Nick Clegg at the launch of the Liberal Democrat European election campaign in Colchester last week. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Who will win the first-time vote in 2015?

Labour has a 16-point lead over the Tories, with the Lib Dems in fifth place behind Ukip and the Greens. 

At the general election, a year tomorrow, there will be 3.3 million young people (some of whom were not born when Tony Blair became prime minister) eligible to vote for the first time. In what one Labour strategist recently told me would be a "bloody close" contest, they have the potential to play a decisive role. But a new poll by British Future shows that 59 per cent aren't planning to vote at all. This compares to 40 per cent of all voters and 25 per cent of the over-65s (the most likely group to turn out). 

Among the 41 per cent of 17-21-year-olds who are certain to take part, there is more grim news for the Lib Dems. Labour is on first place on 41 per cent, followed by the Tories on 25 per cent, Ukip on 12 per cent and the Greens on 9 per cent, with Nick Clegg's party trailing in fifth place on just 5 per cent. Nearly four years after the Lib Dems broke their pre-election promise not to vote in favour of increasing tuition fees, the damage endures. The news is all the more dispiriting for the party given their traditional strength among this demographic. At the 2010 general election, 30 per cent of 18-24-year-olds voted Lib Dem, compared to 31 per cent for Labour and 30 per cent for the Tories. 

There is better news for Ed Miliband. Unlike among the electorate in general, he is rated as by far the best party leader. While 58 per cent say that David Cameron does not understand their concerns, only 46 per cent say the same of Miliband, giving him a net rating of -14, ahead of Cameron (-35), Clegg (-37) and Boris Johnson (-27). The Labour leader is also narrowly rated as the best prime minister with a score of 17 per cent, putting him ahead of Cameron (15 per cent), Johnson (15 per cent), Alan Sugar (12 per cent) , recent NS guest editor Russell Brand (12 per cent), Jeremy Clarkson (11 per cent), Nigel Farage (9 per cent) and Clegg, who is level with Jamie Oliver on 6 per cent. 

With his promise of policies to aid "Generation Rent" (including a cap on rent increases, longer tenancies and a ban on letting agent fees), of a "radical offer" on tuition fees, and of a guaranteed job for all 18-24-year-olds out of work for more than a year, Miliband has made a conscious appeal to the young as the Tories have focused on the old (promising to maintain the triple-lock on the state pension and introducing new high-interest pensioner bonds). The challenge for Labour will be ensuring that they turn out. Among those who are likely but not certain to vote, Labour's lead rises from 16 points (41-25) to 22, showing the benefits of maximising participation. If Miliband is to win in 2015, a successful voter registration drive will be crucial. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

The most terrifying thing about Donald Trump's speech? What he didn't say

No politician uses official speeches to put across their most controversial ideas. But Donald Trump's are not hard to find. 

As Donald Trump took the podium on a cold Washington day to deliver his inauguration speech, the world held its breath. Viewers hunched over televisions or internet streaming services watched Trump mouth “thank you” to the camera, no doubt wondering how he could possibly live up to his deranged late-night Twitter persona. In newsrooms across America, reporters unsure when they might next get access to a president who seems to delight in denying them the right to ask questions got ready to parse his words for any clue as to what was to come. Some, deciding they couldn’t bear to watch, studiously busied themselves with other things.

But when the moment came, Trump’s speech was uncharacteristically professional – at least compared to his previous performances. The fractured, repetitive grammar that marks many of his off-the-cuff statements was missing, and so, too, were most of his most controversial policy ideas.

Trump told the crowd that his presidency would “determine the course of America, and the world, for many, many years to come” before expressing his gratefulness to President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama for their “gracious aid” during the transition. “They have been magnificent," Trump said, before leading applause of thanks from the crowd.

If this opening was innocent enough, however, it all changed in the next breath. The new president moved quickly to the “historic movement”, “the likes of which the world has never seen before”, that elected him President. Following the small-state rhetoric of his campaign, Trump promised to take power from the “establishment” and restore it to the American people. “This moment," he told them, “Is your moment. It belongs to you.”

A good deal of the speech was given over to re-iterating his nationalist positions while also making repeated references to the key issues – “Islamic terrorism” and families – that remain points of commonality within the fractured Republican GOP.

The loss of business to overseas producers was blamed for “destroying our jobs”. “Protection," Trump said, “Will lead to great strength." He promised to end what he called the “American carnage” caused by drugs and crime.

“From this day forward," Trump said, “It’s going to be only America first."

There was plenty in the speech, then, that should worry viewers, particularly if you read Trump’s promises to make America “unstoppable” so it can “win” again in light of his recent tweets about China

But it was the things Trump didn't mention that should worry us most. Trump, we know, doesn’t use official channels to communicate his most troubling ideas. From bizarre television interviews to his upsetting and offensive rallies and, of course, the infamous tweets, the new President is inclined to fling his thoughts into the world as and when he sees fit, not on the occasions when he’s required to address the nation (see, also, his anodyne acceptance speech).

It’s important to remember that Trump’s administration wins when it makes itself seem as innocent as possible. During the speech, I was reminded of my colleague Helen Lewis’ recent thoughts on the “gaslighter-in-chief”, reflecting on Trump’s lying claim that he never mocked a disabled reporter. “Now we can see," she wrote, “A false narrative being built in real time, tweet by tweet."

Saying things that are untrue isn’t the only way of lying – it is also possible to lie by omission.

There has been much discussion as to whether Trump will soften after he becomes president. All the things this speech did not mention were designed to keep us guessing about many of the President’s most controversial promises.

Trump did not mention his proposed ban on Muslims entering the US, nor the wall he insists he will erect between America and Mexico (which he maintains the latter will pay for). He maintained a polite coolness towards the former President and avoiding any discussion of alleged cuts to anti-domestic violence programs and abortion regulations. Why? Trump wanted to leave viewers unsure as to whether he actually intends to carry through on his election rhetoric.

To understand what Trump is capable of, therefore, it is best not to look to his speeches on a global stage, but to the promises he makes to his allies. So when the President’s personal website still insists he will build a wall, end catch-and-release, suspend immigration from “terror-prone regions” “where adequate screening cannot occur”; when, despite saying he understands only 3 per cent of Planned Parenthood services relate to abortion and that “millions” of women are helped by their cancer screening, he plans to defund Planned Parenthood; when the president says he will remove gun-free zones around schools “on his first day” - believe him.  

Stephanie Boland is digital assistant at the New Statesman. She tweets at @stephanieboland