Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour drops to its lowest level with YouGov since the summ
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour drops to its lowest level with YouGov since the summer of 2010
When on Monday monrning the latest Populus poll came out showing LAB on 36% just a point ahead of the Tories it didn’t attract much attention. Since its big party ID weightings change in February the firm has been showing some of the worst LAB position and this just seemed to follow that pattern.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It might actually be the rate or level to which others drift "back" to the three parties which can win more than a couple of MPs.
Never mind no mention of the EU; their campaign has almost totally avoided any mention of Labour.
Negative campaigning works in a two-party system even (providing the allegation is credible and relevant), because by default the damage done to an opponent can only have one beneficiary, whether directly or indirectly. That's true even when the party or candidate making the attack is adversely affected themselves (going negative isn't liked by the public, even when it's believed).
On the other hand, in a 4+ system, you have to give people positive reasons to vote for you as well as negative reasons not to vote for the others. What are Labour's? Who knows.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10827622/As-Labour-stalls-its-time-to-bring-on-the-new-Balls.html
" Mr Miliband has no stauncher ally than his shadow chancellor, not least because their aims, for now at least, are identical. If Ed B is consolidating his influence, then Ed M can expect to reap the benefit."
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/deciding-next-election-2-east-midlands.html
And whats to stop additional losses in the future too?
That said, it would be extremely funny to those of us on the centre-right who've watched Labour complacently stroll towards victory on the assumption of a united left and divided right, if on the last lap of the race, Labour's own vote was eaten into significantly by UKIP while a decent proportion of Con-Ukip switchers returned on the back of an improving economy and things like gay marriage receding in those voters' memories.
Also more Labour 2010 VI appears to be defecting to UKIP.
Yesterday's poll on Sind showed little significant change.
Breaking: Sony expects to post a loss of $489 million for the current fiscal year. http://wsj.com
Thats embarrassing, I thought Sony was on the crest of a wave.
The economy is growing, if not booming. Opposition has less wind in its sail.
The Labour message is yet to cohere into a program for govt, feels very "oppositiony", but UKIP are a more potent protest vote.
The labour message would go down very, very well in CLP meetings. That's quite a narrow appeal.
EdM struggles to convince many outside.
So Labour are squeezed.
I am glad others are confirming what I have thought for months, that on the ground the Tories are actually very active in very many places and not moribund as some have been suggesting for several years. The disconnect which has failed to register is that the Tories now have a fairly decent sized body of supporters who will help out but don't choose to pay a membership fee, often because it is too high. I mentioned some time ago that in Scotland when Ruth Davidson launched the helpers/friends campaign it resulted in hundreds of new volunteers and roughly £250k in donations. If this is being replicated in England, some Labour MPs in marginal seats better start sweating, never mind Tories in marginals. We can (almost) all hope for EBXMP next year.
Richard Calhoun @richardcalhoun 5m
A very bad day for Britain’s reputation as an open economy http://www.cityam.com/article/1400029580/very-bad-day-britain-s-reputation-open-economy …
Labour have just not campaigned for the Euros at all. As the thread points out they have nothing of interest to say on the matter. Their PEB was all about class politics and being juvenile. Are they paying the price? Like the Newark story yesterday there has to be a suspicion that Labour are on their uppers with very little campaigning funds available.
The overall picture for Labour suggests flat or very gently declining contributions but a quick skim of the infomation available on the Electoral Commission's website does not disclose any particular crisis: http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/political-parties-campaigning-and-donations/political-parties-annual-accounts/2012#Lab
In fact their net asset situation, although still in deficit, is better than it was as they use taxpayers money (short money) to pay down their debt. It may be that the uncertainty on their banking arrangements is weighing down on them as they switch from the Co Op to their new Union bankers.
I would be interested to learn if this picture of invisibility is reflected elsewhere. The euros are our least important elections but in the year before the GE ignoring the opportunity to show strength seems daft.
That is almost certainly true - and has horrible implications for Labour at the GE. It's not the Euro elections where Labour has no message. Labour has no message at all. There's some infantile class war and a bit of idiotically un-thought-through price control communism. But what is Labour's offer to the electorate? What is Labour for? I invite any lefty from Miliband himself via any of his useful idiots in the media to the PB lefty commentariat to just set it out. Go on tell us. This can't be avoided in the run up to May next year.
But nobody knows. Least of all Ed Miliband. And therein lies the problem.
So the key to number 10 remains UKIP as it was before. Now with three questions:
1. Can the Tories win back defectors. "Vote Farage get Milliband" was ineffectual before, you would imagine even less so now that "Labour is doomed" allegedly
2. Can Labour win back defectors. Be interesting so see how the polls behave after the Euros when that elections stops influencing Westminster VI. Could be a trend, could be a blip
3. Can UKIP keep taking even more votes. For a party so many people hate and a leader so apparently awful, they seem rather effective.
= the story.
Edit: Not just me, then, who noticed a marked and nasty angle to the latest UKIP election literature.
But what he lacks is any sort of coherant political philosophy.
It makes you wonder what they teach on that PPE course.
This is partly because many of them despise the wwc and aren't interested in understanding them.
The AV referendum when the 'progressive majority' was shown to exist only in eastern inner London and a few university towns should have been a wake up call to them.
But they didn't want to wake up.
And what both sides miss is the petty bigotry (not necessarily racism) that so many people have. Race, region, wealth, politics, faith - we all find things in others we dislike and say it openly. Yet when it comes to voters the mainstream parties don't want their voters to be bigots because its their people. So we get Brown on Gilliam Duffy, Cameron on UKIP racists, and both sides together on anyone in UKIP who ever said anything.
Farage has managed to tap into this on a cross political scale that makes Cameron and Clegg and Milliband weep. Ands that's why they all hate him. Because he's a better politician than they are.
Populism is not the only measure of political worth.
David Cameron is PM. Ed might be. Nigel never will be.
Will they now be jolted from their complacency?
@georgeeaton: John Curtice on latest Scotland polls: "the progress made by the Yes side during the winter has not continued apace" http://t.co/PYEz6VuehW
David Jones @DavidJo52951945 3m
Anti UKIP fascists now circulating Nigel Farage's home address- UKIP have the restraint not to retaliate http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/05/13/ukip-mep-gerard-batten-home-attacked …
Want to know why the Tory VI isn't improving and why only 1 in 8 feel any effects of economic recovery? Go ask the grocers.
So there are resource implications for this new promise. Quite big one's actually. But there is no money. So they promise a really token amount of £10K per GP practice. Which gets about 1 additional GP session a week.
Our MSM are not very good at maths but even they pick up very quickly that there is a disparity here. The government helpfully produce a figure of £3bn. Probably off the back of a fag packet but who cares, it is already more credible than Labour's costings. So the idea gets bogged down in the fact there is no money and Labour are willing to make daft promises they cannot keep.
This was another throw away Labour headline initiative that has already been forgotten by most if they noticed it in the first place but how does a party whose main function is to find additional ways of spending on the needy in our society cope with seeking election to a government that will have to cut spending significantly? I don't think they are even close to finding an answer. And people are starting to notice.
Their problem is the voters don't see it as coherent. With good reason. The promise of "Government by fortune cookie" has been shown up as worthless.
The Labour campaign in 2015 is shaping up to be a car crash. Heh!
No wonder UKIP are doing well. Previously the "I'm angry I need a protest vote who promise the moon on a stick and won't win" was the LibDems. Since their buyout by the Tories the protest voters gave been stuck, but happily here comes UKIP to the rescue. Not only are they a safe protest vote they also offer someone to blame for causing all your troubles.
A stinker, this one.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnjPb12IIAANh9w.png:large
Whoever thought a breakfast of kippers would leave such a bad taste in one's mouth?
Sign of a good politician?
I wouldn't be surprised if Ipsos Mori showed a tie or 1% Tory lead. Last month's 6% Labour lead was well out of line.
And yesterday there was YouGov polling on the Nigerian girls showing pretty clear support for the use of troops to help rescue them.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/05/13/send-troops-if-nigeria-asks-them-say-public/
Labour 2010 VI:(all monthly averages)
Lab for Lab: Jan: 85.4; May (td): 81.9
Lab for UKIP: Jan: 5.0; May: 7.3
Lab for Cons: Jan 4.5; May: 5.3
LibDems 2010:VI
LD for Lab: Jan: 34.2: May: 31.2
LD for UKIP: Jan: 9.5: May: 11.9
LD for Green: Jan: 5.4; May: 7.1
LD for Cons: Jan 12.1; May: 12.9
LD for LD: Jan: 35.3; May: 33.4
All small movements which add up.
Cons have been quite steady.
I maintain he is a demagogue, playing to the lowest common denominator. It often looks superficially successful but such people are monstrously dangerous.
UKIP are a party which wants us to leave the EU, information such as that helps their cause. So why not?
When people fear immigration, what they really fear is globalisation. Loss of manufacturing, wages and real jobs. Globalisation. Lack of real choice in the market. Globalisation. Corporations without any local roots or responsibilities. Globalisation. Too big to fail and bankrupt Government. Globalisation.
Nobody doubts globalisation has brought tremendous benefits, but the degree to which these benefits are being shared is increasingly narrow.
This is the discontent into which Farage is tapping so successfully. The irony is that he himself has little to say about it. Instead pointing at the EU as a useful squirrel. When Labour have something meaningful to say about globalisation they will have found their niche again, but at the moment they look lost.
Here is a twitpic of the 'likes' which appear on the Facebook page of Bill Etherington, UKIP's prospective MEP for the West Midlands Region.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BniMAWfCQAArHDy.jpg:large
Sean, UKIP are both sinned against and sinning. Farage rightly complains about bricks being thrown through his MEP's windows but he should also be insisting that his candidates immediately and without hesitation disassociate themselves from the true loony right.
Tell us Avery do Conservative MPs view only Arabs as 'ragheads' or is it Muslims generally ?
For the Euros though this is prime Labour GOTV territory, East Midlands is a marginal seat - the sort that could decide who wins on seats on the night. The fact I've had no campaign literature is telling... May receive one soon, I don't know - but none so far
Con, UKIP, BNP, AIFE all mailed me so far.
They have gone from a film that dare not show the leader to a film exclusively about the NHS that doesn't seem to feature the Shadow Health Secretary, Andy "Stafford" Burnham
Do you think perhaps someone is once again trying to smear Bill? You perhaps? Not so surprising that he is a particular target given that he draws a very large amount of his support in Wolverhampton from the various ethnic minority groups in the area.
Maybe in future you should check your facts before posting such smears, at least when they can be so easily checked.
Mr. Monksfield, Labour have a few issues knocking globalisation.
1) It'll make their decision to let immigrants flood the country look even more stupid than it actually was, and is utterly contrary to Labour policy since about 1997 (maybe earlier).
2) It's to a certain extent meaningless without leaving the EU, as we cannot stop other EU member state citizens from coming here otherwise.
3) It could lose Labour its support from immigrant groups (this isn't a straightforward immigrant = pro-Labour situation but they probably do have more support than other parties from immigrants generally).
4) There's a risk it'll add to the argument Labour are either anti-business or just ignorant about the economy. This is a relatively minor risk, as this already seems to be the case.
On Farage: the behaviour towards him is despicable, as it was when he was abused (although not with bricks) when he visited Scotland.
This is not the case here. It is a snippet from a campaigning leaflet designed to attract support from the prejudiced.
What is really objectionable though is the shielded attack on the middle european Romani (generally referred to as "gypsies") rather than Romanian nationals. This smacks more of the 1930s than the twenty first century.
The real test of published 'facts' such as these is what is the intent of the author? Is it to solve a problem positively or to incite a negative reaction from readers?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27402902
Having one or two populist policies is fine, people love money off bingo and booze (as Grant Shapps kindly pointed out), but having a whole election platform built on them just smacks of incompetence. Labour have no answer to the economic issues of the day other than this stupid cost of living wheeze which has completely run out of steam.
"Miliband said: “Polls go up and down. I've seen that over three and a half years in this job.” Ruling out a change of strategy, he argued that he was “more personally competent” than Mr Cameron. " Independent 14/05/14
You can set your watch by you. When polling is good for the Tories, you declare victory. When it's good for Labour you are nowhere to be found. It's quite common among many.
I am very shaken by the recent polling. But there will be some very red faces on here if Labour stretches out a lead again. As Antifrank said yesterday it is bordering on the hysterical at times.
Perversely I think we will see a bouncelet back to Labour when voters turn away from elections over the summer perhaps with crossover polls springing up from time to time.
However for Labour this dress rehearsal for the general election has seen the fat lady in good voice and warming up nicely for the main event next year.
Tick tock .. tick tock ....
Shocker.
Your point about globalisation is entirely true. And we can't uninvent the internet or jet planes or global markets or supply chains or a generally much deeper level of interaction between regions of the world.
So...over time there will be pressure for living standards everywhere to harmonise (or at least towards as much harmony as unequal cultures of productivity, adaptability and innovation will permit).
What should politicians anywhere do to respond? COMPETE! Every nation needs its USP and its competitve advantage and should pursue them relentlessly. In the developed world we must stay powerful at the 'top end' - we have no future competing with Vietnam on costs for clothing manufacture! We need a smart, well educated, entrepreneurial, innovative, competitve approach.
I think Dave absolutely gets it. The coalition is driving to reform education, cut the state, compete on tax rates, promote business, etc, etc. Dave talks alot about the 'Global Race' (maybe the expression is ugly but the underlying understanding is spot on).
France, on the other hand, is almost a poster-boy for the 'head in the sand' approach to hard realities. It's just not possible to retreat into protectionism. If you choose not to compete - well the world will compete without you and you'll lose. They're f*&^%ed.
And where is Miliband on this? Intervention, cost controls, renationalisation, welfarism, unions, blah blah blah. Precisely at the wrong end of the decision spectrum.
Sun Zi said in The Art of War: Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. What we're hearing From Labour these days is the noise before defeat (if not for themselves then for our country).
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/475767/Bank-warns-cash-could-flood-out-of-Scotland-after-Yes-vote
A YES vote could trigger a rush by savers and investors to get their money out of the country.
This is despicable behaviour by vile idiots.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnlKZyzIgAAiowx.jpg:large
Do not listen to the siren calls of the so-called polls! These misleading vultures of capitalism are merely parroting the foul utterances of the bourgeois decadent class! A demographically representative and statistically significant numerical assessment of voter intentions is no match for the intellectual self-confidence of Comrade Miliband!
Already the Comrade of Competence has put together a dazzling array of innovative, brilliant policies, certain to deliver ultimate victory not only in 2015, but all subsequent elections! Indeed, Comrade Miliband's ongoing triumphs are so certain that the People's Democratic Committee has called on him to abolish elections after his victory in 2015 to avoid unnecessary disruption and silence the capitalist pigdogs and foreign interlopers who would trouble the prosperity and happiness of Britain.
Totally agree with you - what makes it harder is that the UK has overpaid itself for decades whilst at the same time losing both capacity and capability (skill sets) and has to reverse some 40 years of bad educational theory and practice.
Too many politicians look to the past and not what is needed for the next 20-30 years and build a plan to achieve the required objectives.
In the meantime, what are we going to do with the thousands of uneducated/undereducated and unemployable.