Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s Falkirk problems seem to be going over many voters
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s Falkirk problems seem to be going over many voters` heads
On the specific issue of Ed Miliband’s handling of Falkirk 19‰ say he is doing well while 36% say badly. The biggest grouping, are, however, the don’t knows at 45%.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Nothing rains on your parade like a poll
YouGov
And do you think the events in Falkirk have or have not damaged the Labour party?
Damaged: 39
Not damaged: 23
DK: 37
Some people have suggested that the law should be changed so that a union can only go on strike if over 50% of its members back the strike, rather than 50% of those voting. Would you support or oppose this change?
Support: 55
Oppose: 21
Would you support or oppose a ban on trade unions involved in a dispute protesting outside the private homes of company directors?
Support:54
Oppose: 24
More disturbing to me is the IDS one linked to on the last thread and written by Nick Cohen. His treatment of that 24 year old girl who just wanted to be a librarian is Horrible and he's a government minister. What's more he was a Tory leader so he could have become PM. The thought makes me shiver
YouGov
The Niqab is a veil used to cover the face except the eyes, worn by some Muslim women so they have can dress modestly in front of men who are not their close relatives. Would you support or oppose a ban on wearing the niqab in Britain?
Support:63
Oppose:24
NB: LDs are only party to oppose a ban
Current laws allow the government to impose "Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures" (Tpims) on people who they suspect pose a serious terrorist threat, but who they do not have evidence to prosecute. Tpims can restrict where suspects are allowed to go, require electronic tagging and a curfew and restrict internet and phone use. They do not require a trial and there are only limited rights of appeal. Do you think the government should or should not have these powers?
Should:69
Should not:16
Until 2011 the government cound impose "control orders" on terrorist suspects. These were similar to the "Tpims" that replaced them, but had more extensive powers, including th ability to relocate suspects to a different part of the country, and greater powers to ban internet
or phone use and who suspects could communicate with.
Do you believe the government should reintroduce control orders?
Should: 66
Should not: 17
Thinking about protecting Britain's national security and protecting the human rights of individual people who may be suspected of terrorist offences, which of the following best reflects your view?
Too much consideration is paid to the human rights of terrorist suspects, and not enough to ensuring national security: 68%
It's almost as if the media want to personalise any scandals, to have a face as a target, rather than a faceless organisation.
At the moment this scandal is split between the Labour party and Unite. Although McCluskey is in charge of Unite, I'm not sure that there's anything directly linking him with what happened, and therefore he is somewhat insulated. The same is true for Miliband.
That *may* change if more evidence comes out that points directly towards individuals (e.g. Watson, Miliband, McCluskey), if there is any such evidence.
The fear for Labour must be that Falkirk will become a "dripping tap". It will either fail to go away and keep plugging away or it will lead to questions about other constituencies where there are suggestions UNITE had more than a fair hand in the selection of the Labour candidate and it begins to sap the enthusiasm of party activists, particularly if good local candidates are beaten by Labour luvvies, parachuted in by Ed and Len's chums.
26 has; 43 has not; 30 DK
I remember when Blair wanted to bring in draconian anti terror laws like 90 day detention and the Tories quite rightly led a very effective opposition on civil liberties grounds.
Reading your poll it seems like a long time ago. So one seems to care less about civil liberties anymore. A majority even want to tell women what they have to wear.
How closely are you following Falkirk
Scotland (OA)
Closely: 43 (26)
Not Closely: 24 (27)
Not at all/DK: 24 (48)
Miliband handled issue - net well: -28 (-18)
Damaged Labour Party - net: +27 (+16)
Unite undermine enquiry - net: +40 (+29)
Labour should hold another enquiry - net : +20 (+12)
It's not like the standing of the largest pro-UK political party in Scotland is of any import over the next 10 months is it?
Whereas An MP spending public money warming up his horses has bite.
For most non-anoraks I suspect it boils down to: argument over candidate selection in safe Labour seat. That's if they have noticed the story at all.
To restore lost trust, the BBC needs a dose of austerity, argues Martin Bell as he writes about "The Ministry of Truth".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10437720/A-sense-of-entitlement-at-the-top-has-damaged-the-BBC.html
Drip, drip, drip.....
YouGov down to 5% (yeah, it's MoE 5-8%), but 18 months to go.
Drip, drip, drip.
Many people who see the headlines, such as they are, think, so what? The unions trying to get their men as candidates. Is that meant to be news?
Despite all the guff about voting for the MP, people generally vote for the party. And the candidate tends to come from a select few anyway, often chosen by the party. That's why people vote for posh fops when they represent Labour, but complain when the same sort of people represent the Tories
I'd take the exact opposite view. Yes, 3/4 are disinterested, but most people are disinterested in most aspects of politics. Having a quarter of people reportedly closely following a story that could be hugely damaging to Labour is significant.
Also, the little graph is excellent. I had a furkle, and it's interesting that the Lib Dems are following this least, with Labour and UKIP most intrigued. Of course, it depends what sort of 'voter' these are, as a voter can be anyone from a die-hard activist to a floating voter.
"Some of us are concerned about the fate of the UK...."
No need to get on your high horse...........
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/millionaire-conservative-mp-nadhim-zahawi-2715379
UKIP (OA)
In past month have you seen a bicycle go through a red light:
Net yes: +23 (+1)
Generally, how common is it for cyclists to go through red lights:
Net common: +66 (+38)
Have you cycled through a red light (small base)
Net no: +96 (+62)
Should cyclists who go thru red be prosecuted:
Net yes: +84 (+66)
What are the chances of cyclists going through red lights just to annoy UKIP supporters?
And how can the cyclists tell?
Does it actually matter who Labour (or Unite) choose?
When Shaun Woodward left Witney to become a Labour MP in St Helens, the red majority there was still large. He's standing down in 2015, but Jimmy Saville would get in with a red rosette.
Jeremy Corbyn or Frank Field? Most vote for the rosette - they're generally only voting fodder anyway.
OA (Lab VIA)
Strike only if 50% of members vote or 50% of those taking part?
Members: 55 (45)
Taking part: 21 (35)
Union "Leverage" (demo outside director homes) - net:
Acceptable: -46 (-21)
Should be banned: +30 (-)
@Roger - no high HORSE, just bemusement at the apparent indifference and complacency in London!
I agree and then it'll be a case of shutting the farmyard gate after the HORSE has bolted
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/millionaire-conservative-mp-nadhim-zahawi-2715379
Following closely: Con 37/Lab 26/LD19/UKIP32/ but all=26
Let's say that the Con and the LD more or less even out to make 26 the average between just those too (it will be higher as there are more Con voters and the average of 37+19 is 28 anyway). That means that the "others" must be sufficiently disinterested to outweigh UKIP - i.e. assuming equal numbers of UKIP vs others (again roughly) they would need to be on just 20%. Based on the reaction of our Nat friends, presumably the SNP supporters have been following more closely than average?
Is there something going on with the don't knows, for instance?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/is-it-ok-to-kill-cyclists.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
I can't remember a post from you to me where you haven't referred to me as stupid and dishonest.
Do you think I'm being paranoid?
I suppose there could be some inbuilt bias (like that poll a year or so ago 'do you disapprove of this made-up scandal').
I don't think that it will have much direct impact on voting behaviour though, because I doubt it has much salience. Where it could have an impact is *if* people begin to reassociate (subliminally) bad behaviour by the unions and Labour. But you'd need more examples, more high profile situations, and - forgot who said it - personalisation in a way that you don't have at the moment
(I'll get my coat)
"Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:"
That's funny! When I did my driving test the examiner asked 'under what circumstances is it OK to hit a pedestrian'?
I foolishly gave him a list and failed
How about "If you were previously not planning to vote, would this incident (and others like it) change your mind"?
Independence is not about burning Scotland's boats
- Unionist factions are engaged in a race to the bottom of the barrel for fresh ways to scare Scotland off independence http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats
Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
" You've managed it again! I ask if you're thick OR dishonest, and you reply that I call you stupid AND dishonest. Are you twisting my words or misunderstanding them? "
You're right. I must be paranoid.
I passed my test despite an 'atrocious' corner reverse manoeuvre (too fast) because at one point the car in front of me knocked a motorcyclist off his bike and I did a spectacular swerve/brake combo to avoid him. The examiner squealed like a stuck pig.
Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.
Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?
I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home
However, the biggest effect of the Falkirk/Grangemouth/Unite scandal is not on overall Westminster VI, it is on local VI and on internal SLab factionalism.
Believe you me, SLab is undergoing a vicious civil war. Everybody is involved, from Darling, Murphy, Alexander, Lamont and Sarwar downwards. We are only getting occasional tasters in the mainstream media, but there have been heavy casualties behind the scenes.
And the ordinary SLab membership and ordinary trade unionists are sick to the back teeth of the mismanagement and petty corruption.
That is the true legacy of Falkirk. It will not affect voting intention in Surrey or Salford one jot, but it is tearing the once all-conquering Scottish Labour Party apart at the seams, from the inside.
My advice is just to get the popcorn out, put your feet up, and enjoy a fine bloodsport being played out. Console yourself with the fact that none of the victims are innocent.
Sweden used to have one of the most equitable and high performing education systems in the OECD. This is no longer the case. Standards are falling and the whole system is perceived as chaotic and out of control. One of the biggest free school companies JB Education went bankrupt this spring and left parents stranded. Anger is mounting against greedy private equity groups making easy money off Swedish children. Recent revelations by the media also showed how these for profit schools turn away children with special needs.'
http://www.policy-network.net/pno_detail.aspx?ID=4514&title=The-spell-cast-by-Swedens-Conservatives-is-breaking
Some may be following this and hearing about how close the combined worthy nations of the World and the Iranians were to some kind of deal. Then, suddenly, it needed more talks.
For this delay apparently the world has the French to thank. Seeing it as too weak and nowhere near comprehensive enough, they reportedly threw the proposal out leaving the US with the possibility that one major ally would disown the whole show before it got signed.
Stories have it that the US Secretary of State John Kerry didn't much like the deal either for the same reasons but was told by his boss to carry on.
Its possibly essential. As things stand, the Israelis are willing to bomb, the Saudis are willing to go nuclear (though the reports about a bunch of nukes sitting in Pakistan awaiting delivery are not quite what they seem) and the Iranians already have a crude nuclear weapons capability that isn't too far short of being refined & expanded with the proposed deal leaving enough in place for it to carry on.
Syria: There are persistent rumours that The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, a comparative late comer to events and one of the most radical Jihadist outfits fighting in Syria are at some level co-operating with Assad's forces. This is one reason why the Al Qaeda leader Al Zawahiri has stated that it will be dissolved, though he has no power to do so. It may explain why some serious radical fighters in Syrian prisons were mysteriously released.
ISIS have the reputation of spending more time fighting against other insurgents over territory than fighting Assad's forces.
Do you believe that banning a specific garment is telling women what they have to wear, or not?
The better Together mob have no story to tell other than negativity.
Other than when the London news features a Scottish item we rarely see in Scotland the same news items headlining because so much of what happens in the daily lives of Scots is determined by Eck and chums at Holyrood not by Dave, Nick and chums at Westminster.
Issues like Falkirk may have basically slipped off the radar in Englandshire but this week we had an entire Newsnight Scotland on Falkirk. Grangemouth was THE issue in Scotland over the past month.
The question for political anoraks like the PB community is how long will such issues remain in the minds of the typical Scottish voter (if it ever entered their minds in the first place) and what effect, if any will it have?
My tuppence worth is I doubt it will have registered much with the typical Scottish punter who is far more interested in some talentless bimbo getting her kit off to win the X Factor or such like. However among those interested in politics, it will entrench their views and as I said earlier, it may cause some internal dissent among the activists Labour needs to plod up and down the streets at election time.
Scottish Labour is currently engaged in various succession wars due to the end of the Brown 30-year reign of terror which totally dominated Scottish politics. Old tensions and rivalries are appearing the length and breadth of Scotland.
I still believe the London chatterati could waken up on the 20th September 2014 and find that on conclusion of the count, the Scots didn't do what they were told was good for them and had voted Yes two days earlier. I cannot forget Tony Blair was assured by all the experts that the Holyrood voting system they had stitched us up with could not ever produce a majority government. Eck took only 4 attempts to prove them wrong.
But the sort of independent Scotland on offer seems to be one with the same monarchy, same currency, and possibly the same navy. It doesn't sound much like independence to me, but if that is the model then building frigates there may be reasonable.
http://goo.gl/FwWPSL
Mr. Y0kel, as ever, a very interesting post on matters Middle Eastern
Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.
Mr. G (2), didn't bilateral trade with Ireland significantly decline after it became (largely) independent? I wonder if the same occurred with the Czech Republic and Slovakia when they had the velvet divorce.
Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.
"These three wretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014."
It's a very deliberate policy of the unionists to counteract the 'Braveheart' tendency of the separatists to show that in fact they're completely depenent on the union. Why would you expect them to do anything else? It's exactly the counter to the sales ploy of the separatists and any other strategy wouldn't make sense
If it was grim for LAB north of the border then you'd think that it would show up from the same group of people.
This is, of course, the point I am making.
Also who is to say that Poland would be cheaper?
When does that show up in the polling?
I have a certain sympathy.
I believe the yards in Scotland should not be sitting with a begging bowl waiting on Westminster making a decision.
Portsmouth still has 12000 jobs in other areas, whereas Govan is now down to just over 2000 and it is a one trick pony outfit waiting on major warships.
They are dying a slow death in any case , workforce halved in recent years and what they need to do is diversify. In Norway they build between 100 and 200 ships in 42 shipyards.
Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland .
If Scotland votes "Yes", and please do not slam the door when you leave, then BAe Systems will become a foreign supplier (of warships) under EU law. At that point they compete with the Europeans (especially the Poles and Romanians) and our friends in South Korea. Scottish warship-building will die without the life-blood of England's taxes....
Mr. G, assuming No wins then it is true to say Westminster has killed (actually) shipbuilding in England.
I've long been an advocate of greater defence spending, but the idea the evil English have deliberately done down Scottish industry by reducing ship-building is entirely wrong.
No the stupidity of that will hopefully be gone and they will diversify rather than die following the crap Westminster strategy. These yards will shut in the short term if we do not get independence, it has been a lingering death so far and they are down to only a couple of thousand workers sitting waiting on Westminster deciding if they will build a few more ships..
Scotland has a chance to get out of the dead hand of Westminster, rest of England is not so lucky.
"Great piece from Nick Cohen on IDS"
Isn't it. The story of the 24 year old librarian and his treatment of her is really sickening.
What a C***!
From 346 : The directive contains an important exclusion in that cooperative programmes with an R&D phase
conducted by at least two member states are excluded from the directive
It is interesting that despite high costs Norway has a shipbuilding industry, it seems to have developed specialist expertise in specific sectors. Scottish yards have failed to do the same.
No the stupidity of that will hopefully be gone and they will diversify rather than die following the crap Westminster strategy. These yards will shut in the short term if we do not get independence, it has been a lingering death so far and they are down to only a couple of thousand workers sitting waiting on Westminster deciding if they will build a few more ships..
Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.
No the stupidity of that will hopefully be gone and they will diversify rather than die following the crap Westminster strategy. These yards will shut in the short term if we do not get independence, it has been a lingering death so far and they are down to only a couple of thousand workers sitting waiting on Westminster deciding if they will build a few more ships..
No I certainly do not. I believe that the countries will co-operate on many things after independence and one of those will be building ships on the Clyde. However they still need to diversify and they will be required to build ships for any Scottish navy.
Carmichael is a talentless buffoon , only interested in personal gain, a disgrace of a politician but a normal Lib Dem, no principles, no morals and would sell their granny for personal aggrandisement.
"BRITISH AMONGST LEAST GENEROUS ON OVERSEAS AID"
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/
"As Duncan Smith realised he was losing the case, he went on the BBC to denounce Cait Reilly, one of the claimants who was challenging him in court. Despite receiving benefits, the 24-year old had refused to work for nothing in Poundland, he claimed. She was part of "a group of people out there who think they are too good for this kind of stuff". A "job snob", in other words; a scrounger, who was not prepared to get off her backside and put in the hours necessary to secure remunerative employment.
If he had checked his facts, a task that seems beyond him, Duncan Smith would have discovered that Ms Reilly had been a volunteer at a Birmingham museum. She worked there gratis because she hoped one day to be taken on by a museum or gallery. Reilly objected to Duncan Smith's minions taking her out of the museum and sending her to Poundland instead because they were stopping her fulfilling her ambition for no reason at all."
Scope for some losses?
Latest Betfair prices:
Yes 5.7
No 1.18
Madness. Complete madness.