But if people believe that nothing would change under either Labour or the Tories, wouldn't that make them more inclined to vote for a fringe party or not vote at all rather than vote Conservative?
Possibly, but obviously only if they think it will change for the better under a fringe party.
A lovely little question that snuck its way into the Ashcroft polls - it shows that outside the Labour Party, on balance people believe they would have been worse off under Labour. Exactly the kind of mentality that will count come election day
Worth noting the views of the swing voters here...
But that table shows that a clear majority of people that thought they would be "about the same" under Labour.
It's only Conservative support who think otherwise.
This is so clear cut, I don't understand why you are claiming something that does not actually exist.
We can disregard the "About the same's". They don't count for either side. It'll be decided by those on either side of that line.
It's basically saying that if people vote in terms of what is better for them financially, the balance tips - by and 2 to 1 of those who actually have a firm opinion on the matter - in terms of the Conservatives. And it's not only Conservative support that think that - it's everyone else other than Labour supporters.
About the same (under Labour): Con: 29% / Lab 42% / LD 61% / UKIP 58% / Swing 57%
Not many people thought we would be better off under Labour, apart from Labour voters that is where 51% thought they would have been better off under Labour.
So, if we are to accept Ashcroft polls, it's very significant that such a large number of people think that under Labour it would've been about the same.
As for swing voters, just 24% thought they would have been worse off under Labour.
About the same (under Labour): Con: 29% / Lab 42% / LD 61% / UKIP 58% / Swing 57%
Not many people thought we would be better off under Labour, apart from Labour voters that is where 51% thought they would have been better off under Labour.
So, if we are to accept Ashcroft polls, it's very significant that such a large number of people think that under Labour it would've been about the same.
As for swing voters, just 24% thought they would have been worse off under Labour.
You're missing the point. Both Labour and the Conservatives can lay claim to the "about the Same's". Let's do the honourable thing and split them down the middle and give each party half.
Ashcroft actually replied to me on Twitter.
He seems to think people don't care about the debates as much as the media.
I wonder given the tory lead will they (labour) move on now and just allow the no show to have the effect ?
Wait until the debates are front and centre as in ongoing, and we have had the spectacle of feeble Dave's no show, (or even worse, for him, his humiliating climb down) then we will see what the country think of the beloved leader and his cowardice.
You're missing the point. Both Labour and the Conservatives can lay claim to the "about the Same's". Let's do the honourable thing and split them down the middle and give each party half.
Now. Let's add the rest in.
See the problem?
And now it's nonsense language to confuse the issue.
The Conservatives have completely failed to convince anyone other than Conservative support that they have done a good job these last 5 years.
That's very revealing.
But it's only an Ashcroft poll. I don't think they are very accurate.
You're missing the point. Both Labour and the Conservatives can lay claim to the "about the Same's". Let's do the honourable thing and split them down the middle and give each party half.
Now. Let's add the rest in.
See the problem?
you are having a bubble aren't ya? "let's do the honourable thing"? I think I am having irony overload.
And now it's nonsense language to confuse the issue.
The Conservatives have completely failed to convince anyone other than Conservative support that they have done a good job these last 5 years.
That's very revealing.
But it's only an Ashcroft poll. I don't think they are very accurate.
Probably best that you stick to the research rather than try to introduce your own line of thought...
Probably best that you stick to the research rather than try to introduce your own line of thought...
You'll be pleased to know that the MSN poll appears to have ended. It has been replace with another poll on who is to be most trusted with the economy. Thusfar there have been over 3,500 votes with Conservatives on 38% in second place. Guess who's in the fractional lead.
You'll be pleased to know that the MSN poll appears to have ended. It has been replace with another poll on who is to be most trusted with the economy. Thusfar there have been over 3,500 votes with Conservatives on 38% in second place. Guess who's in the fractional lead.
I'm really going to have to put some thought in to that one.
It must be frustrating for Labour and Tories. Whatever they do the polls barely change! Does it seem like Labour got the biggest and most consistent lead when they were slagging off the Boots boss?
Who do you think is to blame for the break down in talks over the debates.
David [feeble] Cameron 38%
the broadcasters 13%
Both equally 23%
neither 4%
Opinions on the sincerity of feeble Dave and Ed Milibland in regards to actually wanting to take part in the debates
feeble Dave January 2014
genuinely wants to take part. 22%
is actually trying to avoid taking part 51%
in March 2015
genuinely want to take part, 13%
trying to avoid 62%
Ed Miliband January 2014
genuinely wants to take part 51%
Trying to avoid 18%
March 2015
genuinely wants to take part 65%
trying to avoid 9%
Seems the public have got feeble Dave bang to rights on this one. it's all good,
perhaps feeble Dave and the Tories can just cross their fingers in the hope that Ed eats another sandwich?
I'm really going to have to put some thought in to that one.
Just for a laugh, tell me what Labour are on...
Also ran at 14%. The rest are almost in minus figures. Latest is that UKIP have now gained a two point lead whilst "Others" which include Greens and, aptly, Monster Raving Loony Party, are sitting comfortably on 3%.
Seems the public have got feeble Dave bang to rights on this one. it's all good,
perhaps feeble Dave and the Tories can just cross their fingers in the hope that Ed eats another sandwich?
Some more general debate questions too. 69% think there should be debates. 57% think they’re good for democracy, 39% think they’d help them decide who to vote for. 48% feel they won’t make a difference.
DC performance as PM: 44% well, 50% badly.
EM performance as LAB leader: 22% well, 68% badly.
Coalition management economy: 45% well, 45% badly.
I think people are putting far to much emphasis on the debates tbf
Cameron showing up or not isn't going to decide the election
It's a classic case of preference vs salience. I'd imagine most people would like to see debates, but it's probably about 150th on their lists of priorities.
A Populus poll last week showed just 4% had noticed the 'debate on tv debates' in the news. Meanwhile the other 96% were getting on with their lives.
It's a classic case of preference vs salience. I'd imagine most people would like to see debates, but it's probably about 150th on their lists of priorities.
A Populus poll last week showed just 4% had noticed the 'debate on tv debates' in the news. Meanwhile the other 96% were getting on with their lives.
That means nothing.
I am certain a vast majority of the 96% would have loved to see the debates. They just know Cameron is a coward and has successfully sabotaged it. Making a panto 7 party slagging match.
I am certain a vast majority of the 96% would have loved to see the debates. They just know Cameron is a coward and has successfully sabotaged it. Making a panto 7 party slagging match.
How on earth can you be certain of that?
The polling has shown only a tiny minority have taken any notice of this story. Most people just don't care that much about tv debates.
I agreed with you that for most people viewing the debates is low on the list of priorities for them in every day life. However, as a potential voter I would imagine it would be quite high.
I find it bizarre to suggest that only 4% of potential voters would be interested in a TV Leaders debate. I would imagine the opposite. The ordinary citizen is not as invested in politics in terms of reading party manifesto's etc so having a TV debate between party leaders they could address the big issues that they're mainly concerned about.
Comments
Possibly, but obviously only if they think it will change for the better under a fringe party.
Any evidence that they think that?
But that table shows that a clear majority of people that thought they would be "about the same" under Labour.
It's only Conservative support who think otherwise.
This is so clear cut, I don't understand why you are claiming something that does not actually exist.
We can disregard the "About the same's". They don't count for either side. It'll be decided by those on either side of that line.
It's basically saying that if people vote in terms of what is better for them financially, the balance tips - by and 2 to 1 of those who actually have a firm opinion on the matter - in terms of the Conservatives. And it's not only Conservative support that think that - it's everyone else other than Labour supporters.
About the same (under Labour): Con: 29% / Lab 42% / LD 61% / UKIP 58% / Swing 57%
Not many people thought we would be better off under Labour, apart from Labour voters that is where 51% thought they would have been better off under Labour.
So, if we are to accept Ashcroft polls, it's very significant that such a large number of people think that under Labour it would've been about the same.
As for swing voters, just 24% thought they would have been worse off under Labour.
You're missing the point. Both Labour and the Conservatives can lay claim to the "about the Same's". Let's do the honourable thing and split them down the middle and give each party half.
Now. Let's add the rest in.
See the problem?
Wait until the debates are front and centre as in ongoing, and we have had the spectacle of feeble Dave's no show, (or even worse, for him, his humiliating climb down) then we will see what the country think of the beloved leader and his cowardice.
And now it's nonsense language to confuse the issue.
The Conservatives have completely failed to convince anyone other than Conservative support that they have done a good job these last 5 years.
That's very revealing.
But it's only an Ashcroft poll. I don't think they are very accurate.
you are having a bubble aren't ya? "let's do the honourable thing"? I think I am having irony overload.
Probably best that you stick to the research rather than try to introduce your own line of thought...
You'll be pleased to know that the MSN poll appears to have ended. It has been replace with another poll on who is to be most trusted with the economy. Thusfar there have been over 3,500 votes with Conservatives on 38% in second place. Guess who's in the fractional lead.
I'm really going to have to put some thought in to that one.
Just for a laugh, tell me what Labour are on...
14%. Which is quasi-rational, with Tories on 37%.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/generalelection2015?pfr=1
Whatever's up there, there is clearly a UKIP bias. Why / how etc, I've no idea.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/08/public-blame-david-cameron-breakdown-tv-debates/
Opinions on the sincerity of feeble Dave and Ed Milibland in regards to actually wanting to take part in the debates
Seems the public have got feeble Dave bang to rights on this one. it's all good,
perhaps feeble Dave and the Tories can just cross their fingers in the hope that Ed eats another sandwich?
Cameron showing up or not isn't going to decide the election
Also ran at 14%. The rest are almost in minus figures. Latest is that UKIP have now gained a two point lead whilst "Others" which include Greens and, aptly, Monster Raving Loony Party, are sitting comfortably on 3%.
Some more general debate questions too. 69% think there should be debates. 57% think they’re good for democracy, 39% think they’d help them decide who to vote for. 48% feel they won’t make a difference.
DC performance as PM: 44% well, 50% badly.
EM performance as LAB leader: 22% well, 68% badly.
Coalition management economy: 45% well, 45% badly.
Exactly. And all the hot air expended on here in past 4-5 days is exactly that - just hot air.
They've been scapegoated and rightly so for the tuition fee disgrace and lost their core votes and trust.
Bear in mind that that's more a reflection of where the money's been staked than actual probability.
It's a classic case of preference vs salience. I'd imagine most people would like to see debates, but it's probably about 150th on their lists of priorities.
A Populus poll last week showed just 4% had noticed the 'debate on tv debates' in the news. Meanwhile the other 96% were getting on with their lives.
That means nothing.
I am certain a vast majority of the 96% would have loved to see the debates. They just know Cameron is a coward and has successfully sabotaged it. Making a panto 7 party slagging match.
How on earth can you be certain of that?
The polling has shown only a tiny minority have taken any notice of this story. Most people just don't care that much about tv debates.
I agreed with you that for most people viewing the debates is low on the list of priorities for them in every day life. However, as a potential voter I would imagine it would be quite high.
I find it bizarre to suggest that only 4% of potential voters would be interested in a TV Leaders debate. I would imagine the opposite. The ordinary citizen is not as invested in politics in terms of reading party manifesto's etc so having a TV debate between party leaders they could address the big issues that they're mainly concerned about.