Labour support a benefits cap but they won't say how much, apart from excluding child benefit from the cap. Diane Abbott was floundering on Question Time over this issue.
The cap is being set at £26,000 per year, more than many working people are earning.
My mother has already seen her benefits drop. She's on nothing like that much.
As usual the Labour voters jump to conclusions off the back of one poll.
There are other polls showing them around the 33-35% mark (comres,ipsos-mori,icm) and no one knows which are the most accurate.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.....
People should always wait to see how the week turns out to see if it really is the start of a trend or just a blib not least because they have a +/-3% margin of error meaning it could be out by up to 6%.
It could be either and as the week progresses we'll know which.
I've never claimed that they can, just that i would like to see if it's true before condemning it.
Ok, i've never seen that ratiionale which rather explains why I couldn't explain Cleggs statement.
In any case, I stand by what I originally said about how the Tory Right think its their turn for a new plan as Osbourne plan has failed- we are back in recession and Tories are flagging in polls.
They are pressing for labour markets reforms and supply side tax cuts (eg Liam Fox and Boris' articles in the Telegraph). I believe Osbourne is going along with this (approves of Liam Fox article, pressing IDS for another £10B cut to welfare).
And btw Osbourne is steadiliy cutting corporation tax, in 2014 we will have the lowest corporation tax in G7. A supply side measure.
I'd much rather he reduced business costs instead of reducing tax on profits.
Does the average person really give a damn about all this?
I think Hunt should be sacked personally.
What people care about is the economy and their current situation. The issue of Murdoch and co will not be an issue at the election.
I agree most people do care more about the economy and their own situations and like you say the Murdochs probably won't be an issue but Camerons judgement may be.
I've always been curious that people put so much store in polls like this. Reading how they collate the data does not fill me with confidence. Yougov admit their results on voting and taxation issues differ from other polling methods - they can not both be right ? Equally paying in such a strange way does not seem likely to encourage a genuine polling group. Perhaps it's not the poll or method that people back but the result.... 8 of 10 cats like what ??
As usual the Labour voters jump to conclusions off the back of one poll.
There are other polls showing them around the 33-35% mark (comres,ipsos-mori,icm) and no one knows which are the most accurate.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.....
People should always wait to see how the week turns out to see if it really is the start of a trend or just a blib not least because they have a +/-3% margin of error meaning it could be out by up to 6%.
It could be either and as the week progresses we'll know which.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/ seems to be making a big deal out of it, and Mr Wells seems to always be the first to urge caution.
The point is the now fairly regular 10 point gap between the two main parties.
We're at the point where the Conservatives have lost the next election. They now need to actually do something to win it. Where is that coming from at this stage?
The point is the now fairly regular 10 point gap between the two main parties.
We're at the point where the Conservatives have lost the next election. They now need to actually do something to win it. Where is that coming from at this stage?
Yes and also Labour aren't really doing that much, if they start coming up with some decent ideas and Miliband becomes more confident or he get's replaced etc then the gap could become much bigger
On the Sunday Politics show they had a poll that showed the public still think that the Tories would still handle the economy better than Labour.
Come 2015, if, as predicted, the economy has improved then current polls will be meaningless.
Just recently the media have been giving the Tories a kicking to show they still have influence over public opinion, in light of Leverson.It will all be ancient history in 3 years.
On the Sunday Politics show they had a poll that showed the public still think that the Tories would still handle the economy better than Labour.
Come 2015, if, as predicted, the economy has improved then current polls will be meaningless.
Just recently the media have been giving the Tories a kicking to show they still have influence over public opinion, in light of Leverson.It will all be ancient history in 3 years.
And the gap on that poll was 12% iirc in the government's favour.
Neil was bemused that the voters had so much more confidence in the party that they said they weren't going to vote for.
Elections are won or lost by the party in power, oppositions just have to not trip over their own shoe laces.
I think this is a complete myth. A government can be strong on many key points yet still lose an election. Look at Churchill and Major. It all boils down to a popularity contest in the end.
People are a fickle bunch. I think this poll is more of a reflection of them having being bombarded with Labour leaflets over the last few weeks to remind them about what the Coalition may or may not have done.
After the elections, I would expect the Tories' rating to go into the 30s again. Think of it as the opposite of the 'Cameron bounce' last December.
In reality though, Labour should be streets ahead already. They're not doing it right.
I wonder if that will make a difference in the London Mayor Election. It will be interesting to see an opinion poll on that right now.
Ian.
What this poll seems to show is not Tory voters moving to Labour but as much Tory voters moving to UKIP.
The London Mayoral election however is not first past the post - its a supplementary vote system (similar to AV). So all those UKIP voters can quite happily vote for the UKIP Mayoral candidate first - and then give their second preference vote to Boris to help him win.
Perhaps the Tories should not have been so opposed to AV last year - as the UKIP effect could cost them seats next time!
It may still be close between Ken and Boris - but the last two polls this week showed Boris's lead rising in London despite all the unpopularity for the Tories.
I think this is a complete myth. A government can be strong on many key points yet still lose an election. Look at Churchill and Major. It all boils down to a popularity contest in the end.
In 1997 Major's Government wasn't strong on any points. Unemployment was still above 2 million, and his Government had not only presided over the humilaition of the ERM devaluation but had allowed borrowing to reach a record 9% of GDP, for which we paid for the rest of the decade.
I think this is a complete myth. A government can be strong on many key points yet still lose an election. Look at Churchill and Major. It all boils down to a popularity contest in the end.
Major is the epitome of a government losing an election.
His government blew it on Black Wednesday and never recovered. Labour could have put a chimp in charge and won 1997.
Bullingdon club running the country, the rich getting richer in times of austerity for everyone else - do the Tories think any of this will INCREASE their vote?
His government blew it on Black Wednesday and never recovered. Labour could have put a chimp in charge and won 1997.
I'm not sure Labours victory in 1997 was much to do with Black Wednesday. By then the Tories had been in power for 18 years and the Great British Public are a pretty fair bunch and concluded that it was time for a change. Even without BW the Tories would have lost in 97 - they had just been in power for too long.
I think many have realised again what the Tories are and who they are at the top.
Yes, we need to save our economy - but they really have proven by strangling government spending through cuts (many that haven't even happened yet) essentially you strangle the whole nation= recession.
I'm not sure Labours victory in 1997 was much to do with Black Wednesday. By then the Tories had been in power for 18 years and the Great British Public are a pretty fair bunch and concluded that it was time for a change. Even without BW the Tories would have lost in 97 - they had just been in power for too long.
That might explain a swing -- but 97 was a kicking.
And I refuse to believe that Blair was that much of a draw. He was my constituency MP and he always gave me the willies -- never could quite put my finger on why, but I was proven right.
Comments
5 x more than they get back in the difference between 50% and 45|%
so the rich will be paying more than they do now
I can prove he didn't come up with it "off the top of his head"
like i said it was mentioned in the budget by Osbourne
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/mar/21/50p-tax-rate-george-osborne
I've never claimed that they can, just that i would like to see if it's true before condemning it.
My mother has already seen her benefits drop. She's on nothing like that much.
There are other polls showing them around the 33-35% mark (comres,ipsos-mori,icm) and no one knows which are the most accurate.
I've said it before and I'll say it again.....
People should always wait to see how the week turns out to see if it really is the start of a trend or just a blib not least because they have a +/-3% margin of error meaning it could be out by up to 6%.
It could be either and as the week progresses we'll know which.
Ok, i've never seen that ratiionale which rather explains why I couldn't explain Cleggs statement.
In any case, I stand by what I originally said about how the Tory Right think its their turn for a new plan as Osbourne plan has failed- we are back in recession and Tories are flagging in polls.
They are pressing for labour markets reforms and supply side tax cuts (eg Liam Fox and Boris' articles in the Telegraph). I believe Osbourne is going along with this (approves of Liam Fox article, pressing IDS for another £10B cut to welfare).
And btw Osbourne is steadiliy cutting corporation tax, in 2014 we will have the lowest corporation tax in G7. A supply side measure.
I'd much rather he reduced business costs instead of reducing tax on profits.
I agree most people do care more about the economy and their own situations and like you say the Murdochs probably won't be an issue but Camerons judgement may be.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/ seems to be making a big deal out of it, and Mr Wells seems to always be the first to urge caution.
The point is the now fairly regular 10 point gap between the two main parties.
We're at the point where the Conservatives have lost the next election. They now need to actually do something to win it. Where is that coming from at this stage?
Yes and also Labour aren't really doing that much, if they start coming up with some decent ideas and Miliband becomes more confident or he get's replaced etc then the gap could become much bigger
Errr.....
Come 2015, if, as predicted, the economy has improved then current polls will be meaningless.
Just recently the media have been giving the Tories a kicking to show they still have influence over public opinion, in light of Leverson.It will all be ancient history in 3 years.
And the gap on that poll was 12% iirc in the government's favour.
Neil was bemused that the voters had so much more confidence in the party that they said they weren't going to vote for.
Besides the ST has the best supplements.
Indeed. This is exactly why I avoided mentioning Labour in my post.
Although ellenpagerocks is right to point out that Labour have an open goal here.
I think this is a complete myth. A government can be strong on many key points yet still lose an election. Look at Churchill and Major. It all boils down to a popularity contest in the end.
After the elections, I would expect the Tories' rating to go into the 30s again. Think of it as the opposite of the 'Cameron bounce' last December.
In reality though, Labour should be streets ahead already. They're not doing it right.
What this poll seems to show is not Tory voters moving to Labour but as much Tory voters moving to UKIP.
The London Mayoral election however is not first past the post - its a supplementary vote system (similar to AV). So all those UKIP voters can quite happily vote for the UKIP Mayoral candidate first - and then give their second preference vote to Boris to help him win.
Perhaps the Tories should not have been so opposed to AV last year - as the UKIP effect could cost them seats next time!
It may still be close between Ken and Boris - but the last two polls this week showed Boris's lead rising in London despite all the unpopularity for the Tories.
In 1997 Major's Government wasn't strong on any points. Unemployment was still above 2 million, and his Government had not only presided over the humilaition of the ERM devaluation but had allowed borrowing to reach a record 9% of GDP, for which we paid for the rest of the decade.
Major is the epitome of a government losing an election.
His government blew it on Black Wednesday and never recovered. Labour could have put a chimp in charge and won 1997.
I'm not sure Labours victory in 1997 was much to do with Black Wednesday. By then the Tories had been in power for 18 years and the Great British Public are a pretty fair bunch and concluded that it was time for a change. Even without BW the Tories would have lost in 97 - they had just been in power for too long.
Yes, we need to save our economy - but they really have proven by strangling government spending through cuts (many that haven't even happened yet) essentially you strangle the whole nation= recession.
Ideological Policy isn't working.
That might explain a swing -- but 97 was a kicking.
And I refuse to believe that Blair was that much of a draw. He was my constituency MP and he always gave me the willies -- never could quite put my finger on why, but I was proven right.