Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It has been working class voters who have been the main dri
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It has been working class voters who have been the main driver of the Ukip vote
Above is the split for the final Eastleigh poll by Lord Ashcroft. As can be seen it was C2s and DEs who swung most to the purples.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
These are quite good, historical characters given a modern overhaul. Nelson and Henry VIII look credible.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturepicturegalleries/10030619/Historical-Figures-for-the-21st-Century.html?frame=2551566
Labour thinks it sticks up for the working class but it means public sector drones and career welfarists.
Stuart Hall and their own report looks like timing to get it all out in one go - but its got the biggest form of cut-through re bugger all else on the radar. The fake bomb detectors are truly dreadful but they didn't touch us here - so is just another sociopath conman story.
Entirely agreed. And voters know this. So trying to buy them off looks more insulting than sticking to your policies and explaining them.
Luckily for Labour UKIP won't be taking many seats off them in the next election so in the short term it will actually help them if anything.
"I've been a political anorak for twenty years, and I still don't know what the LDs are for." :-)
"Chris Grayling has ordered an urgent review of a controversial court that has the power to make life-or-death decisions – and even send people to jail – in secret.
The Justice Secretary last night asked one of the country’s most senior judges to consider steps to increase the transparency of the shadowy Court of Protection. Set up in 2007 under Labour’s Mental Capacity Act, it gave the state draconian powers to intervene in the lives of those deemed unfit to look after their own affairs.
Controversy increased when the Daily Mail revealed last month that a woman had been jailed in secret after trying to remove her father from a care home where his family thought he was in danger of dying.
A judge ruled Wanda Maddocks, 50, should go to prison for five months for contempt of court even though she was not present or represented by a lawyer. She is the first person known to have been imprisoned by the Court of Protection.
Several senior MPs expressed alarm at the case and suggested the Government should review its procedures.
Now the Justice Secretary has written to Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division of the High Court of England and Wales, asking him to expand an existing review of the family courts to consider the use of secret hearings in the Court of Protection.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2318010/Open-secret-courts-demands-Justice-Minister-Chris-Grayling-orders-review-shadowy-Court-Protection.html#ixzz2S8WeQdii
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
WTF?
Danny Shaw @DannyShawBBC
Linda MacDougall tells @bbcwato Stuart Hall had hands all over women & was well known for taking women back to his room at BBC Manchester
When I recently remarked to one influential figure at No. 10 that Ukip might come first in this 2014 poll, I was cut off with an irritable, ‘I think it’s pretty certain they’ll do that.’ I was then offered an explanation as to why this would be worse for Ed Miliband than David Cameron. The level of detail in the answer suggested that this is something that has been discussed many times by the Prime Minister’s inner circle."
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8901181/ukip-vs-the-world/
Secret justice is abhorrent. I expect I will be howled down but I'm not keen on the idea of rape victims being anonymous. No other witness is; no other victim. And until a crime is proven with the conviction of the person charged, the person is an alleged victim. Either all parties are treated the same or none of them are. Skewing the rules in this way to make an open and fair trial secret in some way is very worrying.
And - yes - I know and sympathise with the counter-arguments. But still I am very uneasy.
Entirely agreed again. (!) The tories' attempts to cosy up to potential UKIP voters are only showing their own impotence, because they will still be playing by the EUs rules.
Its like UKIP voters want to watch rugby, and the tories are offering them soccer, but with an oval ball and a liberal interpretation of the existing foul play laws.
At least labour aren't even trying. It's much more sensible.
And what goes for Germany will go for us to.
My biggest difficulty with this story is that I keep imagining the various activities taking place with a running commentary from Eddie Waring.
In April its CPI went to 49.4, well above the expected 48. The driving force seems to be housebuilding.
Looking at the last year or so the three driving forces for the poor growth have been falling north sea oil, falling construction and falling manufacturing setting off increasing services and government spending. It is looking increasingly likely that none of these forces will be negative for the rest of the year and by the end of the year they may even by adding to the party.
If so growth is going to well over the forecast. The NIER upward revision of growth today is likely to be the first of many. Hopefully, this will give the government a better press and make the irrelevancy of Labour even more apparent. We shall see.
That the courts should have summary power to imprison for contempt is self-evident. The legal system could not function without it. The summary power is to be used sparingly, and the usual course is for the Attorney General to move a motion for committal before a Divisional Court under RSC 54. Criminal contempt is not an offence where a trial on indictment is necessary or desirable.
Juvenile witnesses and defendants have statutory anonymity under the terms of section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. nevertheless, it is true that it is very difficult to justify anonymity for complainants in sexual offence cases in principle.
There are of course well known cases of wider publicity bringing down a well known person or serial rapist as a result of publicity - we've a dozen or more very public figures either convicted or under investigated as a result of the lady who went on camera and accused Savile.
But on the otherhand we have the likes of Matthew Kelly who was maliciously maligned and never ever recovered - I lean to anonymity until the police feel there is a compelling multiple trail of evidence that overrides the total destruction of someone's alleged behaviour.
They really can be inept with regards to political strategy, can't they? Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Nigel Farage attacking the Tories from all side with no rebutting of their points. Genius.
It's a relatively incoherent scream of frustration arising from many things: a rational fear of the future (increasing competition from low cost workers [immigration], disintermediation of the skilled working classes), a sense that they are losing their place in society and a belief that the government isn't concerned about their fate.
Ultimately where there is a sense of disconnection there is very little that the government can do: it can try to address the issues (within the constraints of what is achievable) but then the fear will latch onto a new cause. Fundamentally, from that perspective, it's more of an emotional than an intellectual appeal.
To be fair to UKIP, many of the issues they have identified are very reasonable and need to be addressed - Labour had a bad habit of just looking at aggregate national or group statistics without considering the impact on individuals who found their lives upended for "the greater good". But I don't think they can be fixed to UKIP's satisfaction.
Ultimately this means the "Chumocracy" tag as you put it is irrelevant. No one in government - not Cameron, not Miliband, not Clegg, May, Hague or even Thatcher could appeal to the red mist.
I guess to you tim they are all racists anyway and should be ignored.
This is a very, very good idea. It would still be a huge simplification of the tax system, but it wouldn't be anywhere near as regressive. UKIP need to be smarted about addressing other attacks too. It would also be smart to rethink their policy on fiscal policy, which Labour are also attacking them for. One way to square the circle is to promise to invest more on "sensible infrastructure projects". That gives them a rebut against the cuts argument, while also allows them to oppose individual projects that prove unpopular/unwise.
More recently there's been a little noise on EU immigration, but not sure there have been any actual policies? Not much that you can do without leaving the EU.
No one will stand up for them.
It's a barmy comparison.
That article I mentioned
"As a long-term prisoner, I have spent many years of my life in a variety of British prisons, including maximum security. From my experience, I would say that, for the most part, prisoners are treated with humanity and respect by the authorities.
Positive opportunities, however, are only available once the prisoner has come to terms with the fact that he is living in a bleak, lonely, hostile world where the stench of menace permeates prison-grey skin, and where the threat of violence regularly manifests in dark corners. It is a world where "justice" is indeed rough. The killing of Jeffrey Dahmer, beaten to death by one of his fellow prisoners, highlighted the fact that serving time can be a dangerous business.
What about honour among thieves? The idea behind this proposition is that those involved in crime, or those in prison, have a set of pseudo-honourable values in common. In fact, the modern-day criminal code involves little in the way of honour, and probably reflects the demise of a creditable value system in the outside world.
Among the population of any British prison there exists a hierarchy, a pecking order. Far from being rigid, it is movable and dynamic. There are constant power struggles as those in the middle vie for more status. Life is indeed a case of the survival ofthe fittest. Sid, a friend, described his existence in jail as "a war of survival".
It does not automatically follow that the strong and intelligent are at the top of the hierarchy and the weak and slow are at the bottom. A strong intelligent man would be disqualified from his natural position in the pecking order if, for example, it was discovered that he was a rapist or a child molester. A person who appeared weak and perhaps not so bright could be elevated to the upper echelons of the hierarchy if his crime was bank or security van robbery. The type of crime a person has committed i s the greatest determining factor of where the person finds himself positioned within the hierarchy.
Lowest on the list are sex offenders, or "nonces". Offences against children are the worst. Those who commit them are the most reviled. They live in constant fear of attack, of being scalded with sugared hot water or being slashed with home-made tools.
Rapists come next, along with people who attack elderly folk. At the top of the hierarchy is the armed robber. He is the aristocrat of the community and the sex offenders are the serfs. Between them is a whole plethora of types of offender; from fraudster s and thieves, to those who have committed grievous bodily harm (violence rates highly). Murderers are relatively exempt from the pecking order unless they also happen to be sex offenders or armed robbers, in which case they will be at the bottom or the top respectively.
There is another category of offender: the mass killer, who holds a peculiar place in the prison hierarchy. Regular prisoners seem to become confused in the presence of this type of offender. I watched as Britain's answer to Jeffrey Dahmer regularly paraded a gang of acolytes around the exercise yard of a maximum security prison, meeting any glance in his direction with an intimidating, icy glare. There were often discussions among prisoners trying to define his status; those in awe of him would defend him; those in whom he inspired revulsion dismissed him as a "nonce". He was also the victim of a savage attack by one of his detractors, which left him with a thick, ragged scar running from his right ear to the corner of his mouth. This event immediately established the reputation of his attacker.
The 10 months that Frederick West spent on remand in Winson Green prison would have given him a good idea of what to expect had he been convicted. Perhaps the thought of spending the rest of his life in such a precarious environment was pertinent in the way his life ended.
The hierarchy offers offenders a means of self-justification - "I've done wrong, but I'm not as bad as him." Moreover, it is a reaction to the way society appears to condone this primitive idea of the way things should be. For the British public are approving towards those who mete out prison "justice'' to sex offenders and the like; Myra Hindley gets attacked and "it's no more than she deserves". http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/rough-justice-in-the-gaolbirds-pecking-order-1566565.html
You've not been paying attention. We have Frau Merkel exactly where we want her. Avery will explain.
As people age, they tend to vote more and more right wing. The elderly do indeed die off quicker but the group are continually enlarged by the younger ones coming though. The tims of yesteryear are the UKIP voters of tomorrow.
Embrace your future, tim.
Care to post some stats that disprove it?
Don't they segregate the child sex crime people from the general inmates?
If there was a referendum on [COUNTRY'S]
membership of the European Union, how would
you vote?
I would vote to remain a member of the European Union
GB: 35%
Germany: 46%
France: 40%
Denmark: 50%
Sweden: 39%
Finland: 44%
Norway: 18%
I would vote to leave the European Union
GB: 43%
Germany: 33%
France: 31%
Denmark: 34%
Sweden: 44%
Finland: 32%
Norway: 67%
http://order-order.com/2013/05/02/guardian-uses-scrounger-more-than-any-other-paper/
"Seemingly the entire left-wing twitterati have been up in arms this week over analysis carried via LexisNexis showing that use of the word “scrounger” has rocketed in the British media since 2010.
You might, even if you subscribe to the Owen Jones thesis that there is a right-wing agenda cooked up in CCHQ to demonise “scroungers”, have expected it to appear more in the likes of the Mail or the Express than the ‘progressive’ metropolitan liberal press.
"After carrying out a simple search of the word “scrounger” on each newspaper website for the period 2010 to date, the figures show that the Guardian used the word in 736 articles over the last three years. In second place is Owen Jones’ Indy, who – as he might say - “demonised the poor” 185 times over the period. Much further down come the right-wing tabloids: 76 for the Mail and 20 for the Express."
If, however, in 2015 they got something comparable to or exceeding the Lib Dems that might be another matter.
And, for the record, I still think the debates are a very bad thing.
I am utterly unsurprised by the link there.
What they should have done is seen now many times Owen Jones used it - more or less than the Express?
Every party leader knows that they'll lose horribly if they refuse to participate because the rest will simply aim to knock the ball into that empty net. As long as a majority of the others are up for it, they'll have to join in too.
The crucial step last time was Sky essentially saying "we will provide a platform for these debates. You are invited and welcome to come but we will go ahead whether you do or not". That set the ball rolling and ensured the Beeb and ITV jumped on board too. As long as one of the broadcasters says the same again, the debates will take place and as things stand, Farage will be there - and so will the other three.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/raped-beaten-and-enslaved-for-years--and-handed-back-to-her-tormentors-when-she-went-to-beg-police-for-help-8580921.html
Frankly, I've no issue with a prisoner in solitary on a very long sentence on compelling evidence > committing suicide. They could do it if on the outside, it saves us money, they are clearly very unhappy - it eliminates the risk of re-offending.
Fred West and Harold Shipman are prime examples who managed it by themselves. Both were well beyond *reasonable doubt* on conviction terms. Why fork out £40k a year for 40 more years to punish them if they want to off themselves instead?
EDIT: People are also underrating how much TV politics editors like to wield power over uppity politicians.
Tory supporter: I look down on him [indicates Labour supporter] because I am upper-class.
Labour supporter: I look up to him [indicates Tory] because he is upper-class; but I look down on him [indicates UKIP supporter] because he is lower-class. I am middle-class
UKIP supporter: I know my place!
There is no such thing as a 'Prime Ministerial Debate'. We live in a parliamentary democracy, and we elect MPs, not PMs.
Even Sky and ITV were too embarrassed to use the ludicrous 'Prime Ministerial Debate' name, which Michael Crick openly admitted had only been dreamt up as a contrived justification for banning the SNP and Plaid Cymru from taking part.
'He doesn't need to win it. He just needs a strong enough bid to assuage voters concerns. I accept that he can't do this while we stay in the EU, however, and ~40% (or whatever it is) of immigration we don't have any control over.'
At least Dave has put controls on the 50% non EU immigration which of course was bitterly opposed by Labour.
Also, does cutting from 0.75% to 0.5% actually make any difference at all?
I have zero time for Lefty hugging of the oppressed when they remove First Class signs from their train seats before the photographers turn up, or hoover up hundreds of thousands of expenses, or turn up in a Roller instead of attending an NHS rally...
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01473/ROLLS-532_1473547a.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4203841/Ed-Miliband-in-limo-trip-to-100k-donor.html&h=510&w=532&sz=74&tbnid=YAp5elORdQk-6M:&tbnh=101&tbnw=105&zoom=1&usg=__81kOMqQUwSTNU4wX2b5PiBkv8C4=&docid=lyhytjdiHC_P0M&sa=X&ei=bWWCUb_hMYKj0QXzqYH4Bw&ved=0CDoQ9QEwAg&dur=26
I somehow feel "We're strongly clamping down on half the problem" isn't going to be a compelling election argument.
Do you have real world experience to bring to this discussion of gaoled paedophiles and the HMG pecking order or was it because I made a post?
Surely allowing a fellow human to take their own life even when incarcerated is the sign of respect for the ultimate sacrifice and personal decision.
I don't approve of force-feeding either unless the person is well beyond totally insane. The treatment of the suffragettes and even Ian Brady are revolting.
'Gaoled'? Are you speaking to us via a live link from the 18th Century?
The crucial step last time was all sides had an incentive which hadn't happened before for a while, that got things moving initially. The TV stations want to get this enshrined as a regular part of elections not a one-off. Farage'll be grumbling from the sidelines.
25 basis points is the normal change for a rate cut. It's much more effective than QE. Although QE is more effective than nothing.
http://skynews.skypressoffice.co.uk/press-releases/items/2009-12/2242/progress-prime-ministerial-debates-–-bbc-itv-sky
Human rights “protect ourselves against any risk of being overrun, crushed by whatever form of totalitarian tyranny” by our own state. Not my words but those of Winston Churchill at the emergent Council of Europe in 1949. He argued that “there is no reason why we should not succeed in achieving our aims and establishing the structure of this united Europe whose moral concepts will be able to win the respect and recognition of mankind.”
That the UK Government should say, as it said last week, that it was considering a temporary withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights should terrify us all. It didn’t seem to appreciate what it was suggesting. Firstly, it’s not something you just step out of for a few moments; it’s an important international treaty recognised by the 47 member states of the Council of Europe. Founded in the aftermath of the Second World War to help promote peace and the rule of law, the Council has a record of achievement which includes the promotion of human rights.
Abu Qatada’s human rights should be respected and protected. He should be allowed full access to all legal channels to defend his human rights in the face of challenges which may impinge upon or infringe his human rights. Not only that, we should back him and make sure that his human rights are defended and that he has those legal options. If we don’t do that we damage our own human rights.
http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/05/02/the-axis-of-incredulity/
2010 9.6% (on a 69.3% turnout)
2013 9.8% (on a 52.8% turnout)
...in 2009. By the time the actual debate was held they'd come to their senses.
Personally, I ask myself, if I pull someone out from in front of a train, would they have a right to be angry with me? I think not; I do not accept one's right to die and would stop all men from doing so if I could. If prisoners are said to differ, then the cost of housing them is offset against the knowledge that they are in prison and not, as many people who commit suicide see it, free from their problems.*
*I am loathe to make generalisations, but I am confident this one is true in most cases.
Votes P&L % P&L
LD10 24966 0.69 46.5
LD1213 13342 -11624 0.53 32.06 -14.44
Co10 21102 0.65 39.3
Co1213 10559 -10543 0.50 25.37 -13.93
La10 5153 1.02 9.6
La1213 4088 -1065 0.79 9.82 0.22
UK10 1933 7.72 3.6
UK1213 11571 9638 5.99 27.8 24.2
BN10
BN1213
Respect10
Respect1213
Others10 496 4.95 1
Others1213 2056 1560 4.15 4.95 3.95
100
100
Turnout 10 53650
Turnout 1213 41616 -12034 0.78
Say you love Wikipedia! Say it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastleigh_by-election,_2013
"Net long-term migration to the UK was 163,000 in the year to June 2012, significantly lower than the 247,000 estimated in the year to June 2011."
So 'well on the way' to meet the pledge (163K down from 247K) rather than having achieved it yet. Don't have time to dig out forecasts, but would assume they would show the trend continuing so pledge in achieved in this parliament.
Having achieved over half of the target reduction (aiming for a reduction of 150K to meet the pledge, achieved to date 84K) is not a bad outcome for 1 year's work [realistically, taking over in May 2010 means you can't really affect the 12m to June 2011 numbers much]
Personally, I ask myself, if I pull someone out from in front of a train, would they have a right to be angry with me? I think not; I do not accept one's right to die and would stop all men from doing so if I could. If prisoners are said to differ, then the cost of housing them is offset against the knowledge that they are in prison and not, as many people who commit suicide see it, free from their problems.*
*I am loathe to make generalisations, but I am confident this one is true in most cases.
As someone who's known a few people who've contemplated suicide very seriously and done it, the aftermath of those who experienced it as family, the various reasons for it - its very hard to be black and white about it.
I've seen it used as the ultimate punishment by a hen-pecked husband against his wife who made his life a misery, by children who felt it was their destiny because their dad did it, destroyed a young wife who felt she'd not seen it coming and blamed herself because her new husband did it and never forgave herself and was ashamed.
These are very different from someone who is in jail for killing several people on purpose and knowing that the rest of their days will be an endless terror of being buggered in the showers, stabbed with a sharpened toothbrush or whatever. I personally think that being terrorised by fellow inmates must be the ultimate hell with no escape bar suicide. I'd never stop anyone from making that final and rational decision.
If we don't own our own lives - who does?
He concludes,"All in all, what voters do today will be important, both locally and nationally, fascinating for those of us who follow these things, and possibly dramatic. But if you are looking for simple winners and losers this weekend, stick to soccer, the Voice or Britain’s Got Talent."
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/02/making-sense-local-elections/
YouGov also has Anthony Wells on, Local Elections and UKIP.
He concludes,"A year ago in 2012 UKIP actually did pretty well in the local elections in terms of the votes they won where they stood… but got hardly any councillors because their vote was evenly spread even where they did do well (to take some examples, in Basildon they got 17% of the vote and came third, but got no councillors at all, in Thurrock they got 18% but only managed one councillor). We may see the same, or we may see more effective targetting or them getting over a critical mass of support in some councils and gaining large numbers of seats. Right now we really cannot tell."
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/02/local-elections-and-question-ukip/
They really can be inept with regards to political strategy, can't they? Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Nigel Farage attacking the Tories from all side with no rebutting of their points. Genius.
If faced with choosing between Cameron or Farage to have on, the tv channels will tell Farage he'll have to watch it on tv.
I'm not convinced by that. If UKIP have outpolled the Lib Dems for 2-3 years leading into 2015, it's very difficult to see how it's anything other than both or neither. Since it would be almost impossible not to invite the Deputy Prime Minister and leader of a party which had over 50 seats going into the election, UKIP would have to have an invite.
Every party leader knows that they'll lose horribly if they refuse to participate because the rest will simply aim to knock the ball into that empty net. As long as a majority of the others are up for it, they'll have to join in too.
The crucial step last time was Sky essentially saying "we will provide a platform for these debates. You are invited and welcome to come but we will go ahead whether you do or not". That set the ball rolling and ensured the Beeb and ITV jumped on board too. As long as one of the broadcasters says the same again, the debates will take place and as things stand, Farage will be there - and so will the other three.
It's very easy to see it. While there weren't specific debates the poll ratings of the alliance in the 80s didn't get them the media status that'd compare to them. Results matter a lot, polling very little. OFCOM will still define UKIP as a minor party for general elections etc.
The crucial step last time was all sides had an incentive which hadn't happened before for a while, that got things moving initially. The TV stations want to get this enshrined as a regular part of elections not a one-off. Farage'll be grumbling from the sidelines.
="Quote"
Every party leader knows that they'll lose horribly if they refuse to participate because the rest will simply aim to knock the ball into that empty net. As long as a majority of the others are up for it, they'll have to join in too.
The crucial step last time was Sky essentially saying "we will provide a platform for these debates. You are invited and welcome to come but we will go ahead whether you do or not". That set the ball rolling and ensured the Beeb and ITV jumped on board too. As long as one of the broadcasters says the same again, the debates will take place and as things stand, Farage will be there - and so will the other three.
I'm not quite so sure about that. Surely under the ofcom broadcasting rules I doubt if they would even allow a debate to take place if say David Cameron refused to appear with Farage. Basically what Sky did last time was a piece of gigantic bluffand got away with it.
C2 34 %
DE 30 %
Labour's North London millionaire elite shivers.
That is why Cameron has been fêted by Frau Merkel on bratwurst and sauerkraut at Schloß Meseberg. Cameron and Hague are her forward Panzer divisions.
Transport Specials: What will happen first? Bet placed 2011-07-10
Highspeed rail expansion Birmingham @ 26.00: Win
I can't now remember what the other options were, but, whatever they were, it's jolly decent of Ladbrokes to have settled so early.