There are three reasonable reactions to the suggestion that the Tories have, according to an opinion poll for the Observer, a 19% lead in public support at present with 47% supposedly intending to vote for them.
First, you can reasonably doubt the accuracy of the polls. They have been decidedly wrong on occasion in the past. It is entirely possible that for all sorts of reasons they are again.
Second, you can presume the Tories are winning because they are persuading the electorate of the merits of their case.
Or, third, you can decide the public has lost the ability to think rationally given that what the Tories are offering them is so clearly against their best interests.
Since the faults in opinion polls are known I see little point spending time discussing that issue.
The other two issues are related, of course. Let me view them through the medium of the second question.
The Tories are having a terrible campaign.
They sacked a whole host of MPs to ensure cohesion in their ranks before the election began.
They were winning the case for Brexit in Parliament before the election was called. They called it anyway, claiming this was not true.
One of their prime election assets, Jacob Rees-Mogg, gaffed so badly on Grenfell before the election really got going that he has been silenced ever since.
Most of the rest of the Cabinet have also to be hidden, so bad are they. Indeed, so bad that Matt Hancock is considered an electoral asset.
The Prime Minister has lied so many times that interviewers are now blatant about saying he has. Even Fiona Bruce calls him out.
And so far they have announced almost nothing they will do.
Apart that is, from delivering an ‘oven-ready' Brexit, a phrase so hackneyed people now groan when they hear it.
This is not a bad campaign. It is a dire campaign unless, that is, you believe that only Brexit matters.
There the Tories have done a deal with Farage. There will be a price to pay.
And they have persistently said Brexit will be done by 31 January, which is merely when, at the earliest, the next and much harder round of talks begin, about which the Tories have not given a hint of preparedness.
Perhaps most angering, Johnson pretends he has nothing to do with the Tory treacle record, as if nine years of Tory government have nothing to do with him.
So austerity, stagnant real wages, growing inequality, universal credit, no house building, the bedroom tax, a 15% decline in the exchange rate since 2016, public services in crisis and record levels of household debt that threaten the stability of his economy are matters on which he and his party are in denial even if they all happened as a result of their policy.
Objectively, most people are worse off now than in 2010. They have worse public services. They have more limited hopes if they can correctly appraise their prospects.
And the Tories are saying nothing at all about what they will do about any of this.
Instead the only talk is of Brexit.
But Brexit was unknown to almost anyone as an idea, let alone an objective, a decade ago.
The truth is that we must have a trade deal with our EU partners, come what may, and eventually will.
And the reality is that of the pressing issues facing this country Brexit comes immeasurably far behind the climate crisis, and yet Johnson is going to refuse to debate that issue.
Objectively, then, the Tories are running a dire campaign. And if opinion polls are anything like right they are winning.
Why is that? It can only be because of media manipulation. The continual messaging that Brexit is all that matters has worked. And let's not be in denial: the evidence that marketing works is all around us and permeates almost all our lives. In that case let's not be arrogant enough to presume otherwise or accept any claim that this issue has become the electorate's obsession for any other reason. Massive effort has created the toxic, self-destructive view that Brexit must be delivered.
So, the Tories are running a highly successful campaign.
And the electorate has lost the rational ability to think about it, or they would not be supporting it in the numbers that they are.
We are seeing what happens when there is a collective loss of sense as a result of massive media manipulation - call it propaganda if you like - in this election.
It may still change.
The Tory bubble may burst.
Their manifesto may include crippling gaffes. Their ability to spot them is measured on the Duke of York scale.
But maybe the Tories will maintain their momentum as well.
The question then is what happens when people realise that Brexit either remains a long and winding road, or a deeply uncomfortable, and very hard place. Irrational behaviour frequently leads to remorse. This election might do that.
Too late to reverse Brexit though.
Too late to tackle climate change too, maybe.
Too late for hope, then.
And that's a really dark prospect that might have to be addressed against the background if a majority Tory government.
But only if the polls are right.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
[…] This is an election in an era of mass propaganda […]
And now the bbc have joined in with creative editing of Johnson on QT debate.
I’m really starting to seriously worry about our country.
Isn’t it just more likely that the majority of people have different priorities to you and view things differently?
Persuading people with the strength of your arguments would be far more convincing that simply suggesting that everyone else is wrong (or have been mislead) just because they do not believe with your, often unique, perspectives.
You think my perspectives are unique?
That is an interesting suggestion from a person with two apparent web identities here this morning
Polls polls polls polls …wonderful BALLS.
(To the tune of Spam!)
THE TORY LEAD IS LESS THAN 5%
I spent a lot of time last election blowing major holes in their balls polls, especially the commissioned ones by opinium for the Obsessive Groaniad. Also one of the reasons why I done with them.
I called it pretty correctly. By looking at their RAW data. And I say the current tory lead is exactly what it was at the end of 2017 . If you believe their raw data.
This time I hadn’t bothered up till now. Drilling down into data is the key. Even as the representation of the data has changed… in my opinion they have manipulated raw data!
The Obsessives splash yesterday that claims a headline of
‘Conservatives open up 19-point lead with 47% share of the vote’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/23/tories-renewed-poll-boost-brexit-party-candidates-pull-out-opinium-observer
Now understand that there is a catch up period by Labour as the election campaign proceeds and fair coverage in the media allows that. Last time that ended with the overall lead of 800,000 votes over the whole 650 seats by the tories.
‘Despite a drop in the number of seats, the Conservatives actually saw a rise in vote share (up 5.5% points to 42.4%). Labour’s vote share rose at an even greater rate (up 9.5% points) and now sits at 40.0%.’
https://data.london.gov.uk/blog/the-2017-general-election-the-numbers-behind-the-result/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES WAS 2.4%.
Remember that percentage – 2.4%.
Now lets drill down into the Opinium poll.
1. They state ‘Source: Opinium poll: 2,003 UK adults surveyed from 20 to 22 November 2019’ – that is 3 days over which the two thousand and three people were interviewed. Things were happening over these 3 days and doesn’t include the Friday debate.
2. In their new presentation of the data – https://www.opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/VI-20-11-19-website.xlsx There are now multiple data sheets. The relevant sheet is 5a. It asks what the responders voted in 2017, of the number that are used to derive the headline ‘result’.
3. The actual number of responders who voted in 2017 is a total of 1,368.
4. Off these 46% (508) voted Tory and 36% (421) Labour in 2017 – a difference of 10% not the 2.4% of the actual result remember!
5. The actual 2017 Tory share was 42.4% not 46% as of the responders. The actual Labour share was 40% not 36% of the responders. Self selected responders, many who couldn’t even ‘remember’ how they voted 2 years ago btw (ahem!).
So the Tory share of responders is over represented by 7.6% (4)
6. Then let us look at sheet 3 & 3b which mutates the numbers even further. The first has tory 35% (558) , Lab 23% (372). The second has tory 37% (585) , 24% Lab (379) – both have a total respondents used as 1592.
So the magic trick is pulled! How does my point 6 compare to my point 4?
I put all that up there not expecting most to follow it but to show the ‘data’. It can be ignored and you can just take my opinion below or their opium from Opinium (a firm that should hang it’s head in shame – i believe).
————
So how many ways to skin this very thin cat?
The raw data adjusted for the 7.6% starting variance would give the Tories a current lead (to the 3 day period ending 22/11) of between 4.4% and 5.4%.
With undecideds of some 16%.
I am sticking to my prediction of a landslide based on how the numbers improved through the campaign last time.
Anyway the 19% HEADLINE current lead is balls!
Do we really need to wonder why such magical thinking is going on in the Obsessive Groaniad?
Now posted as a blog
Thanks
Speaking of ‘balls’ DunGroanin, you have definitely got them and I thank you for it.
You’ve got bags of intelligence too. Thank you for raising this issue.
[…] comment was posted by a regular contributor who uses the name DunGroanin' in response to my discussion of the […]
‘And the electorate has lost the rational ability to think…’
You’re one step away from suggesting that the electorate can’t be trusted and there is a name for people who propagate this sort of thinking, and it ends in a very bad place.
You have obviously been triggered by the coming catastrophe for the Labour Party and with it your hope for funding
I am saying that the electorate has a right to decent information
And that;’s something very different indeed
But you show your real colours very clearly
I think I understand where ‘Steve Jones’ is coming from. He touches upon one of the big issues of the day. In democratic terms, how effective are ‘people’s votes’ / plebiscites / referenda as tools to create more cohesive and effective societies? The constructs that underpin societal stability, which have been developed /manipulated over the past 250 years, are showing signs of increasingly being ‘unfit for purpose’ in order to meet the needs and aspirations of the digital age. The Brexit referendum – as devised and since ‘implemented’ by successive Conservative administrations – highlights the problem because it has generated negative division in place of positive collaboration for the greater good of UK society. At the same time it stands as a useful indicator in terms of what lessons can & should be learned. We are where we are but it’s certainly no time for paralysis. To cut to the chase … there are crucial issues confronting all societies that will necessitate much better informed political decision making at every level. I suggest a practical step in the right direction would be ‘deliberative democracy’ – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kOGdq-9jXM.
Saying they have lost the ability to think rationally is very different to saying they can’t be trusted. Your second paragraph sems to acurately describe what’s happening with the tories and Brexit party and their “mismanagement” of data and ” information”.
I think the most pervasive propaganda is the one that is close to your heart Richard, which is the whole MMT vs not MMT thing. I feel like MMT has completely lost the battle – just look at how every conversation has been framed. The idea that ‘my taxes fund things’ appears to be so embeded in the minds of practically everyone, that the no.1 weapon the Tories have in their arsenal is the idea that Labour will crash the economy and saddle everyone with debt.
Admiteddly this is a small sample space, but i work in offices around the UK – the conversation – when it is brought up (which is very rare, politics is hardly discussed in the workspace), i hear people roll out the paper propaganda – these are professional people, in corporate finance, legal departments etc.
No one has ever stopped to think “where does the money come in the first place”. No one stops to ask how there can possibly be a finite money source, if the population has grown over centuries. The thought does not even occur.
It is now a fact that taxes fund spending, and governments have to borrow – it is as much a truth as the earth being round – and we are the flat earthers.
Unless there is a real effort to reach vital left leaning media to educate on MMT, this myth will never come to light. And unfortunately we have people like Paul Mason or James Meadway who are fighting the same fight, but completely dismiss MMT as nonsense – which plays Right into the hands of the rich people who say “Look! YOu need us! We are the ones with all the money, you need our taxes from all of our hard earned income”.
There was a woman in the QT debate on Friday who said to Corbyn “why are you going on about broadband, we have more important things to spend this money on”.
I often wonder, if there was a meteorite heading to Earth, and we had a 100 days to build a super weapon, but it would require the entire population to pull together, and “cost” £300 billion, or we all die – would everyone still go “but how will we pay for it?”.
I am afraid you too are confused
It is now a fact that taxes do not fund spending
Richard says –
“It is now a fact that taxes do not fund spending
I don’t think that’s quite right. It’s the TRUTH that taxes don’t fund spending… but the truth is all too often different from the fact.
A Fact is what all correspondents in a debate agree the truth to be, or else it’s what a court directs is a fact. If everybody (or the vast majority of people) arguing about it agree that taxes fund spending, then that becomes a fact. Doesn’t matter if it’s true or not.
Sometimes, just sometimes, I bl00dy hate facts. Taxes pay for spending: Fact. Government finances are like a household: Fact. The Govt must live within its means: Fact…
Money is created from nothing, taxes don’t pay for anything but it does give value to money: Dangerous, Commie nonsense! I mean, it’s the honest truth, but don’t let that get in the way of a good bit of old-fashioned dogmatic abuse of capitalism.
So, you and Moschum were basically saying the same thing!
I guess you didn’t read my comment with total diligence or I wasn’t clear.
Maybe I should have put in parentheses
“it is now a fact” (amongst the electorate).
I thought the rest of my comment made it pretty clear which side of the fence I was on. The whole point of my comment was to raise the issue that the propaganda around tax revenues funding things has become the defining feature of any arguments against a progressive agenda, both here and across the pond. And everywhere else.
Apologies
I have to read a lot here, very quickly
I am not infallible
What I am seeing in the Observer is something one of their contributors mentions – fatalism.
As for a lack of ability in society to consider issues, I think that Guy Standing is onto something in his book ‘The Precariat’.
I think this election will be about Brexit. Sadly, not about all the issues that Labour might address and the Conservatives won’t.
It will come down to whether those who voted for Brexit in the referendum and whether enough have decided to change their mind about exiting the EU (alongside younger people now eligible to vote who are pro-remain); or see that the Tories delivery will not be in the best interests of the country.
As Jeremy Corbyn, as Labour leader, has said he stands neutral upon Brexit and he would negotiate a new deal with the EU, which would be put to a public vote alongside remain this will make those adamant to leave will not want such a vote. They want out definitely. No chance of a reversal in decision.
From interviews in the media and in swing seats it seems Labour voters – die hard ones – will vote Tory because they want to be sure of a Brexit outcome. How many to tip to Tory, who knows.
Labour are caught between a rock and a hard place regarding saying they are ‘Pro’ or ‘Anti’ Brexit. I actually think Corbyn‘s position is the most sensible position. We will see.
Richard you need to understand one thing..Brexit is a consequence of the high brow arrogance shown by you and your kind who ridicule and demonize those who disagree with what you think..the same goes for a Tory victory in the forthcoming GE
Oh come on
It got 51% of the vote
The rest are all high brow arrogant?
Pull the other one
I recommend reading/watching “Manufacturing Consent”. It’s like taking the red pill and suddenly being awake to the incredible bias of big media.
I think media-enabled economic illiteracy has a lot to answer for. I wonder if the electorate are focused so much on Brexit because this is certain to bring change (and at some level will return us to where we were in the past when things were better) and they literally cannot see any other options for change. The mainstream narrative is that there is no money to do things – it is simply not possible to improve conditions (by spending) without making them worse (taxing /making other cuts). Labour are condemned as reckless and irresponsible for their proposals in order to frighten the electorate into dismissing them. Yet again on QT this week the old chestnut “We have to live within our means” went unchallenged. And on Andrew Marr I heard that if the public want better public services they have to pay more tax. I despair about this because people accept it and believe it and feel trapped and hopeless because of it. I have contacted the BBC (again) asking them to get Richard on QT or on Andrew Marr – maybe others could do the same? If people could learn to understand that austerity was a cynical choice engineered to serve the interests of the rich and that there really is nothing to stop us taking our future into our own hands and creating a society where everyone can thrive and we can take the steps necessary to secure a sustainable future for our planet then another positive, exciting choice for change is on offer.