Danny

It does, but (a) even I'd be happy with a government who was reducing the deficit based solely on tax rises, even if I'd think it unnecessary, and (b ) that 36% who flat-out don't think the deficit matters at all would still be enough for Labour to probably win. Doesn't change the fact that the stance of all 3 main parties (more massive cuts) accounts between them for only one-fifth of public opinion.

Well, does this question meet your test? Thinking about how the next government handles the deficit, which of the following best reflects your view? They should prioritise reducing deficit, mainly through cuts: 20% Should prioritise reducing deficit, mainly through taxes: 19% Should NOT prioritise reducing deficit, spend more on public services or cut taxes: 36% None of these: 10% Don't know: 15% http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/docu...ults-051214.pdf The big question is why the mainstream politicians are surprised that they're held in such contempt, when they're determined to only represent the 20% of extremists who want yet more cuts (even if those extremists are over-represented in the Westminster echo chamber).

Actually, it does indeed seem that it MIGHT be starting to dawn on Ed Balls that, if he wants to win the votes of people who oppose the Tories' policies (the 59% of people who do not see the need for more austerity according to Populus), it might be an idea to oppose the Tories' policies himself: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/d...r-spending-cuts

More competent at making cuts, certainly, simply because they're the seasoned pros at it and have years of experience at doing it. If I thought cutting the deficit was overwhelmingly the biggest issue that needed tackling (which needless to say I don't) I would probably vote Tory since they're the "market leaders" in that regard. And this is the big problem for Labour, they've got themselves into the ridiculous position of complaining that George Osborne hasn't cut spending quickly enough. Apart from the fact that line of attack will just look like petty schadenfreude to the public, it also encourages people to think that the deficit is out of control and needs tackling, and that's something which people are ALWAYS going to think the Tories are the answer to. It's exactly the same as trying to "out-Ukip Ukip" on immigration, which the main parties seem to have finally at long last given up on after weeks of posturing only led to Ukip's ratings climbing ever higher.

How well is "vote Labour for massive spending cuts delivered with half as much competence as the Tories" working on the doorstep?

Well, modestly good increases in health and education spending (though, at the risk of sounding like a rightwinger, I actually think education is one area where throwing money around doesn't really improve anything). But a good chunk of the extra spending was "corporate welfare" - topping up people's wages because Labour were too scared to actually make employers pay decently themselves.

"Do Voters Even Care About The Deficit?"

Is that Neil Findlay guy known at all in Scotland?

I never would've thought 5 years ago that Gordon Brown would look like the paragon of good competent government and of principled, inspiring leadership of the Labour Party, but such is the standard of his successors in both cases...

It's interesting that the only two Sheffield Hallam polls have been taken at times when Labour nationally wasn't doing so well (now and in late 2010), yet they STILL showed Labour neck-and-neck. Presumably any Hallam polls in 2012 or 2013 would've shown a Labour lead. ** Meanwhile, Tyron, are the whispers about Jim Murphy possibly losing the Scottish Labour contest true?!

Such as an end to austerity? :angel:

Opposition to fracking is not by any means limited to lefties or the usual save-the-planet brigade. If anything, preserving the "green belt" and generally preserving a peaceful/traditional life is one of the main things that makes people vote Tory in places like Cheshire!

You'd be surprised - I'm expecting some really good Green performances in some "true blue" Tory seats where fracking is an issue. Possibly including George Osborne's seat in Cheshire.

I would probably laugh at someone who had about 4 St George's flags on their door, in the same way I would if someone had really gaudy, flashing Christmas lights </metropolitansnob>

Miliband is just so gutless. Given how the dreary "on-message" automatons are killing the party, he should be happy one finally showed some personality. This is yet another example to feed the image of him as being someone easy to push around and dominate. "If he can't even stand up to the press, how's he going to stand up to Putin?"

My litmus test is always that, if the Daily Mail commenters back a "left-wing" stance on something, it really must be public opinion. These are some of the top-rated comments on the Daily Mail story about Myleene: "Is Klass living in la-la Richland? I don't know a single granny living in a mansion. Obviously if they live in mansions they are rich by definition. What is wrong with taxing the rich please?" "...Poor little Myleen in her mansion.....amazing what bathing in a bikini in Celebrity Jungle can do for a womans career ....and bank balance...." "You dont hear her moan about the bedroom tax,when you tread on the feet of the rich they squeal.if you dont want to pay your fair share myleen emigrate.you wont be missed" "Idiot Klass said on proposed mansion tax "you can't point at things and tax them" Sure you can. IDS said there's a bedroom, and there's a tax." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-28...arget-rich.html

Again....the Scottish independence referendum.

I think it's possible independence would've been rejected by even MORE had they not had the press and super-rich hysterically against them. Having all the elites against you actually can be an asset in this day and age when people are so anti-establishment. But Labour are too inept to take advantage of it, because they can't campaign in a populist way to save themselves, and because they're so obsessed with getting "credibility" from the establishment.

Yes, so that's two papers - even now, there are still 2-3 papers (Independent is questionable) who would support such things. My point is that there's nothing new in the vast majority of the press viciously opposing anything vaguely left-wing - it's ALWAYS been the case, and always will be, rich people are always going to be the major press barons. But that's not an excuse for left-wing people to just whine about how impossible it is and not even try to fight against it, when that 1945 example showed even THEN that people didn't pay much attention to what the press said (and for a more recent example, how about the fact that 45% of people voted for Scottish independence despite all the hysterical propaganda from the press against it, a voteshare that would be easily enough for any party to get a landslide win in an election).

Boo hoo. Just because it's difficult, that doesn't mean they can just pathetically give up time after time. I believe the entire press were hysterically against Labour's "communist" plans before the 1945 election, yet they still won a landslide - and that was when the press were far more trusted than they are now.

It's still a total travesty that he stayed last week. ** Wasn't Adele meant to be on Band Aid?

Um...I made it to £40.5bn :unsure: Maybe I'm not such a deficit denier afterall. Though I'd be spending more on health, welfare and local services which would cancel out a good portion of the savings.

Conservative spending plans that indicated (modest) increases to spending, NOT massive cuts.

No I don't. Thatcher increased NHS spending more than Miliband plans to (and yet, in yet another sign of the left's Stockholm syndrome, the pathetic, inadequate increase that Miliband plans is also hailed as "radical").

If Labour's plans are so breathtakingly daring and radical, then why do people STILL say, by a margin of 65% to 20%, that Miliband "hasn't made it clear what he stands for"? http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/docu...ults-071114.pdf Or is this another issue on which people in the constituency you're canvassing in mysteriously have polar-opposite views to everyone else in the country?