Labour 12 Point Lead, Ukip At Its Most Popular Ever...

[Gromit]

... Is now the time for the Conservatives to ditch Cameron?

// Labour has forged a 12-point lead over the Conservatives for the first time in almost a decade, according to a Guardian/ICM poll.

Ed Miliband's party now stands at 41% of the vote, up three points on ICM's January figure, and the Tories are on just 29%, having slipped back four from 33% last month. Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats have sunk two points, to 13%, whereas Ukip has inched up three to 9% – setting a new record for Nigel Farage's anti-European outfit in the Guardian/ICM series.

The Labour lead is the biggest – and the Conservative vote-share the smallest – in the polling series since May 2003, during the brief political bounce for Tony Blair which came between the felling of Saddam Hussein's statue in Baghdad and first stirrings of civil war in Iraq and arguments about dodgy dossiers.

With his party plumbing the sort of depths associated with the second half of the John Major era, David Cameron will be particularly dismayed about the continuing surge in Ukip support. //

[sunny-dave]

The Tories will (as always) be ruthless if they think Cameron has no chance of winning in 2015.

It may be that Labour are hitting the front a little to early though - it exposes them to a level of scrutiny that they have had the luxury of avoiding until now.

[FredPuli43]

They'll keep Cameron until the election. If he doesn't get a good result then, he'll be out.

[emmie]

no more ruthless than stabbing your brother in the back to get the party leadership. I don't think Cameron will go, there isn't anyone to replace him as yet, and as they say a week is a long time in politics.

[bibblebub]

How did he stab his brother in the back? This seems to be a phrase that Cameron and the usual suspects in the press throw around in the hope that mud sticks - maybe you can provide something to back up the allegation...

[emmie]

from one source, the BBC, it's pretty much the same whichever source you use.
ED Milliband
He says he thought long and hard about standing against his older brother, who has insisted "brotherly love will survive".

Positioning himself firmly to the left of David, he has warned the party against retreating into a "New Labour comfort zone" - widely interpreted as a swipe at his older brother.

It is a strategy that has seen him secure heavyweight backing from Britain's biggest trade union leaders. The GMB has even threatened to withdraw funding from the Labour Party if he does not win the contest.

[emmie]

don't see why cameron was brought into it - if you read the comment
at the end, David was the party choice, but the unions wanted Ed, and that is what they got.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/sep/26/labour-leadership-results-election

[bibblebub]

So having a political position and making a public statement amounts to a stab in the back? Hardly registers on the richter scale of horse trading that goes on in the corridors of power.

[emmie]

i don't think that anyone considered Ed much before he threw his hat into the ring, that David was the front runner by his party, that there still seems to be no thaw between the two, that David would have been a better leader overall. And it obviously was not just spin by the conservatives, without union support Ed wouldn't have been leader. Party politics is a dirty business i agree.

[Quizmonster]

In what conceivable way, Em, does your source material support your view that Ed "stabbed his brother in the back", a comment that you seem to produce here just about every other day?
Both brothers knew full well how the Labour Party electoral system worked before they put themselves forward, but each had a different view as to what the right approach was...Ed more leftwards and David more rightwards. As it happens, the 'system' resulted in Ed's win.
In exactly the same way, Cameron is now Prime Minister simply and solely because of the way the whole country's electoral system works. Did he stab anyone in the back? Of course he didn't, so isn't it time for you to stop talking such nonsense!

[emmie]

hardly every other day is it?

[emmie]

so if Ed wins the next election, anything is possible, what job will David do?
the system being that by and large it was the unions support that put Ed into the job. Had they supported David then that would have resulted in him leading the party.

[Quizmonster]

Everything doesn't have to be taken literally, Em; my use of the words "just about every other day" was done for literary effect. That is, as an expression of what I felt about your continual - and obviously wrong - overuse of the 'stabbing' claim.
Obviously, I have no idea what post Ed would offer his brother should he become PM one day or whether David would accept it.

[emmie]

i hope the day doesn't come when either are leader of the country, but that is the electorate's choice.

[venator]

Politics is a nasty business. They're either in it for themselves, or they're starry eyed idealists - the most dangerous sort. None of them are in it because they wish to serve the people. They have to be dragged, kicking & screaming, to doing what the people want. Look at the referendum promise, which Cameron had to make to pull the carpet from under Ukip, and to wrong foot Millipede.

The Labour party has always had "Tax and Spend" as its policy. Twice in my lifetime, it's maxed out the credit card and left the mess for the Tories.

The Tories believe in letting "market forces" operate, but are eternally shutting stable doors after their legislation goes wrong.

Let's dump the lot and elect taxi drivers and grannies to run the country.

[venator]

I was going to say "shoot the lot", but in these enlightened days, I'd have had the thought police at my door...

[bibblebub]

it's usually seems that they run this site, would you want that inflicted on the country?

[weecalf]

would it not be a good time to forget party politics as they all the same and have what best for the country from where ever .

[venator]

Too true, weecalf - are you a granny or taxi driver, by any chance?

[bibblebub]

(my last post was referring to taxi drivers and grannies)

[Gromit]

Anyone who becomes a professional politician is going to be ambitious and want to be successful. They do not join to be under their ing's shadow.

David was a minister in the last Labour Government that the country had rejected. David was a Blair/Brownite and ed thought the Labour Party needed to change. And under the Party's bizarre election process he won the day.

He did not stab his brother in the back, David is just a bad loser and should stop sulking.

Just because they are brothers does not mean he should automatically have to offer his brother a job, that should be on merit. There are many Brown/Blairites who do not deserve another chance, and David is rapidly showing an immature side which is pushing him into that camp.

Cameron was brought into this question because the poll is obviously bad news for him. You would expect Labour to be doing well, but the strong UKiP showing means many right wing voters are rejecting the Conservative Party as well. And the buck for that stops at Cameron.