Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Political polling

...and here's an indicator of that challenge...criticism from their own about concealment on welfare...they're not confident they can carry their core...

 
Fez909 said:
Their goal and their policies are shit for the vast majority of society.

Just because they bring about their own aims, doesn't make them good. That's why they have to conceal everything. No one would vote for them if they were honest.
Click to expand...
This is why I don't trust approval ratings in polls.

"Do you think Cameron is doing a good job of leading the Tory party?"

Em, are you asking if I approve of what he's doing, or whether he's doing it well? He's doing a terrific job of being vermin.
 
Roadkill said:
I think the Tories have been pursuing three main agendas in that respect. The first is a genuine attempt to put the public finances back on an even keel after the crash. They've gone about it the wrong way and it's not worked, but I think they're so sunk in liberal ideology that they genuinely believe there's no alternative. The second is that they've used the crisis as a cover for pursuing the ideological goal of a much smaller state, and as you say they've done so worryingly successfully. The third is simply to protect their own electoral base by making damn sure that the spending cuts have fallen disproportionately hard on the cities, the poor and on young people, since none tend to vote Tory. That's profoundly stupid and short-sighted - in the end, Birmingham, Liverpool or Hull all contribute far more to the economy than some no-mark Tory commuter town - quite apart from being cynical to the last degree.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but I'm not at all convinced that they ever were actually interested in balancing the public finances. If that had been a genuine goal, rather than merely a pretext for the neo-liberal ideological agenda, they could have achieved greater progress with higher tax receipts, as well as their public sector cuts. The fact that they didn't, and that Osborne has determinedly stuck with 'Plan A' austerity betrays the real driver IMO.

This graph..UK current budget deficit: June 2010 plans and outturns (per cent GDP).
upload_2015-3-29_13-40-59.png

...pretty much proves how little the 'balanced books' concept has actually mattered to them. Faced with rubbish tax receipts, caused by their own small-state austerity, they've allowed the planned deficit figures to drift wildly away from the 2010 estimates. The need to perpetuate financial capital's neo-liberal project taking precedence over any thatcherite/swabian housewife notions of fiscal probity.
 
brogdale said:
...and here's an indicator of that challenge...criticism from their own about concealment on welfare...they're not confident they can carry their core...

Click to expand...


I think that IDS may have caused the tories some damage with this - it smacks of extreme arrogance and will set multiple hares running about which benefits they may or may not target.

Tory campaign not having the greatest of starts is it?
 
brogdale said:
They will certainly be concerned about the early evidence that their negative campaigning strategy may not work to their advantage. Crosby has clearly staked a great deal on the 'scary Miliband in No.10' idea, and it's not surprising when so much else of their record/'vision' does not stand up to examination.
Click to expand...
I agree with Alex Salmond on this: posters with your opponent standing in front of Number 10 aren't a good idea. Even if you're trying to say it's a scary idea, you've no control over how the public will take it. If you want the public to be thinking "Cameron for number 10" don't keep saying "Miliband in number 10" over and over; especially not to the exclusion of your guy.
 
Has anyone here ever been contacted by one of the pollsters?
I haven't and I can't recall anyone I know mentioning they have either.
 
3) How come I’ve never been invited to take part?

There are about 40 million adults in the UK. Each opinion poll involves about 1,000 people. If you are talking about political voting intention polls, then probably under 100 are conducted by phone each year. You can do the sums – if there are 40,000,000 adults in the UK and 100,000 are interviewed for a political opinion poll then on average you will be interviewed once every 400 years. It may be a long wait.
 
Yeah YouGov's been asking me about my voting intentions quite a lot recently, I think it's a postcode thing though.
 
YG's ITV Wales only poll gives Lab 40% for the first time in over a year...

e86d4932-d286-462a-bbfd-e1cbed54e92e-620x372_zps3gkvzuby.png


Will be interesting to see to what extent PC rises and dents that figure after Leanne Wood's chance to shine in Thursday's TV debate. if she performs like she can (see last QT where she dared to advocate more trades union influence) I can imagine that she has a chance of some 'bounce'.
 
...and YG/ITV's London only polling showing potentially damaging losses for the vermin/coalition...

949b7473-4d96-4e43-bac4-4e3e0837ccd4-620x372_zpsrxeavrrr.png


Here are the figures, and the shift since 2010.

Labour: 46% (up 9)

Conservatives: 32% (down 2)

Ukip: 9%

Lib Dems: 8% (down 14)

Greens: 4%
Click to expand...

LD - 14%!
 
Monday populus has 34% each -+1 lab/+3 con

ComRes has a london poll only for ITV:

LAB 46% +9.4
CON 32% -2.5
LIB 8* -14.1
UKIP 9% +7.3
GRN 4%

A CON-LAB swing of just under 6%
 
It's obv not a universal swing in London, varies (literally) seat to seat.

Hence the value of the Ashcroft polls and private polling - often better to look at target and non-target seats for the inside story.
 
Up the junction said:
It's obv not a universal swing in London, varies (literally) seat to seat.

Hence the value of the Ashcroft polls and private polling - often better to look at target and non-target seats for the inside story.
Click to expand...
Yes, because the stuff in the media about the LDs losing all but Cable in London is gibberish. Brake will certainly hold C&W.
 
Up the junction said:
It's obv not a universal swing in London, varies (literally) seat to seat.

Hence the value of the Ashcroft polls and private polling - often better to look at target and non-target seats for the inside story.
Click to expand...
They can certainly tell us more about the seat they're polling - nonetheless an average like the above tells us something as it's going to contain all the local swings, if not in quite such depth. But it seems pretty clear that labour are going to taking chunks out of the lib-dems across the city and that this is reflected in the city-wide poll. Matching that to individual seats involves a bit more and utilising local knowledge.
 
butchersapron said:
They can certainly tell us more about the seat they're polling - nonetheless an average like the above tells us something as it's going to contain all the local swings, if not in quite such depth. But it seems pretty clear that labour are going to taking chunks out of the lib-dems across the city and that this is reflected in the city-wide poll. Matching that to individual seats involves a bit more and utilising local knowledge.
Click to expand...
Yep, I think Ashcroft told us 12-15 months ago the Labour-side of the LD's had broadly already come across. What we're looking at now is the rump of Con-leaning LDs.
 
Like my neighbour who has an inbuilt and tribal dislike of Labour (largely for anti-socialist reasons that no longer actually exist in the modern Labour party) and quite likes the Tories but votes Lib Dem because she perceives them as "nicer", i.e. less UKIPpy. In many ways she's not wrong too in this understanding of the Lib Dems. That's a core vote they're not going to lose.
 
brogdale said:
Did you clock UKIP>LD in the ITV London polling. That's pretty fucking damning for the collaborators.
Click to expand...
There's nothing left for them beyond individual rep - the incumbency factor is going to be inverted. I need to do a chart of who that might apply to. But yeah - it's look after yourself time for them. But do they have any activists left - and where will they direct them? I think clegg is gone.
 
brogdale said:
Yeah, but I'm not at all convinced that they ever were actually interested in balancing the public finances. If that had been a genuine goal, rather than merely a pretext for the neo-liberal ideological agenda, they could have achieved greater progress with higher tax receipts, as well as their public sector cuts. The fact that they didn't, and that Osborne has determinedly stuck with 'Plan A' austerity betrays the real driver IMO.

This graph..UK current budget deficit: June 2010 plans and outturns (per cent GDP).
View attachment 69409

...pretty much proves how little the 'balanced books' concept has actually mattered to them. Faced with rubbish tax receipts, caused by their own small-state austerity, they've allowed the planned deficit figures to drift wildly away from the 2010 estimates. The need to perpetuate financial capital's neo-liberal project taking precedence over any thatcherite/swabian housewife notions of fiscal probity.
Click to expand...
Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

Either he stuck with Plan A austerity (and balanced the books), or he didn't, and allowed the deficit to rise. I'm all for sticking it to the Tories, but it has to be based in reality.

The graph shows that after 2012-2013, the austerity spending plans actually went out of the window, so he can't have stuck to 'Plan A'. Simon Wren-Lewis explains here: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n04/simon-wren-lewis/the-austerity-con

I'm guessing you've already ready that article as it looks to be where you sourced your graph, but how do you come away with such a different reading?
 
Fez909 said:
Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

Either he stuck with Plan A austerity (and balanced the books), or he didn't, and allowed the deficit to rise. I'm all for sticking it to the Tories, but it has to be based in reality.

The graph shows that after 2012-2013, the austerity spending plans actually went out of the window, so he can't have stuck to 'Plan A'. Simon Wren-Lewis explains here: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n04/simon-wren-lewis/the-austerity-con

I'm guessing you've already ready that article as it looks to be where you sourced your graph, but how do you come away with such a different reading?
Click to expand...
I think what I'm trying to say is that 'Plan A' was not the Plan A they said it was. First and foremost the vermin saw their chance to accelerate the neo-liberal, consolidator state project under the pretext of concern that 'the markets' require "balanced books". They don't of course and the vermin always knew that. So the reason that they've not met their debt reduction targets is the depressed tax take resulting from the recessionary impact of the austerity. Their actual game-plan is progressing nicely, and they can even spin the slipped debt target as the need for more and more cuts. Financial capital's priority is for the state to continue to facilitate the displacement of the state in areas that they can monetise, and keep on collecting their debts for them. They're not really worried about tax; they don't pay it....the little people do.
 
...and their shills like Finkelstein will sit on Newsnight and tell Davis that dave is a pragmatic managerialist with no real ideology...and then in the next breath describe miliband as "much more ideological".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Veronika94
What's happened to classic,old-fashioned political scandals?
Replies
27
Views
999
tim
tim
quimcunx
  • Poll
What is your polling station usually?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
2K
ska invita
ska invita
Pickman's model
yvette cooper's pitiful politics
Replies
0
Views
203
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
N
Ever had a negative reaction to a political T-shirt?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
163
Views
8K
Chz
Chz
Silas Loom
Practical republican politics
2
Replies
59
Views
2K
Silas Loom
Silas Loom
Back
Top Bottom