politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes/ITV News poll finds the public grumpy about all the

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes/ITV News poll finds the public grumpy about all the main parties

9% tell ComRes/ITV News poll that George Osborne has made their family better off. See this & other findings pic.twitter.com/FeFg9pEZ38

Read the full story here

edmundintokyo

Somebody should out-flank UKIP by making The Grumpy Party.

Sean_F

It's interesting that so many people should think the government is out of touch with elderly people, despite the lengths they've gone to to shield them from the cuts.

I think it shows how it is almost impossible for political parties to shift the perceptions that people have about them.

Robert_Eve

As voting Labour or Lib Dem would mean I'd lost my mind and as the Tories are behaving like Lib Dems - there is only UKIP left.

Tykejohnno

Hugh said:

Blimey, that's a worrying set of findings for the Tories. Dismal.

I agree,except from the one if the labour party were in government,economic growth would be weaker as it is now Agree 37% Disagree 26%

MikeSmithson

edmundintokyo said:

Somebody should out-flank UKIP by making The Grumpy Party.

That' a brilliant idea. Get is registered for the Euro elections ans I'm sure you could pick up a seat or two.

anotherDave

"I am confident that if the UK economy grows i will be personally better off: Agree 31%, Disagree 38%, DK 30%"

That's the Conservatives election campaign.

TGOHF

Some very "Com Res" questions in there.

isam

I would be surprised if the public thought of UKIP as more grumpy than the other parties.. has there been any polling?

Despite the attempts of thread headers and UKIP haters, almost everyone I know thinks Farage is funny, and a character, even very left wing friends of mine. His BBC Weather report was the most watched page on the bbc website the other day

SouthamObserver

Tykejohnno said:

Hugh said:

Blimey, that's a worrying set of findings for the Tories. Dismal.

I agree,except from the one if the labour party were in government,economic growth would be weaker as it is now Agree 37% Disagree 26%

Isn't that 37% current Tories and LDs?

taffys

Those tables are singing like a canary.

Its a familiar refrain too -

'make the weather better and give us a tax cut'.

AndyJS

The better communications get the more grumpy people inevitably become, because, for example, we're all able to access a day by day account on Twitter of exactly how someone like SeanT is paid to sip champagne on a Thai beach while staying in a 1K a night luxury villa. Previously that sort of thing used to happen mainly in private, or at least it wasn't in our faces so much.

perdix

Such questions should include the following questions:
a. In what category do you place yourself?
b. Are you doing enough to improve your lot?

Anorak

This poll is testament to:

1) The power of negative messaging (fair play to Labour)
2) People's inclination to blame the government for bad things (e.g. losing a job)
3) People's inclination to award themselves the credit for good things (e.g. getting a job)
4) The fact that the recession has passed 80%+ of people by (still millions affected, mind you, but most people sailed through without much mishap.

Tissue_Price

Paddy Power:

When will YouGov show Conservatives level with or leading Labour?

Q1 2014 4/1 <---- VALUE!
Q2 2014 6/1
Q3 2014 11/4
Q4 2014 9/2
Not before 2015 11/8

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/novelty-betting/other-politics/uk-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=1159292

Morris_Dancer

F1: the Caterham nose looks a bit... odd. It's also ruined my brilliant Tusks, Platypus and Rhino categories because it doesn't look like any sort of animal.

TGOHF

perdix said:

Such questions should include the following questions:
a. In what category do you place yourself?
b. Are you doing enough to improve your lot?

Has any CoE ever been personally responsible for making you better off ?

Has any CoE ever been personally responsible for a recovery ?

Deborah earning her corn.

Sean_F

isam said:

I would be surprised if the public thought of UKIP as more grumpy than the other parties.. has there been any polling?

Despite the attempts of thread headers and UKIP haters, almost everyone I know thinks Farage is funny, and a character, even very left wing friends of mine. His BBC Weather report was the most watched page on the bbc website the other day

UKIP are a Teflon party, at the moment. That will change, in time, but it's true for now.

Lennon

Morris_Dancer said:

F1: the Caterham nose looks a bit... odd. It's also ruined my brilliant Tusks, Platypus and Rhino categories because it doesn't look like any sort of animal.

It must look like some part of some animal... there are enough to choose from! Picture link and we can all make suggestions?

Richard_Tyndall

Hugh said:

edmundintokyo said:

Somebody should out-flank UKIP by making The Grumpy Party.

Scared of everything? Hate everything? Nothing positive to say about anything? Vote Grumpy!

Trouble is that you know The Grumpy Party would fall short of an absolute majority and would end up in coalition. Imagine the slogan there. Vote Grumpy, Get Dozy.

RichardNabavi

You need historical context to interpret poll findings like this. Voters are always grumpy and usually pessimistic. For example, throughout the boom year of 2006 - when economic skies were cloudless and the City was shovelling money at Gordon Brown, and he was shovelling it at voters, as never before - the monthly IpsosMORI Economic Optimism never showed more than 13% of respondents saying that the general economic condition of the country would improve over the next 12 months:

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemID=43

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Lennon:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72575000/jpg/_72575684_bfemhyccaaawjps-1.jpg

Easterross

I asked OGH earlier but didn't get a reply. Was it the weighting by YouGov which turned a healthy Tory lead in responses into a Labour lead of 2% in last night's poll?

Anorak

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Lennon:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72575000/jpg/_72575684_bfemhyccaaawjps-1.jpg

Few candidates here: http://scienceray.com/biology/zoology/20-weirdest-and-ugliest-looking-animals-on-earth/

MrJones

If the Cameroons had held a big televised public inquiry into how the nomenklatura ignored the grooming gangs for twelve years this wouldn't be happening cos people would be too busy being angry at Labour.

MarkSenior

Easterross said:

I asked OGH earlier but didn't get a reply. Was it the weighting by YouGov which turned a healthy Tory lead in responses into a Labour lead of 2% in last night's poll?

Yes it was the weighting which was compensating for the fact that the Yougov sample voted 46 % Conservative in the last 2010 GE rather than the 37% that actually did so .

taffys

Trouble is that you know The Grumpy Party would fall short of an absolute majority and would end up in coalition.

Of course they would. If there's nobody else in government there's nobody else to get grumpy with.

Lennon

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Lennon:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72575000/jpg/_72575684_bfemhyccaaawjps-1.jpg

Hmm... fair point.

It's not a great likeness - but it did remind me somewhat of the protruding forehead above a narrow snout of the beluga whale. http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/beluga-whale/

Tissue_Price

MarkSenior said:

...the Yougov sample voted 46 % Conservative in the last 2010 GE rather than the 37% that actually did so .

I assume YouGov are using reported votes dating from 2010 (or perhaps from when someone joined their sample, if later), whereas phone pollsters are presumably asking respondents as part of the poll?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Lennon, it is comparable.

Surprised that neither Red Bull nor McLaren have done any running, nor Williams. I forget what engine Williams is using (I think they've switched to Mercedes, but could be wrong), Red Bull have Renault and McLaren a Mercedes.

Casino_Royale

FPT - I do wish the Conservatives would end their obsession with the 'Labour Isn't Working' strapline. It has assumed almost mythical status and there is a quasi-religious belief that it somehow was instrumental in winning the 1979 election, claims subsequently shown by several eminent psephologists to be grossly exaggerated. There have been numerous phonetic or graphically similar posters since, 'Labour Still Isn't Working', 'Labour Isn't Learning', 'Let Down By Labour?' etc.

Saatchi & Saatchi must love recycling this every time rather than actually coming up with something new.

Polruan

One way of testing the idea that voters blame the government for all bad stuff, credit themselves with successes, and assume things are better for everyone else would be to look at similar polling over time.... is this pretty much a one-off poll or does anyone know of something similar in the archives? Would be particularly interesting to see something around 2006/7 before the economy blew up.

Pulpstar

Tissue_Price said:

Paddy Power:

When will YouGov show Conservatives level with or leading Labour?

Q1 2014 4/1 <---- VALUE!
Q2 2014 6/1
Q3 2014 11/4
Q4 2014 9/2
Not before 2015 11/8

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/novelty-betting/other-politics/uk-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=1159292</p&gt;

I'm on.

Carnyx

Lennon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Lennon:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72575000/jpg/_72575684_bfemhyccaaawjps-1.jpg

Hmm... fair point.

It's not a great likeness - but it did remind me somewhat of the protruding forehead above a narrow snout of the beluga whale. http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/beluga-whale/

or this? http://www.ucl.ac.uk/stalkie/pdfs/handelsblad.pdf

MarkSenior

Tissue_Price said:

MarkSenior said:

...the Yougov sample voted 46 % Conservative in the last 2010 GE rather than the 37% that actually did so .

I assume YouGov are using reported votes dating from 2010 (or perhaps from when someone joined their sample, if later), whereas phone pollsters are presumably asking respondents as part of the poll?

Yep , correct .

AlastairMeeks

We already have the Sleepy Party (the Greens), the Bashful Party (the Lib Dems) and the Doc Party (Rufus Hound). So the Grumpy Party would not be breaking new ground.

Partisans of opposing stripes can decide for themselves which of the two main parties is the Dopey Party.

Charles

Carnyx said:

Lennon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Lennon:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72575000/jpg/_72575684_bfemhyccaaawjps-1.jpg

Hmm... fair point.

It's not a great likeness - but it did remind me somewhat of the protruding forehead above a narrow snout of the beluga whale. http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/beluga-whale/

or this? http://www.ucl.ac.uk/stalkie/pdfs/handelsblad.pdf

There's sonething of the foxhound or pointer about it

Anorak

Very interesting article on how housebuilding policy in the UK and Germany differed post WW2, and how it lead to very low home-ownership rates in Germany, but high quality rental housing.

http://qz.com/167887/germany-has-one-of-the-worlds-lowest-homeownership-rates

The interplay between build quality, subsidy, rent control, and private vs. public schemes shows how tricky the problem issue is to approach with a sound and long-lasting policy.

Easterross

Thanks Mr Senior

Casino_Royale

Looking at those figures, and they aren't great figures I admit, they do give a little bit of an indication as to the likely polling range of the Conservatives at the next election (as do the answers on 50p tax where I think 36%(?) agreed it would do economic damage)

32% think the coalition understand small business owners/ entrepreneurs
34% on middle incomes
32% that the Conservatives want everyone to benefit from economic growth
31% who think they'll be personally better off, and...
37% who think Labour would lead to lower economic growth

Once you strip-out/reallocate/ignore the don't knows - plus add Cameron's leadership advantage - there is something to work with there for building an election 'winning' coalition.

The question sort of feels like it'll either drop out with the Conservatives polling 33-34% in the election (but no lower) or with a coordinate Cameron/Osborne/Crosby managing to pump it up to 37-38%, but no higher, which would make all the difference as to who leads the next coalition/minority government.

Anorak

antifrank said:

We already have the Sleepy Party (the Greens), the Bashful Party (the Lib Dems) and the Doc Party (Rufus Hound). So the Grumpy Party would not be breaking new ground.

Partisans of opposing stripes can decide for themselves which of the two main parties is the Dopey Party.

The Lustful Party could hoover up a lot of those Bashful Party candidates, if current events are anything to go by.

Charles

Anorak said:

antifrank said:

We already have the Sleepy Party (the Greens), the Bashful Party (the Lib Dems) and the Doc Party (Rufus Hound). So the Grumpy Party would not be breaking new ground.

Partisans of opposing stripes can decide for themselves which of the two main parties is the Dopey Party.

The Lustful Party could hoover up a lot of those Bashful Party candidates, if current events are anything to go by.

I thought it was the Grumpy Party that was particularly focused on who does the hoovering?

Pulpstar

Casino_Royale said:

Looking at those figures, and they aren't great figures I admit, they do give a little bit of an indication as to the likely polling range of the Conservatives at the next election (as do the answers on 50p tax where I think 36%(?) agreed it would do economic damage)

32% think the coalition understand small business owners/ entrepreneurs
34% on middle incomes
32% that the Conservatives want everyone to benefit from economic growth
31% who think they'll be personally better off, and...
37% who think Labour would lead to lower economic growth

Once you strip-out/reallocate/ignore the don't knows - plus add Cameron's leadership advantage - there is something to work with there for building an election 'winning' coalition.

The question sort of feels like it'll either drop out with the Conservatives polling 33-34% in the election (but no lower) or with a coordinate Cameron/Osborne/Crosby managing to pump it up to 37-38%, but no higher, which would make all the difference as to who leads the next coalition/minority government.

An astute analysis - 33 - 37% seems like a good estimate for Conservative support at next GE. I reckon 35% personally.

Polruan

Pulpstar said:

Casino_Royale said:

Looking at those figures, and they aren't great figures I admit, they do give a little bit of an indication as to the likely polling range of the Conservatives at the next election (as do the answers on 50p tax where I think 36%(?) agreed it would do economic damage)

32% think the coalition understand small business owners/ entrepreneurs
34% on middle incomes
32% that the Conservatives want everyone to benefit from economic growth
31% who think they'll be personally better off, and...
37% who think Labour would lead to lower economic growth

Once you strip-out/reallocate/ignore the don't knows - plus add Cameron's leadership advantage - there is something to work with there for building an election 'winning' coalition.

The question sort of feels like it'll either drop out with the Conservatives polling 33-34% in the election (but no lower) or with a coordinate Cameron/Osborne/Crosby managing to pump it up to 37-38%, but no higher, which would make all the difference as to who leads the next coalition/minority government.

An astute analysis - 33 - 37% seems like a good estimate for Conservative support at next GE. I reckon 35% personally.

I suppose the counter-analysis would be to note that on a number of these questions, the don't knows are relatively few (often <15%). If you applied an equally rose-tinted view from the Lab perspective, taking into account the decreased attractiveness of the Lib Dems as an "alternative" you'd probably end up concluding a Lab vote share of 60% or more (e.g. "all of those who support 50% tax plus a pro-rata share of "don't knows" will vote for us). Now, I'm struggling to see Ed attracting 60% of any given electoral college, probably including the current shadow cabinet, but it does highlight the risk of this kind of methodology.

The big unknown must be how the polling showing general kneejerk opposition to the government of the day translates into actual votes for the actual opposition - and does the correlation strengthen when the policies of the opposition appear closer to the concerns of the electorate.

Garethofthevale

It's a shame they didn't ask these questions about Labour and UKIP as well for comparison

Pulpstar

Polruan said:

Pulpstar said:

Casino_Royale said:

Looking at those figures, and they aren't great figures I admit, they do give a little bit of an indication as to the likely polling range of the Conservatives at the next election (as do the answers on 50p tax where I think 36%(?) agreed it would do economic damage)

32% think the coalition understand small business owners/ entrepreneurs
34% on middle incomes
32% that the Conservatives want everyone to benefit from economic growth
31% who think they'll be personally better off, and...
37% who think Labour would lead to lower economic growth

Once you strip-out/reallocate/ignore the don't knows - plus add Cameron's leadership advantage - there is something to work with there for building an election 'winning' coalition.

The question sort of feels like it'll either drop out with the Conservatives polling 33-34% in the election (but no lower) or with a coordinate Cameron/Osborne/Crosby managing to pump it up to 37-38%, but no higher, which would make all the difference as to who leads the next coalition/minority government.

An astute analysis - 33 - 37% seems like a good estimate for Conservative support at next GE. I reckon 35% personally.

I suppose the counter-analysis would be to note that on a number of these questions, the don't knows are relatively few (often

My view isn't particularly rose tinted for the Conservatives though, I think Ed Miliband will be next PM.

But my range of views and betting is from a continuation of the coalition to a small(ish) Labour majority - this analysis appears to back this up.

Morris_Dancer

Police working hard to shed any remaining supporters:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25930167

Not the most serious recent case, but it's sad to see the police acting like twonks. More seriously, Parliamentary privilege should be better understood and protected. It reminds me, writ small, of when a newspaper was prevented by injunction from reporting what had been said in Parliament.

PBModerator

Avery.

Please do not copy and paste entire pieces from other websites, or a majority of an article.

In future a couple of paragraphs and a link will be sufficient.

weejonnie

It's just the general rule that people do NOT like the government when it is dealing with a recession - but will heartily approve of it once the recession is perceived to have ended.

I don't like what you are doing . . . . but I like what you did.

Anyone can live like a king - for thirteen years.

Casino_Royale

Polruan said:

Pulpstar said:

Casino_Royale said:

32% think the coalition understand small business owners/ entrepreneurs
34% on middle incomes
32% that the Conservatives want everyone to benefit from economic growth
31% who think they'll be personally better off, and...
37% who think Labour would lead to lower economic growth

Once you strip-out/reallocate/ignore the don't knows - plus add Cameron's leadership advantage - there is something to work with there for building an election 'winning' coalition.

The question sort of feels like it'll either drop out with the Conservatives polling 33-34% in the election (but no lower) or with a coordinate Cameron/Osborne/Crosby managing to pump it up to 37-38%, but no higher, which would make all the difference as to who leads the next coalition/minority government.

An astute analysis - 33 - 37% seems like a good estimate for Conservative support at next GE. I reckon 35% personally.

I suppose the counter-analysis would be to note that on a number of these questions, the don't knows are relatively few (often

Pulpstar - thanks.

Polruan - you are correctly, it's risky to directly infer very much from these figures. I'm working on the basis that if voters are willing to say something positive about the government and the Conservatives at this stage of the electoral cycle (particularly in the core battleground areas of economic growth working for "people like me" - i.e not big business/the wealthiest taxpayers) then that is worth nothing.

I confess there is not much science behind my intepretation of the figures. I am using them as signposts and a guide. We're talking about trying to predict the future here.

On that point, like Pulpstar, I also feel I'm not being particularly rose-tinted for the Conservatives. Predicting a maximum vote share of 38% for a 'job well done' is pretty derisory.

Casino_Royale

"then that is worth nothing." - I meant "noting", not 'nothing'. Blasted iPhone. Jesuz!

AveryLP

PBModerator said:

Avery.

Please do not copy and paste entire pieces from other websites, or a majority of an article.

In future a couple of paragraphs and a link will be sufficient.

Moderator

Markit Economics issue their reports as "press releases" for the specific purposes of gaining wide press coverage for their survey results and commentary. Whilst Markit assert their copyright, provided this is acknowledged and Markit attributed as the source, users are free to publish their whole press releases verbatim.

There is even a "Notes to Editor" section of the report directing users on how to use the materials and giving additional background gloss.

My post was a précis of Markit's findings and not a verbatim copy, even though this makes no difference legally.

The issue of material as a press release implies consent to publication (with source and copyright acknowledgement).

Tissue_Price

This may well have been linked yesterday; it's a excellent review of UKIP's support by two political scientists:

"Meet Ukip, Britain's most working-class party"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukipwatch/100256765/meet-ukip-britains-most-working-class-party/

TGOHF

Oil price drop ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10601899/Iraq-and-Iran-plot-oil-revolution-in-challenge-to-Saudi-Arabia.html

"Iraq's intention to challenge Saudi Arabia's status as the "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel could see a dramatic fall in oil prices if Baghdad decides to break the group's quotas and sell more of its crude on the open market."

Pulpstar

TGOHF said:

Oil price drop ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10601899/Iraq-and-Iran-plot-oil-revolution-in-challenge-to-Saudi-Arabia.html

"Iraq's intention to challenge Saudi Arabia's status as the "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel could see a dramatic fall in oil prices if Baghdad decides to break the group's quotas and sell more of its crude on the open market."

Not worrying me about my bet with Fluffy Thoughts.

Anorak

TGOHF said:

Oil price drop ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10601899/Iraq-and-Iran-plot-oil-revolution-in-challenge-to-Saudi-Arabia.html

"Iraq's intention to challenge Saudi Arabia's status as the "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel could see a dramatic fall in oil prices if Baghdad decides to break the group's quotas and sell more of its crude on the open market."

That could f*ck Saudi Arabia up. They spend a colossal amount on social support for their population (only half of which are allowed to work, and unemployment amongst that half is very high). It's a widely held view that the Royal Family retains its grip on power by making sure everyone is kept happy and comfortable. As income tax is zero and they need a high and stable oil price to balance the books, a sharp fall could easily result in widespread social unrest, the departure of swathes of Pakistani and Bangladeshi workers, and a transfer of power to the clerics. The latter are already very influential and sit just one rung below the Taliban in terms of conservatism, as do most of Saudi Arabia rural population and urban working class.

Not a good recipe for anyone.

taffys

Not a good recipe for anyone.

What's really behind this? perhaps the Iraqis suspect the saudis of meddling in their horrible internal politicis....

The world's attitude to Saudi baffles me. They are supposed to be an ally and friend, and yet they are said to be behind every militant Islam group going.

Pulpstar

taffys said:

Not a good recipe for anyone.

What's really behind this? perhaps the Iraqis suspect the saudis of meddling in their horrible internal politicis....

The world's attitude to Saudi baffles me. They are supposed to be an ally and friend, and yet they are said to be behind every militant Islam group going.

The world's attitude to Saudi Arabia is an example of 'tolerance' for all the wrong reasons.

state_go_away

taffys said:

Not a good recipe for anyone.

What's really behind this? perhaps the Iraqis suspect the saudis of meddling in their horrible internal politicis....

The world's attitude to Saudi baffles me. They are supposed to be an ally and friend, and yet they are said to be behind every militant Islam group going.

It doesn't baffle me , how much oil does Saudi produce again?

RichardNabavi

Tissue_Price said:

This may well have been linked yesterday; it's a excellent review of UKIP's support by two political scientists:

"Meet Ukip, Britain's most working-class party"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukipwatch/100256765/meet-ukip-britains-most-working-class-party/

The comments to that article have to be seen to be believed. 'Fruitcakes and loons' doesn't begin to cover it; they are incredibly indignant, but there's absolutely nothing in the article to get indignant about.

Charles

taffys said:

Not a good recipe for anyone.

What's really behind this? perhaps the Iraqis suspect the saudis of meddling in their horrible internal politicis....

The world's attitude to Saudi baffles me. They are supposed to be an ally and friend, and yet they are said to be behind every militant Islam group going.

The House of Saud is a friend (or at least complicit). The deal is:

1. We keep them in power,
2. The Al-Sauds get very rich
3. They spend some of that money as Danegeld paying off the Wahhabites
4. The Wahhabites spend that money on making life miserable for us

The problem we face is if the deal falls apart, then Wahhabites take over in Saudi and it become a mecca (apologies, couldn't resist) for all sorts of nasty people. And the Wahhabites probably stop the flow of oil.

Personally that's why I thought the US was so keen to dislodge Saddam. With Iraqi and Russian oil freely available, the power and importance of the House of Saud is dramatically reduced.

TGOHF

The Saudi's problem is that their break even price for the economy is something like $100 a barrel and rising.

They are rooked if the price drops to $70.

Anorak

state_go_away said:

taffys said:

Not a good recipe for anyone.

What's really behind this? perhaps the Iraqis suspect the saudis of meddling in their horrible internal politicis....

The world's attitude to Saudi baffles me. They are supposed to be an ally and friend, and yet they are said to be behind every militant Islam group going.

It doesn't baffle me , how much oil does Saudi produce again?

Iran is Shia, and the Shia majority in Iraq have been gaining ground and power (funded generously by - guess who?), and SA is the centre of Sunni Islam. There's no love lost between the two and I suspect that Iran wants to project some power and influence in that corner of the world as it (temporarily?) reintegrates globally.

TGOHF

Farage gets "brave"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100257048/nigel-farage-the-tories-have-failed-only-ukip-dares-cut-spending-on-nhs-and-pensions/

"Mr Farage will strike out in favour of cuts to the NHS, pensions, and all the other protected areas of public spending. He will pledge to end the ring-fencing of particular spending: "ridiculous arguments" he told me, specifying the NHS and the triple-lock on pensions. "

Anorak

Awesome brass neck: http://arbroath.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/man-used-first-class-airline-ticket-to.html

"Man used first-class airline ticket to get free meals in airport’s VIP lounge for almost a year. Then returned ticket for a refund".

taffys

The comments to that article have to be seen to be believed.

The comments below the Guardian's latest Islington-based broadside against UKIP are also interesting.

Basically, we are way past the time for insults and condescension. In fact, shut the f8ck up you are making it worse.

UKIP is gaining with the WWC and we have to understand why.

OldKingCole

TGOHF said:

Farage gets "brave"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100257048/nigel-farage-the-tories-have-failed-only-ukip-dares-cut-spending-on-nhs-and-pensions/

"Mr Farage will strike out in favour of cuts to the NHS, pensions, and all the other protected areas of public spending. He will pledge to end the ring-fencing of particular spending: "ridiculous arguments" he told me, specifying the NHS and the triple-lock on pensions. "

Noyhing like savaging your own core vote!

isam

taffys said:

The comments to that article have to be seen to be believed.

The comments below the Guardian's latest Islington-based broadside against UKIP are also interesting.

Basically, we are way past the time for insults and condescension. In fact, shut the f8ck up you are making it worse.

UKIP is gaining with the WWC and we have to understand why.

***LEFTY KLAXON***

Using the acronym "WWC" or mentioning there is such a thing as the white working class is the latest thing to spring the passive aggressive lefty mousetrap... be very careful or you'll be end up protesting that youre not a "Banque National de Paris" supporter

Tissue_Price

RichardNabavi said:

The comments to that article have to be seen to be believed. 'Fruitcakes and loons' doesn't begin to cover it; they are incredibly indignant, but there's absolutely nothing in the article to get indignant about.

I've given up reading Telegraph comments altogether since they, regardless of article topic, always end up being about the LibLabCon. If you get to an article quickly the first half-dozen comments can be insightful.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/anthropology-in-practice/2013/07/29/dont-read-the-comments-why-do-we-read-the-online-comments-when-we-know-theyll-be-bad/

taffys

The Mail is running a potentially pertinent article on who is benefiting from state-backed mortgages.

The big winners are northern cities.

isam

TGOHF said:

Farage gets "brave"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100257048/nigel-farage-the-tories-have-failed-only-ukip-dares-cut-spending-on-nhs-and-pensions/

"Mr Farage will strike out in favour of cuts to the NHS, pensions, and all the other protected areas of public spending. He will pledge to end the ring-fencing of particular spending: "ridiculous arguments" he told me, specifying the NHS and the triple-lock on pensions. "

My Dad got hospitalised two years ago on Christmas Day, and so I visited Queens Hospital in Romford for the first time..

The first thing I remember thinking as I walked in, quite stressed and worried, was what the hell was a grand piano doing in the large foyet of this Hospital..

Went into the ward to find Dad chatting to a paranoid schizophrenic that was in the bed opposite his, and I ended up standing there holding the ariel on the tv so they could watch the news without the picture breaking up...

A week later my Dad was discharged having been ready to leave three days earlier but for the lack of a doctor to sign him off over the Christmas period

Last year Queens hospital was put into Special Measures

Anorak

isam said:

taffys said:

The comments to that article have to be seen to be believed.

The comments below the Guardian's latest Islington-based broadside against UKIP are also interesting.

Basically, we are way past the time for insults and condescension. In fact, shut the f8ck up you are making it worse.

UKIP is gaining with the WWC and we have to understand why.

***LEFTY KLAXON***

They should install one of those in every public building.

AndyJS

Man who jumped from Canary Wharf building this morning named as Gabriel Magee of JP Morgan:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/man-who-plunged-to-death-from-jp-morgan-hq-roof-in-canary-wharf-named-as-it-worker-gabriel-magee-9089919.html

Pulpstar

taffys said:

The Mail is running a potentially pertinent article on who is benefiting from state-backed mortgages.

The big winners are northern cities.

Good(ish) news I suppose...

We'll see how grateful northern city voters are shortly in Sale & Wythenshawe.

Pulpstar

taffys said:

The comments to that article have to be seen to be believed.

The comments below the Guardian's latest Islington-based broadside against UKIP are also interesting.

Basically, we are way past the time for insults and condescension. In fact, shut the f8ck up you are making it worse.

UKIP is gaining with the WWC and we have to understand why.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/ukip-members-walter-mitty-nigel-farage this Guardian article ?

anotherDave

TGOHF said:

Farage gets "brave"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100257048/nigel-farage-the-tories-have-failed-only-ukip-dares-cut-spending-on-nhs-and-pensions/

"Mr Farage will strike out in favour of cuts to the NHS, pensions, and all the other protected areas of public spending. He will pledge to end the ring-fencing of particular spending: "ridiculous arguments" he told me, specifying the NHS and the triple-lock on pensions. "

That article is pure speculation.

anotherDave

Anorak said:

TGOHF said:

Oil price drop ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10601899/Iraq-and-Iran-plot-oil-revolution-in-challenge-to-Saudi-Arabia.html

"Iraq's intention to challenge Saudi Arabia's status as the "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel could see a dramatic fall in oil prices if Baghdad decides to break the group's quotas and sell more of its crude on the open market."

That could f*ck Saudi Arabia up. They spend a colossal amount on social support for their population (only half of which are allowed to work, and unemployment amongst that half is very high). It's a widely held view that the Royal Family retains its grip on power by making sure everyone is kept happy and comfortable. As income tax is zero and they need a high and stable oil price to balance the books, a sharp fall could easily result in widespread social unrest, the departure of swathes of Pakistani and Bangladeshi workers, and a transfer of power to the clerics. The latter are already very influential and sit just one rung below the Taliban in terms of conservatism, as do most of Saudi Arabia rural population and urban working class.

Not a good recipe for anyone.

Russia's budget apparently requires oil to be >USD117.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100026424/60-oil-will-finish-russias-putin-regime-says-hermitages-browder/

Socrates

Fascinating interview with Edward Snowden:

http://www.ndr.de/ratgeber/netzwelt/snowden277_page-1.html

- "There have been thousands of violations of the National Security Agency and other agencies and authorities every single year."

- Every time you pick up the phone, dial a number, write an email, make a purchase, travel on the bus carrying a cell phone, swipe a card somewhere, you leave a trace and the government has decided that it’s a good idea to collect it all, everything, even if you’ve never been suspected of any crime. Traditionally the government would identify a suspect, they would go to a judge, they would say we suspect he’s committed this crime, they would get a warrant and then they would be able to use the totality of their powers in pursuit of the investigation. Nowadays what we see is they want to apply the totality of their powers in advance - prior to an investigation.

Morris_Dancer

Good evening, everyone.

Sounds like Farage is going down a brave route.

Anorak

anotherDave said:

Anorak said:

TGOHF said:

Oil price drop ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10601899/Iraq-and-Iran-plot-oil-revolution-in-challenge-to-Saudi-Arabia.html

"Iraq's intention to challenge Saudi Arabia's status as the "swing producer" in the OPEC cartel could see a dramatic fall in oil prices if Baghdad decides to break the group's quotas and sell more of its crude on the open market."

That could f*ck Saudi Arabia up. They spend a colossal amount on social support for their population (only half of which are allowed to work, and unemployment amongst that half is very high). It's a widely held view that the Royal Family retains its grip on power by making sure everyone is kept happy and comfortable. As income tax is zero and they need a high and stable oil price to balance the books, a sharp fall could easily result in widespread social unrest, the departure of swathes of Pakistani and Bangladeshi workers, and a transfer of power to the clerics. The latter are already very influential and sit just one rung below the Taliban in terms of conservatism, as do most of Saudi Arabia rural population and urban working class.

Not a good recipe for anyone.

Russia's budget apparently requires oil to be >USD117.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100026424/60-oil-will-finish-russias-putin-regime-says-hermitages-browder/

Also not good (apart from seeing the back of Putin), but at least the spectre of a radicalised caliphate with armed to the teeth with modern weapons isn't in that scenario.

Iran may (have been?) be bonkers, but their armed forces are still in the 1980s at best. The Saudis have a lot of scary toys.

Pulpstar

UKIP is very difficult to trash. Attack it from the left and you're branded a metropolitan trendy liberal lefty idiot (Which may be true...), say they will cut funding to the NHS and the comments are a mixture of "No they won't, you're making it up" to "Good ! The NHS needs serious change anyway".

It's supporters may well be mostly WWC and it's leader a Kent city-boy made good, but it's also a wonderfully blank canvas, something to project your own vision of how you want politics to turn out onto. A way of sticking two fingers up to the perceived rule by metropolitan elite.

Morris_Dancer

Indeed, Mr. Pulpstar. It'd be fascinating to know how UKIP would be doing if one of the big three parties was not led by a fortysomething Oxbridge SPAD type.

saddened

Socrates said:

Fascinating interview with Edward Snowden:


- Every time you pick up the phone, dial a number, write an email, make a purchase, travel on the bus carrying a cell phone, swipe a card somewhere, you leave a trace and the government has decided that it’s a good idea to collect it all, everything, even if you’ve never been suspected of any crime. Traditionally the government would identify a suspect, they would go to a judge, they would say we suspect he’s committed this crime, they would get a warrant and then they would be able to use the totality of their powers in pursuit of the investigation. Nowadays what we see is they want to apply the totality of their powers in advance - prior to an investigation.

He is massively overstating the role he held.

JosiasJessop

saddened said:

Socrates said:

Fascinating interview with Edward Snowden:


- Every time you pick up the phone, dial a number, write an email, make a purchase, travel on the bus carrying a cell phone, swipe a card somewhere, you leave a trace and the government has decided that it’s a good idea to collect it all, everything, even if you’ve never been suspected of any crime. Traditionally the government would identify a suspect, they would go to a judge, they would say we suspect he’s committed this crime, they would get a warrant and then they would be able to use the totality of their powers in pursuit of the investigation. Nowadays what we see is they want to apply the totality of their powers in advance - prior to an investigation.

- "When you are on the inside and you go into work everyday and you sit down at the desk and you realise the power you have - you can wire tap the President of the United States, you can wire tap a Federal Judge and if you do it carefully no one will ever know"

- "But what (the review boards investigating the illegal NSA programs) found was that these programs have no value, they’ve never stopped a terrorist attack in the United States and they have marginal utility at best for other things...The National Security agency operates under the President’s executive authority alone. He can end of modify or direct a change of their policies at any time."

- "I can track your username on a website on a form somewhere, I can track your real name, I can track associations with your friends and I can build what’s called a fingerprint which is network activity unique to you which means anywhere you go in the world anywhere you try to sort of hide your online presence hide your identity, the NSA can find you."

- "So realistically what’s happening is when they say there’s no spying on Germans, they don’t mean that German data isn’t being gathered, they don’t mean that records aren’t being taken or stolen, what they mean is that they’re not intentionally searching for German citizens. And that’s sort of a fingers crossed behind the back promise, it’s not reliable."

- "The problem there is you end up in a situation where government policies are being influenced by private corporations who have interests that are completely divorced from the public good in mind. The result of that is what we saw at Booze Allen Hamilton where you have private individuals who have access to what the government alleges were millions and millions of records that they could walk out the door with at any time with no accountability, no oversight, no auditing, the government didn’t even know they were gone."

Shame the majority of it is either wrong or a direct lie. He was a sys admin. He has no access to any tasking, he wasn't in a position to collect anybody's data let alone the POTUS.
He is massively overstating the role he held.

He know his audience.

JosiasJessop

Hugh said:

***FAR RIGHT KLAXON***

Don't try to reason with a raving CyberKipper or get them to elaborate on their views, you get the same sensation quicker from banging your head repeatedly against the nearest wall.

I find it funny how some people (and this is not just a UKIP thing; right and left are also 'guilty') seem unable to expand on simple definitions, or give reasons behind their thinking.

Scott_P

Right wing rag...

Perhaps the only people not happy about today's news are Ed Balls and his fellow miserablists. At each stage they have predicted the worst – millions more out of work, a triple-dip recession and even economic uncertainty caused by the prospect of an EU referendum. At each stage they have been completely wrong.

Meanwhile, under President François Hollande, the disastrous implementation of plan B has seen French unemployment reach a record high.

Labour should be as glad as the rest of us to have dodged that bullet – a little shamefaced, but glad their scaremongering about austerity has proved to be unfounded.

In reality, they are nothing of the sort. Balls is as red-faced and defiant as ever, and seems to view the word "sorry" as an expletive.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/28/only-loser-britains-resurgent-economy-labour-osborne-balls

Sunil_Prasannan

JosiasJessop said:

saddened said:

Socrates said:

Fascinating interview with Edward Snowden:


-- "So realistically what’s happening is when they say there’s no spying on Germans, they don’t mean that German data isn’t being gathered, they don’t mean that records aren’t being taken or stolen, what they mean is that they’re not intentionally searching for German citizens. And that’s sort of a fingers crossed behind the back promise, it’s not reliable."

- "The problem there is you end up in a situation where government policies are being influenced by private corporations who have interests that are completely divorced from the public good in mind. The result of that is what we saw at Booze Allen Hamilton where you have private individuals who have access to what the government alleges were millions and millions of records that they could walk out the door with at any time with no accountability, no oversight, no auditing, the government didn’t even know they were gone."

Shame the majority of it is either wrong or a direct lie. He was a sys admin. He has no access to any tasking, he wasn't in a position to collect anybody's data let alone the POTUS.
He is massively overstating the role he held.

He know his audience.

I thought that as a right-winger you would believe in a "small" State...

JosiasJessop

The religious nutcases are causing Spain difficulties:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f817d252-82a4-11e3-8119-00144feab7de.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25473146

taffys

On the topic of oil, just read an interesting piece on the topic of US production.

Oil companies are lobbying government to lift export restrictions that have been in place since the '73 oil shock.

US domestic crude trades 11 dollars a barrel cheaper than the global market price.

RodCrosby

It's now a 'crime' to be a lawyer and do your best for your client, according to this Green muppet...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25931677

JosiasJessop

Sunil_Prasannan said:

JosiasJessop said:

saddened said:

Socrates said:

Fascinating interview with Edward Snowden:


-- "So realistically what’s happening is when they say there’s no spying on Germans, they don’t mean that German data isn’t being gathered, they don’t mean that records aren’t being taken or stolen, what they mean is that they’re not intentionally searching for German citizens. And that’s sort of a fingers crossed behind the back promise, it’s not reliable."

- "The problem there is you end up in a situation where government policies are being influenced by private corporations who have interests that are completely divorced from the public good in mind. The result of that is what we saw at Booze Allen Hamilton where you have private individuals who have access to what the government alleges were millions and millions of records that they could walk out the door with at any time with no accountability, no oversight, no auditing, the government didn’t even know they were gone."

Shame the majority of it is either wrong or a direct lie. He was a sys admin. He has no access to any tasking, he wasn't in a position to collect anybody's data let alone the POTUS.
He is massively overstating the role he held.

He know his audience.

I thought that as a right-winger you would believe in a "small" State...

I'd like to see myself as socially centre-left, economically right.

People will probably laugh at that.

I also believe in a world that is becoming ever more complex, the size of the state probably has to increase a little.

Again, people will probably laugh at that ... ;-)

JonathanD

JosiasJessop said:

saddened said:

Socrates said:

Fascinating interview with Edward Snowden:


-

Shame the majority of it is either wrong or a direct lie. He was a sys admin. He has no access to any tasking, he wasn't in a position to collect anybody's data let alone the POTUS.
He is massively overstating the role he held.

He know his audience.

Spy agencies spy, its a real shocker. Still he does highlight one good point which is that the US / NSA had shocking security to allow him to walk off with all this data and not even realise it.

MrJones

Reverse identity politics - these people aren't like you so don't vote for them

1st attempt: golf clubs

didn't work

2nd attempt: cloth caps and whippets

anotherDave

Pulpstar said:

UKIP is very difficult to trash. Attack it from the left and you're branded a metropolitan trendy liberal lefty idiot (Which may be true...), say they will cut funding to the NHS and the comments are a mixture of "No they won't, you're making it up" to "Good ! The NHS needs serious change anyway".

It's supporters may well be mostly WWC and it's leader a Kent city-boy made good, but it's also a wonderfully blank canvas, something to project your own vision of how you want politics to turn out onto. A way of sticking two fingers up to the perceived rule by metropolitan elite.

After the May elections that canvas will be filled in a little. No doubt the other parties will also be trialling their 2015 platforms.

"The NewKIP faction wants the days after the European elections to be the moment when the party surprises people. During what is expected to be a big moment in the spotlight the aim is to showcase opposition to privatisation of the NHS and preview tax cuts for the working and middle classes."

http://www.ukipdaily.com/tim-montgomerie-begins-take-ukip-seriously-cameron-needs-ask-pickfords-quote/

A "better off with UKIP" pitch should be do-able. Today's ComRes shows there are a lot of people who feel the Con/LD gov't are not looking out for them.

Neil

RodCrosby said:

It's now a 'crime' to be a lawyer and do your best for your client, according to this Green muppet...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25931677

The harpies are getting uppity, Rod.

Socrates

saddened said:

Right. Because skilled intelligence operators that know their way around computers can never access things other than what they're officially allowed to right? It's not like he has already released documents that were way above his intelligence level, or that the US Government has not been able to determine what he did or did not access...

Some people have their heads so far in the sand here. This used to be a country that cared about our rights and liberties...

Pulpstar

"All it will take is a fall in the price of oil to $60 a barrel "

That's a pretty big and massively unlikely IF !

Sunil_Prasannan

Neil said:

RodCrosby said:

It's now a 'crime' to be a lawyer and do your best for your client, according to this Green muppet...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25931677

The harpies are getting uppity, Rod.

Rod once again screaming like a harpy re. Rennard

Socrates

It's worth bearing in mind that our government has not retrenched on any of the crap that GCHQ is doing with the NSA. This despite a "liberal" Conservative as PM and a "liberal" Democrat as DPM. They've all studied PPE at school, yet none of them seem to value things like protection against searches without warrants, or innocence until proven guilty.

Pulpstar

RodCrosby said:

It's now a 'crime' to be a lawyer and do your best for your client, according to this Green muppet...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25931677

I'm not always the first to defend lawyers, the defence at Lee Rigby's trial made my blood boil but this line takes the cake:

"It is based on your vigorous defence of Lord Rennard in the media, which indicates to me a lack of understanding of women's issues."

Oh Crikey oh riley.

Sunil_Prasannan

Socrates said:

saddened said:

Right. Because skilled intelligence operators that know their way around computers can never access things other than what they're officially allowed to right? It's not like he has already released documents that were way above his intelligence level, or that the US Government has not been able to determine what he did or did not access...

Some people have their heads so far in the sand here. This used to be a country that cared about our rights and liberties...

They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin, 1755.