Honesty and realism. One of the things that I believe turns voters off from Cameron is that he wants to be all things to all men (and women). In particular with his dealings with the issue of the EU he has been utterly dishonest about what is achievable. In an age when the electorate are far better informed about what politicians in other countries are saying he can no longer afford to pretend that he can get some great result from his negotiations when everyone knows they will be meaningless.
Obviously that is just one example but it seems to be a fault that permeates all his inner circle's dealings with the public. Defence is another area where the say one thing/do another syndrome is all too prevalent. Local Government as well. In fact almost all areas of governance to a greater or lesser extent with the possible exception of education and perhaps (just to annoy the left on here) the economy where realism and the willingness to upset people by being honest about the mess we are in have been obvious and welcome.
This dishonesty is not, of course, limited to the present government. But after all the claims that they would change the way we do politics I am afraid the Cameroons have fallen far short of what was required.
That's just meaningless guff. Are you saying they should spend more on Defence? OK, fair enough, but financed how? Similarly with local government - what do you actually want done differently?
The fact is, these are all trade-offs. What you call 'dishonesty' is the tough job of actually governing, which of course means balancing conflicting aims and making difficult choices in what is currently an extremely difficult financial position.
(I've already dealt with your first point in my reply to Socrates).
In which case don't make the promises. Don't claim that you are going to be maintaining the defensive capabilities of the country and that cuts in manpower won't affect our armed forces when you, and everyone else, knows that is a load of garbage. Same goes with the EU. Don't pretend that you are going to get some sort of deal on repatriation of powers when everyone knows that is simply not credible and any promises he might obtain are not worth the paper they are written on. This is a plague across almost all departments. Say what the public want to hear and what you think will make you popular whilst knowing damn well it is meaningless because there is no practical way you can keep your promises.
As holders of the wooden spoon if anyone has to go it should be France.
I'm only being semi-serious but qualification for the 2015RWC is - in Europe - via the European Nations Cup. The six Six Nations teams are exempt from qualifying but *not* because they are in that tournament but because they finished in the top three in their respective 2011 groups.
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question, particularly if one of the ENC teams - Georgia or Romania most likely - did qualify.
My guess is that if such a scenario did come about, money would talk and the qualification rules would be changed, perhaps via a play-off, but the Six Nations would remain 'as was'. It's not a given though.
If Scotland votes Yes, would the SNP rename itself? What as?
I've never really fathomed where they sit on the left-right axis...
Left of Labour, which isn't saying much.
Post Yes there'd be a lot of realignment & waiting to see how the chips fall before anyone got to the stage of party re-naming. SLab, SCons and SLDs would have to set themselves up as separate entities to start with.
Suggests the UKIP support in these kind of seats is the same as nationally. Ex BNPers, a big chunk of Tories, and a skim off the rest.
Also suggests we should take Ashcroft's marginals polling very seriously.
If we get past Indyref with no game-changer and little real change in the polls, Labour can start being quietly confident of a majority.
The BNP vote dropped by less than 1% (unfortunately there are still a few people willing to vote for them). So how exactly does that translate to UKIP getting support from Ex BNPers?
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question
Is it? Hasnt this already happened to Wales and Ireland even if under a slightly different regime? They would surely have to be incorporated into the process in a fair way (a play-off against the last qualifier perhaps).
In which case don't make the promises. Don't claim that you are going to be maintaining the defensive capabilities of the country and that cuts in manpower won't affect our armed forces when you, and everyone else, knows that is a load of garbage. Same goes with the EU. Don't pretend that you are going to get some sort of deal on repatriation of powers when everyone knows that is simply not credible and any promises he might obtain are not worth the paper they are written on. This is a plague across almost all departments. Say what the public want to hear and what you think will make you popular whilst knowing damn well it is meaningless because there is no practical way you can keep your promises.
Actually, on the most central issue of the day, the public finances, they were blindingly honest in 2009/2010 (remember Osborne's Conference speech). They lost a lot of potential voters to the LibDems, and probably the chance of a majority, as a result.
It's all very well saying be frank and honest, but the voters punish politicians who are. Conversely, they reward snake-oil salesmen. The idea that the Tories can get increased support by being even more explicit about reality is cloud-cuckoo land - look at the public response to Ed Miliband's energy nonsense for a good example.
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question
Is it? Hasnt this already happened to Wales and Ireland even if under a slightly different regime? They would surely have to be incorporated into the process in a fair way (a play-off against the last qualifier perhaps).
More importantly, Ireland could be playing test cricket in a couple of years time
Suggests the UKIP support in these kind of seats is the same as nationally. Ex BNPers, a big chunk of Tories, and a skim off the rest.
Also suggests we should take Ashcroft's marginals polling very seriously.
If we get past Indyref with no game-changer and little real change in the polls, Labour can start being quietly confident of a majority.
The BNP vote dropped by less than 1% (unfortunately there are still a few people willing to vote for them). So how exactly does that translate to UKIP getting support from Ex BNPers?
Suggests the UKIP support in these kind of seats is the same as nationally. Ex BNPers, a big chunk of Tories, and a skim off the rest.
Also suggests we should take Ashcroft's marginals polling very seriously.
If we get past Indyref with no game-changer and little real change in the polls, Labour can start being quietly confident of a majority.
The BNP vote dropped by less than 1% (unfortunately there are still a few people willing to vote for them). So how exactly does that translate to UKIP getting support from Ex BNPers?
Hugh isn't the sort of chap to use actual facts.
BNPers are thick as pigsh*t and wouldn't realise a tactical situation if it slapped them in the face. Unfortunately for UKIP there are no prizes in not picking up 'immoral' votes.
Suggests the UKIP support in these kind of seats is the same as nationally. Ex BNPers, a big chunk of Tories, and a skim off the rest.
Also suggests we should take Ashcroft's marginals polling very seriously.
If we get past Indyref with no game-changer and little real change in the polls, Labour can start being quietly confident of a majority.
The BNP vote dropped by less than 1% (unfortunately there are still a few people willing to vote for them). So how exactly does that translate to UKIP getting support from Ex BNPers?
Hugh isn't the sort of chap to use actual facts.
Not sure why parties do not want ex-BNp voters . Logically if everyone spurned them then the BNP could never lose support and only gain . Is that what parties want. UKIP (if they do take BNP voters) should be proud of their moderating influences
Wythenshawe seemed to end up pretty much where everyone guessed so not sure there are many lessons from it. Well done to Labour who showed the value of working in the community over a long time and best wishes to Mike Kane, now MP for the seat next to where I grew up.
UKIP didn't have a great or lousy night. But it was a missed opportunity to cause an earthquake and dominate the agenda, and they are not going to have many more opportunities before 2015.
For the Lib Dems, shame to be so close to holding the deposit, and this just shows how vital it was to hold Eastleigh last year (and a town council by-election there last night.) Had Eastleigh fallen then the party could easily have fallen into panic the way our opponents have encouraged us. Still no chance though - the coalition will last the full 5 years, even though it'll be like wading through treacle for both sides.
V disappointed that MPs recall looks like it's gone down. Exactly the sort of thing the LDs should be fighting for in Government, and I hope we tell the Tories to get lost on anything not in the coalition agreement until they change their mind here. If I was a LD backbencher, I'd introduce it as a private member's bill to flush it through.
If Scotland votes Yes, would the SNP rename itself? What as?
I've never really fathomed where they sit on the left-right axis...
They'd stay the Scottish National Party. I think they are basically centre, centre-left on the right-left axis but they are a broad enough church to pick up votes from the centre-right too (Like Malcolm of this parish)
If Scotland votes Yes, would the SNP rename itself? What as?
I've never really fathomed where they sit on the left-right axis...
They'd stay the Scottish National Party. I think they are basically centre, centre-left on the right-left axis but they are a broad enough church to pick up votes from the centre-right too (Like Malcolm of this parish)
I suspect they may go more centre right when they have to raise money through taxation as well as just spend it as they do now
Actually, on the most central issue of the day, the public finances, they were blindingly honest in 2009/2010 (remember Osborne's Conference speech). They lost a lot of potential voters to the LibDems, and probably the chance of a majority, as a result.
It's all very well saying be frank and honest, but the voters punish politicians who are. Conversely, they reward snake-oil salesmen. The idea that the Tories can get increased support by being even more explicit about reality is cloud-cuckoo land - look at the public response to Ed Miliband's energy nonsense for a good example.
I mostly agree with this, but TBF the coalition looked like it was taking people along with it on deficit reduction pretty well, right up until the Osborne budget where he cut the headline rate of income tax. The middle way between between making up populist stuff that will sound good to the voters and doing exactly what you think will work is to pick some general themes that you think are right, then govern with the goal of giving the impression that you mean them.
I'm a little bit bemused at how, having started off so strongly on the "there is no money left" theme, the coalition proceeded to throw it away, partly by doing things that the voters thought were inconsistent with the message like headline tax cuts, and partly by failing to adopt the appropriate demeanor.
I think that under the circumstances and in light of all the latest info, the UKIP result of 17.8% in #Wythenshawe was not a bad effort.
The main lesson for UKIP to learn is to manage expectations better, especially when fighting a snap by-election in a seat long held by Labour or Tory. The postal vote was a killer for UKIP, all the more reason to get as many councillors elected in May as possible.
It certainly won't put off UKIP supporters from putting even more effort into future battles.
Lib Dems had only four possible outcomes after their initial period of life as a permanent opposition party: die, form a majority government, lead a coalition government, serve as junior partner in a coalition government. 1 was the worst possible outcome for them, 2 was almost impossible. 3 was their best possible outcome but it won't happen now. 2 or 3 could have resulted in PR, and/or could have torn the party apart.
Outcome 4 not only subjects reckless promises like tuition fees to the harsh reality of government, it also makes them compromise on even their feasible promises more than their partner, which is why small coalition partners almost always suffer more. It's clear now that a Tory coalition hurts them by forcing compromises further from the ideal Lib Dem policy set, but a moment's thought shows that a Labout coalition would hurt them by both making it much harder to prove their independent existence and jeopardising the majority of their seats, which are in Tory areas.
Hopefully they will learn not to make reckless promises, and to campaign on liberal social themes and local issues until they die or PR comes in. Their worst viable outcome would be to survive with about 22 seats, support knife-edge parliamentary majorities every 3-4 elections, and demand specific wonkish changes that entrench their ability to bounce back when in opposition, like PR in the assemblies. Even 8% would be a very decent result for a European liberal party these days. And they'd happily take 8% of seats in the House of Commons versus what they will get under FPTP.
In which case don't make the promises. Don't claim that you are going to be maintaining the defensive capabilities of the country and that cuts in manpower won't affect our armed forces when you, and everyone else, knows that is a load of garbage. Same goes with the EU. Don't pretend that you are going to get some sort of deal on repatriation of powers when everyone knows that is simply not credible and any promises he might obtain are not worth the paper they are written on. This is a plague across almost all departments. Say what the public want to hear and what you think will make you popular whilst knowing damn well it is meaningless because there is no practical way you can keep your promises.
Actually, on the most central issue of the day, the public finances, they were blindingly honest in 2009/2010 (remember Osborne's Conference speech). They lost a lot of potential voters to the LibDems, and probably the chance of a majority, as a result.
It's all very well saying be frank and honest, but the voters punish politicians who are. Conversely, they reward snake-oil salesmen. The idea that the Tories can get increased support by being even more explicit about reality is cloud-cuckoo land - look at the public response to Ed Miliband's energy nonsense for a good example.
I agree with your first paragraph in so far as they were honest and have continued to be. I did mention Education and the Economy as the tow shining examples of the exception to my complaints. Indeed in both areas the Tories have continued to take the hard decisions and be honest with the electorate (I can hear the Labourites howling already at that statement)
Of course I disagree with you about what caused the Tories to throw away their chance of a majority. It is clear from when the drop in Tory support started in the previous autumn that it had little to do with honesty about the economy and a lot more to do with them abandoning their Eurosceptic position.
But the idea that they have to continue to be dishonest when everyone knows what the true situation is - particularly with regard to issues like the EU renegotiations and Defence - is simply not supportable. People may not like being told the truth but what they hate even more is being told such blatant lies when both sides already know they are lies. They don't like being taken for fools and that is what Cameron seems to think most of the electorate are.
UKIP has a habit of not following the logic of its views through.
For instance, that UKIPper who thinks that gay marriage causes floods has been deafeningly silent on what gays should now be doing to sort out the flooding problem their marriages have caused down in the southwest. Well I'm sorry but where's the consistency? Any fool can complain about a problem but there must also be ideas to fix it.
Unless UKIP can get a coherent narrative up and running around this sort of issue, it is just car crash material.
Suggests the UKIP support in these kind of seats is the same as nationally. Ex BNPers, a big chunk of Tories, and a skim off the rest.
Also suggests we should take Ashcroft's marginals polling very seriously.
If we get past Indyref with no game-changer and little real change in the polls, Labour can start being quietly confident of a majority.
The BNP vote dropped by less than 1% (unfortunately there are still a few people willing to vote for them). So how exactly does that translate to UKIP getting support from Ex BNPers?
Hugh isn't the sort of chap to use actual facts.
I agree. We have already established that in previous discussions.
If Scotland votes Yes, would the SNP rename itself? What as?
I've never really fathomed where they sit on the left-right axis...
They'd stay the Scottish National Party. I think they are basically centre, centre-left on the right-left axis but they are a broad enough church to pick up votes from the centre-right too (Like Malcolm of this parish)
I suspect they may go more centre right when they have to raise money through taxation as well as just spend it as they do now
In the short term Scotland is in good shape. The problems come in the future years, so they'd be wise to use the oil revenue to invest into industries with steady ROI as capital. I think they'd join the Euro too, London doesn't want anything to do with the Scots monetary system so they'll need to go cap in hand to Frankfurt... or Oslo !
UKIP has a habit of not following the logic of its views through.
For instance, that UKIPper who thinks that gay marriage causes floods has been deafeningly silent on what gays should now be doing to sort out the flooding problem their marriages have caused down in the southwest. Well I'm sorry but where's the consistency? Any fool can complain about a problem but there must also be ideas to fix it.
Unless UKIP can get a coherent narrative up and running around this sort of issue, it is just car crash material.
That ex-UKIPper was of course also an ex-Tory and had been a Tory with those very same views for much longer than he was a UKIPper. It does perhaps say something about the relative Tory and UKIP party positions when the Tories did not kick him out for his views but UKIP did.
Much like that homophobic Tory councillor in Kent who left messages hoping a colleague die of Aids. Very sad that he is still a Tory Councillor whilst his victim has had to resign his seat.
Greetings from a grey but dry Budapest. The general election campaign here is underway (the first round of elections is on 6 April). This poster is everywhere:
The three on the left are centre left opposition leaders. Ferenc Gyurcsány and Gordon Bajnai were the last two socialist Prime Ministers, each of whom now leads a vanity party. Attila Mesterházy was the socialist candidate for Prime Minister at the last general election and remains the leader of the socialists. These three parties have recently agreed to campaign jointly with Attila Mesterházy as the proposed Prime Minister.
Miklos Hagyó was a prominent socialist who is charged with corruption in a murky trial.
Loosely translated, the caption reads "They don't deserve another chance".
in politics as in general life ,people like being told the (sometimes) painful truth as long as its backed up with 'but this is what we can do about it ' (even if the target result is still not perfect). People hate being told that everything will be/is wonderful (greens and labour do this too much as does UKIP to some extent) and then when the reality comes nothing is done due to complacency. (The falling standards of education over the last 20 years is a sign of this no matter how many qualifications people get) On the other hand people do not like doomsayers who then say nothing can be done.
I think that under the circumstances and in light of all the latest info, the UKIP result of 17.8% in #Wythenshawe was not a bad effort.
The main lesson for UKIP to learn is to manage expectations better, especially when fighting a snap by-election in a seat long held by Labour or Tory. The postal vote was a killer for UKIP, all the more reason to get as many councillors elected in May as possible.
It certainly won't put off UKIP supporters from putting even more effort into future battles.
Any revision to your UKIP 20+ seats at the next General Election
I fear you and Junior Smithson rather got carried away with the hype this time.
It is a small advance no doubt for UKIP, finishing second is no disgrace whatsoever especially so far from their homeland of the east of England.
Another great piece of journalism from Rolling Stone, demonstrating how the major banks have bought up major chunks of industry and the commodities supply chain to manipulate prices of electricity, aluminium, copper, oil etc...
They also mention how there is currently zero regulatory structure to deal with this sort of purchasing of physical goods to manipulate markets. I somehow doubt we're doing anything to regulate this in the UK...
Environment Agency job cuts put on hold apparently.
Excellent news, let's hope it's permanent and not just until the waters recede.
Isn't there 11,000 of them (and presumably they also then contract out a lot of the actual building work)? Efficiency of the department might be more of a problem than not enough personal
So do I take it that "discussions" includes links to external reputable news sources without comment? Is that something Mike will really be exposed to risk by?
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question
Is it? Hasnt this already happened to Wales and Ireland even if under a slightly different regime? They would surely have to be incorporated into the process in a fair way (a play-off against the last qualifier perhaps).
No, even when Six Nations teams have failed to reach the quarter-final stage, they've always finished third in the group.
Suggests the UKIP support in these kind of seats is the same as nationally. Ex BNPers, a big chunk of Tories, and a skim off the rest.
Also suggests we should take Ashcroft's marginals polling very seriously.
If we get past Indyref with no game-changer and little real change in the polls, Labour can start being quietly confident of a majority.
The BNP vote dropped by less than 1% (unfortunately there are still a few people willing to vote for them). So how exactly does that translate to UKIP getting support from Ex BNPers?
Hugh isn't the sort of chap to use actual facts.
I think the referring to UKIP as 'ex-BNPers' goes back to the point in 2009 where in parts of the country the BNP became the default angry anti-immigrant party and so swallowed up the votes of those relatively uninterested in politics apart from the endless stream of invective in certain newspapers.
I actually think it's a really good thing - despite disagreeing with UKIP profoundly and their being prone to the odd bit of scapegoating, they aren't a racist party and when at their best make a cogent argument for a legitimate political position that challenges the other political parties to make their own case. It's much better that those who just want to express anger and xenophobia vote for that than a bunch of fascists who want to stir up racial tension.
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question
Is it? Hasnt this already happened to Wales and Ireland even if under a slightly different regime? They would surely have to be incorporated into the process in a fair way (a play-off against the last qualifier perhaps).
No, even when Six Nations teams have failed to reach the quarter-final stage, they've always finished third in the group.
From distant memory (which may be playing tricks) but didn't one year everyone who did not get to the final or win the 3rd /4th place play off have to qualify for the next world cup?
This morning’s interview with Alex Salmond on BBC Radio Scotland was instructive. Unable anymore to credibly claim that Scotland would keep the pound he kept falling back on the same statement: his fiscal commission set out “a range of options” for what currency Scotland would use. The penny has dropped for Alex Salmond – he knows he cannot promise the pound.
What a difference a day makes. 24 hours ago the SNP were saying that the fact that the UK parties had not ruled out the pound was proof that Scotland would keep the pound. Once the pound was comprehensively ruled out following advice from the Treasury’s top civil servant they claimed it was bluff. By this morning they were pointing out that there are a “range of options”.
Australia giving the saffers a hell of a shellacking at the moment. Effectively 336/1 at the moment. They'll want to post over 500 to chase though as South Africa are a good team.
Only consolation for the Lib Dems is they beat the Greens.
The Lib Dem commitment not to raise tuition fees was a relatively minor one in comparison to what Labour and the Tories promised (who were themselves in favour of the most radical fiscal consolidation). Both wanted to ringfence the budget of whole departments. The Lib Dem policy was perfectly affordable had they considered it a priority. Clegg saw the opportunity to ditch it and jumped. Unfortunately he hadn't anticipated the likely backlash he'd receive.
I think that under the circumstances and in light of all the latest info, the UKIP result of 17.8% in #Wythenshawe was not a bad effort.
The main lesson for UKIP to learn is to manage expectations better, especially when fighting a snap by-election in a seat long held by Labour or Tory. The postal vote was a killer for UKIP, all the more reason to get as many councillors elected in May as possible.
It certainly won't put off UKIP supporters from putting even more effort into future battles.
Any revision to your UKIP 20+ seats at the next General Election
I fear you and Junior Smithson rather got carried away with the hype this time.
It is a small advance no doubt for UKIP, finishing second is no disgrace whatsoever especially so far from their homeland of the east of England.
My dear Pulpstar, Let me tell you and others where I stand.
True, It was pure wish fulfillment on my part when I predicted a win in Wythenshawe for UKIP.
However, my prediction for UKIP seats in the 2015 GE, has not changed. Indeed it has been strengthened by the advances UKIP are making in other areas such as organisation, propaganda, and membership. Much still to do of course, which I will leave to the younger members of the party; me egging them on to even better results.
I still expect that UKIP will gain between 23 and 33 seats at the GE. Keep smiling!
So do I take it that "discussions" includes links to external reputable news sources without comment? Is that something Mike will really be exposed to risk by?
I don't know if that would expose him to legal risk, but it's not ideal to link to news sources (we're talking about British newspapers here so there aren't any reputable ones) if people aren't allowed post to question or debunk them.
It really feels like we need a "too hot for pb" forum somewhere outside the reach of British censorship laws.
So do I take it that "discussions" includes links to external reputable news sources without comment? Is that something Mike will really be exposed to risk by?
I don't know if that would expose him to legal risk, but it's not ideal to link to news sources (we're talking about British newspapers here so there aren't any reputable ones) if people aren't allowed post to question or debunk them.
It really feels like we need a "too hot for pb" forum somewhere outside the reach of British censorship laws.
My post to Thomson Reuters was deleted! Surely they qualify! I'd have thought just simple links would allow bettors to be aware of developments and how they might affect things.
But yes, I agree. It does show how horrendously damaging British libel laws are if they remove all political debate about a subject.
So do I take it that "discussions" includes links to external reputable news sources without comment? Is that something Mike will really be exposed to risk by?
Yes that is exactly what it means.
Unfortunately the links contain reference to the ongoing trials and experience has taught us posters do end up commenting upon on the topic.
News International lawyers do read PB and have sent correspondence to Mike in the past.
So we operate on a safety first basis.
No discussions.
People who repeatedly ignore this ruling will have their posting privileges revoked.
I rarely agree with anything a LibDem says - but I have to admit I would very much like the electorate to have a bit more control over their useless politicians.
So do I take it that "discussions" includes links to external reputable news sources without comment? Is that something Mike will really be exposed to risk by?
Yes that is exactly what it means.
Unfortunately the links contain reference to the ongoing trials and experience has taught us posters do end up commenting upon on the topic.
News International lawyers do read PB and have sent correspondence to Mike in the past.
So we operate on a safety first basis.
No discussions.
People who repeatedly ignore this ruling will have their posting privileges revoked.
I understand - and I appreciate the explanation. It really does help us "buy in" to where you guys are coming from.
I rarely agree with anything a LibDem says - but I have to admit I would very much like the electorate to have a bit more control over their useless politicians.
The floods have really caused the watermelon to burst open
The greens' recipe for dealing with the floods includes 'getting rid of any cabinet ministers or senior government advisors who refuse to accept the scientific consensus on climate change or who won;t take the risks to the UK seriously'
The Conservatives have scored a historic win in the Kingstanding by-election, with local campaigner Gary Sambrook gaining a seat.
Mr Sambrook faced an uphill struggle to gain his seat in a traditionally Labour area, but managed to take a win with 1,571 votes, compared with 1,433 for Labour’s Lorraine Owen – a majority of 138.
This is just the lastest in a number of polls showing him about balanced with his opponent. And he still has a Tea Party primary challenge to survive. Quite amazing a position to be in for a Senate leader.
The floods have really caused the watermelon to burst open
The greens' recipe for dealing with the floods includes 'getting rid of any cabinet ministers or senior government advisors who refuse to accept the scientific consensus on climate change or who won;t take the risks to the UK seriously'
This from Commissar Bennett, Green leader.
Pretty obvious isn't it? If you think climate change is a very serious threat, you'll want a cabinet full of people who also think it's a threat, and want to do something about it. By analogy, if you put together a war cabinet with the goal of winning a war with Germany, you wouldn't want anybody in it who didn't want to fight the war with Germany, or who didn't believe in the existence of Germany.
The floods have really caused the watermelon to burst open
The greens' recipe for dealing with the floods includes 'getting rid of any cabinet ministers or senior government advisors who refuse to accept the scientific consensus on climate change or who won;t take the risks to the UK seriously'
This from Commissar Bennett, Green leader.
Scientific consensus. An oxymoron of the worst kind.
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question
Is it? Hasnt this already happened to Wales and Ireland even if under a slightly different regime? They would surely have to be incorporated into the process in a fair way (a play-off against the last qualifier perhaps).
No, even when Six Nations teams have failed to reach the quarter-final stage, they've always finished third in the group.
From distant memory (which may be playing tricks) but didn't one year everyone who did not get to the final or win the 3rd /4th place play off have to qualify for the next world cup?
Yes - for the 1999 tournament. England ended up putting over 100 points past Holland at Huddersfield. But it's rather different now with the ENC doubling as qualifying, with the 1A division matches taking place the same weekends as the 6 Nations, and the competition being over two seasons - compared with a mini qualifying group whose matches are completed in the space of a week.
If Scotland votes Yes, would the SNP rename itself? What as?
I've never really fathomed where they sit on the left-right axis...
They'd stay the Scottish National Party. I think they are basically centre, centre-left on the right-left axis but they are a broad enough church to pick up votes from the centre-right too (Like Malcolm of this parish)
Pretty fair analysis, though centre is perhaps most accurate. http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010 has an analysis of UK parties in 2010 which puts the SNP as far the most centrist of them all, well to the left of the LDs, never mind Labour. It certainly seems about right to me in a Scottish context - there is also definite clear water between them and the Scottish Socialists.
I think the referring to UKIP as 'ex-BNPers' goes back to the point in 2009 where in parts of the country the BNP became the default angry anti-immigrant party and so swallowed up the votes of those relatively uninterested in politics apart from the endless stream of invective in certain newspapers.
I actually think it's a really good thing - despite disagreeing with UKIP profoundly and their being prone to the odd bit of scapegoating, they aren't a racist party and when at their best make a cogent argument for a legitimate political position that challenges the other political parties to make their own case. It's much better that those who just want to express anger and xenophobia vote for that than a bunch of fascists who want to stir up racial tension.
Yes, that's right - I don't even think Farage at least is especially xenophobic, merely isolationist and reactionary, neither of which is an especially aggressive philosophy. As right-wing populist parties go, we probably have the least bonkers one in Europe.
in politics as in general life ,people like being told the (sometimes) painful truth as long as its backed up with 'but this is what we can do about it ' (even if the target result is still not perfect). ... On the other hand people do not like doomsayers who then say nothing can be done.
There's some acceptance too of being told that nothing can be done but it's not really doom. Our anti-snow railways policy is like that. I've found people will buy it: "We could heat our rails like the Swedes, but it's not worth it as we so rarely get heavy snow, so we don't. Now and again the system will seize up and we'll all be late for work. That's life."
Comments
In which case don't make the promises. Don't claim that you are going to be maintaining the defensive capabilities of the country and that cuts in manpower won't affect our armed forces when you, and everyone else, knows that is a load of garbage. Same goes with the EU. Don't pretend that you are going to get some sort of deal on repatriation of powers when everyone knows that is simply not credible and any promises he might obtain are not worth the paper they are written on. This is a plague across almost all departments. Say what the public want to hear and what you think will make you popular whilst knowing damn well it is meaningless because there is no practical way you can keep your promises.
If Scotland votes Yes, would the SNP rename itself? What as?
I've never really fathomed where they sit on the left-right axis...
Elsewhere Labour are re-absorbing the BNP.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10260130/Son-of-Jack-Straw-gets-support-from-ex-BNP-member-for-his-bid-to-be-an-MP.html
And of course, Nazis.
http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/local/former-nazi-wins-a-labour-council-seat-1-3826439
What would happen in the event that any Six Nations team failed to qualify for 2019 through the RWC 2015 finals is an open question, particularly if one of the ENC teams - Georgia or Romania most likely - did qualify.
My guess is that if such a scenario did come about, money would talk and the qualification rules would be changed, perhaps via a play-off, but the Six Nations would remain 'as was'. It's not a given though.
Post Yes there'd be a lot of realignment & waiting to see how the chips fall before anyone got to the stage of party re-naming. SLab, SCons and SLDs would have to set themselves up as separate entities to start with.
It's all very well saying be frank and honest, but the voters punish politicians who are. Conversely, they reward snake-oil salesmen. The idea that the Tories can get increased support by being even more explicit about reality is cloud-cuckoo land - look at the public response to Ed Miliband's energy nonsense for a good example.
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/ireland-see-path-to-test-cricket-opened-up-by-icc-1.1685077
We'll want all our players back for that though. You can throw Jade Dernbach in for free too if you like.
If Jade had been playing for Ireland in 2011, Ireland would never have beaten England.
Thanks
UKIP didn't have a great or lousy night. But it was a missed opportunity to cause an earthquake and dominate the agenda, and they are not going to have many more opportunities before 2015.
For the Lib Dems, shame to be so close to holding the deposit, and this just shows how vital it was to hold Eastleigh last year (and a town council by-election there last night.) Had Eastleigh fallen then the party could easily have fallen into panic the way our opponents have encouraged us. Still no chance though - the coalition will last the full 5 years, even though it'll be like wading through treacle for both sides.
V disappointed that MPs recall looks like it's gone down. Exactly the sort of thing the LDs should be fighting for in Government, and I hope we tell the Tories to get lost on anything not in the coalition agreement until they change their mind here. If I was a LD backbencher, I'd introduce it as a private member's bill to flush it through.
I'm a little bit bemused at how, having started off so strongly on the "there is no money left" theme, the coalition proceeded to throw it away, partly by doing things that the voters thought were inconsistent with the message like headline tax cuts, and partly by failing to adopt the appropriate demeanor.
The main lesson for UKIP to learn is to manage expectations better, especially when fighting a snap by-election in a seat long held by Labour or Tory. The postal vote was a killer for UKIP, all the more reason to get as many councillors elected in May as possible.
It certainly won't put off UKIP supporters from putting even more effort into future battles.
Outcome 4 not only subjects reckless promises like tuition fees to the harsh reality of government, it also makes them compromise on even their feasible promises more than their partner, which is why small coalition partners almost always suffer more. It's clear now that a Tory coalition hurts them by forcing compromises further from the ideal Lib Dem policy set, but a moment's thought shows that a Labout coalition would hurt them by both making it much harder to prove their independent existence and jeopardising the majority of their seats, which are in Tory areas.
Hopefully they will learn not to make reckless promises, and to campaign on liberal social themes and local issues until they die or PR comes in. Their worst viable outcome would be to survive with about 22 seats, support knife-edge parliamentary majorities every 3-4 elections, and demand specific wonkish changes that entrench their ability to bounce back when in opposition, like PR in the assemblies. Even 8% would be a very decent result for a European liberal party these days. And they'd happily take 8% of seats in the House of Commons versus what they will get under FPTP.
Of course I disagree with you about what caused the Tories to throw away their chance of a majority. It is clear from when the drop in Tory support started in the previous autumn that it had little to do with honesty about the economy and a lot more to do with them abandoning their Eurosceptic position.
But the idea that they have to continue to be dishonest when everyone knows what the true situation is - particularly with regard to issues like the EU renegotiations and Defence - is simply not supportable. People may not like being told the truth but what they hate even more is being told such blatant lies when both sides already know they are lies. They don't like being taken for fools and that is what Cameron seems to think most of the electorate are.
UKIP has a habit of not following the logic of its views through.
For instance, that UKIPper who thinks that gay marriage causes floods has been deafeningly silent on what gays should now be doing to sort out the flooding problem their marriages have caused down in the southwest. Well I'm sorry but where's the consistency? Any fool can complain about a problem but there must also be ideas to fix it.
Unless UKIP can get a coherent narrative up and running around this sort of issue, it is just car crash material.
Much like that homophobic Tory councillor in Kent who left messages hoping a colleague die of Aids. Very sad that he is still a Tory Councillor whilst his victim has had to resign his seat.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vrig9b4ukPc/UuWC4DqufhI/AAAAAAAAABw/H_JE5u0eqvA/s1600/2014-01-25+09.32.07.jpg
The three on the left are centre left opposition leaders. Ferenc Gyurcsány and Gordon Bajnai were the last two socialist Prime Ministers, each of whom now leads a vanity party. Attila Mesterházy was the socialist candidate for Prime Minister at the last general election and remains the leader of the socialists. These three parties have recently agreed to campaign jointly with Attila Mesterházy as the proposed Prime Minister.
Miklos Hagyó was a prominent socialist who is charged with corruption in a murky trial.
Loosely translated, the caption reads "They don't deserve another chance".
People hate being told that everything will be/is wonderful (greens and labour do this too much as does UKIP to some extent) and then when the reality comes nothing is done due to complacency. (The falling standards of education over the last 20 years is a sign of this no matter how many qualifications people get)
On the other hand people do not like doomsayers who then say nothing can be done.
I fear you and Junior Smithson rather got carried away with the hype this time.
It is a small advance no doubt for UKIP, finishing second is no disgrace whatsoever especially so far from their homeland of the east of England.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-vampire-squid-strikes-again-the-mega-banks-most-devious-scam-yet-20140212
They also mention how there is currently zero regulatory structure to deal with this sort of purchasing of physical goods to manipulate markets. I somehow doubt we're doing anything to regulate this in the UK...
No discussions of phone hacking
And no swearing at other posters
I actually think it's a really good thing - despite disagreeing with UKIP profoundly and their being prone to the odd bit of scapegoating, they aren't a racist party and when at their best make a cogent argument for a legitimate political position that challenges the other political parties to make their own case. It's much better that those who just want to express anger and xenophobia vote for that than a bunch of fascists who want to stir up racial tension.
The Lib Dem commitment not to raise tuition fees was a relatively minor one in comparison to what Labour and the Tories promised (who were themselves in favour of the most radical fiscal consolidation). Both wanted to ringfence the budget of whole departments. The Lib Dem policy was perfectly affordable had they considered it a priority. Clegg saw the opportunity to ditch it and jumped. Unfortunately he hadn't anticipated the likely backlash he'd receive.
True, It was pure wish fulfillment on my part when I predicted a win in Wythenshawe for UKIP.
However, my prediction for UKIP seats in the 2015 GE, has not changed. Indeed it has been strengthened by the advances UKIP are making in other areas such as organisation, propaganda, and membership. Much still to do of course, which I will leave to the younger members of the party; me egging them on to even better results.
I still expect that UKIP will gain between 23 and 33 seats at the GE. Keep smiling!
It really feels like we need a "too hot for pb" forum somewhere outside the reach of British censorship laws.
You are a man after my own heart. The film is an absolute classic, with the Prisoner of Zenda subplot being particularly inspired.
But yes, I agree. It does show how horrendously damaging British libel laws are if they remove all political debate about a subject.
Unfortunately the links contain reference to the ongoing trials and experience has taught us posters do end up commenting upon on the topic.
News International lawyers do read PB and have sent correspondence to Mike in the past.
So we operate on a safety first basis.
No discussions.
People who repeatedly ignore this ruling will have their posting privileges revoked.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2559109/Cameron-ditches-pledge-allow-voters-expel-MPs-lost-confidence.html
I rarely agree with anything a LibDem says - but I have to admit I would very much like the electorate to have a bit more control over their useless politicians.
The greens' recipe for dealing with the floods includes 'getting rid of any cabinet ministers or senior government advisors who refuse to accept the scientific consensus on climate change or who won;t take the risks to the UK seriously'
This from Commissar Bennett, Green leader.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2014/kysen_0213.html
This is just the lastest in a number of polls showing him about balanced with his opponent. And he still has a Tea Party primary challenge to survive. Quite amazing a position to be in for a Senate leader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_parliamentary_election,_2014