Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 18:41:18 GMT
ICM says Labour 41, Tories 31, LDems 14 and with Cable as leader Lab 38 Con 30 LD 19 that is still very good for us no matter how you read it and the overall is the biggest LAB lead since IDS was leader.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,777
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 24, 2012 19:04:24 GMT
Poor old ComRes
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 19:07:37 GMT
Poor old ComRes yep everyone else had tories falling to the vital 30% and somehow they got a 3% increase to 35, the new gold standard ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 19:09:49 GMT
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,622
|
Post by john07 on Sept 24, 2012 21:59:40 GMT
and with Cable as leader Lab 38 Con 30 LD 19 that is still very good for us no matter how you read it and the overall is the biggest LAB lead since IDS was leader. How does that compare with the figures that Kinnock enjoyed in the late 1980s? I am not trying to put the mockers on but maybe a reality chack needed?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,777
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 24, 2012 22:07:06 GMT
Polls were different back then, as you should be well aware. But Kinnock era Labour only enjoyed really big leads for 18 months or so (mid '89-late '90)
|
|
thetop
Labour
[k4r]
Posts: 945
|
Post by thetop on Sept 24, 2012 23:55:42 GMT
IIRC Labour only achieved sustained double-digit leads 1) pre-SDP split, 2) 1990 until Thatcher was replaced and 3) post '94, anyway. I think if an election were held during those periods there would have been a Labour victory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2012 6:43:20 GMT
How does that compare with the figures that Kinnock enjoyed in the late 1980s? I am not trying to put the mockers on but maybe a reality chack needed? Absolutely agree, but there is the difference is that there is only one opposition party (plus UKIP bleeding the Tories from the right...)
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,777
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 25, 2012 9:49:34 GMT
IIRC Labour only achieved sustained double-digit leads 1) pre-SDP split, 2) 1990 until Thatcher was replaced and 3) post '94, anyway. I think if an election were held during those periods there would have been a Labour victory. Actually 3) is not *quite* right - Labour went in the lead almost straight after Black Wednesday and the big tipping point in the polls was arguably in early 1994 (as "Back to Basics" imploded) when John Smith was still leader. In short, you are buying the Blairite revisionist version of things! ;D
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,370
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 25, 2012 9:57:49 GMT
IIRC Labour only achieved sustained double-digit leads 1) pre-SDP split, 2) 1990 until Thatcher was replaced and 3) post '94, anyway. I think if an election were held during those periods there would have been a Labour victory. Actually 3) is not *quite* right - Labour went in the lead almost straight after Black Wednesday and the big tipping point in the polls was arguably in early 1994 (as "Back to Basics" imploded) when John Smith was still leader. In short, you are buying the Blairite revisionist version of things! ;D A quick glance at UK Polling REport seems to show that Labour were reasonably consistently getting double digit leads throughout most of 93 from everyone except ICM.
|
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,870
|
Post by Pimpernal on Sept 25, 2012 10:08:38 GMT
Has any '4th' party ever consistently polled c9-10% for a year before?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,777
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 25, 2012 11:17:18 GMT
It was 13% in 1997 (44-31) Ed's personal ratings don't compare well to Blair's in opposition, but not many others do either - and the incumbent *always* leads on the "best PM" question, save for the most extreme moments of unpopularity. In short, much of what has been opined on this topic recently has been mendacious self-serving rubbish...... No change there, then ;D
|
|
thetop
Labour
[k4r]
Posts: 945
|
Post by thetop on Sept 25, 2012 13:24:14 GMT
Actually 3) is not *quite* right - Labour went in the lead almost straight after Black Wednesday and the big tipping point in the polls was arguably in early 1994 (as "Back to Basics" imploded) when John Smith was still leader. In short, you are buying the Blairite revisionist version of things! ;D A quick glance at UK Polling REport seems to show that Labour were reasonably consistently getting double digit leads throughout most of 93 from everyone except ICM. That'll be my problem - it's ICM I'm largely recalling (or rather their list on Guardian website I looked at a while back). Saying that, even ICM had John Smith achieving such leads before his death, so I think I'm innocent of propagating the Blairite line!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2012 14:19:49 GMT
[quote author=thetop board=general thread=8 post=32878 time=1348579454I think I'm innocent of propagating the Blairite line![/quote] M'lud, he would say that wouldn't he ...
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,820
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 26, 2012 15:21:29 GMT
ICM / Guardian September Poll Current Party Leaders: Lab 44% Con 31% Lib Dem 11% Others 14% (UKIP 6%, SNP 4%, Green 3%, Plaid 1%, Others 1%) Cable as leader of Lib Dems: Lab 40% (-4%) Con 30% (-1%) Lib Dem 16% (+5%) Others 14% (unchanged) (UKIP 6%, SNP 3%, Green 3%, Plaid 0%, Others 1%)
Forecast House of Commons Current Party Leaders: Lab 410 seats Con 207 seats Lib Dem 0 seats Others 33 seats (UKIP 0, SNP 11, Green 0, Plaid 3, Others 19) Cable as leader of Lib Dems: Lab 370 seats(-40 seats) Con 224 seats (+17 seats) Lib Dem 27 seats (+27 seats) Others 29 seats (-4 seats) (UKIP 0, SNP 7, Green 0, Plaid 3, Others 19)
|
|
thetop
Labour
[k4r]
Posts: 945
|
Post by thetop on Sept 26, 2012 15:53:27 GMT
How have you got no Liberal seats? Even in low single figures I've never seen them without seats.
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Sept 26, 2012 16:03:37 GMT
ICM / Guardian September PollCurrent Party Leaders: Lab 44% Con 31% Lib Dem 11% Others 14% (UKIP 6%, SNP 4%, Green 3%, Plaid 1%, Others 1%) Cable as leader of Lib Dems: Lab 40% (-4%) Con 30% (-1%) Lib Dem 16% (+5%) Others 14% (unchanged) (UKIP 6%, SNP 3%, Green 3%, Plaid 0%, Others 1%) Forecast House of CommonsCurrent Party Leaders: Lab 410 seats Con 207 seats Lib Dem 0 seats Others 33 seats (UKIP 0, SNP 11, Green 0, Plaid 3, Others 19) Cable as leader of Lib Dems: Lab 370 seats(-40 seats) Con 224 seats (+17 seats) Lib Dem 27 seats (+27 seats) Others 29 seats (-4 seats) (UKIP 0, SNP 7, Green 0, Plaid 3, Others 19) Those are NOT the figures published by ICM from their September poll both with current leaders and with Cable as leader , Harry . Why do you persist in thinking you know better than ICM ?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,777
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 26, 2012 16:15:37 GMT
Is he using the "unadjusted" figures, perhaps?? thetop - Harry is presumably using universal national swing, something he knows as well as us won't be the case on election day
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,820
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 26, 2012 16:31:20 GMT
Is he using the "unadjusted" figures, perhaps?? thetop - Harry is presumably using universal national swing, something he knows as well as us won't be the case on election day I am indeed using the unadjusted figures (because they list ALL parties that will contest the next election including Plaid, SNP, UKIP, Green and BNP) and I use the combination of both national swing and ratio as used in UK-Elect (which got the last election 95% correct)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2012 18:42:08 GMT
ICM - 13% lead
|
|