A trend of 8 point lead in November 2013 to 5 points in December to 3 points in January 2014 is pretty clear, no?

 

I don't really agree at all that Labour's trend is down tbh. In fact, the average of all the YouGov polls over the past week is marginally up on the final batch of polls in December. Just tonight, the lead is 6%, suggesting last night's 3% lead was an outlier.

Meanwhile, contrary to the media true to form constantly boiling politics down to personalities, the public consider the party leaders to be less important than they have been in years, and much less important than policies and the party. Yet somehow, Cameron having marginally less terrible personal ratings is somehow meant to save the Conservatives...

Sorry to emulate a certain poster by posting three times in a row, but....

 

You not caring about the Bedroom Tax =/= no one caring. It's generated a lot of press, and very little of it positive.

 

The recovery was completely botched in that Osborne has unequivocally failed in what he set out to do. Maybe I'm overestimating how much attention people paid to this but the cornerstone policy of the Tory manifesto last time out was to have the deficit gone within one parliament. The fact that it's so far off is bound to attract attention.

 

Imo, people never really understood what the deficit was, and to the extent they ever were aware of it, most assume the problem is solved simply because the news has stopped being filled with stories of European countries being on the brink of bankruptcy, and because the "mood music" about the "official" UK economy has become so good. And that's why, if the Labour leadership have any sense, they won't talk about cuts at all and will stop rambling on about "zero-based spending reviews" and "iron discipline", and they certainly shouldn't be bragging about Osborne missing his deficit target since that not only looks like partisan point-scoring on technicalities, but it will also make people think the deficit is more important than they would otherwise think. I don't expect the Tories to be talking about cuts in the 2015 election either (even Lynton Crosby, idiot though he is, will probably realise that topics like immigraton and welfare have far more resonance with the public than the deficit will). People will (rightly) not understand the need at all for further cuts when there's no air of crisis anymore like there was in 2010-11 when the Euro-crisis was raging.

I'd actually agree now that if Ed wants to get elected he shouldn't be talking about cuts/further austerity - not least because I don't think he comes off credible even when he does, mainly as I don't think anybody looks at Ed and thinks 'he went into politics to get the deficit down' when he does those kinds of speeches. I think the safest option now for him is to go steady as she goes and hope his progressive majority voting coalition stays together while the Conservative vote stays split, as he only risks diffusing it when he strikes for the centre.

 

That said, I can't see that plan working out too well for him once he's elected...

Meanwhile, contrary to the media true to form constantly boiling politics down to personalities, the public consider the party leaders to be less important than they have been in years, and much less important than policies and the party. Yet somehow, Cameron having marginally less terrible personal ratings is somehow meant to save the Conservatives...

Sorry Danny, but it's just a *bit* of a misrepresentation to go from Mike Smithson ruminating that collective leader approval ratings being at an all-time low *might* show that party leaders are less important in voting intention than all the other factors, to saying outright that 'the public consider the party leaders to be less important than they have been in years'! It could be the case, but as it goes, it could well still be the most important, just we don't see it so much as the public holds all three in broadly similar contempt! Even then I'd argue that Nick Clegg being by far the least popular alongside the Lib Dems is no coincidence.

Sorry Danny, but it's just a *bit* of a misrepresentation to go from Mike Smithson ruminating that collective leader approval ratings being at an all-time low *might* show that party leaders are less important in voting intention than all the other factors, to saying outright that 'the public consider the party leaders to be less important than they have been in years'! It could be the case, but as it goes, it could well still be the most important, just we don't see it so much as the public holds all three in broadly similar contempt! Even then I'd argue that Nick Clegg being by far the least popular alongside the Lib Dems is no coincidence.

 

As far as I understand it, it was based on a question explicitly asking people which they considered most important.

Apologies - I've just seen it on my phone, the image didn't come up for me when I saw it on the laptop so I thought it was just the text and an image showing the collective leader rating averages! Damned articles using pictures to speak a thousand words :arrr:

Poll specifically for this year's European elections shows the Conservatives in third place, behind UKIP and with Labour out in front by 6% -- but, perhaps more significantly (bearing in mind how pitifully low the turnout will be), Labour's lead over UKIP is only 2% among people saying they're certain to vote. Smart money is still on a UKIP win I think.

As it goes, because the media is near unanimous (and has been for a while now) that UKIP will win the European elections, I actually think the smarter money might be on Labour when we reach peak UKIP hype in early May - I'd give it about a 50/50 chance that it'll be a narrow Labour win. And I wouldn't be surprised with a result that has UKIP narrowly winning the raw vote but Labour winning more seats. I'll definitely be placing a cheeky £20 on it when UKIP mania is at saturation point.

The turnout is going to be awful, but the fact that it's the locals on the same day might push it up slightly. Given all the metropolitans are having their elections you'd assume it will favour Labour as well, so I'm still hopeful of us "winning".

As it goes, because the media is near unanimous (and has been for a while now) that UKIP will win the European elections, I actually think the smarter money might be on Labour when we reach peak UKIP hype in early May - I'd give it about a 50/50 chance that it'll be a narrow Labour win. And I wouldn't be surprised with a result that has UKIP narrowly winning the raw vote but Labour winning more seats. I'll definitely be placing a cheeky £20 on it when UKIP mania is at saturation point.

 

 

The turnout is going to be awful, but the fact that it's the locals on the same day might push it up slightly. Given all the metropolitans are having their elections you'd assume it will favour Labour as well, so I'm still hopeful of us "winning".

 

Yes, the only thing that I think gives Labour a shred of hope is the locals held on the same day skew massively to Labour areas. Even so, I can't help but feel that people would love to give the mainstream parties a kicking in such a "useless" election as the Euros, so I do fear many people who vote Labour in locals might then go and immediately vote UKIP in the Euros.

 

Meanwhile, I wonder if the Lib Dems could be beaten into 5th by the Greens?

Oh that's got to be a near certainty.

Oh that's got to be a near certainty.

 

Nah. I look forward to LIbdems being the party Miliband needs to get on board to form a government at the next election. Certainly NOT going to be UKIP or the greens sweeping the board with seats in parliament and if there are any seats going far more likely to be Tory or Labour seats going not Libdem.

 

Nice to see Ed has finally announced a policy though. It's even one I agree with (bank reform smaller). Pity it's one already being pursued by the coalition to a smaller extent (Lloyds/TSB split), and he doesn't say it WILL happen, just that it will be reported on and studied with the hopeful intention of doing it by 2020, but hey I'm sure he has plenty of original policies to come to sway the electorate. A proper apology on behalf of the Labour party for messing up the economy would be a good start.

Nah. I look forward to LIbdems being the party Miliband needs to get on board to form a government at the next election. Certainly NOT going to be UKIP or the greens sweeping the board with seats in parliament and if there are any seats going far more likely to be Tory or Labour seats going not Libdem.

 

You do realise we were talking about the Europeans?

The Lib Dems will definitely be third on seats in the UK general election but they're going to have a brutal fight on their hands trying not to slip behind the Green Party in the Europeans.

You do realise we were talking about the Europeans?

 

Oops, thats what you get coming in halfway through a film...!

 

Still be shocked if Libdems get pushed into 5th place for them, as a strictly pro-europe party one would imagine voters might wish to take that into account. Except for the ones who would never vote for them anyway, of course....

 

I realise there's an attempt to discredit the LibDems for doing what the electorate voted for, as if they are in some way to blame for everything. The facts, shall we say, do not support that viewpoint and the 2 main parties are cra**ing their pants over the possibility that they will again need their co-operation, diminshed votes or not.

Oops, thats what you get coming in halfway through a film...!

 

Still be shocked if Libdems get pushed into 5th place for them, as a strictly pro-europe party one would imagine voters might wish to take that into account. Except for the ones who would never vote for them anyway, of course....

 

I realise there's an attempt to discredit the LibDems for doing what the electorate voted for, as if they are in some way to blame for everything. The facts, shall we say, do not support that viewpoint and the 2 main parties are cra**ing their pants over the possibility that they will again need their co-operation, diminshed votes or not.

Doing what the electorate voted for?

53% of those who turned out voted for Labour and the Lib Dems - parties that has committed to slower rates of deficit reduction. 36% voted for the Conservatives and the current plan of action.

 

Now, you may take the view that the problem was so severe that it needed the democratic will to be overridden. That's a point that can have a fair argument made for it, albeit not one I'd agree with. You can't make the point that this is what the people of the UK voted for though.

Still be shocked if Libdems get pushed into 5th place for them, as a strictly pro-europe party one would imagine voters might wish to take that into account. Except for the ones who would never vote for them anyway, of course....

 

I'm not sure there's really many people who would be particularly interested in voting for a pro-Europe party though? Although I adamantly believe the number of people who have a pathological hatred of the EU is far far less than the Tories seem to think, there's still probably even less people who are enthusiastically pro-EU -- most people just don't really give a crap one way or the other.

 

The reason why there's a strong chance the Lib Dems will come 5th is because they ALWAYS poll significantly below however they're doing generally in European elections (in 2009, they came a full 10% lower in the Euro elections than they did in the locals on the same day), while the Greens typically overperform, probably because like UKIP people like the chance to protest against the mainstream parties in an election they see as meaningless (even moreso than local elections, since a lot of people atleast think local councillors have some direct impact on what happens in their communities, whereas frankly most people don't think MEPs have any impact at all, rightly or wrongly).

HOLD ON Danny, the HOARDES of CHEADLE are just SALIVATING to register an enthusiastic YES for Barroso (as best communicated by a vote for their local faintly paedophilic looking orange badge wearer)