« Boris: 'Where is Her Majesty?' | Main | Triple whammy poll blow for Brown »

Comments

My daughter,usually totally disinterested is openly talking about how useless Brown is and how everybody she talks to at work and amongst her friends thinks Brown is a joke.Sadly the joke is in poor taste.

Caution;Boris only won with less than 20% of the electorate voting for him.Looks like Europe could be back on the agenda big time---bring it on Dave.

ukip mg - so you would be pleased if the efforts of ukip assisted Nulab to keep power? Twit!

Excellent. And while the figure is down 4% from the last YouGov one (from the Sun), I believe it's actually 2% up from the last in the Times. Not that the paper makes a difference, just interesting to note.

And it's encouraging that so little slip back seems to have occured since the 49% one too.

TORY LEAD DOWN BY 4%?! CALL ME DAVE SHOULD BE 30 POINTS AHEAD BY NOW! HE MUST GO! WE WOULDN'T BE IN THIS CRISIS IF EDWARD LEIGH WAS LEADER!

=]

The 25 point lead seemed a bit incredible for me, this one feels realistic by comparison. And it's such a nice feeling to call a twenty point Tory lead realistic.

The importance of this poll is that it's still above the teens, it's post-relaunch, post-10p 'resolution' and post-election campaign.

The secret for Cameron now isn't to keep the polls bloated, but to keep nibbling away at Labour's credibility and to keep our own 'policy striptease' coming.

While all welcome restoring the money, stolen by Labour, from the poor, Brown must be livid that his £2.7 billion bung only scored him 2 % in this poll. It must be the most expensive 2 % vote buy in history.

"Caution;Boris only won with less than 20% of the electorate voting for him."

Is this the latest pitiable attempt by the right of the party to claim that Cameron just isn't working?

"Looks like Europe could be back on the agenda big time"

Where?

"Caution;Boris only won with less than 20% of the electorate voting for him"

It's all very well to say that, but what proportion of the electorate voted for his opponents?

Another good poll. It's good to see most people are not falling for Labour's desperate actions.

All of the doubters seem to have disappeared or gone off to play politics on the outer, outer fringes with UKIP and the other unmentionables . These polls show one thing we have the right leader , with the right policies for the right time!

Tim, I'm sure you have already picked up your copy of Grazia, but there is a very favourable comparison of Sam 'n' Dave ('Hold on I'm comin' seems an apt hit from the original s&d) versus Sarah 'n' Gordo.

You see, I read the quality mags! ;-)

"All of the doubters seem to have disappeared"

Jack Stone, those of us who stood by, and stood up for David Cameron during the dark days of the Brown bounce have been vindicated. David Cameron has proven that he has the nerve and steadfastness of character to be prime minister. The turning point was when team Cameron kick started their summer of economic attack on Brown, once the spotlight was fixed on Brown's fake economy the penny dropped and people realised that the Gordon Brown economy was all smoke and mirrors. The only question now is how big will the winning margin be?

Fabulous stupendous news. Well done lib Dems!!! Up 1 to 18. People conveniantly forget we were on 11% last October. Fabulous stupendous momentum - we'll over take Labour first, and then the Tories aswell, There's just enough time to win the General electon in 2 years time.

Jack - To be fair those advocating tax cuts, particularly on inheritance tax have been vindicated and this is what changed things around.

If we had followed your world view - no tax cuts etc, we could have had an October election which we would have lost. DC has listened and taken a balanced view. Thank god he didn't listen to you!!!!

hahaha, very funny Gloy...although it does beg the question of just how low can 'New' Labour go?...Maybe the real nasty party of local elections can overtake the nasty party of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election (thats Lib Dem's and New Labour for those not acquainted with the rough and tumble!)

Please though...no talk of a Conservative win until there is in fact a Conservative win: the only thing worse than a socialist is the same lefty fools crowing after causing an upset (á la Michael Portillo losing his seat) Talking GE here, probably in 2010....2 years is a long time in politics...or is it a week?

Yes Tony, I was there and like you stuck up for DC. I claimed Gordon had fired off all his ammunition, briefly starving Cameron of the media attention that is so vital to a politician's sucess. I was mocked, most were convinced it was curtains for us.

Then when party conference season came round, lo and behold Gord's poll lead began to plummet. And why? Because for the first time, the media gave equal coverage and could compare the two leaders. Our party's pledge on tax vs Labour's spin (Surprise troop visit). Can't wait to get rid of this terrible government.

This is indeed encouraging, and proves the trend of us being 20 or so points ahead - the one giving us a 26 point lead was not rogue after all!

We need to continue to work hard to win the next GE and prove we are ready for Government. And we mustn't forget key Lib Dem seats we must win (e.g. Sutton & Cheam, and Oxford W & Abingdon) - the message being only we can form an alternative government to Labour which is so unpopular now, and a vote for the Lib Dems would only help keep Labour in power.

David Cameron should continue with what he's good at: being relaxed and himself and connecting with voters' concerns.

those of us who stood by, and stood up for David Cameron during the dark days of the Brown bounce have been vindicated.

No you haven't! This lead is almost entirely the result of Labour failure combined with a turnaround in world economic fortune. Cameron has had nothing whatever to do with either. As has been pointed out, the change in fortune started with an announcement on inheritance tax of the kind long demanded by Cameron's critics, and until then resisted by his team.

Don't forget that the share of the Tory vote in the local elections was only 3% up on two years ago. That's not much to show is it? The stunning success was due not to Tory gain but Labour collapse.

I haven't been to Crewe and Nantwich, but all the reports are that any change is due to people turning against Labour rather than positively voting for the Conservatives, and that the Conservative campaign is based on exploiting this rather than being positive.

Alex, the LibDem vote share hardly moved. Labour support switched to us and yes, their support did collapse by itself as well.

But for a party to have a collapse in its vote, the opposition has to be something they can stomach having in office. That was an aim of DC's "Detoxification" process, and it has succeeded. Osborne and Cameron want tax cuts- the reason why they've avoided talking about them until recently is because it would've interfered with the Detox process- Labour would've been able to shout "same old tories" at a point where it would've still been believable.

Now though, it isn't.

The Brown bounce was a media creation with a lot of dubious polling including opinions from people most unlikely to vote. As soon as Brown had hit the campaign trail, had he called an election, people would have realised he was not up to it.

Cameron's got a good team around him, something Brown is congenitally incapable of achieving. Anyone with ability he sees as a potental threat so he surrounds himself with lesser beings - who are intended to make him look good. Net result disaster.

The latest real test of voters opinions in a Lab/Con contest was the London elections where UKIP almost disappeared and the Lib-Dems suffered an horrendous, but classic, third-party squeeze, falling to third fourth and even fifth in assembly constituency votes and only just managing to beat the greens in the list vote!

When the popular view was late 07, early 08 or 09, I said 2010, but I'm increasingly thinking that Brown will now put 2009 back in the frame for the General Election, calculating that an extra 1-2,000 votes for UKIP in each margina seat - garnered because of the Euro Parliament elections on the same date - could save 20-30 seats for Labour and LDs and that this will allow him to lead a wounded dog, coalition administration.

That he believes the electorate so stupid is typical, but be ready!

MrB, what you say is very true. One the eve of conference the BBC were literally writing David Cameron's political obituary. Then came that stunning unscripted speech which finally allowed the public to see what David Cameron is all about. As you say upto that point the media had cultivated an image of Gordon Brown as being the only show in town. Once the public got to see David Cameron and had a chance to compare him to Brown the bounce soon faded.

Labour support switched to us

No, it didn't. Read the figures!

But for a party to have a collapse in its vote, the opposition has to be something they can stomach having in office.

The people of this country are not "the opposition" - they're the same people who voted for Margaret Thatcher three times.

That was an aim of DC's "Detoxification" process, and it has succeeded.

All the evidence (look up "evidence" in a dictionary if you have problems with the concept) says the opposite.

Osborne and Cameron want tax cuts

News to me.

But for a party to have a collapse in its vote, the opposition has to be something they can stomach having in office.
Not neccessarily true - support may well fragment for example when all the main parties are unpopular, the general trend is for people (including many of the 3 main parties voters) to be increasingly fedup with the 3 main political parties who have the advantage over smaller parties of incumbency, there certainly isn't much enthusiasm about what politicians of any of the 3 main parties will do, the 3 main parties persist because there is division about the alternatives.

Alex, the share of the vote gain at the local elections was 5%, with Labour losing 6% and LDs picking up 1%. How you cannot see this as Labour support switching to the Conservatives is beyond me.

The reason why I didn't quote the evidence is because I didn't have it in front of me at the time, but now David has kindly confirmed the figures. If the vote didn't switch to us, who did it switch to? For their supporters to stay at home, they have to feel unthreatened by us. That is the success of the detoxification process. Don't forget that the tide was beginning to turn even before the long list of Brown disasters. Remember that marginal seats poll before the election that never was?

Sure, the collapse of confidence in the government has a lot to do with our now huge poll lead. But to say that is the only reason for it is unfair, and an insult to the hard work done by Cameron and the majority of the party.

I think Alex Swanson is wrong.
First, the Conservatives achieved 40 per cent in both 2006 and 2007 - which was the highest share the party has hit since 1992.
This year, it was 44%.

I have posted many times over the last year asking the party to sharpen up their tax proposals.
They have been doing more on this - they are more firmly stating their intention to cut taxes, but we also are in a situation where the debt burden could be very high indeed. No serious opposition can commit to a budget in advance - it wouldn't make us credible.

I was not an initial supporter of Cameron, and campaigned for DD who I still admire hugely - as before, but DC won the contest and is fully entitled to make changes to the party - both in it's policies and to broaden it's appeal. With results like this, I would advise you to support the party and not snipe at it.

Alex, the LibDem vote share hardly moved.

A little searching of the BBC website reveals that their estimate of Labour's vote last year was a whopping 27%. So they've dropped an equally whopping one (1) percentage point.

First, the Conservatives achieved 40 per cent in both 2006 and 2007 - which was the highest share the party has hit since 1992.
This year, it was 44%.

We've been through this before.

Cameron can hardly claim credit for 2006 - he'd barely got his feet under the table. And not only was there no improvement to 2007, national polls before and after the local elections quite simply did not support the idea that the party nationally (as opposed to locally) was that popular. Remember, in the summer of last year the consensus was that Brown would win a general election.

Given the mess Labour are making of things, a 4 point rise is hardly anything to be proud of. Cameron knows this even if you lot don't. That's why he's campaigning at Crewe and Nantwich on Labour's record not his own.

Alex, the share of the vote gain at the local elections was 5%, with Labour losing 6% and LDs picking up 1%.

No idea where you got this from.

I would advise you to support the party and not snipe at it.

If you think I'm sniping here you should read what I post on Labourhome!! But seriously - I've done my fair share of blind support over the years. From here on in, I will support them only if they tell and truth and support me and mine. Neither of which at the moment they show no signs of doing.


"... a 4 point rise is hardly anything to be proud of. Cameron knows this even if you lot don't. That's why he's campaigning at Crewe and Nantwich on Labour's record not his own."

FYI - I got those figures from Jeremy Vine on election night, in between his cowboy routine. And your comment I have quoted is absolute nonsense. We already have more than 50% of council seats in the UK, and were already coming from a very strong position in local election vote shares. To say a 4-5% increase in these circumstances is nothing to be proud of is akin to complaining that you only got 150 pints of blood out of a stone when you wanted 151.

I got those figures from Jeremy Vine on election night

Well, I'm using figures taken off the BBC website, and from the Times. I suspect you may have misheard?

We already have more than 50% of council seats in the UK, and were already coming from a very strong position in local election vote shares. To say a 4-5% increase in these circumstances is nothing to be proud of

This is a misuse of statistics. The Conservatives did not have a very strong position in local election vote shares, they had 40%, which is not bad, but still not enough to win a general election. The 3 to 4 (not 4 to 5) percent point increase in this vote (not council seats) over the two years from 2006 on a turnout of 35% means that out of every hundred people eligible to vote, the Conservatives got one or two extra, putting them up from around fourteen to just over fifteen. Doesn't sound so good when you put it like that, does it?

One further comment (and this is the last I'm going to post on this thread).

We are in danger of missing the two main points here, which are:
(1) There is no evidence that the "detoxification" campaign has persuaded anyone of anything, and merely repeating that it has, like some kind of religious mantra, doesn't make it so.
(2) The "detoxification" campaign has in fact been positively dangerous, because it has blocked off any serious political debate about the future of the country. By deliberately aligning the Conservative Party with the main features of the left-liberal consensus of the political elites, Cameron has committed a future govt to maintain essentially the same policies which have done so much damage certainly over the past eleven years and in some cases (eg education) much longer.

Yes it is nice to have a lead in the opinion polls but I think we are also missing an important point. This party may have increased its share of support, but from a dwindling number of people who actually vote.

What is worrying is that many people do not vote because they have become so disenfranchised from the political process. In future a party may win an election but the numbers voting in it are so small that a win does not give the party moral legitimacy to govern.

A very worrying state of affairs that I think we need to address.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker