Labour Shifts Left

jonesythered Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:28:10 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

A new YouGov poll for the Sunday Times has revealed that both Labour party members and trade unionists are drastically to the left of the party leadership.




Despite being denied a contest, support for John McDonnell has surged in the space of just a month. Support for John was 9% among party members last month; it is now up to 18%. Among trade unionists, it was 10% in March; it is now up to 26%. We can only imagine how much this would have increased if John had been given a platform during an actual contest.

Members of the Cruddas team - who have claimed that their man has a better chance of winning broader support among the party membership than McDonnell - should take note. Cruddas is on 12% among party members (or 5th out of 6 candidates) - or only two-thirds of McDonnell's support. Among trade unionists, Cruddas is on 15% (again, 5th out of 6 candidates) - a whopping 11% less than McDonnell.

On a range of issues, both party members and trade unionists are way to the left of New Labour. 68% of party members and 75% of levy-paying trade unionists want Britain to publicly distance itself from Bush's policies in the Middle East; 66% of party members and 71% of trade unionists want a 50% rate of taxation for those earning £100,000 or more a year; 58%/67% want a drastic rethink/slowdown of Blairite reforms in public services; 58%/66% want railways renationalised even if this means increasing taxes; and 48%/57% want British troops withdrawn from Iraq as soon as possible, regardless of the circumstances.

Exciting times to be on the Labour left... 

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/labmember.pdf



tags: , , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Labour Shifts Left | 65 comments (65 topical)

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#1)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:00:13 AM GMT

What did you leave out of your post, Jonesy? Hmm let's see...

...Oh yes, here we are: Cruddas is polling fifth out of six candidates among both members and unions, and the field is being led by the second-most Blairite candidate in the field, Alan Johnson (again, in both aspects of the college).

Also interesting that the majority of party members DO NOT support:

* immediate withdrawal from Iraq
* more Trade Union rights
* scrapping ID cards
* cancelling Trident and
* opposing nuclear energy

Jeez, you're right Jonesy: sounds like a great swing to the left there...


Re: Labour Shifts Left (#2)

by fluffymike on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:23:33 AM GMT

And what did you omit Petey? Ah yes - majority support for:
Publically distancing Labour from Bush
50% taxation on income above £100,000
Slow down and radically rethink the 'Blairite' (though pushed as much if not more by Brown) reforms for health, education and other public services
Renationalise the Railways
Increase taxes on motoring and flying to reduce publice transport costs

Jeez, you're right Petesy: sounds like a great swing to the left there...


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#16)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:31:11 PM GMT

You realise imitation's the greatest form of flattery, don't you Mike?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#3)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:47:44 AM GMT

"What did you leave out of your post, Jonesy? Hmm let's see..." and what both of you did you leave out? uhm, that Labour members (and trade unionists) support Hodge's ideas that have impressed BNP so much....


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#17)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:31:54 PM GMT

Well, happy to see I'm more in touch with Labour members than the left is on yet another issue, Andrea.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#19)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:43:53 PM GMT

well, happy to see you in touch with BNP....they can borrow your posting style for some leaflets writing session. It would fit them


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#4)

by fluffymike on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:57:32 AM GMT

Oh, and actually Peter - the survey says most Labour Party members DO support scrapping our nuclear 'deterrent'...


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#18)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:34:02 PM GMT

Except nowhere did I claim that "most" Labour Party members do not support scrapping Trident - claimed that a majority did not. Which is accurate.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#5)

by jonesythered on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:34:12 AM GMT

Peter,

According to this poll, only a third of party members and trade unionists intend to vote for the 'Blairite' candidates (Johnson and Blears). And in any case, there are those treating the deputy leadership as a personality contest on the grounds that the position has no powers. For example, even 11% of McDonnell supporters are voting for Johnson, according to this poll!

Furthermore, if you read my post, I explictly referred to Cruddas' level of support.

As for the policies that you refer to. Well, the party is actually practically split 50-50 over immediate withdrawal from Iraq. This is a policy that divides even some on the hard left - for example, the avowed revolutionary socialists of the Alliance for Workers Liberty oppose immediate withdrawal!

You've completely misconstrued the question about trade unions. The question wasn't whether trade unions should have more rights (e.g. secondary action) - it was whether or not trade unions should have more power over government policy. 40% said yes.

ID cards - again, even staunch McDonnell supporters in Parliament (like David Drew) support ID cards. Once again, the party is split nearly 50-50 on this issue (47% want them scrapped). There's a good debate to be had there and clearly the left could easily win the argument.

Where did you get the majority opposing the cancellation of Trident from? In actual fact I shouldn't have missed this out - because only 37% of party members and 38% of trade unionists support replacing Trident! In actual fact, there's majority support for what would effectively be unilateral disarmament.

A narrow majority don't support nuclear energy - 47% support building more power stations.

In actual fact the most worrying finding (for the left and right of the party) is that around half support Hodge's call for the "indigeneous" population to be given priority in social housing over refugees. Unfortunately this isn't surpising given the climate of hate stirred up by the media - which obscures the fact, for example, that only 1% of social housing is even given to refugees. There needs to be a proper debate on this issue so some of the misconceptions can be exposed - and real solutions (such as direct investment in council housing) can be offered.

Overall, this poll is grim reading for the right.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#6)

by otware on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:49:04 AM GMT

Haha this is great news! Timess are changing. Thank god.

I personally support nuclear power stations, although somewhat grudingly. They seem to be a necessary evil as there is no other way we can generate enough electricity.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#20)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:44:48 PM GMT

Jonesy, however much you try to spin this, the main purpose of the poll was to gauge support for the Deputy Leadership contenders. And the outcome is clear: that the "left-wing" candidates - and in particular the left's newly-favoured candidate Jon Cruddas, have not a hope in hell of winning this contest.

In no way does such a finding substantiate your claim that the party is swinging left. Now let's turn to the policy issues.

Again, you can't sustain an argument that the party has swung to the left on these issues either, simply because there have not been previous polls measuring members' support for and opposition to the list of things provided - I could just as easily (and unjustifiably) assert that there's been a huge swing to the right: the reality is we don't know whether members' views have become more or less supportive of government plans.

In all likelihood, had previous polls been conducted, we'd probably find that members were swinging in contradictory ways: I suspect that in the past for instance support for immediate withdrawal from Iraq may have been stronger; ditto Trident when that issue was dominating the headlines.

What you're actually arguing is not that the party's shifted to the left, but that for the first time there's empirical evidence that the government's substantially out of touch with the party - and that's a claim I'd broadly agree with you on. That said, you clearly think it's a bad thing - while I think its absolutely vital it becomes even more so and that we should be doing more to bring the grass-roots party into line with the country, rather than the government into line with the party.

But we both know - don't we - that it's not "grim reading for the right" because it's the "right" that controls the government and therefore the policies actually implemented are going to be the ones I'm happier with than you. That's actually grim for the left - I'm quite relaxed about it.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#8)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:16:55 AM GMT

Wrong, Peter. You didn't read this properly. Only 37 per cent of Party members supported keeping Trident. 47 per cent wanted to scrap ID cards.58 per cent wanted to scrap Blairite reforms of the NHS and education.Most importantly, 66 per cent of Party members in favour of increasing the top rate of taxation. 48 per cent of Party mmebers wanted troops outof Iraq now. And let's imagine we had had a proper leadership campaign, not this Albanian nonsense.McDonnell doubled his support with about three days of coverage. Given seven weeks, he really would have given Brown a run for his money. Will Cruddas supporters now pleae shut up about how we were too "extreme left" Oh, almost forgot. 58 per cent of Party members supported bringing railways back into public ownership. Basically , almost EVERY key policy John stood on is supported by a majority ofthemebers and even more of the trade unionists. Real hope for the future......


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#21)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:52:37 PM GMT

Grim, please read what I said - you've made exactly the same mistake that someone above did. I didn't claim that members were in favour of the policies I listed - I claimed (accurately) that a majority did not oppose them.

You are perfectly able to claim from this poll that left-wing positions claim widespread support in the party. Where you're wrong to be too jubilant about that is that this isn't new - I think we both know that there has always been strong grass-roots opposition to these government policies. As such, the only merit this poll has is to confirm that. Fair enough.

But don't you then find it odd that the favourites for the Deputy Leadership (and for that matter the leadership) are candidates diametrically opposed to implementing the Party's and Trade Unions' views on every single one of those issues? Seriously - how can this give you hope if they're voting for the people whose policies they claim to oppose?

Either members are more pragmatic than perhaps both of us give them credit for, or it's turkeys voting for Christmas syndrome...


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#13)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 12:37:43 PM GMT

"more Trade Union rights"
which questions are you referring to?
I see a question about giving unions more influence on government's policies. However I don't think it would equate to give more TU rights. I can be in favour of more trade union rights, but I don't think unions should have more influence over government's policies.
"cancelling Trident and "
actually just 37% want to keep the government's committment to Trident's replacement
Ah, they asked what members would have voted in a GB-McD fight. McDonnell would have got 18% among party members and 26% in the unions section. As predicted, Brown had nothing to worry about a McDonnell's challenge as he would have won it easily. I think it would have been in Brown (and the party) best interest to have a contested election. It would have helped to keep the party more in the headlines and the interest towards the handover (I don't think people are interested in 6 people fighting for a non job)


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#14)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 12:38:08 PM GMT

sorry for the awful editing.... :-(


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#7)

by otware on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:03:57 AM GMT

It's important to note that this fieldwork was done before the Newsnight debate, so the Cruddas score has not benefitted from his surge in popularity.


Re: Labour Shifts Left (#9)

by jkitleft on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:50:29 AM GMT

Even if the polls had suggested members were in a majority in supporting Blairite reforms, this can only be expected with our membership halfed.


Re: Labour Shifts Left (#10)

by jkitleft on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:50:42 AM GMT

'halved'


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#11)

by jonesythered on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 12:13:47 PM GMT

And yet the poll hasn't - and therefore we can say that, even though thousands of socialists have left the party, the majority of members are still way to the left of the leadership!


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#12)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 12:32:19 PM GMT

Which of course begs the question where do we go with this useful information and where do we go now ? Just to be downbeat for a minute, we're stuck with a right-wing Leader and (if the poll is anything to go by) probably a right-wing Deputy too ( whatever their activists are saying, Cruddas isn't going to do it in the wider OMOV arena)


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#15)

by jkitleft on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 12:42:42 PM GMT

and yet despite the poll, we find ourselves with a new leader who wants to introduce more draconian 'anti-terror' laws


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#22)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 01:56:33 PM GMT

I don't want to get into the petty left v. right stuff, but I think that the main message in this poll is that the membership, while holding views slightly to the left of the Leadership, are not prepared to move to a more left-wing leadership.

Despite McDonnell's slight 'bounce (we all have our views of why this might have occured), the members are still overwhelmingly more is favour of being led by a right-winger like Brown than a left-wing like McDonnell.

The same is true of the deputy polling, with right candidate Johnson and pro-Iraq war Benn topping the poll and 'left-wing' standard bearer (I know some disagree) Cruddas polling very poorly.

Finally the membership's rejection of giving more say to Trade Unions over policy is further evidence that the membership are not looking for a leadership to move policy leftwards.

My view would be that the membership recognise the danger in a leftward move in policy and would rather hold on to power and not get the exact policies they want on a few issues than move party policy to the left and risk losing power.


Re: Labour Shifts Left (#24)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:07:38 PM GMT

"Despite McDonnell's slight 'bounce (we all have our views of why this might have occured), " because very few heard of him at the time of the previous poll, whilst he got a bit more exposure in the week before nominations?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#29)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:36:21 PM GMT

That would be my view. I'm sure others will say it's because the membership are "disgusted at the way Brown has closed off party democracy" or something like that.

My point was that the bounce doesn't matter - The party still wants to be run by a rightwinger over someone like McDonnell.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#34)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 03:16:02 PM GMT

As John McD doubled his vote with two or three days TV exposure, I wouldn't draw any such conclusions if I were you in the long-term.......


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#35)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 03:22:35 PM GMT

I would be surprised if he hasn't maxed out.

If they ever do another Brown v. McDonnell poll, i suspect McDonnell will have reduced.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#37)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 04:38:16 PM GMT

Maxed out????? This is just the start......


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#40)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 06:17:21 PM GMT

If you want to believe that, that's fine. I just see no evidence of it.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#42)

by jonesythered on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 06:32:26 PM GMT

Other than the fact that support for John has doubled in the space of a month among party members; and nearly tripled among trade unionists in less than 3 months? All based on about three days of coverage?

You may not like McDonnell personally, but it's difficult to deny that's pretty solid evidence!


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#46)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:44:44 PM GMT

Where did you get the comparitive figures from?

You say "Support for John was 9% among party members last month" - where are you getting that 9% figure from?

You also say that "Among trade unionists, it was 10% in March; it is now up to 26%." - where is that figure from?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#47)

by jonesythered on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 08:52:21 PM GMT

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1720004.ece

www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/TEL070101005_1.pdf


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#48)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:07:51 PM GMT

Oh my God. You can't be serious? You think those figures are comparable? THEY'RE NOT EVEN THE SAME QUESTION!

You can't compare (in the first case) a Brown vs. McDonnell vs. Meacher vs. Clarke question with a Brown vs. McDonnell question! OF COURSE the results show a McDonnell bounce - the Meacher votes were hardleft votes and the Clarke votes were anti-Brown votes!

As for your "Among trade unionists, it was 10% in March; it is now up to 26%.", the orginal 10% figure is from a McDonnell vs. Brown vs. Meacher vs. Miliband question. You CANT compare that with a McDonnell vs. Brown question.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#49)

by doctordunc on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 09:34:07 PM GMT

Err... Yes you can.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#50)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:03:26 PM GMT

No, you really can't.

His popularity hasn't risen, the numbers just prove that he was the second choice for a lot of Meacher supporters. And, quite possibly, some anti-Brown Miliband or Clarke supporters.

The rise in his numbers doesn't prove a rise in the support for his ideas as the thread creator suggests - it proves that people of those views were presented with a question which forced them to choose McDonnell rather than giving them the choice of Meacher or McDonnell.

It's like comparing last months "If there was a General Election tomorrow, who would you support: Lib Dem, Conservatives or Labour?" with this month's "What would you rather see after the next General election, a Labour government or a Conservative government?" - all that you'd be doing it forcing Lib Dems to choose sides.

Would you characterise the 'rise' in Labour or Conservative percentages of the second poll as a rise in popularity? Or course not - the 'rise' is only due to the forced nature of the question. The same as in this poll.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#51)

by doctordunc on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:08:45 PM GMT

The point about the ideas/policies was to do with specific questions about those ideas and policies. The other issue is the increased personal vote for McDonnell (despite him no longer being a candidate). Personally I think that is precisely for the reasons you and Andrea suggested: increased exposure for a few days. That is obviously hugely encouraging for the left: still lots of party members and union activists have seen or heard very little of John McDonnell, but what people have seen appears to have impressed. Whether Milibandistas or Clarkites have moved to McDonnell is rather irrelevant (and all their parliamentary supporters went to Brown) - it is a question of a personal vote, and neither Brown nor McDonnell could have any control over who the other options might be.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#52)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:13:56 PM GMT

Dunc - you're missing my point.

Yes, the individual issues figures are legitimate, but the figures implying the McDonnell is more popular than a month ago amongst members and three months ago amongst TU levy payers are completely fatuous. A child can see that!

It's like running a poll on the board saying "Who is the best poster on the LabourHome: Jonesy, GlassHouse or Dunc", running another poll a month later only giving "Dunc and GlassHouse" as options, and then deciding that any increase in our votes meant that we had become MORE popular over the last month. It's ridiculous.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#53)

by doctordunc on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:26:32 PM GMT

Except it's not like saying that at all. It's like comparing the polling on the original London Mayor elections between the ones when they included Richard Branson and when they didn't. Ken's vote went up. It really did go up, and what's more Branson was never going to stand anyway. Yes the options have changed, because the options really did change. Taking your blogging example, if you'd rather describe it as one or other of us benefiting under changed circumstances, describe it that way if you like. But the point remains that there was a sizeable increase in John McDonnell's personal vote. Yes, much of it may have come from Meacher or the other candidates, and we don't have any way of determining that, but Brown could have benefited from the changed circumstances just as easily - and probably did (unless you're suggesting that 'anti-Brownism' is a virulent Labour strain uniting left, centre and right).


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#54)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:35:15 PM GMT

Dunc. I'm really shocked that you, as an educated person, don't see this.

The first post in this thread tries to imply that 'the left' is becoming more popular.

To do this, it shows polling evidence that a standard bearer of the left (McDonnell) has become more popular.

But if the fact that this is mostly only a reflection of a concentration of the left vote into one candidate (from Meacher and McDonnell to only McDonnell) renders the evidence worthlesss.

I might as well say that Meacher's support has dropped from 13% of Trade Unionists to 0% (because he wasn't mentioned in the second poll) and claim that this shows a decline in support for the left.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#55)

by doctordunc on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:47:11 PM GMT

I do see what you're saying, I'm just disputing it being of particular significance. If you re-read the original post, it does not actually 'imply' that the left 'is becoming' more popular, it states that the party and the movement is to the left of the government on a significant number of issues (based on the Yougov polling evidence). It also points to a surge in the popular vote for John McDonnell in the last month or so, which there has been (however you account for it - I actually think your earlier suggestion is correct: that John has had more exposure; one reason why Meacher may have been comparatively over-represented in the earlier poll - I don't think the poll is even close yet to the actual support that John would have had in a real contest). These are essentially personal ratings, and people won't say we can no longer pay any attention to Cameron's personal ratings come June because it's comparing with Brown rather than Blair: yes, the change of circumstances is instructive and worth noting, but it doesn't invalidate all comparisons. The other point in the original post is that John was ahead of the supposedly 'centre-left' candidate for the deputy leadership. Again that is not undermined by your point. Okay, 'shifts left' suggests a process, and discuss that with Owen by all means: I actually suspect that the movement is much as it was a month ago except that we now have a popular parliamentary spokesperson, and we have increased self-confidence.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#56)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 10:55:46 PM GMT

Whichever way you look at it, Owen seriously misrepresented the polling evidence.

You can't deny that "Despite being denied a contest, support for John McDonnell has surged in the space of just a month." is a hideous misrepresentation what the polls he used were saying.

"We can only imagine how much this would have increased if John had been given a platform during an actual contest." - implies that he has become more popular despite the lack of a contest. However, as a contest would necessarily have meant Meacher dropping out, the numbers would have gone up anyway (through the forced question)

I really am pretty angry about this - I know everyone has different views on this board, and I know that polls can be analysed in different ways but this is, frankly, to close to a deliberate lie for my likeing.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#57)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:45:28 PM GMT

Glass, I think you are angry because the left IS on the up within the Party.Not having a contest, actually, probably has increased John McD's popularity ( along with the media coverage he got ) because many members are aggrieved, feel sympathetic, hate bullying tactics etc etc. As, more importantly now, ordinary members are clearly way to the left of Brown on policy then that can only continue to be the case - and more so. What Brown couldn't wipe out was 10 months of campaigning,and the fact that all the issues are still "live" and that the left now has an identifiable champion whose Real Labour policies are more popular than his right-wing, authoritarian proposals.You may not like it,but it's true. Even in the original poll, McDonnell hadmore suport than Clarke or Meacher. And, no, I can't see uber-Blairites voting hard left.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#58)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:51:48 PM GMT

Are you deliberately avoiding the point of my posts?

Jonesy deliberately misled this board about polling figures? don't you give a damn?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#59)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 11:58:11 PM GMT

And, for what must be the thousandth time, what is your evidence that "the left is on the rise"?

Can you point to ANY evidence other than anecdotal nonesense (or Jonesy's misrepresentation of polling evidence)?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#61)

by grimupnorth on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 09:47:01 AM GMT

Whether you like it or not ( you obviously don't) this poll clearly shows most Party members are to the left of the leadership.One example. 66 per cent want to increase the top rate of taxation. The rest have already been referred to and am not going to repeat myself.Two months ago John McDonnell scored nine per cent in a YouGov poll - now it's 18 per cent. So stop whingeing and accusing people of lying. Not everything or everyone can be manipulated and bullied into toeing the New Labour line.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#62)

by Glass House on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 10:05:54 AM GMT

I'm not trying to bully anyone. I'm simply saying that, to count as evidence of a trend, you would have to show comparative figures from some time ago to show that the membership have moved leftward since then.

Otherwise, what's to stop me from coming along and saying that the Labour party used to be very left wing and that, therefore, these figures show that the party is more evenly spit between left and right than it used to be - therefore 'proving' that the party is moving rightwards.

You said that the party was shifting leftwards, but these figures only show current attitudes. Without comparative figures, it is impossible to know whether these attitudes are more leftwing or more rightwing than they used to be.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#63)

by jkitleft on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 10:14:11 AM GMT

I'll get slaughtered for this, but I agree with almost everyone, and you know how that makes me mad. Glass, you're right. It was different polling data, different question, different candidates etc. I do think however, that the other polling data i.e. the questions on trident, tax rates etc. shows that the left are on the up.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#64)

by Glass House on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 10:40:07 AM GMT

But the questions on trident, tax rates etc can only show that "the left are on the up" if there is similar data showing that members used to be less against trident and less for higher tax rates i.e. movement toward more leftish positions.

Maybe such data exists and maybe the left ARE on the rise - but my point is that this polling data is not evidence of a trend without another data set to compare it with.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#60)

by Glass House on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 12:00:16 AM GMT

And, while we're at it, what one Earth do you mean by "uber-Blairites voting hard left". What the hell are you talking about?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#43)

by jonesythered on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 06:33:06 PM GMT

And indeed another reason we could have expected his support to have grown significantly in a proper contest is that, according to this poll, a majority of party members and trade unionists support his policy programme!


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#36)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 03:24:35 PM GMT

Define long-term please - are we talking centuries or millennia?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#38)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 04:38:59 PM GMT

I wish I were as witty as you are.....


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#39)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 05:21:41 PM GMT

You can but aspire, Grim (appreciate that aspiration's frowned upon in the circles you move in but give it a go - it might suit!)


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#45)

by grimupnorth on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:23:59 PM GMT

There are many things I aspire to but probably not the same as yours


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#23)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:06:00 PM GMT

Some interesting (for me!) info from this poll.

There's a likelyhood to vote question and Cruddas supporters are the ones with the highest "certain to vote" figure and Harman's ones are the ones with the worst certain to vote figure.

55% of Cruddas supporters would vote for McDonnell...McDonnell would also get 21% of Benn's supporters, 17% of Harman's, 13% Hain's, 11% of Johnson's and 11% of Blears' supporers.

Second preferneces by candidate:

Johnson: 23% for Harman: 22% for Hain, 20% for Benn, 15% for Blears and 4% for Cruddas

Benn: 28% for Harman; 22% for Johnson; 20% for Hain; 10% for Blears and 8% for Cruddas

Blears: 34% for Johnson, 25% for Benn; 25% for Harman; 8% for Hain and 3% for Cruddas

Cruddas: 35% for Benn, 15% for Hain, 14% for Johnson, 8% for Harman, 5% for Blears

Harman: 27% for Benn, 23% for Johnson, 18% for Hain, 15% for Blears, 3% for Cruddas

Hain: 24% for Benn, 17% for Johnson, 15% for Harman, 12% for Cruddas, 11% for Blears

Cruddas seems to be struggling also on second preferences.


Re: Labour Shifts Left (#25)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:18:20 PM GMT

Yeah, I think this is where polls may become completely unreliable - it's far too complex an electoral system to poll accurately on this issue.

I can't seem to open the link to the detailed poll findings at the moment, but what was the sample size? And from where did Yougov get membership details - ie is it a bona fide list (which in itself raises questions about how they got hold of it) or is it self-identified Labour members from YouGov's panel?

But with transfers, it's not just about percentages redistributing, it's also about numbers - and returns diminish as fewer and fewer members cast preferences beyond 1. I'm not disputing the broad accuracy of this poll, just the depth to which it can go and retain meaning.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#27)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:26:34 PM GMT

Peter, the details are here..can you see them?
http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tumembers.pdf

Sample size was 833

Re sample composition. well, I've always wondered it. Did Labour provide them of some stats on Labour total membership (gender, age, social info and so on) to allow them to build up a sample reflective of Labour membership?


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#30)

by Glass House on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:37:35 PM GMT

YouGov asks you to identify yourself as a member of a political party - i don't know if they have information on party demographic makeup though.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#31)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 03:12:09 PM GMT

I have to say I find that dodgy. I know YouGov has a good reputation, but I just think it's going too far out on a limb with such a technical poll and such a small electorate.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#33)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 03:14:32 PM GMT

No pdf went mad and won't let me open it, but I saw the screen capture of the sample size on political betting after I posted!


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#26)

by Wiseman on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:19:47 PM GMT

Thats why I am encouraging Cruddas voters to vote first preference only. I know I lost on a second peference vote on a parliamentary selection. Wiseman


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#28)

by Andrea on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 02:28:00 PM GMT

but how would this help Cruddas? As long as he's in the race, potential second preferences of Cruddas voters won't be counted. They would be counted when/if he's eliminated, but at that point, he's already out of the race


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#32)

by petercoe on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 03:13:51 PM GMT

Well exactly. John - you should really be urging first preference supporters of other candidates to vote 2 for Cruddas rather than indulging your - frankly absurd - fantasy that he's going to win; and just pray that he's not going to finish last in the first round so that he might actually benefit from redistribution.


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#41)

by lastword on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 06:32:17 PM GMT

"Frankly absurd fantasy"? LOL


[ Parent ]

Re: Labour Shifts Left (#44)

by HenryG on Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 07:10:26 PM GMT

One of the most important questions for an election like this will be how many people will vote. Therefore the number of certain voters is particularly important. Have a look at the result of this question in the YouGov poll which changes the complexion on things: Q How likely are you to vote in the election for Labour's deputy leader: Cruddas supporters 74% Blears supporters 69% Benn supporters 58% Johnson supporters 56% Hain supporters 40% Harman 35% So although Harman has a higher poll than Cruddas, her supporters are half as likely to be certain vote in the constest. This should take him comfortably clear of Hain too. If you multiply the first preference result with the certainty to vote figure you get a `guaranteed vote' for candidates before others make up their minds. It changes the picture: Benn 13.9%, Johnson 13.4%, Cruddas 10.3%, Blears 6.9%, Harman 6.3% and Hain 5.6%. This poll was conduced before the live husting debate on Newsnight which Cruddas won and has boosted his profile a fair bit. On the leadership poll I was pleasantly surprised by how well McDonnell did. Had his team been able to commission something like this a month ago and achieve such a result I think the pressure on MPs to nominate him would have been stronger. 1 in 4 trade unionists is very respectable.


Re: Labour Shifts Left (#65)

by BrownSupporter on Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 11:16:09 AM GMT

Good try jonesthered, but your claim of a surge in support for McDonnell isn't comparing like with like. The new poll only asks about Brown versus McDonnell whereas last month's also included Meacher and Clarke. The combined McDonell/Meacher support was 15% last month and the total anti-Brown vote was 20%. In other words when the left chose McDonnell as their candidate Brown's support went up - hardly surprising. But in both polls Brown has overwhelming support from party members and trade union levy payers - whoever is named as his supposed opponent.


Labour Shifts Left | 65 comments (65 topical)