Front of the Tribune today -

FF: 28 (-2)
FG: 33 (-2)

Lab: 14 (nc)
GP: 8 (+3)
Ind: 8 (nc)
SF: 9 (+1)
-------------
= 39%

This was the real poll result youngdan. Four points moved away from FF/FG. We are in a transitional month. The next poll will be the one that means something.

johnfás wrote:

The Greens will always exist as a pressure movement regardless of whether they had anyone in the Dáil or not (which they always will anyway as they have a couple of strong candidates). This is what constrasts a party of a particular vision like that from the latter days of the PDs.

Green policies are becoming mainstream and it would be easy to outflank Ryan and Gormley on environmental issues. Internationally, there has been a split between Greens along social policy lines, with the emergence of the Green Lefts, who are contenders (leading the polls) in the Icelandic General Elections.

I am not surprised by the Greens poll performance: they are a consequence of looking and sounding reasonably confident, as opposed to like this...

A lot of the people who canvassed for them are disaffected: it remains to be seen if their new admirers are similarly motivated.

So a FF man is saying. Thank God, we only lost 2 points. A FG man is saying, if we are not gaining under these circumstances we really should just wrap it up.

Papal Knight wrote:

Respvblica wrote:

Why are Labour not up? I think the answer to that is that people know well that they could still keep FF in power after the next election.

The next election is going to play out like a referendum with only tow choices. Do you want FF or do you want FG? Thats all it boils down to.
Forget the rest -waste of time really.
FG are down but if they can maintain a competent image than I cant see then drop below 30 anymore.

The results are very good for FG and Labour and very bad for FF. The trick in reading polls is to understand two things

- trend
- expected movements.

The key to this poll is expected movements. December/January are always for want of an alternative way of explaining it, good months for government and bad months for oppositions. The reason is to do with the public attention span and media opportunities. When the Dáil is in session the opposition can use it to attack the government, with the media joining in. So normally in Dáil terms governments fall and oppositions rise. The corollary is true at this time of year.

- The Dáil is not in session, limiting media exposure.
- Poll corrs themselves go on holidays so the amount of political coverage goes down.
- The public are surrounded by distractions (Christmas, New Year, sales, holidays) and so focus less on current affairs.

So end of January polls usually show opposition falls and government rises. (FF in recent years have gone up by 3-4% in January polls.)

The government has faced a tough time, tough enough probably to cancel out the natural rise that occurs at this time. So FF could have expected a small rise or at worst no change. Dropping in January is contrary to normal January movements. FF will be worried by this poll, not because they are at 28% but because at the 'cushion poll' (the poll which gives them a lift which they then lose in the following 3 months) they went down. If they go down now by 2, it suggests the potential for a larger fall in the negative months (Feb, March, April).

FG and Labour will be very happy with the result. Both could have expected a drop. Labour had none and FG had only 2%, less than half the drop they could have expected in a January poll. So even in a month when they get less coverage than at other times of the year, in a month when political coverage in the media is way down and when the journalists who would normally cover political stories are on holidays, their downward move is in the range 0-2%, far better than would normally be expected.

Quite simply, FF went down where in January they invariably go up. FG went down by half the amount they could have expected them to fall, and Labour stayed stable. So FG and Labour are well placed to gain considerably in the backlash against government cuts, and FF are far below where they would want to be before cuts are announced. On these numbers FF would lose 20+ seats, FG gain around 12-15 and Labour gain 4-5.

As for the Greens and SF, their movements are largely irrelevant. They have two types of supporters, the committed and the transfers. Movements among small parties only indicate supporter movements and supporter movements on their own don't win seats as their support level by definition is too small to have many safe seats. Small parties often increase support but lose seats, or vice-versa. In a coalition they will be relying on transfers from the other party. (Remember the Rainbow lost even through FG did very well because Labour tanked.) So if FF are tanking, then a host of their seats will be lost as they will not have the additional transfers they need to win or hold seats. Trevor arguably is the only seat where supporters alone could deliver it.

The rule of thumb is simple: if in government you cannot go up in January, you are in trouble. That is the month when the cards are stacked in your favour. If in opposition you drop 0-2% in the month when the cards are stacked against you, you stand to make considerable gains later in the year. And if you are below 10%, poll movements don't matter much because they still on their own cannot get you seats. You need transfers for that, so you are inextricably linked with the appeal of your coalition partner.

All things considered & taking into account your insider knowledge, I’d say the vast majority of that post is Bollox.

Frankly, FF are down because the economy is in a mess, and FG are down because they don't sound up to the job of governing any better and they're sounding a bit vicious.

Gilmore, on the other hand, is at least doing a good job of opposing, and left wing will go down well at the moment (hence the Shinners going up one). The Greens are managing spectacular changes in Irish car purchasing habits (aided by the oil spike and ensuing recession, but they deserve credit for appropriate VRT policy), and we're all aware of the need for green energy; Bad Vlad has ensured that the spectre of gas cuts during a cold winter has focussed everyone's mind on the issue.

That's my take on it, may also be bo!!icks

cactus flower wrote:

Green policies are becoming mainstream and it would be easy to outflank Ryan and Gormley on environmental issues. Internationally, there has been a split between Greens along social policy lines, with the emergence of the Green Lefts, who are contenders (leading the polls) in the Icelandic General Elections.

No it wouldn't because they, unlike the hippies, have the skill, tenacity and maturity to successfully create, implement and oversee policy to its fruition. Ryan and Gormley are competent, smart and will have impressive records as Ministers.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Green policies are becoming mainstream and it would be easy to outflank Ryan and Gormley on environmental issues. Internationally, there has been a split between Greens along social policy lines, with the emergence of the Green Lefts, who are contenders (leading the polls) in the Icelandic General Elections.

No it wouldn't because they, unlike the hippies, have the skill, tenacity and maturity to successfully create, implement and oversee policy to its fruition. Ryan and Gormley are competent, smart and will have impressive records as Ministers.

In the short term, yes, they have that appearance. In the long term, which is what I'm talking about, it is likely that green policies will be adopted by the mainstream parties (this has already happened to a degree) and that the reason for the Party's existence will diminish.

cactus flower wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Green policies are becoming mainstream and it would be easy to outflank Ryan and Gormley on environmental issues. Internationally, there has been a split between Greens along social policy lines, with the emergence of the Green Lefts, who are contenders (leading the polls) in the Icelandic General Elections.

No it wouldn't because they, unlike the hippies, have the skill, tenacity and maturity to successfully create, implement and oversee policy to its fruition. Ryan and Gormley are competent, smart and will have impressive records as Ministers.

In the short term, yes, they have that appearance. In the long term, which is what I'm talking about, it is likely that green policies will be adopted by the mainstream parties (this has already happened to a degree) and that the reason for the Party's existence will diminish.

Well the Green Party is the real deal and they have a 30-year head-start on the other parties on developing environmental policies.

As well as that, the Greens aren't a one-note orchestra, if other parties try to encroach on Green space, what's to stop the Greens encroaching on theirs? Green policy on taxation, education, foreign policy and so on is mighty interesting and appealing.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Green policies are becoming mainstream and it would be easy to outflank Ryan and Gormley on environmental issues. Internationally, there has been a split between Greens along social policy lines, with the emergence of the Green Lefts, who are contenders (leading the polls) in the Icelandic General Elections.

No it wouldn't because they, unlike the hippies, have the skill, tenacity and maturity to successfully create, implement and oversee policy to its fruition. Ryan and Gormley are competent, smart and will have impressive records as Ministers.

Agreed, they actually seem to want to do something while in office, whereas a lot of Ministers seem to just want to be in office. That said the Greens will need a lot of luck given the economic climate they face (which will eventually take its toll), plus having Ms McKenna doing her best to convince the electorate that - Yes, the Greens really are crazy - won't help them in the slightest.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Green policies are becoming mainstream and it would be easy to outflank Ryan and Gormley on environmental issues. Internationally, there has been a split between Greens along social policy lines, with the emergence of the Green Lefts, who are contenders (leading the polls) in the Icelandic General Elections.

No it wouldn't because they, unlike the hippies, have the skill, tenacity and maturity to successfully create, implement and oversee policy to its fruition. Ryan and Gormley are competent, smart and will have impressive records as Ministers.

In the short term, yes, they have that appearance. In the long term, which is what I'm talking about, it is likely that green policies will be adopted by the mainstream parties (this has already happened to a degree) and that the reason for the Party's existence will diminish.

Well the Green Party is the real deal and they have a 30-year head-start on the other parties on developing environmental policies.

As well as that, the Greens aren't a one-note orchestra, if other parties try to encroach on Green space, what's to stop the Greens encroaching on theirs? Green policy on taxation, education, foreign policy and so on is mighty interesting and appealing.

If they do encroach, they will have to align right or left in so doing, and that will split their vote. They have an electoral appeal at the moment because they appear not to be in a panic, unlike the other parties. I wonder why they are not in a panic. Is it because they don't understand the situation? Or are they more confident in Fianna Fail's ability to handle it than FF are themselves? Or are they just indifferent to everything apart from their list of projects? There is something to be said for going into denial, if that's what it is. They are perhaps less likely to do lunatic things than people in a panic, and maybe the public pick that up.

Paul R wrote:

Agreed, they actually seem to want to do something while in office, whereas a lot of Ministers seem to just want to be in office. That said the Greens will need a lot of luck given the economic climate they face (which will eventually take its toll), plus having Ms McKenna doing her best to convince the electorate that - Yes, the Greens really are crazy - won't help them in the slightest.

Overall I support the Greens and indeed parties that I think I can easily understand as supplying me with a 'package' unlike the main parties although I do support FG and Lab.

Maybe we're looking for some structure now and the Greens tend to be a crowd who have a plan of some kind and people should generally know what to expect but obviously they've not been able to let loose on policy as much as they would because of economics and other circumstances.

I think we don't mind a bit of structure and can be persuaded to it and I do feel that the GP and SF both appeal in this respect though in different ways I suppose.

People might be looking more and more for that intuitive package they can understand and have their differences within; this has to happen - how long can we go along winging it from election to election with such consequences as we see now happening with all the U-turns? Not that it's a particularly bad philsophy per se - the FF 'managerial' one - it certainly doesn't suit me and I think the limitations of it are evident this weather.

Cactus, I would say one of reasons the Greens are in buoyant mood lately, is that after decades of talking about sustainable economics, suddenly people are listening. If you're a (long established) Green, when you hear Obama say he'll create green-collar jobs, when David McWilliams starts talking about eco-economics, it must bring a smile to your face.

WRT to other parties stealing the Green Party's clothes. I can see this happening someday. But it will take 25 years or more. And if Green ideas and principles did go mainstream, even if that made the GP redundant, I'd be quite happy with that.

eoinmn wrote:

Cactus, I would say one of reasons the Greens are in buoyant mood lately, is that after decades of talking about sustainable economics, suddenly people are listening. If you're a (long established) Green, when you hear Obama say he'll create green-collar jobs, when David McWilliams starts talking about eco-economics, it must bring a smile to your face.

WRT to other parties stealing the Green Party's clothes. I can see this happening someday. But it will take 25 years or more. And if Green ideas and principles did go mainstream, even if that made the GP redundant, I'd be quite happy with that.

Me too. But we can't afford for it to take 25 years, and we need a much bigger and bolder vision. We should be planning for as close to zero carbon (and fuel self-sufficiency) as possible, not moaning about how hard it is to drop by 5 or 10 %. We could easily drop 5-10% just by basic energy conservation measures. Its a big, big, project to turn this around and I just don't see the realism and energy there that's needed. Plus there is the bit where they backed Bertie, etc.

150 bus drivers are losing their jobs, and we're being told there'll be better bus services. Are they getting bigger buses or what?

How much money is saved by axeing a bus driver's job? There was a guy on the radio lunchtime who has a mortage and three kids. He will be paid redundancy. Then he will have to be paid Benefits and mortgage support. Then will be a loss of fares from his services. There will be people who can't take up jobs because they can't get transport to work (common in Dublin). Then there will be the cost of garaging the empty bus, and depreciation of the cost of the bus. Then there will be the loss of taxes he paid. Did anyone actually do the calculations to see what the savings are, if any?

I would like to see the Greens use the grit they have shown in facing down criticism in facing down Fianna Fail's disastrous governance.

youngdan wrote:

So a FF man is saying. Thank God, we only lost 2 points. A FG man is saying, if we are not gaining under these circumstances we really should just wrap it up.

If you knew anything about polling you'd know why FG are happy with the result, as are Labour, as are the Greens, while FF are freaking.

Public opinion is shaped by perception. Perception is shaped by community and personal perspectives, which are in turn influenced by experiences, perception of experiences and the media which frames perception and definitions.

In Ireland and in parliamentary democracies, the degree of media criticism of a government directly shapes how people perceive a government because while facts may be objective, analysis of facts and their interpretation is subjective.

That is why in general governments go up in popularity in parliamentary recesses and go down in parliamentary sessions. In a recess media criticism declines, as usually does public interest. The media focuses more on 'silly season' stuff than on hard analysis. That's why Prime Time goes from 3 nights a week to 1, why news bulletins are shortened or in the case of TV3 for near year reduced to headlines. It is also why Q&A disappears for the first few weeks of January,

Political coverage drops, with the opposition struggling to get coverage. Political editors go on holidays (that's why for most of January there was no David Davin Power or Ursula Halligan on television and political reports were done by junior staff). Of if political editors were around (eg Stephen Collins) it was because others had booked their holidays and he was rostered as he had taken longer holidays in the summer.

Without day-by-day coverage through LQs, Dáil debates, Q&A, etc and without the poll corrs being around, in December-January, and in July to September, government popularity increases because the negative criticism is limited. In February-June, and October/November, government popularity goes down as criticism features regularly and programmes and newspapers devote more time to it.

So every government knows to expect rises in popularity in the polls in January, June and September. And they expect the opposition to rise and they to go down in February-June and October/November. They aim in the 'up' months to get enough of a boost to carry them through 'down' months.

As anyone who understands politics will know, politicians expected the same moments as normal to happen. FF expected to be in the 30s minimum, and had hopes of being around 33%. FG expected the usual January drop, putting it around 30. Labour expected to drop to around 12. The Greens didn't know what to expect.

instead FG and Labour were very pleasantly surprised, with Labour not moving at all, and FG only dropping 2, remaining well in the 30s. FF had a disaster. They fell back into the twenties with their second lowest number on record in Red C, going down when the bare minimum they hoped for as a worst case scenario was to stay steady and they had high hopes of overtaking FG again. The Greens were pleasantly surprised that the internal ructions (of which there are many) had not lost it support.

So FG, Labour and the Greens were happy and surprised. FF were horrified, thinking that if they cannot go up in January, how bad is is going to get when the cuts begin to bite and there is full-on media coverage again? The criticism they have had so far in a cakewalk compared to what is coming, and they know it. Pat Leahy mentioned how worried they are by the result. They think the cuts will cost them 5-6% support. They were hoping they'd be starting off before losing that at 33%, bringing them down to 28-27% once the cuts hit. They now are terrified that if they lose 5-6% from 28% they would be in meltdown territory, with Labour having a chance of overtaking them and pushing them into third. Their strength has since 1933 rested on their perception of invincibility, making them the natural party of government. But if they sink to the low 20s they could well face resignations, people drifting away and even the sort of civil wars Labour and Fine Gael experienced when they hit their rock bottom results.

Fianna Fáil's big fear is that they may become the main victim of the Celtic Tiger collapse, facing what happened to the once powerful Radicals in France mid-20th century and the Christian Democrats more recently in Italy.

Now I know why they call it spin. After reading that my head is spinning.

All I know about polling is that after bad economic news of unparalleled severity FG ratings dropped by 2%. I would not like to see the drop if times were normal.

cactus flower wrote:

150 bus drivers are losing their jobs, and we're being told there'll be better bus services.

Yeah, I don't believe that.
On the other hand, it is not Noel Dempsey's job to micromanage the bus companies. He can tell them to cut costs, but its up to them how to cut costs.

youngdan wrote:

Now I know why they call it spin. After reading that my head is spinning.

All I know about polling is that after bad economic news of unparalleled severity FG ratings dropped by 2%. I would not like to see the drop if times were normal.

It is no surprise you know nothing about polling. It is hard to see what exactly you know about anything much. You seem to think in terms of sweeping generalities, corny attempts at so-called funny names for people, and political views that in most countries would be seen as certifiable. No wonder your hero is Ron Paul.

Unfortunately for you though I have been right. We are in exactly the mess I predicted 18 months ago.

You are just chirpping away as if everything is Dandy.

Can you join the rest of us on planet Earth for a while.

I would have thought that from a strategic point of view that FG and Labour types would be hoping that the Greens did well. The objective should be to decimate FF.

It is clear enough that FG are under performing in a period that has should favour the opposition. The Greens may be necessary in forming an alternative government at some future date and I think they themselves would prefer the alternative.

It will be a few years yet to an election and plenty of time to dump the current leader and present a 'fresh new face'.

Squire wrote:

I would have thought that from a strategic point of view that FG and Labour types would be hoping that the Greens did well. The objective should be to decimate FF.

It is clear enough that FG are under performing in a period that has should favour the opposition. The Greens may be necessary in forming an alternative government at some future date and I think they themselves would prefer the alternative.

It will be a few years yet to an election and plenty of time to dump the current leader and present a 'fresh new face'.

I've a very soft spot for Green policy and a soft enough spot for these Green lads but I wouldn't swear blind allegiance to them as I'm supposed to if I was in the Party. I was going to join but on the form it said "thou shalt not be a member of another political party" so I thought that was a bit restricting as I wanted to simultaneously join Sinn Fein....

But you are spot on Squire with your post above - you'd imagine there would be some grace towards the Greens for 18 months or a little more it being their first time in office and all but Ruairi Quinn was on them bitterly a week after they were in. The sadder thing about that is that I'm sure the man felt that he just had to attack the Greens immediately on familiar ground to them where they were obviously failing or up against enormous odds and he did this moreso that he was fulfilling a role of attacking opposition than Statesmanliness. FG were at this too to a lesser degree and I thought it would just sow seeds of bitterness for later when there was too much bitterness as a hurdle already between FF and FG going back to the Civil Focking Goddam War.

But Statesmanliness is as rare as gold in this land I'm afraid.

Squire wrote:

I would have thought that from a strategic point of view that FG and Labour types would be hoping that the Greens did well. The objective should be to decimate FF.

It is clear enough that FG are under performing in a period that has should favour the opposition.

FG are between 5 and 9% ahead of where they were in the election and are 50% higher than they were when Kenny took over as leader. Seven of their proposals in the last six months were copied by the government. They were proven right on Anglo-Irish bank, on the guarantee, on the fact that moving the budget to October would make its numbers wrong once the November figures came out, have defeated the government in the Seanad, have come within 2 votes of a shock defeat of the government in the Dáil. Enda Kenny's comments on the inadvisability of giving Anglo a bail-out was proven correct. Richard Bruton's predictions on the budget have all proven spot on. And Kenny has worked out exactly how to light Cowen's short fuse and watch him explode in the Dáil in leaders questions after leaders questions.

And FG does it with a backroom staff that is tiny compared to the resources of government. FG does it with a backroom staff smaller than each junior minister has. How is that underperforming?

BTW January polls are not good polls for oppositions. Oppositions need the oxygen of publicity to boost their support but get little in January and the Dáil is in recess and most of the political reporters are on holidays. So invariably FG and Labour have had polls in January and good ones then from February to June. As pollsters admit, that always happens. The parties know it always happens. It is in the February-June cycle that public opinion moves in the direction of opposition parties.

Audi

It was just a strategic observation, not a comment on their ability or policy. For FG and Labour to form a government there is a high possibility that they will also need either SF or the Greens. So if I were in either of those parties I would be trying to prepare the ground for a good working relations now just in case. An insurance policy. They need to concentrate their fire on FF and a FF Labour government is not beyond the realms of possibility.

Papal

You may well be right, but the economic news is so dire that I would have thought that FG should be romping home. As you say the next few months may well tell a different tale.

Did I not see FG saying the guarantee was the correct course of action and now they have changed their tune. Did not Brutan and Kenny issue opposing statements on the morning after the late night rescue. Did not Papal come on this very site saying that had the banks failed there would be a calamity.

I would not be mistaken for a FF man but it looks to me as if 67% want someone other than Enda the Eejit in the drivers seat.

Squire wrote:

Audi

It was just a strategic observation, not a comment on their ability or policy. For FG and Labour to form a government there is a high possibility that they will also need either SF or the Greens. So if I were in either of those parties I would be trying to prepare the ground for a good working relations now just in case. An insurance policy. They need to concentrate their fire on FF and a FF Labour government is not beyond the realms of possibility.

Papal

You may well be right, but the economic news is so dire that I would have thought that FG should be romping home. As you say the next few months may well tell a different tale.

Remember, most of the electorate are committed to their parties no matter what. The proportion of movable voters is growing but still a minority. I would expect polls over the next few months to show a dramatic collapse in FF support and a rise in FG, Labour and SF. The reaction is such that I can see FF in the low 20s, Labour in the high teens and FG in the high 30s. We may even see a poll where FF gets overtaken by Labour maybe along the lines of FF 20, Labour 21. It would be a temporary experience - the FF committed vote would rally back to put it 8-10% higher than Labour eventually at a minimum, with Labour 15ish and FF 25ish. To be honest, in January people felt almost numb with the shock of what was going on. Even political people were turning off news bulletins thinking "I cannot listen to this any more. I need a break from it." This week's cuts will focus minds much more, and really hit FF badly. People are venomous about them right now, even normally FF voters.

The drama is just too much