Gordon Brown on course to win election

[Hopeless Romantic]

GORDON BROWN is on course to remain prime minister after the general election as a new Sunday Times poll reveals that Labour is now just two points behind the Tories.

The YouGov survey places David Cameron’s Conservatives on 37%, as against 35% for Labour — the closest gap between the parties in more than two years.

It means Labour is heading for a total of 317 seats, nine short of an overall majority, with the Tories languishing on a total of just 263 MPs. Such an outcome would mean Brown could stay in office and deny Cameron the keys to No 10.

The poll result presents the Conservative leader with one of the greatest challenges of his leadership today as he makes the keynote speech to his party’s spring forum.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, Cameron defied his right-wing critics who believe the party’s modernisation has gone too far. He said: “Some people say to me, ‘Play things safe; try to win by default — the government is in a mess.’ I say, ‘No. This is the Conservative party that is offering radical change. I’m doubling up on change’.”

With the expected May 6 election now just over two months away, Cameron will seek to reconnect with voters through a series of pledges, including a plan to restore discipline in schools. In an echo of the speech that won him the Tory leadership in 2005, he will address the Brighton conference without notes.

“This is very, very clear,” he said. “I’ve made my choice. There is no going back. This election is about change and we will be offering change.”

Cameron insisted he was unconcerned about the collapse in Tory support. “The polls move around a lot,” he said. “The voters tell us that they want change. They want to know the Conservative party itself has changed.”

The narrowing of the Conservative lead has been dramatic and rapid. Until January the Tories held close to a 10-point lead. But a week ago a Sunday Times YouGov poll put the gap at six points, suggesting a hung parliament, with the Tories still on course to become the largest party.

In the last election, in 2005, support for the parties generally held steady in the run-up to polling day. YouGov polling for The Sunday Times showed Labour leads of between two and five points from January through to the June election. Labour’s margin of victory was three points.

In today’s poll, Labour has risen two points on the previous week, from 33%, while the Conservatives have dropped two from 39%. The Liberal Democrats are unchanged on 17%.

The collapse in the Tory poll lead will put pressure on the pound in financial markets tomorrow by adding to fears that a hung parliament will mean insufficient action is taken to cut Britain’s budget deficit.

The last time the gap between the two main parties came this close and the Tory support was so low was in autumn 2007. That was before Brown’s honeymoon ended with his failure to call a snap general election. The Conservatives went on to peak in May 2008 with a 26-point lead.

Today’s poll suggests recent claims about Brown’s tantrums and his intimidation of staff may have actually helped him. Just 28% of people believe the prime minister is a bully and 50% agree he has a “strong sense of right and wrong”.

The survey disclosed growing concerns about Cameron’s elite background and lack of empathy with ordinary families. Just 25% think that Cameron understands problems faced by “people like me”, compared with 35% for Brown.

Furthermore, only 28% think the Conservative leader wants to do the best for “all groups in Britain”, against 39% for the prime minister.

Peter Kellner, president of YouGov, the Sunday Times pollster, said that while individual polls could throw up unexpected shifts, the recent trend had been for a significant narrowing of the Tory lead.

“Our daily polls should be regarded a bit like the FTSE index: a 100-point rise or fall in a day might be a blip or a trend — often we can’t tell for a few days,” he said.

“I am confident the Tory lead is down this weekend but I can’t promise whether the latest movement will be sustained, increased or reversed in the days ahead. One of the reasons for doing daily polls is to monitor these fluctuations.”

The Tory lead of 6%, which was first reported in The Sunday Times, was maintained in YouGov’s polls in The Sun last week. The increase in support for Labour on Thursday and Friday, as the latest Sunday Times poll was being conducted, came as figures showed a strengthening economic recovery.

Under the British parliamentary system, the prime minister remains in office after a general election until he either tenders his resignation or is defeated in a Commons no confidence vote.

If the election result leaves Labour just short of an overall majority, Brown is likely to battle on, with Labour running the country as a minority government. The party would seek to do deals with minor parties such as Ulster’s Democratic Unionist party or, if necessary, Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats, to get its legislation through parliament.

If repeated in a general election on the basis of a uniform swing in all constituencies, today’s poll would leave Labour just nine seats short of the 326 needed for an overall majority in the new 650-seat House of Commons.

The Tories would be well behind on 263 seats, with the Liberal Democrats on 41. Kellner calculated that, even allowing for a larger swing to the Tories in marginal seats, where the party has spent millions of pounds on campaigning, the poll was consistent with Labour being by far the largest party.

He suggested that in such a scenario Labour might win 300 seats, with the Tories on 270 and the Lib Dems on 50.

Labour will believe it is benefiting from the upturn in the economy. For the first time in a YouGov poll since July 2007, before the financial crisis, people trust Labour more than the Tories to run the economy.

YouGov, which began polling after the 2001 election, has developed a reputation for accuracy. Its final Sunday Times poll in 2005 was precisely right, and it accurately predicted Boris Johnson’s victory in the 2008 London mayoral election and the results of last year’s Euro elections.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7044185.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2

[Mr Creosote]

1. Hmmm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=191x29212#29288

[non sociopath skin]

3. Nice one, Mr C

I don't look forward to a Labour minority government supported by Cleggy's gang with any real relish, but I really would enjoy seeing the look on Young Dave's and his pals' smug faces if they bomb out. As they richly deserve to do.

The Skin

[Mr Creosote]

4. Let's not get carried away

Anything rather than the Tories, even if it is some ghastly New Labour / Lib Dem coalition

[TheBigotBasher]

6. One simple reason to not back Labour

[LeftishBrit]

11. I'm voting Lib Dem; but anyone is better than the empty-headed Dave with the Thatcherites pulling

his strings!

[TheBigotBasher]

12. Not with compulsory ID cards on the table

I know how much of a database state we have already - it is much much bigger than people recognise, this is a step too far.

[LeftishBrit]

15. And you think the Tories would respect civil liberties any better?

Remember the last bunch? Lock 'em all up! Prison works! The sus laws? Do you seriously think that if they've got the technology they won't use it to keep tabs on us? Tories tend to be far more pro-police-state (in the literal sense) than the other parties.

In fact, the sort of thing you're mentioning is a very good argument for *not having any government with a big majority*. This sort of intrusion on privacy is unpopular, and any government in a hung parliament, or with a razor-thin majority, would be reluctant to implement it.

[TheBigotBasher]

18. "not having any government with a big majority"

Agreed.

It has however been Labour that has been heavier on the police state than ANY other previous Government. Stop and Search is SUS done with a smile. Anti terror laws used to stop trainspotters taking pictures at railway stations. There is much much more but the one line that should not be crossed is introduction of compulsory ID cards.

I like the LD Freedom petition proposals, although these seem to have died a death in the run up to the election.

http://freedom.libdems.org.uk/sign-the-freedom-bill-petition/

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Heh, my pessimism is looking unjustified

which is good, overall. But this brings up an interesting situation, highlights in an Independent blog aheadof their poll tomorrow:

The Conservatives' slide in the opinion polls continues in the latest survey by ComRes for The Independent. It shows the Tory lead down from seven points last month to five points, its lowest in our monthly series since December 2008. Crucially, it suggests that Labour would be the biggest party in a hung parliament, with 17 more seats than the Tories.

That would give Nick Clegg a huge dilemma, since the Tories would have "won but lost" -- won the battle for the popular vote but ended up with fewer seats than Labour because of our first-past-the-post system. The only deal in town would probably be a Lib-Lab agreement, with Clegg's party supporting Labour in key Commons votes. Our calculations suggest that even if the Tories and LibDems joined forces, they would be three seats short of an overall majority.

http://todayinpolitics.independentminds.livejournal.com/49563.html

With the Lib Dems having long said some form of PR is needed, should they support the party with the most seats, or the one with the most votes (and what if the additional support of the DUP was needed to get that majority? Working in partnership with Paisley's party? Ugh)

In this case, perhaps the principled (or non-committal, depending on your point of view) thing to do would be to tell Labour to form a minority government, with no promises, and see how things develop - with either a quick new election called if Labour gets popularity, as in 1974, or a no-confidence vote if Labour screws up majorly about something.

But what if a party dangled PR in front of Clegg? Labour seems willing to contemplate the Alternative Vote system, but I can't see them going for PR when they benefit the most from the current system; what if the Tories decided they could be the most popular party, although never getting an absolute majority, for most votes, and decided to go for being the normal leaders of coalitions in the future? It's against their traditions, but if anything would goad them to it, it'd be winning the popular vote by a significant amount, and ending up with significantly fewer seats than Labour.

Would the promise of a referendum on adopting PR (perhaps allowing the Lib Dems to specify the form of PR, eg AV+) be enough to tempt Clegg into a coalition with Cameron?

[LeftishBrit]

2. Here's hoping!

At least the Tories may not get the big majority that had been expected.

[tjwmason]

5. I think that people are seeing through Cameron

A smiling stuffed shirt in the style of Blair; utterly bereft of policies or principles...just as people are becoming increasingly hostile to politicians who seek power merely for the sake of seeking power.

[T_i_B]

14. Aren't they all "smiling stuffed shirts"?

That's the big problem. Too much obsessing over image and very little policy.

It's annoying when the politics coverage is more concered with whether or not Gordon Brown shoved somebody then what's gone wrong at Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust. I'm not looking forward to how the next election is going to pan out.

[LeftishBrit]

16. Actually no. Gordon Brown isn't a smiling stuffed shirt, whatever else he is.

He is a thoughtful man who concentrates on substance. He's more RW than I care for, but not the Tory spin doctor, all surface and no depth, that Blair or Cameron is.

He lacks surface rather than depth. A person who often appears like a dour and unsmiling stereotype of an accountant, and every now and then throws a tantrum, is not the type who wins lots of instant popularity. Nonetheless, he is our best PM in 30 years, and a lot better than Young Dave is likely to be.

'It's annoying when the politics coverage is more concered with whether or not Gordon Brown shoved somebody then what's gone wrong at Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust.'

Fully agree!

[T_i_B]

17. "our best PM in 30 years"

That's a heck of a damming statement to make about modern politics!

[LeftishBrit]

19. 'A heck of a damning statement' - yes, I suppose it is.

[dipsydoodle]

26. Indeed

:rofl:

[craigmatic]

8. It's just one poll but the people are clearly against both party leaders

they don't trust cameron and they don't really like Brown. I've said before that the best thing that can happen to Labour is a hung parliament that way they can get rid of Brown and find someone new while still holding power. It might not happen but it needs to.

[fedsron2us]

9. The next election is going to be little more than a gurning contest

from the ugly sisters who have dominated British politics for far too long. Don't go expecting any answers to Britains problems because neither the Tories, Labour or the Liberal Democrats have any. In fact none of the major parties have two original ideas to rub together so you can expect constant retreads of tired old policies that passed their sell by dates years ago All of them are basically offering warmed over Thatcherite leftovers garnished with a slightly different coloured sauce.

The truth is that the coming election will resolve nothing.

[fedsron2us]

10. And here are the winners

[finn78]

13. Probably right

The UK is in real trouble. Massive debts, falling pound and weak political system. Labour shouldn't get back in because of all the mistakes they've made - failing to control immigration, not arming our troops sufficiently, the economy, social order, youth crime etc etc etc. But in all liklihood Brown will win simply because the Tories aren't connecting enough with the public. I think Cameron is pretty lightweight but I'm pretty sure he and his cronnies couldn't possibly do a worse job than Labour are doing at the moment.

[Spider Jerusalem]

21. ...

UK public debt as a percentage of GDP is at roughly the same level as that of the US; it's not good, but it's also not insurmountable and far from being as bad as Greece or Spain.

Immigration as a political issue plays well with people who are too thick to comprehend the reality of the situation, which is that not much can be done about immigration from within the EU (no matter how much posturing politicians of various parties do on the issue), and that the number of immigrants from within the EU to Britain is probably greater than the number of immigrants from without.

As far as social order and youth crime? Better now than in the past, whatever the Tories have been saying (see here).

Cameron may be a lightweight and an empty suit, but the Tories are still the Tories, and they can do a much worse job than Brown is doing (just ask anyone who remembers Thatcher).

[Dutch]

22. A tendency to call people concerned about immigration "thick"

Is exactly the kind of smug arrogance that has led to the complete disenchantment with both parties amongst so many people in this country, especially among working class people (actually the limited powers of the UK's elected authorities to make policy on this and other subjects one way or the other is another). It's also exactly the kind of crap that drives people to the BNP. Engaging with the concerns of the public is a far better electoral strategy than mocking them.

[LeftishBrit]

23. 'the kind of crap that drives people to the BNP'

There is little point in Labour (or Tories) becoming more like the BNP in order to prevent people voting for the BNP. The trouble with the BNP is its policies, not that it draws votes away from other parties.

Also overplaying the immigration card can backfire even electorally, as Howard discovered in 2005.

There are really two different 'immigration' issues, one more genuine than the other. The more genuine one is that the large and more-or-less unrestricted migration within the EU can and sometimes does lead to employers choosing the cheapest labour, and undercutting local people in favour of people who can be persuaded to work for less. There ought to be far tighter regulation of the employment rules in such circumstances, especially with the present economic mess. I can see many people's frustration there. But this is something of mainly recent origin. There has always been another sort of suspicion of immigrants, which demagogues and tabloids can readily whip up into hatred, and which is really code for racism/cultural prejudice. The 'immigrants' (read non-whites, even if they have been in Britain for several generations) are treated as convenient scapegoats.

As regards disenchantment of many people, especially working class people, from both main parties: I think that Thatcher's successful crushing of the unions, never really addressed by New Labour, is a major factor here, far more so than immigration. Both because its effect both on working class people and on the economy (de-industrialization of the economy in favour of banks and the service industry), and because it deprives Labour of what used to be their largest base.

Also of course just the fact that New Labour are hard to distinguish from the Tories.

[dipsydoodle]

20. The bi-product

of the low lead is anticipated to be that lethargic tory voters who may not have bothered to vote with a higher/safer lead will now bother to vote.

Personally I don't really give a shit who wins as long as Brown and the whole cabinet are consigned to history.

[LeftishBrit]

24. Not if it means that the Thatcherites get back in!

Yes, I know the obvious retort is 'but they were never out!' But the real Thatcherites are even worse that the imitation Thatcherites.

[dipsydoodle]

25. I'd definately vote Labour

if I was on the electoral register for Bethnal Green and Bow. They've got some heavy shit brewing down there with the IFE and Labour regaining the seat may help the situation. I thought it was tragic when Oona King lost that.

[LeftishBrit]

27. Galloway was hopeless as an MP...

and for the rest, I am certainly not keen on any sort of religious-rightie, whether Christian or Muslim, having too much of an influence on politics anywhere.

But that is an unusual situation, given the influence of Galloway there. In most places, I'm just concerned with NOT electing the neo-Thatcherites led by an empty-headed empty suit. Also, I would prefer if no party got a huge majority; but the chances are that they won't under any likely result.

[dipsydoodle]

28. under any likely result...........

never a truer word was spoke. :)

[truebrit71]

29. That would be awesome...

...

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. Channel 4/YouGov marginals poll suggests at least 305 Tory MPs

In our latest poll, the swing is down to 6.5 per cent. That is higher than the national swing – 4.5 per cent in YouGov's latest Britain-wide poll – but not enough to win every target seat.

If we apply this swing to each Labour marginal, the Tories would win 52 out of the 60 seats.

Add that to the 43 Labour super-marginals, where Labour’s majority last time was below 6 percentage points, and the Tories would capture 95 seats overall from Labour.
...
Add in 95 gains from Labour, and they would have 305. To secure an overall majority, they would need to gain another 21 seats from the Liberal Democrats.
...
I believe the Tories would be doing well to unseat more than 10 Lib Dem MPs.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/analysis+tories+short+of+overall+majority/3569147

Of course, if they really wanted to be popular, they should offer to make Vince Cable Chancellor in the event of a hung parliament:

The Liberal Democrats received a big thumbs up when voters were asked who would make the best chancellor, Vince Cable receiving 27 per cent of the vote, compared to 17 per cent for Alistair Darling and 15 per cent for George Osborne.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/exclusive+tory+lead+shrinks+in+key+marginals/3569462

(from the same poll in the 'battleground' seats)