dreadful state we find our public finances in today is unrelated to his own actions.
I suspect that the deferral of the budget from March to April may have less to do with the G20 summit and more to do with a Mandelsonian wheeze to call a snap GE on 4 June. That way Darling can announce even more fiscal largesse for the client state, with all the tax rises deferred to an emergency mini-budget after polling day.
PAUL H-J
An interesting post-thanks.
FAO Cllr Peter Cairns
See Ivan’s comment on Feb 17th for explanation- hope my reply now makes sense. Sorry didn’t reply sooner, but not able to come on the site until now.
Cheers.
A question to you experts please?
A blue candidate polls 42.5% against red 57.5% in County Council election in 59% turnout during 2005 in a straight fight.
What would be result if fought today with Lib Dems joining in and 40% turnout. (no Generakl election on same day and keeping candidates personalities aside!
Thanks experts in advance!
@mark m
interesting.michael howard was brought in to restructure the party,and create order before he promoted david cameron.
i dont think any politician would say no to being pm,but it was not part of the plan.
it would have been more difficult to make the progress and jettison dc into the leadership contest or hand over the pm’s job,if he had won.
just like if labour had won in 1992,(they had the same erm policy)they would have been kicked out after one term because of weak handling of the currency crisis,and been out of power for a long time!
the same would have happened to the tories now if they had won in 2005.
Borderer,
My mistake, I misread it as By me not to me.
Peter.
rodger bannister
You’re right, this sort situation isn’t good for any incumbent to be winning a GE. It also helps the opposition if they’ve not had a go in government for a while, hence people have forgotten how not very good they were last time.
larry henson
“A question to you experts please?
A blue candidate polls 42.5% against red 57.5% in County Council election in 59% turnout during 2005 in a straight fight.”
The local scene will always vary from the national as Anthony’s latest post shows, however, as a rough estimate;
Given that the national swing is somewhere between 8 and 10% depending which pollster you believe a blue candidate might expect just over 50% now in a two horse race. Adding the Lib dems as a new entry onto the scene would doubtless take a few votes from both with the bulk coming from the incumbant and, if things remain as they are, more unpopular ‘Red’ candidate.
So, perhaps (with the caveat that this is a complete guess!) 40% Blue, 35% red, 25% Yellow.
Chris:
“…If the economy recovers and the recession is not as sever as the gloom merchants predict (anyone stating otherwise is ridiculed) Labour should receive the benefit, even from this right-wing reactionary media…”
Apart from openly admitting that this recession was not foreseen – despite the global economic signs to the contrary – and then generating gut-wrenching amounts of borrowed debt in a desperate attempt to bluff this nation out of a depression ( ….and if trillions upon trillions of pounds are NOT gut-wrenching, then what is?) what else exactly should Labour receive the benefit for?
I have a mind of my own, as do most contributors to this website, and therefore we are quite capable of discerning fact from fiction – whether it be dispensed by Brown, Cameron or even Clegg. To suggest that the media’s only function is to fuel and then direct a right-wing frenzy at blameless Gordon is incredibly naive. I support the Conervatives, but I never take the words of the Express, Mail or Sun as gospel. I applaud and respect both honesty and integrity regardless of its political hue. I was genuinely saddened at the death of John Smith who, I feel, could have transformed the Labour party into one that could have even expected to win a fourth or even fifth term. But such leaders are very rare. And in his wake came the Labour circus with Blair as ring-master followed by Brown as Gordo the Clown. I can make up my own judgement about what I see and hear and, in my view, Brown has now been shown to have been a charlatan of a Chancellor and is now an indecisive leader of a party, a disastrous PM of a country and an embarassment to the Labour movement.
Whenever the opinion polls turn against a Labour government some of its core supporters simply cannot resist blaming the media. Do they not realise how insulting this is ? What are they saying? Do they think that flagging Labour voters are so thick and gullible as to be led by the nose by what the Sun editorial says? Behind this lies the old besettng sin of the Left-an inability to understand why the ‘workers’ should want to vote them out of office. I recently overheard a Labour party worker bemoan the lack of class solidarity these days as if the poor old workers were a lumpen mass of gormless individuals whose only role in life was to keep his ‘lot’ in power. What arrogance!
[...] questo, e guardato bene l’ultimo IPsos/Mori che dà i Conservatori addirittura a più 20%, possiamo affermare con quasi granitica certezza che [...]