Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Opinium found more CON voters than LAB ones believing that
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Opinium found more CON voters than LAB ones believing that their party will come out on top at GE2015
As we’ve go into the last day of conference season 2013 one thing’s for sure, the political world does look different from before the Lib Dems gathered in Glasgow earlier in the month.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/other-politics/us-politics-specials?ev_oc_grp_ids=1315341
An odd choice of spokesman to come out and defend Ed, from the nasty Mail.
Ali ‘45 minute’ Campbell, a man who lied, smeared and bullied on an industrial scale taking the moral high ground, whatever next.
31/41/8/12
Of course, both sides are most likely to think their own party will win. But what is clear is that Labour’s lead in expectations to win was down to a high degree of pessimism amongst Tory ranks. In March, only 60% of Conservative voters thought their party would win next time round, compared to 82% of Labour supporters who thought their side would win.
Although all voters have reacted to the polls, Labour voters are still pretty clear that they think they’re on course to win (75%). The movement appears to be down to the dissipation of defeatism from many Conservative voters. Now 79% of Tory voters think they’ll be on the winning side in 2015 – up almost 20 points since March. Conservative voters now appear more confident of victory than Labour voters do. http://news.opinium.co.uk/survey-results/tories-regain-their-confidence
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
The piece in the Guardian was very interesting here - http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/01/daily-mail-journalist-ralph-miliband?CMP=twt_gu
"While we respect Mr Miliband's right to defend his father – and he has done so in the Daily Mail today – it is worth stressing that Ralph Miliband wasn't an ordinary private individual but a prominent academic and author who devoted his life to promoting a Marxist dogma which caused so much misery in the world. He hated such British institutions as the Queen, the church and the army, and wanted a workers' revolution. Our readers have a right to know that."
Levy, a former Daily Express reporter, is a long-serving Daily Mail feature writer who specialises in long articles about characters with a colourful – and often controversial – history.
"He is like a human literary sewing machine," said one former colleague, who described Levy's skill as stitching together facts – usually from old newspaper cuttings – into a fresh 1,000-word story. "He is his master's voice and he's good at it."
The significant thing may not be the party polling, though, but what is happening to the EdM polling. If that is sustained then I imagine Labour will be sending champagne and roses to Mr Dacre and his team.
Early days yet, but it could be that the British voting public do not buy the idea that a slight and temporary extension of price controls into energy (from, for example, transport and water) and a slight extension of the existing compulsory purchase regime is not actually the full-scale Marxism the more hysterical members of the right here and elsewhere have claimed.
About 14 million people were killed in the civil war that followed the revolution, five million of them in a famine triggered by the insane economic policies of the Bolshevik government. A deliberate famine, designed to force peasants into collective farms, resulted in a further seven million deaths between 1928 and 1932.
Historians have compared conditions in some camps with those that Allied troops met in Hitler’s Belsen concentration camp, with starving people lying down waiting to die. Many survivors resorted to cannibalism. Such a system — whose goal was ‘social justice’ — relied on any number of Western apologists to deny what others had witnessed first-hand.
Many of these were British academics, intellectuals and journalists. Among them were the founders of the London School of Economics, Sidney and Beatrice Webb. They merely said of Stalin’s terror famine: ‘Strong must have been the faith and resolute the will of the men who, in the interest of what seemed to them the public good, could take so momentous a decision...’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2440732/Ed-Milibands-father-Ralph-MICHAEL-BURLEIGH-Stalins-gulags-Left-wing-British-apologists.html#ixzz2gXctA1lq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Much more coherent than all the stuff about fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
Those who find their values abhorrent are in a majority and have been for several years now and possibly explains why the Conservatives who are closely associated with those values can never break through the glass ceiling.
It is often described as the 'centre ground' but it's values aren't left and right. I suspect it's also why Glegg made such a mistake. He wasn't just pragmatically propping up a Tory government he was lining up behind the values of Paul Dacre and he lost half his party.
"Although it must be stressed that Ralph Miliband never agreed with Hobsbawm over the latter’s refusal to condemn Stalinism’s 30 million dead, or the Soviet invasion of Hungary".
Well, indeed. Miliband Senior explicitly rejected Soviet communism and celebrated its downfall.
There is a parallel between the apologists for Stalins terror and the apologists for regimes in the contemporary world that systematically oppress women, homosexuals and minority groups. Often those apologists are from the left, such as Galloway and Livingstone with their support of Iran.
The Cold war is over, but there is still a substantial body of people in Britain who share contempt for the liberal social values that protect them.
Miliband's best response to The Mail might have been publish and be damned.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16539424
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/05/david-cameron-gulf-arms-trade_n_2075598.html
The truth of course is that the most fruitful line of attack on little Ed's price freeze is the one that the public already leans towards. That you can't trust politicians promises and pledges on electoral bribes. Hardly a surprise Cammie doesn't want to focus on that since he is also in the business of jam tomorrow promises. As we shall see today. (assuming anyone notices)
Nor is it any surprise that Cameron had to give Dacre a friendly slap and stick up for Ed after the idiots stuck inside Dacre's arse were in full throated shrieking support of Dacre's hilariously inept rerun of 'Clegg is a Nazi' style stupidity and smearing against little Ed's dad.
Clegg you may remember went on from Dacre's 'devastating' attack to form the government and keep Cameron and the tories in power all this time. So that was a success at least.
LOL
The reaction to the Daily Mail's attack on Ralph Miliband tells us how remote the Cold War has become in British politics. Nearly 25 years have passed since Mikhail Gorbachev threw in the towel and gave up on the USSR's dreams of Soviet world domination. The fall of the Berlin Wall marked the end of superpower confrontation and the threat of nuclear conflagration. It also marked the beginning of what has become a form of social and political amnesia. Until that point the struggle between freedom and communism defined the world my generation grew up in. Our view was shaped by a deadly struggle to see off the threat of red tyranny.
Before 1989 the divide between the good guys and bad guys was clear, because the bad guys were out to do us in. At its most extreme, the Cold War was about fear, about nuclear brinkmanship, fallout shelters, cruise missiles, five minutes to midnight and The Day After. And the Cold War filtered through to everyday politics. Labour wanted unilateral disarmament, and some of its members were all too willing to excuse communism and play the role of useful idiot for the tyrants of Moscow.
By the time Labour came to power in 1997, the Cold War was already fading from memory and no one was interested in whether a Cabinet minister had thought it acceptable years before to take Communist money for a jolly to Cuba, or had dabbled with political groups whose directing strands could be followed to the other side of the Iron Curtain.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100239056/whether-he-hated-britain-or-not-ralph-miliband-was-one-of-the-cold-wars-bad-guys/
Fotr the last year you've been banging on about how blank canvas Miliband could be rebranded as Super Ed. And yet nobody in our world beating advertising industries could do it.
Today looking at team Red comments he has been rebranded. And by the Daily Mail ! The Mail has done what you could not! Call yourself an ad man ?
Pah you couldn't write copy for Gerald Ratner.
I have no sympathy for the Mail position on this but that is a disgrace.
But Tim, you're not going to defend a position that Ralph Milliband wasn't an unmitigated shit?
You know enough not to be caught out doing that, right?
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2008/05/miliband-pre-et.html
It was wrong to overthrow Idi Amin, because ideologically it offended me.
Do you disagree?
@DrSpyn. Interestingly one of Miliband's problems has been appearing insubstantial. Hailing his father as a great and influential left wing intellectual who influenced several generations of politicians is going to do him no harm at all.
Ralph Miliband seems to express the view that states should be allowed to do as they please within their own borders. This is a debate highly relevant today, and in particular to Ed Milibands position over Syria. The communists are history, but the issue is eternal.
We should not be afraid to stand up for western secular democratic values in a world where many regimes are socially backward and oppressive. How this should be applied is the question, and I prefer soft power to.military power when possible.
The only significant increase is "in touch with the concerns of ordinary people 25 (+6) while the other changes are within MOE.
Is the argument that "ordinary people are worried about their fathers being monstered in the Mail"?
Or might it be the energy price freeze?
"Pah you couldn't write copy for Gerald Ratner."
How about
'At 60 MPH all you can hear is the ticking of the clock'?
(apologies to David Ogilvy)
Persil intends to wash whiter.......
@inglesi
Times, telegraph and guardian all run with EXACTLY the same Cameron headline. #groupthink pic.twitter.com/Y6bZaezFoY via @racheldefriez
Profit is not a dirty word https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BVjYHdlIcAAlWA6.jpg:small
I assume it's an outlier. But it's interesting that it's taken after Osborne's speech and the same sample has an improved view of the Coalition's economic performance, but the general dislike of the Conservatives recorded in previous polls is apparently trumping it. Indeed even 12% of Labour voters feel they're doing quite or very well. But vote for them? Euuu. I try not to link to my blog too often, but you might be interested in my discussion of this:
http://www.nickpalmer.org.uk/help-with-distribution-300-more-houses-should-we-ever-intervene-militarily/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w-GMTxycAXY
"Labour has demanded an apology from the Daily Mail after the newspaper said using a photo of Ed Miliband's father's grave had been an "error of judgement"."
Mail deputy editor Jon Steafel said the picture was removed from its website after Mr Miliband complained to him.
But he told the BBC's Newsnight programme he stood by the reporting."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24361040
Second item on R4 Today.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/30/us-shutdown-explainer-non-americans
Personally I am closer to both Milibands views on this than it seems you are. Either Blairite or isolationist viewpoints are respectable opinions, but Ralphs views do seem to match Eds on this point.
I thought the Labour party was on to a winner here; even Cameron and Clegg were supportive. But having a clearly arrogant bully come on Newsnight and accuse someone else of being an arrogant bull muddies the waters again. It was a contribution with the finesse of a Jeremy Kyle villain.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/10/01/australia-had-a-government-shutdown-once-it-ended-with-the-queen-firing-everyone-in-parliament/
The kids would still have played their IHT avoidance trick of course, in true lefty fashion.
It is interesting because it contains quite a number of quotations from his own works which are not so readily available now.
I have no sympathy with marxist ideology but I cannot deny that there are parts of their critique of society that have insight and are worth considering. What comes across from this piece is exactly what you would expect. That a distinguished intellectual who held important positions for extended periods of time is always going to be more complex and nuanced than pretty much anything the Daily Mail has ever written about.
I am glad that David Cameron has had the essential decency to criticise this attack. It was the right thing to do.
The piece ends with an excerpt from the eulogy given by Ed at his father's funeral:
"There is sometimes a general presumption that intellectuals and academics, occupied with thinking, writing and teaching, do not have time for such mundane things as their children and that when they do, it is only to forcefeed them with their latest ideas. In Ralph’s case, nothing could be further from the truth ... I never heard the words ‘Not now, I’m too busy’ pass from his lips ... He might be up against a deadline, but our needs trumped all others ... When we were young children, he was an absolutely amazing storyteller. We sometimes joked that he was passing up the chance of undreamt sales – undreamt of, at least, by a socialist academic – by not going into print with the stories he used to tell us about the adventures of Boo-Boo and Hee-Hee, two sheep on the Yorkshire Moors ... Ralph relished our political views and encouraged them. Indeed, I remember on more than one occasion, him leaping to the defence of the 12-year-old in the corner, who was arguing with a rather surprised friend or academic who happened to come round to dinner ... Ralph’s respect for our point of view was unflinching."
I pity any man who has a father that he cannot respect and love as well as disagree with. It must make the journey through life much more difficult.
Ed's infatuation that it's all about Ed has given the blues a bit of an easy ride in the last couple of days.
It'll only lead to disobliging journalists asking them "OK, so what's your policy then?"
In response to the McBride book, he has already said he would countenance no briefings against other colleagues, and anyone doing so would be sacked. (1)
Now, it has been made clear that attacks on the families of politicians are a no-go. Presumably, the same punishment would be made for any Labour politician who attacks Cameron's family? Or Clegg's? Or is he only complaining on attacks against him?
In that case, the media in the run-up to 2015 may be filled with stories about sacked shadow ministers, or MPs with their whips withdrawn.
On the other hand, if he does manage to keep the party under control and stop this sort of silliness, then politics will be the better for it. But this is the party of McBride, Campbell and Falkirk. It ain't going to happen.
(1): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24192390
The only clue comes from the current VI of the 2010 Voters and specifically that of the LDs. Con and LAB 2010ers show little variation.
In the ST Poll: 2010 LDs voted:
Con: 8; LAB:42; LD:33; UKIP:10; Others:7. DK=18%
In Yesterday's poll, 2010 LDs voted:
Con:12; LAB:35; LD:39; UKIP:8; Other:6. DK=19%
In todays Poll: 2010 LDs voted:
Con:10; LAB:38; LD:32; UKIP:13; Other:7. DK=19%
So what is the true LD split between LD and LAB?
What were you saying about big strategic mistakes?
I think it was a major error by EdM to get all upset about this - he should have left it to others to defend his dad's reputation. And frankly I think it was largely self-inflicted since he's mentioned him in almost every leaders speech he's made.
He is a must read for anyone wanting to have a political bet.
Whatever mystic Dan predicts,the opposite position is automatic profit.
Speech unravelled by the weekend LOL
The Daily Mail should keep up its good work.
The tory conference has now almost sailed by and from what I can see Labour haven't fired a single shot at it.
"Ed Miliband warned yesterday that there were “boundaries” for British newspapers after becoming embroiled in a bitter row over the beliefs of his late father...
The proposal was put forward by newspaper publishers, including News UK, parent company of The Times, as an alternative to a draft charter agreed between the three main political parties and the Hacked Off campaign in March. It will go before the Privy Council if the newspaper industry’s charter is rejected.
Mr Miliband said: “There are boundaries, and newspapers and people across politics mustn’t overstep those.” He said he was not making a point about press controls. “It’s legitimate for the Mail to talk about my father’s politics, but when they say he hated Britain, I was not prepared to put up with that.” http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3884456.ece
"@Roger - it really gets my goat when politicians accuse their opponents of "selling policies like they're selling washing powder" - if only politicians were held to the standards of washing powders in their claims!"
Couldn't agree with you more! If only people knew. I once did an ad for ICI which was a can of tartan paint. The proposed headline 'When it Happens We'll be There First' became 'If it Happens We'll be There'
What is wrong with you?
Cameron's not in the same boat.
BTW: Ralph Miliband was, apparently a famed political writer. Surely Ed and co can find quotes in his copious works where he expresses a love for his adopted country? Where he says how much he admires it? That would have been a much better defence than the one Ed played. Fight a quote from his father as a 17-year old with ones from an older, maturer man.
Labour spent their conference week battling with Damian McBride and are now battling against their leader being called a Marxist - I think the Tories would be happy with that myself.
Tory will be listening anyway to what said in the Hall.
"Carlsberg Special Brew ?" LOL! (Rolls Royce)
"when the sympathy bounce has died down the reality will come back that Ed is crap"
I'm not so sure. He's grown on me quite a bit these last few weeks. Still too early to tell though.
The boat Cameron is in may not be quite as seaworthy as you seem to think though we shall of course find out in the fullness of time.
Never mind the Mail. I had no idea that the Daily Mirror had backed the Blackshirts. http://t.co/AgCdqy2jxk
And that's what happens when you start throwing stones.
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes
ComRes/ITV News: 47% support tax breaks for married couples 'to encourage marriage', 28% disagree ht.ly/ppy6k
Roger you do realise he's been in the job for 3 years ? How much longer will it take ? :-)
You can't polish a turd you can only roll it in glitter but you still wouldn't want to put it on your mantelpiece.
I get that message if I accidentally delete the "> at the beginning of the quote
I am sure that Ralph Miliband's views on nationality and identity cannot be reduced to some tabloid splash, or soundbite. They were almost certainly more nuanced and complex than that.
However: you cannot have capitalism in the modern world without big business or institutional investor elites. Capitalism thrives on innovation, and we're a long way away from the times when a man in his garage could develop world-changing items such as the light bulb or TV. Research and development costs money, and that means big business and big investors.
When a new (conventional) power station costs a billion to develop, or a new drug two billion, we're far away from the small-investor ideal. Only government or big business can do it, with the problems they bring.
I'm a fairly old-fashioned capitalist when it comes to business - if someone takes on a risk - for instance a couple mortgage their house to start a new business - then they should be rewarded if that risk pays off. One of the problems with big business is that they can sometimes organise things so they have little or no risk. As I have said passim, my concern with energy is not excess profits (as they singularly don't make them), but instead passing risk onto customers. The same with the banks, except in their case it's the customers and the taxpayers.
On a side note: Britain has always been good at research and innovating. What we are less good at is development of the resultant ideas. And that is often down to the short-termism that infects our governments, investors and businesses.
Your hatred of British institutions is well known, particularly the BBC and NHS.
How anyone can defend the Mail article is quite beyond me. They used the word "evil" FFS.
The Daily Mail has achieved what the spin doctors of Labour could not and for which previous evidence was scanty at best. They have made Ed look like a human being.
I have a problem with their biased political coverage and the compulsory TV Tax - and I have a problem with poor standards of care in the NHS but agree it should be free at the point of use.
I don't think my views are *hatred* or in fact that unusual at all.
Satire no less. Wasted on here though. You need to spell it out step by step for the PB Hodges.
I'm also curious at the attempts on twitter to paint the article as being anti-semitic in tone. It's as if the left have collectively gone full retard on this.
Tasked with doing a number of Miliband, if the Mail journo had just run a piece that had said Ralph Miliband had some (especially by modern standards) extreme left wing views and [not justifying this] but made some comparisons in regards to Ed's latest ideas, surely they get the same effect on the hatchet job, and little that Ed could really complain about. There is plenty of solid evidence on Ralph Marxist views.
However, instead they have managed to produce no real proof for the headline and allows Ed to take the moral high ground.
It is like the Sun running with Gordo's spelling mistake...actually what they could have run with was Brown just lying through his teeth to the widow, which actually shows his truth character when presented with a mistake of his own making.
Instead again the focus was on the ridiculous attack on somebody making a spelling mistake, not the fact that when he phoned up the woman up, rather than say sorry I made a mistake how can I make up for it [which if he had done, would have made him look just like Ed in this case], he ended up denying everything and arguing black was white for 5 minutes.