This week’s YouGov/Sunday Times poll has topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 42%, LD 9%. Full tables are here.

The tables also include some questions on long term care for the elderly (the answers are unsurprising… people tend to think that wealthier people should pay for their own care, but bridle at the idea of making them sell their homes. They tend to support a higher level of assets than the current £23,000 when means testing), and on Olympic tickets. 23% think the distribution of tickets was fair, 23% unfair. 34% would have preferred if they’d been sold on a first-come-first-served basis, compared to 31% who think the ballot system was the best way of distributing them.

I’ll be back on the site properly from tomorrow.


250 Responses to “YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 37, LAB 42, LDEM 9”

1 2 3 5
  1. “Yes, I/ we applied for Olympic tickets”

    London 29% : South Eng 19% : Midlands/Wales 11% : North England 8% : Scotland 4%

    Hardly surprising to have that geographic distribution. When the Commonwealth Games come to Glasgow there will be a similar distribution within Scotland – Highlands and the Borders will have fewer attendees.

    The economic benefits go primarily to the host cities, but it seems inappropriate that the further reaches of the relevant country should still contribute significantly through general taxation.

  2. Thanks. Seems the June 1st YG poll was possibly just an outlier then? It does look like the Labour lead is around 5% recently.

  3. Anecdotal I know but my 73 year old mother takes a contrary view. she says in the past the home passed to the next generation and whichever child took ownership became the main carer for their elderly parents. In this way the house ‘ asset’ paid for their care in old age. She says it is not the old themsleves who feel stonmgly about having to sell their homes but their kids who want theinheritence without the responsibility of caring forn their parents.
    Polls static with lead between 2 and 7% until confernece season I reckon,

  4. “Thanks. Seems the June 1st YG poll was possibly just an outlier then? It does look like the Labour lead is around 5% recently”
    The 39, 41, 9 was +1.6%, -1%, 0% out compared to a average of that and the previous 4 days.
    It seems to me that if figures are more than +-1 when compared to the average of the previous 4 days, they tend to be outliers.

    Considering that the latest figure is -0.2%, 0%, 0% away from it’s average (+4 days), I’d say it’s probably the most likely to be correct.

    I’d also suggest that the figure of 37, 42, 9 has probably been the ‘true’ figure since about the 26th May and prior to that, the ‘post election bounce’, it was actually 37.5, 41, 9. (Up/Down from 36, 42, 9.5 prior to the election).
    Which obviously translates to a 5% lead for Labour, previously post-election bounce of 3.5% (6% pre-election).
    And a ‘combined coalition’ lead of 4%, previously post election bounce of 5.5% (pre-election 3.5%).

    So Labour haven’t fully recovered their lead since the ‘post election bounce’, but they’re not doing badly at getting there.

    It’ll be interesting once Lord Ashcroft releases his polling on the Labour party/Ed Miliband (which apparently is really bad for Labour) to see if that feeds in to the press and then in to polling figures.

    That’s just my reading of the polling situation – I could be completely wrong.

  5. @Tinged Fringe

    It is odd how all the polling is bad for Labour… Except for Voting Intent.

    Which means that either a) the basic common VI methodology that has been refined for almost half a decade now is incorrect, b) arbitrary concocted policy and character polling is flawed.

    You can guess which one I think.

  6. Anthony obviously took the right week to go on holiday: no interesting extra questions in YouGov; fairly dull trackers (the other week of the cycle asks better questions); this Monday’s weren’t asked because of the Bank Holiday; and the only other poll was a ComRes with few supplementaries.

    I was a bit worried that the Sunday Times polls might be a bit skimpy without his input, but there’s still the usual pages of the stuff. I was also worried that I was the only person sad enough to think “Are the YouGov data up on their site at 7am as per last Sunday?”, so Tingedfringe cheered me up. :)

    A month after the locals, the headline figures are more or less back to ‘as was’. The Lib Dems a smidge down, though their resilience in remaining at about 10% after their rapid plunge to there has surprised many. They’ll also be slightly relieved that the percentage of their 2010 voters now ‘non-voters’ is back to around 25% rather than staying elsewhere. Cameron is now back in the negatives at -3 after his brief boost last week.

    There is also a set of questions concerning the worries about the day to day effects that the economic situation will cause. These appear to show a drop of 5-6% in ‘TOTAL WORRIED’ since December and a corresponding rise in ‘TOTAL NOT WORRIED’. However if you look at the poll being compared to, the questions do not appear. Some of them are actually tracker questions, but I can’t find the figures there that match in any recent polls. Somewhere on a beach Anthony is sighing “You can’t get the staff”.

    YouGov also asked about expectations of price changes in various categories. Given current rates of inflation, the main news is that people seem wildly optimistic. Only 12% expect the cost of holidays to rise; 8% going out; 10% clothing etc. In all these categories the biggest group is those expecting a fall. Even ‘everyday groceries’ are only expected to go up by 31%. Most expect house prices to remain static – though again I can’t find the historic figures that YouGov claim to compare to.

    As you might expect there are also questions relating to care of the elderly. 68% of those with personal experience of ‘an elderly relative being cared for in a home’ were happy (23% ‘very satisfied’) but that still left a substantial minority of 28% who weren’t. Interestingly women relatives were less likely to be satisfied – are they more likely to have greater contact and so see more?

    77% say ‘Britain, as a nation, does not enough to care for the elderly’. Women (83%) and the over 60s (89%) are most likely to agree – and presumably have the relevant experience. To prove the point, 49% then replied ‘No’ to Suppose that you had an elderly relative who required care. Do you think you would care for them at your home?. 52% think the Government should rescue Southern Cross.

    More generally, asked As someone gets older, they are likely to need to pay for care. How much do you think the Government and the individual should contribute towards this care? only 29% say The government should pay all the costs of care regardless of people’s own assets while 57% contend The government should only pay the cost of care for the least well off, and people with income or assets over a certain level should pay the whole cost of their care Oddly enough it’s the Lib Dems who feel this most strongly 71% to 20% – at 30% and 31% Tory and Labour are equally likely to want to sponge off the taxpayer. Also the figure for Scotland (where such care is free) doesn’t differ much from average: 49% to 32%.

    As Anthony states, when it comes to having to sell one’s home to fund your care, the figures are reversed – 68% are against, only 19% for. Again Lib Dems a bit more in favour, though not as dramatically. A plurality (26%) favour a new asset threshold of £50,000 (20% don’t know).

    However a majority say that they would you be prepared to pay more money in taxation if it was guaranteed to be used to fund free care for the elderly by 51% to 28%. Though as Mr Wells would be quick to point out, saying it and voting for it are different things. The other option, insurance, doesn’t fly: 32% say no, 31% don’t know and most of the rest would only pay a premium so low as to be meaningless.

    Finally as a memorial to Dr Kervokian, YouGov asked if doctors should have the legal power to end the life of a terminally ill patient who has given a clear indication of a wish to die? 68% said ‘yes’ to 20% ‘no’ with very little difference due to political allegiance, age etc (the lower figures for London may be random). Asked And would you be prepared to end your life prematurely if you felt that you were going to suffer from poor health with no chance of recovery? the proportions remained the same after allowing for a much bigger number of those saying ‘don’t know’ or ‘prefer not to say’ (as you would expect).

    YouGov managed to resist linking this to previous topic and asking if you would off Granny before all the inheritance went on care homes (though the way some people rail against relatives using their assets to make their last years comfortable, you do wonder).

    What is it about Olympic tickets though? The Sunday Times is always asking. Is this a big cause of discontent – the figures don’t really show it?

  7. @JAYBLANC
    I’d take a guess and say that Character polling is flawed simply because it’s a completely different party set-up.

    Whereas before, the Tory leaders in power would have seen negative approval from both Labour and the Libs, the Tories and LibDems are now both in power so Labour (the opposition) will get negative approval from both parties in power and Cameron will get positive from both.
    So it’s sort of a reverse situation of what we should see normally.
    If you can see what I mean.

    So usually it’s Power + Opposition + Opposition.
    Where both opposition parties rate those in power badly and each other better (compared to those in power).
    Now it’s Power + Power + Opposition.
    Where both power parties rate each other highly and the opposition badly.

    So our power/coalition set-up skews the figures.

    That’s my suggestion anyway.

  8. Just read an interesting article on Liberal “Conspirachttp://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/06/04/westminster-shocked-as-tory-says-labour-must-listen-to-them/”

  9. @ Jim Jam
    “Anecdotal I know but my 73 year old mother takes a contrary view. she says in the past the home passed to the next generation and whichever child took ownership became the main carer for their elderly parents. In this way the house ‘ asset’ paid for their care in old age. ”

    I agree that this occurred a lot in previous generations, although one should remember that this “insurance” applied only to the relatively few people who owned their own homes. Neither of my sets of grandparents owned, or dreamed of owning, their own home; virtually all of their many children did so.
    One way of paying for the care would be to tax the inherited houses heftily, a policy that all parties are moving away from. But people squeal when their inheritance is taxed, even if most of it is the consequence of unearned house-price inflation.

  10. As regards paying for care…I find it strange that people think it’s ok to expect/require those in care to use their cash savings to pay for care but not to expect/require them to transform their house into cash to pay for their care.

  11. A different topic, but one which might resonate with joe public and perhaps especially with women, is the move to inhibit/prohibit the sexualisation of children.

    On the one hand I understand what is being done and why, but on the other I have serious concerns about this and indeed where it might eventually lead us.

  12. @ Old Nat
    “Yes, I/ we applied for Olympic tickets”
    London 29% : South Eng 19% : Midlands/Wales 11% : North England 8% : Scotland 4%”

    As you imply this is a London-Rest issue, not an England-Scotland one. The Commonwealth Games in Manchester were a huge success, yet the notion of a 2012 Mancs Olympics was scorned on the grounds Mancs was not the Capital city, etc.
    Scotland of course could claim a combined Edinburgh-Glasgow as the Capital venue, in the same manner that Barcelona got the games as Catalonia’s capital. How consoling you must find it to see how well-placed Scotland is compared with England’s regions, also reeling under the impact of cuts & rising unemploment.

  13. RobbieAlive

    Clearly my word skills are slipping. I thought I did far more than “imply”.

    “When the Commonwealth Games come to Glasgow there will be a similar distribution within Scotland” was meant to make the point explicit.

  14. @Tinged Fringe

    Cameron was doing really rather well in personal approval polling in the run up to 2011 tho. And it was actually cited as a reason that the polling *must* be discounting the Conservatives, and that they should expect to a clear seat majority…

    My opinion is that ‘personal popularity’ is priced into VI polling. But the value of personal approval to voter intent is a lot smaller than most assume. Gordon Brown’s personal approval kept Labour down only by a minor amount really, DuffyGate only made a small dent in rising Labour figures, albeit just enough to keep them out of realistic coalition negotiations. Conversely, Cameron’s personal popularity simply couldn’t overcome the opinion of the rest of the party.

  15. @mike n
    Your comment regarding the sexualisation of children, presumably means, you would expect women to approve of the steps taken, rather than disapprove.

    What dangers do you see in not dressing small girls like hookers.

  16. @JAY BLANC
    I liked your 11.10 post. That Labour are behind everywhere but finish 5 points in the lead, suggests something is wrong somewhere.

  17. As has been stated numerous times, it will be the state of the economy at the next election, that will decide who will win. By then Ed Miliband and his team should have been able to put together an alternative plan.

    I pretty much agree with the economists in todays Observer, that Osbornes current plans need to be changed. The current level of cuts, without helpful targeted spending and helpful treasury policies, could take the economy back into recession.

    In the Autumn I expect Osborne will put through some changes to react to what is happening in the world. Britains needs to make the most of a low currency value, to boost earnings from our exporting companies, so I expect to see some help being provided. Also I expect there will be money provided for infrastructure projects.

  18. @Lord Tory

    It’s generally a refusal to accept that most anything other polling shows is already priced into the Voter Intent poll. You can find a poll saying that 90% of people wouldn’t want to have a beer with Ed, or 80% think he sounds whiny. 42% still say they’ll vote labour.

  19. LordTory
    “you would expect women to approve of the steps taken, rather than disapprove”

    I could get bogged down answering this, but my comment was really to reflect that the news pieces I’ve seen in the last few days have had a good number of women supporting the idea. And perhaps that this might have some impact on VI.

    Of course the parent most likely to decide what clothes to buy for their children (boys and girls) is the mother.

    “What dangers do you see in not dressing small girls like hookers”

    None. Nor do I see any problem in dressing children in fashionable clothing.

    But I do wonder about the mindest of those who might see this as something approaching paedophilia.

    Our society has changed (I offer no comment on whether for the better or worse) and everyone has access to and is assailed by the ‘media’. Perhaps we need more and better education of sex and sexuality rather than trying to roll back ‘progress’.

    But to reassure you I am against children being used in the media (e.g ‘entertainment’) in a sexual way.

  20. What jumps out of the tables for me is the 25-39 age group:

    For instance they are closer to the 60+ group in their assessment of Cameron, both going +2% for him, while 18-24s and 40-59s give him a -7% and a -10%.

    In this poll Lab have a 20% lead among the youngest, dropping to 2% for the 25-39s, and a 6% lead among the 40-59s; Tory lead is at 3% for the 60+ bracket.

  21. @ MIKEN

    “Perhaps we need more and better education of sex and sexuality rather than trying to roll back ‘progress’”

    ” I am against children being used in the media (e.g ‘entertainment’) in a sexual way.”

    The implication in these two statements is that :-

    Dressing & treating young children as a sexually aluring parody of adults is “progress “,which is acceptable if carried out by their parents-but not if by the entertainment industry.

    I feel sure you didn’t mean to give that impression-but just in case you did, could I point out that the entertainment industry cannot do anything to young children without the permission of their parents.

    So it is difficult to see how you can approve of parental freedom in this matter , but disapprove of an entertainment organisation which puts that freedom into action for financial exploitation on behalf of the parents & the organisation.

  22. @mike n
    Agree with Colin, the individuals in the media/entertainment business whom many young girls aspire to be, need to be filtered by parents.

  23. @Billy Bob

    25-39 includes the “Remember the 80s with childhood nostalgia” group. I wonder if there’s a statistically significant correlation between government during childhood years and government support in adult life.

  24. I suspect that the polls voting intention are telling us that is electorate is queasy about government policy but unconvinced there’s yet an alternative….

    Surely that is an accurate summation of the true position….Labour is doing relatively well merely by being the only anti-government party on the bloc….and this is really what the local elections told us too….

    Although I don’t think it’s necessary to go quite to the limits of the Mail’s puerile analysis it has to be said that Ed Milliband has started slowly with public perception and that since his election that persepctive has moved against him. He’s not as uncomftable as Heath or Duncan Smith but he doesn’t strike an easy chord with the electorate.

    But my feeling is that he’s still got time….we’re only a year into the coalition and his position was not like Balir’s….who came into the leadership after the implosion of the Conservative’s reputation for sound fiscal management….Ed is perhaps a little more like John Smith after ’92….not brilliant but not a disaster…. a work in progress….

    But postponement cannot go on forever and Milliband will need to start to push the party’s image in a new clkear direction no later than the next conference.

    To some extent the government will be given the benefit of the doubt…rather like Wilson in 64-67 period…But there will come a point when if government policies don’t deliver and things get worse…when the narrartive will slip away from ministers.

    And were I romancing the stars I’d predictably be more concerned about the way government policy looks amateurish and ill thought through….

    The NHS Bill fiasco reminds me of nothing more than In Place of Strife….and Cameron is in many ways more Wilsonian than either Thatcherite or Blairite….and therein lies the opportunities and the dangers for the government….and for the opposition….

    The LibDems may not be as relevant in the next election as they were in the last….the polls point to a pretty harsh judgement being made upon them and that too was confirmed by the local elections…

    But like all readers of public opinion and polls….it’s only my opinion…

  25. Billy Bob

    I think the 25-39s thing is just random variation rather than some sort of ‘Thatcher’s Children’ effect. If you look back over a dozen different polls or so, in most of them there’s no significant difference. Though when there is one it’s in the ST poll oddly, I wonder if the sample could be slightly different for those, either because when they are taken (Thursday pm/Friday am*) or because they tend to have many more questions in them.

    *Anthony. Do these pols tend to closed a little earlier on the POETS day principle? (Given that they have to processed after closing).

  26. Colin

    “Dressing & treating young children as a sexually aluring parody of adults is “progress “,which is acceptable if carried out by their parents-but not if by the entertainment industry.”

    I didn’t say “Dressing & treating young children as a sexually aluring parody of adults is ‘progress'”.

    But there is a distinction, surely? The entertainment industry uses people to ‘entertain’ a wide audience. Parents dress their children to make them (and themselves) feel good or to improve their self-esteem or esteem with their peers.

    I think it’s quite reasonable to inhibit/prohibit exploitation but surely it is a retrograde step to dictate to parents (and children) what they should wear.

    How does the ‘State’ determine what should or should not be worn? How can this be ‘imposed’ on parents?

    As regards the effect on children of advertising that uses sex, how does the State determine what is or is not acceptable?

  27. “Ithink it’s quite reasonable to inhibit/prohibit exploitation but surely it is a retrograde step to dictate to parents (and children) what they should wear” shoudl read

    “I think it’s quite reasonable to inhibit/prohibit exploitation but surely it is a retrograde step to dictate to parents (and children) what should or should not be worn.”

    ((Just for clarity))

  28. Another factor is that the 18-25s, though unenthusiastic about the government, are rather touchingly more optimistic than other age groups about future prospects.

    Perhaps the 25-39s had some of that optimism crushed out of them during the Labour years… not being able to afford a house for example, but they are still ready to give Tories the benefit of the doubt; 40-59s would/should know better, while the 60+s are predominantly Tory survivors.

    Then again, as Roger Mexico says “random variation” is more likely. Though it is interesting that YouGov seem to/are(?) polling different sections of larger sample at any one time.

  29. @OldNat
    I totally agree (about the Olympics).

    The statistics look even starker when you look at the figures as absolute numbers of people
    i.e.
    London 96 people applied for tickets
    Rest of South 159
    Midlands and Wales 60
    North 50
    Scotland 9

    I bet the decades of cuts in sports funding, needed to pay for the £500m a day this jamboree will cost, won’t be applied in the above proportions.

  30. @MIKE N
    You approve of state “support” so much and yet you see any rules from the state (a Tory state) as retrograde.
    Would that all parents did know how best to bring up their children, a trip to ASDA will show that is not the case.
    The trendy view to scrap school uniform has now been backtracked, uniform can give kids pride in their school.
    Wearing that uniform in the manner it was intended, is also enforceable by the school. Why do you feel any form of discipline is retrograde ?

  31. @ RAF
    I wish LordTory would expand on the type of UK Muslim he would kickout, as should he become PM, I’d like to know where I stand.

    Of course RAF, the hard working taxpayers who wish for a peaceful and reasonably prosperous life. The type who wish to integrate into British society and don’t murder beautiful 18 year old girls because they have fallen in love with an Afro – Caribbean or white boy. These would simply have to go. The people suspected of terrorism and stirring up race hate would stay. If they commit terrorism they would still stay, its their human right you see. If you have further difficult questions about Tory thinking, please don’t hesitate to ask.

  32. @ Mike N

    Interesting article. I don’t think that the politics of personal destruction works with British voters. I would imagine that it would backfire. That’s not to say that certain elections have been influenced by the unpopularity of opposition leaders. But that unpopularity is natural. It’s not something that party strategists can simply create.

  33. LORDTORY

    Like you old Adolf was a great believer in uniforms

  34. roger rebel

    A somewhat Godwinian comment?

  35. Inappropriate clothing for kids, David Cameron is pandering to mumsnet. All DC can do is ask retailers who are ‘friends’ of the Tory Party (e.g. M&S) to show restraint in the items they offer for sale.

    Legislation to exclude certain types of clothing for children & pre-teens from sale is impossibly difficult to frame. I mean really, how is it to be done?

    You can proscribe: e.g. Children who do not wear the school unifrom can be excluded from school. And outside school? Children who are caught wearing something other than the ‘Tory Party uniform’ will be packed off to borstal.

    Other than that, kids can wear exactly what they please & retailers – especially internet retailers – can sell it & there’s not a thing the government can do to stop them.

    DC has raised the expectations of the mumsnet crowd. They expect the Tories to do something about it. And about ‘sexy’ magazine covers & ‘sexy’ adverts near schools & ‘sexy’ performances by adult stars like Rhiana & Beyonce being broadcast before 9pm – as if the same performances aren’t viewable at any time on You-Tube etc.

    Mumsnetters also expect DC to deliver greater control over the internet; parental bar for sites with adult content & verification – by the site – of the age of people on internet sites meant for kids.

    It’s quite the laundry list that DC has signed up to. I very much doubt that he can deliver. And if he can’t, will he lose the mumsnet vote?
    8-)

  36. Lord T-to MIKEN

    I agree.

    “laissez faire” is castigated by the left when in an economic context-but is to be desired when it applies to social matters it seems.

    I swear I heard a Labour spokesperson , yesterday on tv, saying that the proposal to disallow subsidised state house rental for earners over £100k pa was a bad idea. The reason given was that it would stop people trying to earn a bigger salary & thus be anti-aspirational……….plus “it wouldn’t solve the housing problem” !

    It’s a different planet they live on LT-still that’s politics I guess :-)

  37. There’s an interesting time-bomb for the Conservatives in the polling figures. 83% of Conservative voters think the government is handling the economy well. Yet only 9% of them think the state of the economy is good at the moment, compared with 61% bad.

    I will guess the reason is they are happy to blame someone else for the current economic problems. Presumably this can’t carry on indefinitely, so in time either these voters are going to think the economy is going well, or they are going to think the government is handling it badly. Which will it be, and how long will it take to resolve?

  38. @ Amber

    “All DC can do is ask retailers who are ‘friends’ of the Tory Party (e.g. M&S) to show restraint ”

    Yes that’s probably correct-legislation on retailing would be difficult to draft.

    “And about ‘sexy’ magazine covers & ‘sexy’ adverts near schools & ‘sexy’ performances by adult stars like Rhiana & Beyonce being broadcast before 9pm – as if the same performances aren’t viewable at any time on You-Tube etc.”

    No reason not to impose restraint on the media & entertainment industry. Watching YouTube is a parental matter-some parents don’t care what their children wear or watch-but no reason to hamper the efforts of responsible parents.

    ” I very much doubt that he can deliver. And if he can’t, will he lose the mumsnet vote?”

    You may be correct-but I hope he tries-thats all one can ask.

  39. @roger rebel
    Have you ever seen a photo of the Soviet leadership, during and after The Great Patriotic War ? Those who have not been airbrushed out, look like the doorman at the Dorchester, carrying the entire stock of H Samuel Oxford St. on their uniforms. Don’t ever throw the National Socialist party of Germany at me Roge my old dumpling, because the Soviets were a fcucking sight worse. There is no left wing high ground.

  40. @hal
    Your comment makes perfect sense to a Labour supporter who feels that the economic performance of the last government was brilliant. It also makes perfect sense to the same group of people who think, indeed pray that Osborn is a busted flush.

    To others it is just a typically partisan comment.

  41. @ Colin

    You may be correct-but I hope he tries-thats all one can ask.
    ————————————————-
    I agree but sadly(?), trying one’s best is not all that the voters can ask, Colin.

    IMO, You get zero points for trying in politics, sometimes you actually get -‘ve points, for ‘promising’ something then failing to deliver.
    8-)

  42. @ Mike N

    I read the Liberal Conspiracy article which you linked to; it was very interesting – of course I’m biased, I am a bit of an SH fan. One thing that stood out for me:

    “Research reveals that voters haven’t rejected this Red Ed label — but larger numbers have now decided that he’s Odd Ed.”

    If the Tories are hoping to base their election strategy on mercilessly attacking ‘Odd’ Ed, that’ll be great for Labour. The earlier they start & the nastier they are about it, the more it will backfire on them.

    It can be turned on them by:
    1. Showing how intolerant the Tories are of anybody who is even a little bit different; &
    2. Ed (& Justine) simply need to do lots of sofa TV & magazine articles showing they are ‘just like many other families’ & the ‘Odd’ strategy comes unstuck.
    8-)

  43. @ Amber

    “IMO, You get zero points for trying in politics, sometimes you actually get -’ve points, for ‘promising’ something then failing to deliver.

    Maybe-it depends on the context perhaps-and the reason for a failure to deliver.

    If the latter was due to lack of governmental will / ineffectve legislation / incompetent regulation etc -then yes-they would deserve what you suggest.

    If, on the other hand, government clearly tried to implement a popular measure & was thwarted by obstructive vested interest , legal loopholes, etc -then support for such a government might increase-to an extent which gave that government an enhanced mandate to legislate further.

    I think the electorate is reasonably fair & even handed -if somewhat subjective & self interested on certain issues.

  44. @AMBERSTAR
    Really Amber, poor Nick Clegg is “a little bit different”, it has not stopped Labour attempting to pull him limb from limb.

  45. Amber

    “If the Tories are hoping to base their election strategy on mercilessly attacking ‘Odd’ Ed, that’ll be great for Labour.”

    I think you are in danger of “reading across” from TM/ ConHome views to Tory Policy.

    It doesn’t work like that………..not yet anyway ! :-)

  46. lordtory (Yes, I realise I’m not the Roger you’re replying to)

    Don’t ever throw the National Socialist party of Germany at me Roge my old dumpling, because the Soviets were a fcucking sight worse.

    Actually not. It’s pretty much established that Hitler killed more civilians than Stalin. There’s an interesting recent article here:

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/?page=1

    Money quote:

    All in all, the Germans deliberately killed about 11 million noncombatants, a figure that rises to more than 12 million if foreseeable deaths from deportation, hunger, and sentences in concentration camps are included. For the Soviets during the Stalin period, the analogous figures are approximately six million and nine million.

    The whole article is worth reading, as it explains why for many years it was thought Stalin killed more – basically the information was locked behind the Iron Curtain and guesswork based on demography turned out to be wrong.

    I would also hope we could agree that none of us has a horse in this race. Those on the right can no more be accused of sympathy with the crimes of Hitler than those on the left should be with the crimes of Stalin.

  47. @ Roger Mexico
    A lot of apologists on the left for uncle Joe, Roger. Not least Ralph Miliband.

    As for the numbers, Joe was well in to mass slaughter before Hitler ever got started.

  48. @Mike N/Amber M

    I tend to agree with your misgivings about the possibility of legislation to prevent the “sexualisation of children and inappropriate marketing”. Leaving aside this being another depressing example of Cameroonian government by focus group, I think it is a very dangerous area for the state to tread. Firstly, let’s make the important caveats. Child pornography is appalling and all that can be done to limit or eradicate it must be done. Paedophilia and the sexual abuse of children is an abomination and, again, all that can be done to limit or eliminate it should be done. No sane or decent person would say or advocate otherwise, but state intervention into murky and ambivalent areas such as how parents dress their children and what private companies do to market their products is fraught with danger. It’s exactly the sort of nanny-statism that Cameron and his crew berated the last Labour Government for and it’s headline grabbing, media kowtowing politics at it’s worst; unworkable, inappropriate and irrelevant to the real issues such as the widespread global availability of child pornography and child trafficking.

    There’s ample Child Protection legislation to prevent the inappropriate media representation and exploitation of children. Maybe we should start by looking at enforcing it more effectively before coming up with some half-baked and muddled crowd-pleasing piece of unenforceable legislation. There was enough of that in the Queens Speech!!lol

  49. @LordTory
    You do take every opportunity of putting 2 and 2 together and producing 5.

    Just because Hitler was a vegetarian, it doesn’t make vegetarians apologists for Hitler.

1 2 3 5