<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: MORI show economic optimism returning</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186</link>
	<description>Opinion polling and political analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:44:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul H-J</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186/comment-page-1#comment-584547</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul H-J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:27:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186#comment-584547</guid>
		<description>With GDP figures for Q1 revised downwards to worst figures in over 50 years, will this have a knock-on effect on optimism levels next month ?

If optimism falls, will this in turn impact on opinion polls ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With GDP figures for Q1 revised downwards to worst figures in over 50 years, will this have a knock-on effect on optimism levels next month ?</p>
<p>If optimism falls, will this in turn impact on opinion polls ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david p</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186/comment-page-1#comment-584313</link>
		<dc:creator>david p</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:07:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186#comment-584313</guid>
		<description>Reading all these postings about economic optimism it assumes a recovering economy will help Labour. I would remind people that the Brown government was in big trouble before the crisis hit, with the government so unpopular that there were repeated stories about palace coups etc. Also remember that the government&#039;s unpopularity forced out Tony Blair while the economy was still going well.
When the crisis hit it pushed this to the background and enabled Brown to act as a global crisis manager. In short economic green shoots wouldn&#039;t be as much help  to labour as people think.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reading all these postings about economic optimism it assumes a recovering economy will help Labour. I would remind people that the Brown government was in big trouble before the crisis hit, with the government so unpopular that there were repeated stories about palace coups etc. Also remember that the government&#8217;s unpopularity forced out Tony Blair while the economy was still going well.<br />
When the crisis hit it pushed this to the background and enabled Brown to act as a global crisis manager. In short economic green shoots wouldn&#8217;t be as much help  to labour as people think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul H-J</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186/comment-page-1#comment-584234</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul H-J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:58:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186#comment-584234</guid>
		<description>JJB,

If Labour get back over 30%, then I agree that they will not be &quot;annihilated&quot; at the GE.

But what if they do stall in low-mid 20s ?

Complete wipe-out - or even a reduction to under 50 seats - is unlikely, but they could conceivably be knocked down to 100-150. Not annihilation (reduction to nil) but much more than decimation (reduction by one tenth). Decimation would leave Lab on 320, and  the largest party in a hung parliament.

In 1997 Tories were reduced to 165 or almost exactly half the number of seats they held in 1992. On the same measure, since Lab are starting from a higher base the Lab figure would be 178. 142 would put them at under 40% of 2005 result, while 118 would put them at under a third.

While few would expect the term to apply in its literal sense, &quot;annihilation&quot; is often accepted as being athe outcome when an organisation becomes incapable of effective action. For a political party losing office, the measure must be whether it can operate as the official opposition. If it is overtaken in the vote, but still retains a substantiial number of seats, it could avoid that. But if it is not even the second largest party, then &quot;annihilation&quot; would have been achieved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JJB,</p>
<p>If Labour get back over 30%, then I agree that they will not be &#8220;annihilated&#8221; at the GE.</p>
<p>But what if they do stall in low-mid 20s ?</p>
<p>Complete wipe-out &#8211; or even a reduction to under 50 seats &#8211; is unlikely, but they could conceivably be knocked down to 100-150. Not annihilation (reduction to nil) but much more than decimation (reduction by one tenth). Decimation would leave Lab on 320, and  the largest party in a hung parliament.</p>
<p>In 1997 Tories were reduced to 165 or almost exactly half the number of seats they held in 1992. On the same measure, since Lab are starting from a higher base the Lab figure would be 178. 142 would put them at under 40% of 2005 result, while 118 would put them at under a third.</p>
<p>While few would expect the term to apply in its literal sense, &#8220;annihilation&#8221; is often accepted as being athe outcome when an organisation becomes incapable of effective action. For a political party losing office, the measure must be whether it can operate as the official opposition. If it is overtaken in the vote, but still retains a substantiial number of seats, it could avoid that. But if it is not even the second largest party, then &#8220;annihilation&#8221; would have been achieved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NBeale</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186/comment-page-1#comment-584227</link>
		<dc:creator>NBeale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186#comment-584227</guid>
		<description>Adding in the Harris poll gives a WMA of 38:23:18 - but the political damage of the Cabinet resignations and Browns absurd lies about public spending have not been felt fully yet I think.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adding in the Harris poll gives a WMA of 38:23:18 &#8211; but the political damage of the Cabinet resignations and Browns absurd lies about public spending have not been felt fully yet I think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stuart gregory</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186/comment-page-1#comment-584223</link>
		<dc:creator>stuart gregory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:02:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2186#comment-584223</guid>
		<description>david in france before you go touting partizan points flag, i was highlighting the fact that the conservatives current policys are on-line in detail not really a party political point is it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>david in france before you go touting partizan points flag, i was highlighting the fact that the conservatives current policys are on-line in detail not really a party political point is it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

