Soaraway Labour..a full 3 points ahead...no stopping these lads.
To be fair, you write that when a poll shows a small lead then disappear entirely when it shows a larger one. It's a tendency I have noted among others on here too.
To be fair, I think that's because most posters assume a Labour lead of 5-7 is 'ordinary course' and therefore there's not much to comment on day after day. Assuming that a lead of 2-3% is sustained over a few polls (so not an outlier) then a jump back to 7% would be worth of comment.
Soaraway Labour..a full 3 points ahead...no stopping these lads.
To be fair, you write that when a poll shows a small lead then disappear entirely when it shows a larger one. It's a tendency I have noted among others on here too.
To be fair, I think that's because most posters assume a Labour lead of 5-7 is 'ordinary course' and therefore there's not much to comment on day after day. Assuming that a lead of 2-3% is sustained over a few polls (so not an outlier) then a jump back to 7% would be worth of comment.
Indeed. And you probably would comment. Richard Dodd would disappear I dare say.
One reason to include don't knows in the 2010 LD switchers is that they are significantly higher (~24%) than 2010C (~10%) or 2010L(~10%).
It's worth noting that.
Just as it is worth noting that the "LD switchers are sliding back" thing was probably based upon a 24 hour blip in a very odd poll that also included a Blue Gen X and a Red Baby Boom. I expect @MikeSmithson will soon comment and perhaps revise his view (assuming the ~35% is sustained)
Mr. Flashman (deceased), I expect it's an excuse to be able to shriek "Thatcher!" and point at heartless, baby-eating Conservatives.
It's easier to attack the past than to defend Labour's present (which is of completely buggering up the economy, then being utterly wrong on how to resolve it).
The SNP assume that they can force England to let them share a currency. I'm not sure that is actually true or in England's own interest. This will be interesting.
It depends on the definition of "share".
The SNP can unilaterally use GBP if they want, and the rUK can't stop them. The SNP can't insist that the rUK gives them (for example) a seat on the BoE MPC.
You may as well join the Euro on that basis. The problem with the Eurozone is that you have barely any input on interest rates and have to negotiate with Germany if you ever need to get a bailout. If you just use sterling without permission, it's even worse. You don't get any input on interest rates and you won't ever get a bailout.
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
Of course the government has got the deficit down. They've just piled up the debt in the private sector instead.
If UKIP goes up to 20 or 25 MEPs in May, then a large proportion of them will probably turn out to be just as useless, lazy and incompetent as the ones elected in 2009, and the group will probably contain just as many gallumphing booliaks, twogliaks, nincompoops, pobblequacks and treacle-pudding maniacs as before. Nikki Sinclaire MEP was born on the same day as me.
So just as useless, lazy and incompetent as the MEPs from all the other parties then?
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
Of course the government has got the deficit down. They've just piled up the debt in the private sector instead.
"The Bank of England said mortgage borrowers built up £10.4bn housing equity in the three months to September - extending to five years the period in which homeowners have increased their property equity rather than grow their debts. This data, officially termed "housing equity withdrawal", measures the change in homeowners' collective equity in their property.""
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Is it just me or is this from the notoriously pi$$ poor Stoke Council (they of the Moroccan themed Xmas market idea that resulted in camels getting lost on the ring road) actually a far better idea than all that money that Project Prescott splashed up the wall knocking down perfectly good homes.
People get a cheap house and you should also get the vast majority of people who are accepted investing in their home / neighborhood...
A sensible approach, and much less damaging that Prescott's Pathfinder scheme.
Use the embodied energy within existing houses where possible. Demolition should be a last resort.
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Probably that it's an issue from decades ago that nobody is going to vote on any more?
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Shows there is no increase in personal debt since 2008 in cash terms.
It shows that people have finally weaned themselves off buying stuff they didn't need with money they didn't have. Or Brownomics, as I think it was known.
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Probably that it's an issue from decades ago that nobody is going to vote on any more?
Is it really? The reactions to her funeral recently might suggest otherwise, as does the panda-level population of Tory MPs in Scotland and much of the North and Wales. (Not a personal sentiment of mine either way; and indeed it would surprise me a little bit if this anti-Mrs T factor is still significantly active.)
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Probably that it's an issue from decades ago that nobody is going to vote on any more?
Possibly. Alternatively, it reinforces Labour's links with its traditional heartlands, while highlighting the "arch-Thatcherite" credentials of a party that says it is targeting white, working class, small "c" conservative, Old Labour voters, because they have been abandoned by the metropolitan, middle class, champagne socialists who now lead Labour. Labour cannot out-UKIP UKIP on immigration, and will not try to, but - perhaps unlike the Tories - when it comes to appealing to the hearts and minds of traditional voters in the face of a UKIP challenge it does have certain other advantages. We shall see. At best this may help Labour slightly, at worse it will make no difference.
So just as useless, lazy and incompetent as the MEPs from all the other parties then?
Your evidence for this lazy generalisation is...? I've dealt with lots of MEPs from UKIP to Tory to LibDem to Labour to Communist to Green. They are generally hard-working, intelligent and notably more willing to listen to other points of view than your average politician, either in the House of Commons or, ahem, here on pb.
On another subject, I see ultra-hot favourite for deputy leader Lorely Burt has been beaten by Malcolm Bruce, even though he's about to leave Parliament next year. What is it about LibDems and women?
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Probably that it's an issue from decades ago that nobody is going to vote on any more?
Is it really? The reactions to her funeral recently might suggest otherwise, as does the panda-level population of Tory MPs in Scotland and much of the North and Wales. (Not a personal sentiment of mine either way; and indeed it would surprise me a little bit if this anti-Mrs T factor is still significantly active.)
How many votes will it shift ? Just rubbing the tummies of the "would vote for a donkey with a red rosette (and have done for decades) brigade"
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
A sound analysis. Smart move by Labour
I am probably straying onto ground where I need to "check my privilege".
But I suspect that aoutside the former coalfields no one will care and/or it won't change any votes. Inside the heartlands it will be a bit like Miliband turning up to the Durham Rally - showing a bit of leg to a core supporter base, making them feel loved and basically getting a few brownie points at very little cost.
And if you get a few silly tories to make silly comments ("sad but necessary" or whatever) that can be quoted/misquoted out of context then so much the better
I strongly encourage Labour to campaign for the Justice for the coalfields.
Trying to extract an apology from the government of thirty years ago, will no way give an opportunity for the Tories to demand an apology for the economic legacy of which the two Eds, left the the coalition.
So just as useless, lazy and incompetent as the MEPs from all the other parties then?
Your evidence for this lazy generalisation is...? I've dealt with lots of MEPs from UKIP to Tory to LibDem to Labour to Communist to Green. They are generally hard-working, intelligent and notably more willing to listen to other points of view than your average politician, either in the House of Commons or, ahem, here on pb.
Yes, it's not their work-rate that worries me, it's the fact that they think they have democratic legitimacy.
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
A sound analysis. Smart move by Labour
I am probably straying onto ground where I need to "check my privilege".
But I suspect that aoutside the former coalfields no one will care and/or it won't change any votes. Inside the heartlands it will be a bit like Miliband turning up to the Durham Rally - showing a bit of leg to a core supporter base, making them feel loved and basically getting a few brownie points at very little cost.
And if you get a few silly tories to make silly comments ("sad but necessary" or whatever) that can be quoted/misquoted out of context then so much the better
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
A sound analysis. Smart move by Labour
I am probably straying onto ground where I need to "check my privilege".
But I suspect that aoutside the former coalfields no one will care and/or it won't change any votes. Inside the heartlands it will be a bit like Miliband turning up to the Durham Rally - showing a bit of leg to a core supporter base, making them feel loved and basically getting a few brownie points at very little cost.
And if you get a few silly tories to make silly comments ("sad but necessary" or whatever) that can be quoted/misquoted out of context then so much the better
Bang on. And not just the Tories; UKIP too.
Will it be quietly dropped after the upcoming bye election ?
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
Probably that it's an issue from decades ago that nobody is going to vote on any more?
Is it really? The reactions to her funeral recently might suggest otherwise, as does the panda-level population of Tory MPs in Scotland and much of the North and Wales. (Not a personal sentiment of mine either way; and indeed it would surprise me a little bit if this anti-Mrs T factor is still significantly active.)
How many votes will it shift ? Just rubbing the tummies of the "would vote for a donkey with a red rosette (and have done for decades) brigade"
Maintaining votes is probably a big part of the strategy. Remind people of UKIP's "arch-Thatcherite" leadership and activist base. It's a tribute to UKIP, but it does raise a legitimate question about the sincerity of their push for Old Labour votes.
The miners, of course, were overwhelmingly white and working class.
Is this " dig up the past" exercise a panic measure to counteract Ukip ?
I suspect not. It's a pretty harmless bit of gesture politics. But it does target a demographic that a few UKIPers on here state Labour is not interested in representing. What do the UKIP leadership and activist base think about the miners and Maggie's smashing of the overwhelmingly white, working class Old Labour trades unions?
A sound analysis. Smart move by Labour
I am probably straying onto ground where I need to "check my privilege".
But I suspect that aoutside the former coalfields no one will care and/or it won't change any votes. Inside the heartlands it will be a bit like Miliband turning up to the Durham Rally - showing a bit of leg to a core supporter base, making them feel loved and basically getting a few brownie points at very little cost.
And if you get a few silly tories to make silly comments ("sad but necessary" or whatever) that can be quoted/misquoted out of context then so much the better
Bang on. And not just the Tories; UKIP too.
Will it be quietly dropped after the upcoming bye election ?
It will rumble on because it will make those involved feel good. It reinforces long-held, unchallenged views. For me, it's one of Labour's big problems. It's harmless, perhaps even politically astute, but it does indicate a reluctance to confront the here, now and tomorrow with anything other than old rhetoric and sloganeering.
Can't help thinking that we should be learning a lot more from this.
Does the "attainment gap" only apply to state schools? If so, it might simply be the case that wealthier pupils are more likely to go to private schools in London.
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
That interview reminded me why people on Balls' own side want to punch him.
My wife is left leaning, she would be a labour voter if it weren't for the fact that Balls turns her stomach, and as for Ed... She says "how can anybody look at him and think he is a potential PM?"
It's true that there are a lot of voters who make their choices based on personality not policy. That's why Dave is such an asset to the Tories when you put him up against Ed. Any Tory agitating - overtly or openly - for his removal is insane if they want the Tories to win in 2015.
I think there is zero chance of Dave being removed by 2015 - even the "I'm a celebrity" faction have given up on that.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
That interview reminded me why people on Balls' own side want to punch him.
My wife is left leaning, she would be a labour voter if it weren't for the fact that Balls turns her stomach, and as for Ed... She says "how can anybody look at him and think he is a potential PM?"
It's true that there are a lot of voters who make their choices based on personality not policy. That's why Dave is such an asset to the Tories when you put him up against Ed. Any Tory agitating - overtly or openly - for his removal is insane if they want the Tories to win in 2015.
I think there is zero chance of Dave being removed by 2015 - even the "I'm a celebrity" faction have given up on that.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
And how likely do you think this is before May 2015 - factoring in the current polling and economic data ?
It will rumble on because it will make those involved feel good. It reinforces long-held, unchallenged views. For me, it's one of Labour's big problems. It's harmless, perhaps even politically astute, but it does indicate a reluctance to confront the here, now and tomorrow with anything other than old rhetoric and sloganeering.
It looks straight out of the Foot era. Probably with similar electoral results.
Is Root really going to score 10+ an over? Seems a strange choice for this format. Not as strange as Dernbach for any format involving a cricket ball though.
This is all about Hales. 10 more overs of him and England would be alright but it is a big ask.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
Tory MP's who were reluctant to embrace boundary changes because they would lose their seat are hardly going to take heavy-caliber weaponry to their own feet. Not unless the election is lost. And that ain't the case, not with recent polls and Labour's risible attempts to come up with an alternative economic strategy.
I still expect David Cameron to be Prime Minister in June 2015.
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
That interview reminded me why people on Balls' own side want to punch him.
My wife is left leaning, she would be a labour voter if it weren't for the fact that Balls turns her stomach, and as for Ed... She says "how can anybody look at him and think he is a potential PM?"
It's true that there are a lot of voters who make their choices based on personality not policy. That's why Dave is such an asset to the Tories when you put him up against Ed. Any Tory agitating - overtly or openly - for his removal is insane if they want the Tories to win in 2015.
I think there is zero chance of Dave being removed by 2015 - even the "I'm a celebrity" faction have given up on that.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
And how likely do you think this is before May 2015 - factoring in the current polling and economic data ?
Something like 5% to 8%. Certainly well above zero.
It will rumble on because it will make those involved feel good. It reinforces long-held, unchallenged views. For me, it's one of Labour's big problems. It's harmless, perhaps even politically astute, but it does indicate a reluctance to confront the here, now and tomorrow with anything other than old rhetoric and sloganeering.
It looks straight out of the Foot era. Probably with similar electoral results.
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
That interview reminded me why people on Balls' own side want to punch him.
My wife is left leaning, she would be a labour voter if it weren't for the fact that Balls turns her stomach, and as for Ed... She says "how can anybody look at him and think he is a potential PM?"
It's true that there are a lot of voters who make their choices based on personality not policy. That's why Dave is such an asset to the Tories when you put him up against Ed. Any Tory agitating - overtly or openly - for his removal is insane if they want the Tories to win in 2015.
I think there is zero chance of Dave being removed by 2015 - even the "I'm a celebrity" faction have given up on that.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
And how likely do you think this is before May 2015 - factoring in the current polling and economic data ?
Something like 5% to 8%. Certainly well above zero.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
Tory MP's who were reluctant to embrace boundary changes because they would lose their seat are hardly going to take heavy-caliber weaponry to their own feet. Not unless the election is lost. And that ain't the case, not with recent polls and Labour's risible attempts to come up with an alternative economic strategy.
I still expect David Cameron to be Prime Minister in June 2015.
It only takes 15% of them to do it, most of whom will be either safe or threatened by UKIP.
Arguably if they pulled the trigger the party would rally around Cameron, but once you've got to the leadership contest the leader is already weakened and things take on a like of their own.
Immigration is a better issue for Tories than it is for Labour.
On average, of course, but the key difference here is that the Tories are in Government, and so if they cannot deal with the immigration issue to the satisfaction of the voter, the voter has little option but to look for an alternative who they believe will.
It is little comfort for the Tories if they come ahead of Labour in [some/many] voter's preferences on who is best to deal with immigration, if they are second behind UKIP and voters being to believe that UKIP are a credible alternative worth voting for.
Everybody seems to ignore the possibility that the War Crimes Against Miners Tribunal makes labour look like a bunch of posturing, ridiculous, lower sixth form dweebs with tiny genitalia. It is simply embarrassing. Sophomoric, silly, time wasting gesture-wank.
Given that Labour already have a problem with this perception of their leaders - Balls and Miliband - as being unlikeable, juvenile geeks - this is not going to help. It's not a huge error but it is an error.
And these unforced errors from Labour are, of late, adding up.
Re Justice for the Coalfields, I wrote an article here (in 2006/7) about changing loyalties in ex-mining areas. Support for Labour was absolutely rock-solid in coal-mining areas once upon a time, but it's faded away in many cases, in places like the Forest of Dean, Leicestershire, Kent, Somerset, even to an extent in South Yorkshire.
Everybody seems to ignore the possibility that the War Crimes Against Miners Tribunal makes labour look like a bunch of posturing, ridiculous, lower sixth form dweebs with tiny genitalia. It is simply embarrassing. Sophomoric, silly, time wasting gesture-wank.
Given that Labour already have a problem with this perception of their leaders - Balls and Miliband - as being unlikeable, juvenile geeks - this is not going to help. It's not a huge error but it is an error.
And these unforced errors from Labour are, of late, adding up.
It's a profound shame we no longer have a LIKE button. Spot on mr Gildas!
BTW that's an excellent plan from Stoke council - sell unwanted houses to needy locals for a quid. I cannot think of a better way to regenerate our more impoverished cities and suburb.
The fact it is likely to create rightwing homeowner voters is merely a bonus.
Re Justice for the Coalfields, I wrote an article here (in 2006/7) about changing loyalties in ex-mining areas. Support for Labour was absolutely rock-solid in coal-mining areas once upon a time, but it's faded away in many cases, in places like the Forest of Dean, Leicestershire, Kent, Somerset, even to an extent in South Yorkshire.
AnotherRichard and myself have noted here that places like Don Valley could conceivably go Tory within a few elections
Everybody seems to ignore the possibility that the War Crimes Against Miners Tribunal makes labour look like a bunch of posturing, ridiculous, lower sixth form dweebs with tiny genitalia. It is simply embarrassing. Sophomoric, silly, time wasting gesture-wank.
Given that Labour already have a problem with this perception of their leaders - Balls and Miliband - as being unlikeable, juvenile geeks - this is not going to help. It's not a huge error but it is an error.
And these unforced errors from Labour are, of late, adding up.
I think you'd be right. If anyone was paying attention. Which they are not.
There may be a second order effect, if it influences the view that the commetariat have of the Eds. But voters? Nah!
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
That interview reminded me why people on Balls' own side want to punch him.
My wife is left leaning, she would be a labour voter if it weren't for the fact that Balls turns her stomach, and as for Ed... She says "how can anybody look at him and think he is a potential PM?"
It's true that there are a lot of voters who make their choices based on personality not policy. That's why Dave is such an asset to the Tories when you put him up against Ed. Any Tory agitating - overtly or openly - for his removal is insane if they want the Tories to win in 2015.
I think there is zero chance of Dave being removed by 2015 - even the "I'm a celebrity" faction have given up on that.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
It was actually even easier in the 1980s, when it was possible to launch annual leadership challenges. I think you just needed one nominee, a proposer and a seconder.
The 1989 Anthony Meyer challenge should have been a big wake-up call to Thatcher but she just brushed it off. Much of the current behaviour of the parliamentary party dates back to Heath's prolonged sulk following his defeat in 1975 (which rubbed off on his supporters) and Thatcher's reaction to that through her factionalising style of leadership in the 80s. The 'purge of the wet's from 1981 through to 1984 on the economy and then the fights over Europe from around 1988 to 1993 (in particular) but also all the way to 2001.
The Conservative Party has been difficult to manage ever since.
I have just watched Balls on Paxo. It seems he is as deluded as ever claiming that the Govt had failed to get the deficit down.. and he thinks he should be the next Cof the E. Of course he failed to acknowledge that it was Labours fault we were in the mess we found ourselves. He's been having too many piano lessons
That interview reminded me why people on Balls' own side want to punch him.
My wife is left leaning, she would be a labour voter if it weren't for the fact that Balls turns her stomach, and as for Ed... She says "how can anybody look at him and think he is a potential PM?"
It's true that there are a lot of voters who make their choices based on personality not policy. That's why Dave is such an asset to the Tories when you put him up against Ed. Any Tory agitating - overtly or openly - for his removal is insane if they want the Tories to win in 2015.
I think there is zero chance of Dave being removed by 2015 - even the "I'm a celebrity" faction have given up on that.
Disagree, when the Tories adopted their current leadership rules they swallowed a bomb, and gave the detonator to a monkey. (Or rather, a group consisting of their 45 least level-headed monkeys.) A no confidence vote could be called at the slightest provocation, and once it had been it's not obvious that Cameron would survive it.
And how likely do you think this is before May 2015 - factoring in the current polling and economic data ?
Something like 5% to 8%. Certainly well above zero.
I'd say between 0-1.5%
That's what it would be if they had sensible rules.
Not really wanting to derail a thread completely - but reading this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572 - what can be done to persuade the ASA that they are totally wrong / is there any recourse to appeal to someone higher up?
Does this mean anything practical or is it just somebody muttering to themselves?
It means absolutely nothing, countries decide who votes in their national elections themselves. If Ireland had to grant every Irish person living in the EU an equal vote in general elections its democratic structures would fall apart as Sinn Féin was given the balance of power against the wishes of people who actually live in the Republic.
What next, the EU Commission complains that the UK and other countries dont allow its citizens to vote for its head of state?
Comments
First ball = 6
Nice.
3 balls in to the over, gone for just 14.
It's one of my overs!!
Labour is launching a Justice For The Coalfields campaign. Honestly. I am not making this up.
It is one of my overs!
That's English men's cricket that is... (which comedy prog am I referring to there...)
Just as it is worth noting that the "LD switchers are sliding back" thing was probably based upon a 24 hour blip in a very odd poll that also included a Blue Gen X and a Red Baby Boom. I expect @MikeSmithson will soon comment and perhaps revise his view (assuming the ~35% is sustained)
"You know that Peter Beardsley? That's your mum, that is."
Classic!
It's easier to attack the past than to defend Labour's present (which is of completely buggering up the economy, then being utterly wrong on how to resolve it).
Th @Pulpstar
Not from an FPTP POV, no. I guess they are worried about losing the PV because of seeping votes to Ukip in their strongholds.
"202/4"
HEW is still negative to billions.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...age-debts.html
"The Bank of England said mortgage borrowers built up £10.4bn housing equity in the three months to September - extending to five years the period in which homeowners have increased their property equity rather than grow their debts. This data, officially termed "housing equity withdrawal", measures the change in homeowners' collective equity in their property.""
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25152556
"the Bank of England has pointed out that - relative to income - debt levels have been falling"
http://www.independent.co.uk/money/loans-credit/1430000000000-britains-personal-debt-timebomb-8950372.htm
Shows there is no increase in personal debt since 2008 in cash terms.
Tom Roberts: (external) My 2000 Suzuki Alto going over ice in gale force winds has more control than Jade Dernbach.
Use the embodied energy within existing houses where possible. Demolition should be a last resort.
http://www.demos.co.uk/press_releases/ataleoftwoclassroomslondonresultsskewnationalpictureaseducationalinequalityontherise
Can't help thinking that we should be learning a lot more from this.
On another subject, I see ultra-hot favourite for deputy leader Lorely Burt has been beaten by Malcolm Bruce, even though he's about to leave Parliament next year. What is it about LibDems and women?
But I suspect that aoutside the former coalfields no one will care and/or it won't change any votes. Inside the heartlands it will be a bit like Miliband turning up to the Durham Rally - showing a bit of leg to a core supporter base, making them feel loved and basically getting a few brownie points at very little cost.
And if you get a few silly tories to make silly comments ("sad but necessary" or whatever) that can be quoted/misquoted out of context then so much the better
Trying to extract an apology from the government of thirty years ago, will no way give an opportunity for the Tories to demand an apology for the economic legacy of which the two Eds, left the the coalition.
No sir.
Emile Heskey is in the same bracket as Luis Suarez
Paddy Power @paddypower 1m
Two Liverpool greats are honoured in Anfield!
pic.twitter.com/bCMIBZ2H2W
This is all about Hales. 10 more overs of him and England would be alright but it is a big ask.
I still expect David Cameron to be Prime Minister in June 2015.
Come on Jos....
With Hales the game has gone for England.
Arguably if they pulled the trigger the party would rally around Cameron, but once you've got to the leadership contest the leader is already weakened and things take on a like of their own.
It is little comfort for the Tories if they come ahead of Labour in [some/many] voter's preferences on who is best to deal with immigration, if they are second behind UKIP and voters being to believe that UKIP are a credible alternative worth voting for.
Given that Labour already have a problem with this perception of their leaders - Balls and Miliband - as being unlikeable, juvenile geeks - this is not going to help. It's not a huge error but it is an error.
And these unforced errors from Labour are, of late, adding up.
He's going to win this for England.
The fact it is likely to create rightwing homeowner voters is merely a bonus.
Well done Stoke.
Chortle - to be fair we haven't had a judge led inquiry call since Xmas.
Ed really is crap.
There may be a second order effect, if it influences the view that the commetariat have of the Eds. But voters? Nah!
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-77_en.htm
Does this mean anything practical or is it just somebody muttering to themselves?
The 1989 Anthony Meyer challenge should have been a big wake-up call to Thatcher but she just brushed it off. Much of the current behaviour of the parliamentary party dates back to Heath's prolonged sulk following his defeat in 1975 (which rubbed off on his supporters) and Thatcher's reaction to that through her factionalising style of leadership in the 80s. The 'purge of the wet's from 1981 through to 1984 on the economy and then the fights over Europe from around 1988 to 1993 (in particular) but also all the way to 2001.
The Conservative Party has been difficult to manage ever since.
What next, the EU Commission complains that the UK and other countries dont allow its citizens to vote for its head of state?