Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
slowdive

Ed Miliband

1,127 posts in this topic

But the one thing the Tories have is money, they can if they need to probably outspend the other parties by a factor of 10

 

There are limits to how much even they can spend.  One of the reasons Cameron went for a coalition rather than let another election happen in 2010 was down to Tory finances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are obvious similarities between how Kinnock and Miliband come across, but the entire political landscape couldn't now be any more different to then. There is a world of difference with the polls when you compare now and 1992, which I list below to cheer you up :)

 

Poll companies have accepted that they got a lot wrong back then and they've changed the way they report their findings now. They used to over represent the Labour position by not including the Don't Knows, many of whom ended up voting Tory. There are many myths surrounding the 1992 election like the Sheffield Rally, Jennifer's Ear, Labour's taxes and the sun's front page, but Shy Tory Factor remains the main reason for the unexpected result.

 

The main changes, therefore, concern how the pollsters deal with Shy Tory Factor and those people who don't know who they will vote for are now marked down as intending to vote for who they voted for last time. After an election like 2010 when the Tories won the vote convincingly, it stands to reason that the polls will subsequently over represent the Tory position.

 

Four-party politics results in leads being smaller, and voters don't tend to switch in between the two main parties now so swings are more modest and leads harder to narrow. The papers got excited in September 2013 when the Tories finally drew level in a YouGov poll for the first time in nearly two years, and eight months later they still haven't taken the lead in that company's polls despite there being five a week. The polls have narrowed in the last 18 months, but it's been glacial.

 

In 1992 there were no pollsters like Ashcroft who could publish findings on the key marginals and it's in these areas where elections are won and lost. Had there been so, Labour may never have been favourites in 1992, although we'll never know, but Labour are currently killing it in the marginals with a 12pt lead, and there are going to have to be some sensational changes in the next 11 months for the Tories to win. Scotland voting for independence would help!

 

In 1992 when the polls started to narrow it was partly because the Tory vote was increasing and partly because the Labour vote was decreasing. But this time the Tory vote isn't increasing at all - it's just that some of the Labour vote has gone in the last month to UKIP and 'Other', mainly the Greens. The Green vote will revert back, but even if we assume the UKIP vote doesn't, it is very unlikely that UKIP can hurt Labour in a General Election like they did in the Locals or the Europeans or like they will hurt the Tories. They ate into the Labour vote in Sunderland, Rotherham and Doncaster, to give three examples, but they cannot cost Labour MPs in those areas in 2015, either by winning the seats themselves or by helping another party win them. They'll win 0-5 seats themselves, but they'll hand Labour scores of marginals by taking votes off the Tories. It won't work the other way around in the north because the figures just don't add up.

 

The Left is now completely united with the Lib Dems on the floor and 2m of their voters intending to vote Labour in GE2015, so they cannot hurt Labour like the SDP or Alliance used to do. The reality for Kinnock is that he couldn't win with the Left split and the Right united with no competition for the Tories.

 

To sum up, Ed in Downing Street is more likely to happen than not. For reasons I've stated in earlier posts, the Tories cannot win a majority and they won't win one for years. The best they can hope for is an enormous swing in the marginals and another hung parliament, but it'll take a lot more than Ed's 'weirdness' and UKIP winning votes in the north for them to achieve this.

I really hope you're right with this. I does make sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are obvious similarities between how Kinnock and Miliband come across, but the entire political landscape couldn't now be any more different to then. There is a world of difference with the polls when you compare now and 1992, which I list below to cheer you up :)

 

Poll companies have accepted that they got a lot wrong back then and they've changed the way they report their findings now. They used to over represent the Labour position by not including the Don't Knows, many of whom ended up voting Tory. There are many myths surrounding the 1992 election like the Sheffield Rally, Jennifer's Ear, Labour's taxes and the sun's front page, but Shy Tory Factor remains the main reason for the unexpected result.

 

The main changes, therefore, concern how the pollsters deal with Shy Tory Factor and those people who don't know who they will vote for are now marked down as intending to vote for who they voted for last time. After an election like 2010 when the Tories won the vote convincingly, it stands to reason that the polls will subsequently over represent the Tory position.

 

Four-party politics results in leads being smaller, and voters don't tend to switch in between the two main parties now so swings are more modest and leads harder to narrow. The papers got excited in September 2013 when the Tories finally drew level in a YouGov poll for the first time in nearly two years, and eight months later they still haven't taken the lead in that company's polls despite there being five a week. The polls have narrowed in the last 18 months, but it's been glacial.

 

In 1992 there were no pollsters like Ashcroft who could publish findings on the key marginals and it's in these areas where elections are won and lost. Had there been so, Labour may never have been favourites in 1992, although we'll never know, but Labour are currently killing it in the marginals with a 12pt lead, and there are going to have to be some sensational changes in the next 11 months for the Tories to win. Scotland voting for independence would help!

 

In 1992 when the polls started to narrow it was partly because the Tory vote was increasing and partly because the Labour vote was decreasing. But this time the Tory vote isn't increasing at all - it's just that some of the Labour vote has gone in the last month to UKIP and 'Other', mainly the Greens. The Green vote will revert back, but even if we assume the UKIP vote doesn't, it is very unlikely that UKIP can hurt Labour in a General Election like they did in the Locals or the Europeans or like they will hurt the Tories. They ate into the Labour vote in Sunderland, Rotherham and Doncaster, to give three examples, but they cannot cost Labour MPs in those areas in 2015, either by winning the seats themselves or by helping another party win them. They'll win 0-5 seats themselves, but they'll hand Labour scores of marginals by taking votes off the Tories. It won't work the other way around in the north because the figures just don't add up.

 

The Left is now completely united with the Lib Dems on the floor and 2m of their voters intending to vote Labour in GE2015, so they cannot hurt Labour like the SDP or Alliance used to do. The reality for Kinnock is that he couldn't win with the Left split and the Right united with no competition for the Tories.

 

To sum up, Ed in Downing Street is more likely to happen than not. For reasons I've stated in earlier posts, the Tories cannot win a majority and they won't win one for years. The best they can hope for is an enormous swing in the marginals and another hung parliament, but it'll take a lot more than Ed's 'weirdness' and UKIP winning votes in the north for them to achieve this.

I hope you're right, but what you're leaving out of the equation is the Murdoch press.  Milliband has given them real cause to hate him and they haven't truly had  their revenge for Leveson and the closure of NOW.. Presumably they're keeping their powder dry until they can do the most damage.  From here on in I expect them to get pretty nasty, even by their standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble brewing for EM in Scotland , senior Labour figures saying there is a crisis in the party. The leader has quit , apparently undermined by those in Westminster. Accused them of treated the party in Scotland like a branch office. Have now had 7 leaders in the last 15 years in Scotland. Is this a poison chalice ? Gordon Brown in the running to take over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Scottish MP's have also realised that they are in great danger from the SNP. 

 

The 35% plan relies on retaining the Scottish seats.

 

I'm not sure anyone wants to actually win the next election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure anyone wants to actually win the next election.

Bit of deja view there; that's exactly how it looked in 2010.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble brewing for EM in Scotland , senior Labour figures saying there is a crisis in the party. The leader has quit , apparently undermined by those in Westminster. Accused them of treated the party in Scotland like a branch office. Have now had 7 leaders in the last 15 years in Scotland. Is this a poison chalice ? Gordon Brown in the running to take over.

A decent article on it from the Guardian that probably won't make good reading for Miliband.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It doesn't look good for Miliband. Many people said at the time that they got the wrong brother - the Salford syndrome?

 

What is worrying is this. Right now, Labour have a virtually unelectable leader, an unconvincing set of policies and no clear idea of a way forward. The LibDems are utterly discredited and, far from offering an alternative, are seen as untrustworthy, having abandoned their principles at the first offer of a nebulous "power". The Tories are now rightly seen for what they truly are - a bunch of shysters who will feather the nests of their friends at the expense of the poor. That leaves us with a rag bag of independents, delusionists and UKIP (an indefensible bunch for whom the label "wolf in sheep's clothing" doesn't even get close). After the last 4 years, it should be unthinkable that the Tories will win the next election, but it is almost certain that they will. These are dark days for anyone who has a social conscience, let alone a left-leaning political standpoint. God help us. (And I don't believe in Him, either. :( )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't look good for Miliband. Many people said at the time that they got the wrong brother - the Salford syndrome?

 

What is worrying is this. Right now, Labour have a virtually unelectable leader, an unconvincing set of policies and no clear idea of a way forward. The LibDems are utterly discredited and, far from offering an alternative, are seen as untrustworthy, having abandoned their principles at the first offer of a nebulous "power". The Tories are now rightly seen for what they truly are - a bunch of shysters who will feather the nests of their friends at the expense of the poor. That leaves us with a rag bag of independents, delusionists and UKIP (an indefensible bunch for whom the label "wolf in sheep's clothing" doesn't even get close). After the last 4 years, it should be unthinkable that the Tories will win the next election, but it is almost certain that they will. These are dark days for anyone who has a social conscience, let alone a left-leaning political standpoint. God help us. (And I don't believe in Him, either. :( )

A fair analysis.  The bit that's most surprising to me is that the Tories seem the most democratic of the lot (in terms of representational democracy that is) with my local MP, Tim Yeo, getting the boot by the local constituency party for taking the proverbial too much.  A government minister with a long history and properly Tory reputation booted out by the local constituency because the local constituency party didn't think he represented them enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fair analysis.  The bit that's most surprising to me is that the Tories seem the most democratic of the lot (in terms of representational democracy that is) with my local MP, Tim Yeo, getting the boot by the local constituency party for taking the proverbial too much.  A government minister with a long history and properly Tory reputation booted out by the local constituency because the local constituency party didn't think he represented them enough.

 

How far right will the political pendulum swing?

 

I always thought Yeo was pretty far right, but the local party think he's not far right enough? (Unless I've misunderstood your post.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How far right will the political pendulum swing?

I always thought Yeo was pretty far right, but the local party think he's not far right enough? (Unless I've misunderstood your post.)

The local party seemed to like his central party attitudes but thought he was utterly ignoring the constituency needs. He refused to change and called their bluff. Oops. Much of it came from him living in Kent despite representing a Suffolk constituency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fair analysis.  The bit that's most surprising to me is that the Tories seem the most democratic of the lot (in terms of representational democracy that is) with my local MP, Tim Yeo, getting the boot by the local constituency party for taking the proverbial too much.  A government minister with a long history and properly Tory reputation booted out by the local constituency because the local constituency party didn't think he represented them enough.

 

Yeo has been pilloried for dipping his wick into extra-parliamentary lucre. Fair enough.

 

However, he must be fuming because he's been shown up by George Gallagher as being a rank amateur in the ancillary-income stakes. Gorgeous George, who is actually a surprisingly good MP and will get re-elected, earned an additional £250,000 last year.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/23/twenty-mps-declare-over-100000-from-second-jobs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am watching a Sky News feature on Scottish voting patterns for next year's General Election.

 

Apparently,

 - surveys indicate that one third of Scotland's Labour voers voted for independence.

 - Miliband needs Scottish votes but opposes a secession of further powers to the Scottish Parliament.

 -  The leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Johann Lamont has resigned, citing an intolerable interference by the party's hierarchy.

 - Miliband does not  favour the appointment of the well-respected Jim Murphy as the  new leader, despite his good performance alongside Gordon Brown in the  Scottish Referendum. He wants someone whose stance is more attuned to his own.

 

He really is a div.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I propose that, if next years election was to be re-enacted as Game of Thrones, Miliband would be excellent as Prince Joffrey.

Edited by Wolford6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am watching a Sky News feature on Scottish voting patterns for next year's General Election.

 

Apparently,

 - surveys indicate that one third of Scotland's Labour voers voted for independence.

 - Miliband needs Scottish votes but opposes a secession of further powers to the Scottish Parliament.

 -  The leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Johann Lamont has resigned, citing an intolerable interference by the party's hierarchy.

 - Miliband does not  favour the appointment of the well-respected Jim Murphy as the  new leader, despite his good performance alongside Gordon Brown in the  Scottish Referendum. He wants someone whose stance is more attuned to his own.

 

He really is a div.

P

Let's just hope then, that the workers of the world unite and keep Miliband as the great leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I propose that, if next years election was to be re-enacted as Game of Thrones, Miliband would be excellent as Prince Joffrey.

Joffrey was an unlikeable leader who didn't have much going on between the ears who had a privileged upbringing. Surely Cameron is a better fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't look good for Miliband. Many people said at the time that they got the wrong brother - the Salford syndrome?

What is worrying is this. Right now, Labour have a virtually unelectable leader, an unconvincing set of policies and no clear idea of a way forward. The LibDems are utterly discredited and, far from offering an alternative, are seen as untrustworthy, having abandoned their principles at the first offer of a nebulous "power". The Tories are now rightly seen for what they truly are - a bunch of shysters who will feather the nests of their friends at the expense of the poor. That leaves us with a rag bag of independents, delusionists and UKIP (an indefensible bunch for whom the label "wolf in sheep's clothing" doesn't even get close). After the last 4 years, it should be unthinkable that the Tories will win the next election, but it is almost certain that they will. These are dark days for anyone who has a social conscience, let alone a left-leaning political standpoint. God help us. (And I don't believe in Him, either. :( )

The polls show Labour will win probably a small maybe unworkable majority. Tories will win the most votes they need a bigger swing because of the voting system we have and UKIP will pinch enough votes to put Ed at number 10. Personally I don't think he would last 5 years as PM he doesn't seem cut out to run a party let alone the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Personally I don't think he would last 5 years as PM he doesn't seem cut out to run a party let alone the country.

 

He couldn't run a fancy dress party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron has got common sense and is a shrewd tactician.

 

Yes his dealings with his rebelling backbenchers is great proof of this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite so. Get rid of Fox, Redwood  etc, PLEASE!!!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with the support of the Lib Dems Cameron only has a slim majority so he needs to hang on to all his MPs whether he likes them and their nutty UKIPesque views or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The polls show Labour will win probably a small maybe unworkable majority. Tories will win the most votes they need a bigger swing because of the voting system we have and UKIP will pinch enough votes to put Ed at number 10. Personally I don't think he would last 5 years as PM he doesn't seem cut out to run a party let alone the country.

 

I'll be straight, I didn't think that the coalition would last six months.  I assumed that Super Vince would bring it down by being the man of principle that he portrayed himself to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did post this in the wrong thread but deleted it.  The power to find my own mistakes!

 

It seems no-one wants to be the leader of the Scottish Labour party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Polls are currently moving against him.  Needs to buck ideas up really!  (Or have the balls to sack balls)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.