Lib Dems surge following Chancellor debate

Spartacus_Mills

aelitaman wrote: »

PB has the YouGov daily out and no movement on the LbDems.

ICM shows a 4% spike since the last week.

Rinoa

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

Labour are the big losers in the latest poll, now below 30%,with the Lib Dems surging 4 points in the latest ICM poll following the Chancellors debate. I said it on Politicalbetting.com, the debate was going to move the polls especially given the way it was reported on the 10 o'clock news and Newsnight.

It backs up my view that Cable was head and shoulders above the other 2, Osbourne was better than expected (could hardly of been worse) and Darling was dull but steady.

Fantastic news for the Lib Dems. I am made up by this. For all the seats we may lost to the Tories I see gains from Labour in Watford, Burnley, Brent Central, Bradford East, Birmingham Hall Green and so on. Yes, I put my money where my mouth is, I am on these.

April 1st, 2010
ICM - GuardianMar Mar 31 Mar 26

CONSERVATIVES 38% 39%
LABOUR 29% 31%
LIB DEMS 23% 19%

If Vince was your leader you'd have more of a chance.

Just wait until the leaders' debates.

With Nick Clegg you'll be down to 10% in the polls.

JP45

aelitaman wrote: »

Any party I see lying will not get my vote this time.

That would appear to rule out the three main parties.

As David Smith noted in the Sunday Times, neither Labour, the Tories nor the Lib Dems are being straight with the electorate - the problem (as he points out) lies in the nature of our political system:

My test for Alistair Darling's budget, as described here last week, was that he did no harm, which is the most you can expect in a pre-election budget from a chancellor under intense political pressure. He passed that test and even did a few things that, at the margin, will help Britain's beleaguered small and medium-sized firms.

Of course it would have been better if he had provided a full and frank disclosure of the spending cuts that will be needed to reduce the still-gaping hole in the public finances. A comprehensive spending review is not needed until this summer but could and should have happened last year, in line with the two-year pattern established in 1998.

That review, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies' post-budget analysis would require departmental spending to drop 3.1% a year in real terms from 2011, a cumulative fall over four years of 12%. Outside protected areas such as health, schools and overseas aid the cumulative fall over four years is closer to 25%.

Darling did not come clean on this, perhaps understandably. The problem is the nature of our political system, particularly in a pre-election period. Opposition politicians call for honesty and transparency but offer none in return.

So George Osborne, shadow chancellor, based his attack on the budget on an apparent stealth tax hitting 30m people — the freezing of income-tax allowances. This, I am afraid, was nonsense from a man who hopes to be chancellor in a few weeks.

The April allowance uprating is based on the previous September's retail price inflation rate. Then, inflation was negative, and in theory Darling could have cut allowances. Freezing them was in no way a stealth tax. Tory supporters, and many in business, would rather the shadow chancellor directed his fire at the new 50% tax rate, coming in on April 6.

Even Vince Cable, the nation's favourite financial uncle, is not above these games. The Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, when criticising Darling for failing to provide details of spending cuts, named cancelling Eurofighter and Trident's replacement as two things he would do.

However, cancelling Eurofighter would cost, as well as lots of British jobs, huge sums in compensation that mean it is cheaper to buy the planes. Not replacing Trident has minimal relevance for the public finances for the next decade.

Spartacus_Mills

Rinoa wrote: »

If Vince was your leader you'd have more of a chance.

Just wait until the leaders' debates.

With Nick Clegg you'll be down to 10% in the polls.

Vince was great when he stood in when the incompetent Ming stood down however he did not want it. He was pushed to stand but you can take a horse to water.....

Our hope is that Clegg, who has been pretty anonymous, will benefit from the equal platform he will get with Brown and Cameron.

If you look at the Chancellors debate Vince thrived partly because we had Vince and Alistair Darling ganging up to attack George Osbourne and Tory Policy then we had Vince and George Osbourne ganging up to attack Alistair Darling and Labour policy. So we got a boost without exposure to policy which does us no harm.

If we get the same in the leaders debate Nick can benefit from that. I am glad Chris Huhne did not win the leadership. Nick has spent his time fighting Labour in Sheffield which is going to be crucial to this election. Our relations with Labour in some of the big cities is awful. We even run Brum with the Tories helping us.

I would be happy to bet we will never get to 10% in the polls.

aelitaman

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

Vince was great when he stood in when the incompetent Ming stood down however he did not want it. He was pushed to stand but you can take a horse to water.....

Our hope is that Clegg, who has been pretty anonymous, will benefit from the equal platform he will get with Brown and Cameron.

If you look at the Chancellors debate Vince thrived partly because we had Vince and Alistair Darling ganging up to attack George Osbourne and Tory Policy then we had Vince and George Osbourne ganging up to attack Alistair Darling and Labour policy. So we got a boost without exposure to policy which does us no harm.

If we get the same in the leaders debate Nick can benefit from that. I am glad Chris Huhne did not win the leadership. Nick has spent his time fighting Labour in Sheffield which is going to be crucial to this election. Our relations with Labour in some of the big cities is awful. We even run Brum with the Tories helping us.

I would be happy to bet we will never get to 10% in the polls.

Clegg asks some good questions at PMQ's I am interested to see how he performs at the debates.

Spartacus_Mills

aelitaman wrote: »

Clegg asks some good questions at PMQ's I am interested to see how he performs at the debates.

He does, but Brown just dismisses them and answers the questions he wishes was asked. Clegg's questions are constantly more digging and incisive than Dave's.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

I think you're overanalysing.

Tories call for austerity agenda, polls slide.

Tories promise tax cut, polls jump.

Generali

DAK what happens if all three main parties get about 30% with the Nats 'n' Nutters taking the remaining 10% between them?

Spartacus_Mills

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I think you're overanalysing.

Tories call for austerity agenda, polls slide.

Tories promise tax cut, polls jump.

I think that is a slight oversimplification of my view. The personal rating of Osbourne prior to and after the debate was interesting as it more than doubled and proportionally he got a bigger boost than either of the other two prospective chancellors although their ratings are still ahead of his.

I think the Tories have bolstered in the polls partly due to Osbourne coming over well in the debates. Of course this is a guess on my behalf as I have not see the raw data of the recent polls.

Emy1501

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I think you're overanalysing.

Tories call for austerity agenda, polls slide.

Tories promise tax cut, polls jump.

In the latest poll Tories are down one or two are are Labour and the Lib Dems up 4 so your comment does not make sense as the Tories have not gained anything in latest poll