The gov't has been unable to find anything about the current EU arrangement that is less than perfect..
Garbage, but even if that nonsense were true, so what? We'd then get the straight In/Out referendum which the Kippers have been demanding for years. What part of 'Yes' do they not understand?
The point is the rhetoric, does not match the actions. So the rhetoric is suspect.
Right, think of it this way. Somebody is offering to buy your car. They say they'll give you 10,000 pounds for it, which is a very good price for the car. But they also say they need to go to the bank to withdraw the money, and to do that they'll need you to give them the keys to the car so they can drive it to the bank.
But it's Friday, the nearest bank is 100 miles away, and it closes in a 20 minutes. You say, "How are you going to get to the bank in time?" and they say, "I am confident I will be able to get to the bank in time". But to ease your concern, they also promise that in the event that they can't withdraw the money, they'll give you 1000 pounds.
So you either get to sell the car for 10,000 pounds, or you get 1000 pounds for the brief loan of your car. Great deal either way, right? Would you hand over the keys?
A Ukip spokesperson made clear that the party takes the incident "very seriously indeed" but made clear: "Councillor Lagoda was suspended from the party before this incident occurred. He is not an acting councillor for Ukip now and he was not an acting councillor for UKIP at the time of this incident."
Mail overcooking it as usual but there is no doubt that little Ed is proving less than receptive to Clegg's somewhat pathetic overtures for any theoretical future coalition/lib lab pact
Here's why 'decapitation' is just a bit of a stretch.
Worth noting Nick Clegg has a 15k maj in #Sheffield Hallam.
Not to say it might not be a good idea tactically as it's painfully obvious the lib dem activist base is being hammered year on year while Clegg has made it quite clear that circling the wagons on the lib dems safest seats to protect them is priority number 1. If Clegg has to deploy a big effort just to make sure he wins comfortably then that is a finite resource he will be using in his own seat and not elsewhere.
Although interestingly there aren't a lot of LD seats all that close to Hallam (assuming you don't cross the pennines to the dark side and Cheadle, Hazel Grove etc. - they only have Leeds North West and Bradford East - so I am fairly sure that the whole of the Sheffield LD activist base would be in Hallam anyway.
Clegg will hold Sheffield Hallam easily in 2015.
Oh, I quite agree - my point was more that when we consider the LD strategy of concentrating on defense something to bear in mind which isn't talked of much is proximity to other LD seats and hence a diffusion of the local activist base over too many seats. If you consider Somerset they have the 4 Somerset seats, plus Bath to try and defend, and they are unlikely to get much help from Bristol as they will be in Bristol West, or Chippenham, and are unlikely to get much help from Exeter as they will be in Torbay or North Devon.
By contrast all the LD activists in Brighton, East Sussex and Kent can be in just the 2 seats of Lewes and Eastbourne as the next nearest places to defend are Portsmouth or South-West London. During the Eastleigh by-election, the coverage mentioned that a third of LD members live in London. (I think this was during a Spectator podcast)
There was an internal disagreement within Labour about how to deal with the Lib Dems. It seems there isn't anymore... http://labli.st/1fd3cAC
Pretty unambiguous language.
"That means the internal battle within the Labour Party between those who think the Lib Dems should be accommodated and those who think they should be crushed has been won by the crushers. And the decisive response of Miliband, Douglas Alexander and Jonathan Ashworth suggests that several key components of Labour’s campaign machine (leader’s office, strategy and attack) are all united in seeking to crush the Lib Dems.
That’s a sensible position to take. Holding down the Lib Dem vote and ensuring that as much of it as possible transfers to Labour is absolutely key in delivering a majority winning vote for Labour in 2015. Lib Dem switchers – those who thought they were voting to stop the Tories but ended up enabling a Tory government – form the bulk of Labour’s increase in vote since 2010. A strategy which sees Labour hug Clegg might be all the notice some of these voters need to begin toying with the idea of voting yellow again come 2015. Nor is targeting Lib Dem votes defeatist – on the contrary, in 86 of the 87 target seats Labour seek to win from the Tories the Lib Dem vote share last time was larger than the Tory majority. Squeezing Lib Dem votes wins Tory seats.
The reaction from the party over the past 24 hours suggests that such a strategy is now in the ascendency in Brewer’s Green, and that Douglas Alexander and others are fully signed up to it. That’s a victory for Harriet Harman and others who have been making such arguments in public in recent weeks. But it’s also a victory for common sense. Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
Right now Alex Salmond looks more like Ally Macleod than either Wallace or Bruce. Macleod was the manager who took a fantastic Scottish squad of players to Argentina in 1978, promising to win the World Cup. He made a complete fool of himself when Scotland crashed out, losing to Peru, drawing with Iran and beating Holland (but not by enough). In the independence referendum it's half-time and Salmond is 2-0 down.
Salmond's defiant position on the currency looked utterly ludicrous last night on the various news bulletins.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
' Alex Salmond never at any time said he had legal opinion on the EU.'
So why waste £20,000 of taxpayers money pretending he had legal opinion?
'Alex Salmond Spent £20,000 Trying To Hide EU Legal Advice ... www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/.../snp-eu-legal-advice_n_4075966.htm... 10 Oct 2013 - Alex Salmond Spent £20,000 Trying To Hide EU Legal Advice, ... on the SNP's folly of going to court to try and hide information that never even existed." .... they would block any application from Scotland to join the EU as an ...
I would have thought that Labour's best strategy was to attack the Conservatives relentlessly and more or less ignore the Lib Dems. When they wasted too much time on the Lib Dems in 2011, it worked badly for them at the polls.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
I don't know what your definition of "very unlikely" is but if you take where we start, assume Labour gains, but also price in incumbency and some Tory improvement from where we are now as UKIP fizzles in the general election, it wouldn't fit mine.
What does become quite unlikely as the size of the LibDem contingent drops is that the LibDems will have kingmaker power.
The gov't has been unable to find anything about the current EU arrangement that is less than perfect..
Garbage, but even if that nonsense were true, so what? We'd then get the straight In/Out referendum which the Kippers have been demanding for years. What part of 'Yes' do they not understand?
The point is the rhetoric, does not match the actions. So the rhetoric is suspect.
Right, think of it this way. Somebody is offering to buy your car. They say they'll give you 10,000 pounds for it, which is a very good price for the car. But they also say they need to go to the bank to withdraw the money, and to do that they'll need you to give them the keys to the car so they can drive it to the bank.
But it's Friday, the nearest bank is 100 miles away, and it closes in a 20 minutes. You say, "How are you going to get to the bank in time?" and they say, "I am confident I will be able to get to the bank in time". But to ease your concern, they also promise that in the event that they can't withdraw the money, they'll give you 1000 pounds.
So you either get to sell the car for 10,000 pounds, or you get 1000 pounds for the brief loan of your car. Great deal either way, right? Would you hand over the keys?
I would have thought that Labour's best strategy was to attack the Conservatives relentlessly and more or less ignore the Lib Dems. When they wasted too much time on the Lib Dems in 2011, it worked badly for them at the polls.
Don't the LDs stand between Labour and their long term goal of a larger presence in the South?
"The leadership of the Co-operative Group was accused of conducting an ill-designed attempt to destroy the Labour-affiliated Co-operative party after releasing a questionnaire asking the public whether it should continue to fund political parties."
The gov't has been unable to find anything about the current EU arrangement that is less than perfect..
Garbage, but even if that nonsense were true, so what? We'd then get the straight In/Out referendum which the Kippers have been demanding for years. What part of 'Yes' do they not understand?
The point is the rhetoric, does not match the actions. So the rhetoric is suspect.
Right, think of it this way. Somebody is offering to buy your car. They say they'll give you 10,000 pounds for it, which is a very good price for the car. But they also say they need to go to the bank to withdraw the money, and to do that they'll need you to give them the keys to the car so they can drive it to the bank.
But it's Friday, the nearest bank is 100 miles away, and it closes in a 20 minutes. You say, "How are you going to get to the bank in time?" and they say, "I am confident I will be able to get to the bank in time". But to ease your concern, they also promise that in the event that they can't withdraw the money, they'll give you 1000 pounds.
So you either get to sell the car for 10,000 pounds, or you get 1000 pounds for the brief loan of your car. Great deal either way, right? Would you hand over the keys?
I'd drive them to the bank...
Or get them to pass legislation enabling an EU referendum.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
I don't know what your definition of "very unlikely" is
Historically. It's not an accident a hung parliament is so rare and the lib dems aren't desperate to get rid of FPTP for nothing.
If Clegg's ostrich faction want to cling on to delusions of being powerbrokers from here on in, just because it happened in 2010, then they can have no complaints when they turn round and find their party has been hammered mercilessly while they were dreaming up grand lib/lab pact plans.
Just catching up on the thread over lunch. It would appear that Salmond has been relying on the Scots (sic) voting with their hearts rather than their heads.
Now that specific questions are being posed, his lack of preparation has been exposed and he is floundering.
When a country goes independent it only owns the assets within its borders that are not legally held by third parties. However, any debts that it has, it is fully liable for those.
It can use another country's currency but does not have any control on the exchange rate or interest rate or any other currency related matter. For instance we invoice our clients in Lithuania in Euros (at their request) and not in Litas.
If Salmond's saviour is to be oil taxes, there are already signs of some oil companies getting out of the North Sea for more profitable ventures elsewhere, and it would only take a reasonable drop in oil prices to make the oil companies mothball the wells in the North Sea and Salmond would be without his major source of income. Any tax increase could only hasten this process.
Has Salmond done any budget sensitivity analysis with DCF that he is willing to publish? I expect not.
Oh, I quite agree - my point was more that when we consider the LD strategy of concentrating on defense something to bear in mind which isn't talked of much is proximity to other LD seats and hence a diffusion of the local activist base over too many seats. If you consider Somerset they have the 4 Somerset seats, plus Bath to try and defend, and they are unlikely to get much help from Bristol as they will be in Bristol West, or Chippenham, and are unlikely to get much help from Exeter as they will be in Torbay or North Devon.
By contrast all the LD activists in Brighton, East Sussex and Kent can be in just the 2 seats of Lewes and Eastbourne as the next nearest places to defend are Portsmouth or South-West London.
Yes, these factors are important, and it's one reason I always thought Labour would do well and UKIP would struggle in Wythenshawe, because Labour's fortress in Manchester is just down the road. In the same way, I benefit from help from Labour's fortress in Nottingham - there are some safe Tory seats not that far away (e.g. Ken Clarke's in Rushcliffe) but most are marginal themselves so can't easily send help. In the East Mids, LibDems don't have any seats so they've been told to concentrate on seats they used to hold, like Leicester S, though I suspect that councillors wanting to defend their seats will give that priority anyway. Down South, the reverse applies, of course, though London activists of all parties fan out in all directions in the Home Counties.
Must we have every thread for the next 6 months hijacked by endless Scottish referendum wittering ? Day after day now we've had this going on- the original topic is subverted as quickly as possibly and then followed by 292 postings about Scotland complete with hilarious side splitting references to "wee Eck" etc etc ad infinitum. Make it cease - it is making this site boring.
Hortence it is the big political issue of 2014 though - I go off topic more than most here but if we can't wind up the nats discuss this on politicalbetting.com where can we ?
OK, whatever turns you on, by does it have to be all day everyday? I don't think any of the contributors to the debate have said anything new for days, and having the same people repeating the same points hour after hour day after day has got pretty tedious. Maybe TSE could set up a PB2 page devoted to the subject and those who want to can go there a repeat themselves to their hearts' content.
On a completely different note, Mr. Pulpstar, this morning Goggle is refusing to allow me to access the PlayDiplomacy.com site - says it contains malware. Bit of a bugger as there is a deadline this afternoon. Can you get access?
I fear I may have been a victim of the malware/blocker already - in my other game Turkey has just NMRed from a decent position where he would have had a massive influence - able to attack Russia's southern flank or France in the med. In fact the influence is so big that Russia has proposed a draw which I have accepted - France may not though... but at any rate Turkey NMRing in his position is wrecking the game. Could be unrelated but highly highly annoying
Game 75568 btw -
Also
The forum admin has stated this too: (rick.leeds)
Google are playing their money-making game again and you will seen the Malware Detected warning.
The site is clean. Google's own systems can't detect malware on the site.
We've taken steps to have Google remove the warning... again. We're also looking at ways to avoid this in the future.
FWIW, I was able to click 'Ignore warning' on the bottom right of the messgage and continue.
The sentencing of Messrs Adebolajo and Adebowale, which was outrageously delayed for political reasons by the trial judge, Mr Justice Sweeney, pending the determination of the appeal and reference before the Court of Appeal today, can now proceed. It appears a certainty that they will receive whole life orders. That said, never count on Sweeney J to do anything sensible.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
I don't know what your definition of "very unlikely" is but if you take where we start, assume Labour gains, but also price in incumbency and some Tory improvement from where we are now as UKIP fizzles in the general election, it wouldn't fit mine.
What does become quite unlikely as the size of the LibDem contingent drops is that the LibDems will have kingmaker power.
Just imagine.
After losing the independence vote Salmond's SNP men and women are needed for supply and confidence in the WESTMINSTER Gov't.
That'd be an absolute hoot
It'd be even funnier if they won the referendum and were needed for Supply and Confidence on budget motions. Particularly hilarious for Scottish Labour.
who wants a share of the morons at defence. If we have 10% of the currency reserves and we own 10% of the Treasury ( BofE ) then I would suspect we would get some say in the matter. We would need to check rumpUK budgets to ensure they did not drag us down with their profligate borrowing habits.
(1) Owning 10% of currency reserves doesn't mean you get any say in anything. It just means you have a pile of money to go take somewhere else. (2) You won't own 10% of the Treasury or any other UK government institution. That's what leaving means. (3) The Treasury is not the Bank of England.
Other than that, good post.
However when we do not get our share of the assets then we may choose to take away our very kind offer of helping the rump pay its debts. Even squeaky is not stupid enough to think he can keep the assets and have us pay his debts.
The SNP definition of 'Assets' is very strange. An asset is something you can sell for cash. (MoD bases, hospitals, forex reserves, etc). A currency is not an asset.
More importantly, after a YES, if the negotiations were to stay at the current level of teddy-in-the-corner-ness then nothing would get agreed. Scotland would be forever in the departure lounge. There will not be an Act of Parliament bringing independence into legal effect. The 'we'll not pay our share of the debt' threat is utterly hollow. Scotland would need to agree to service its share of debt before it could even actually become independent.
Yawn, once it is yes underinternational law it makes no difference if the donkeys in westminster agree it is a done deal. rump UK have to pay up on assets or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free.
Must we have every thread for the next 6 months hijacked by endless Scottish referendum wittering ? Day after day now we've had this going on- the original topic is subverted as quickly as possibly and then followed by 292 postings about Scotland complete with hilarious side splitting references to "wee Eck" etc etc ad infinitum. Make it cease - it is making this site boring.
Hortence it is the big political issue of 2014 though - I go off topic more than most here but if we can't wind up the nats discuss this on politicalbetting.com where can we ?
OK, whatever turns you on, by does it have to be all day everyday? I don't think any of the contributors to the debate have said anything new for days, and having the same people repeating the same points hour after hour day after day has got pretty tedious. Maybe TSE could set up a PB2 page devoted to the subject and those who want to can go there a repeat themselves to their hearts' content.
On a completely different note, Mr. Pulpstar, this morning Goggle is refusing to allow me to access the PlayDiplomacy.com site - says it contains malware. Bit of a bugger as there is a deadline this afternoon. Can you get access?
I fear I may have been a victim of the malware/blocker already - in my other game Turkey has just NMRed from a decent position where he would have had a massive influence - able to attack Russia's southern flank or France in the med. In fact the influence is so big that Russia has proposed a draw which I have accepted - France may not though... but at any rate Turkey NMRing in his position is wrecking the game. Could be unrelated but highly highly annoying
Game 75568 btw -
Also
The forum admin has stated this too: (rick.leeds)
Google are playing their money-making game again and you will seen the Malware Detected warning.
The site is clean. Google's own systems can't detect malware on the site.
We've taken steps to have Google remove the warning... again. We're also looking at ways to avoid this in the future.
FWIW, I was able to click 'Ignore warning' on the bottom right of the messgage and continue.
Monty,
I followed Mr. PulpStar's advice upthread and was able to get on too. I just hope everyone has done the same.
Mr. PulpStar,
A player not sending in a move can be soooo frustrating. Thanks for the info from the site admin.
Re Salmond, though I am a unionist, I have always had a healthy respect for him as a politician; he has done an amazing job, taking a fringe party into majority government, and winning a referendum that might yet deliver his dream.
However in the last few weeks a significant portion of that respect has gone; he looks devious, and, sometimes, clueless. I suggest this is undeniable, to any but the most blinkered. The Yes campaign might be better off without him at the top; Sturgeon is often more convincing.
YES can still win, but Salmond is a rapidly diminishing asset, like North Sea oil.
Independence was always a bridge too far.
DevoMax is still up for grabs though, and will likely be the SNPs endgame for now.
Every major politician has to have moments where they tell their public: "trust me on this one". They can't have too many or the public stop trusting them (unless the trust is visibly repaid).
Alex Salmond has decided that now is the time to invest his substantial political capital to get him past a sticky situation. He has done so on not terribly attractive terrain. But presumably he has decided that it's necessary if the referendum is to stand any kind of a chance. And since the referendum is more important to him than keeping his political capital, he's decided to spend it like a drunken sailor.
I think he's probably made the right call, given what a mess the SNP have made of the currency question. Is it enough? I don't know. But it's the best that he can do.
You also have to wonder if Farage was just spouting platitudes when he said he would be making it a priority to make sure no extremists or BNP types would be jumping on the kipper bandwagon.
Clearly he was doing just that. If extremists and BNP types were successfully prevented from climbing on the kipper bandwagon, Farage would be on it more or less all by himself.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
I don't know what your definition of "very unlikely" is but if you take where we start, assume Labour gains, but also price in incumbency and some Tory improvement from where we are now as UKIP fizzles in the general election, it wouldn't fit mine.
What does become quite unlikely as the size of the LibDem contingent drops is that the LibDems will have kingmaker power.
Just imagine.
You'll need to. The band for where all the votes have to fall for a hung parliament is very narrow as it is and with all those lib dem MPs who are going to get booted out on their arse it gets even narrower. The polls aren't pointing to a hung parliament. Cammie failed to get his precious Boundary Changes remember.
Mail overcooking it as usual but there is no doubt that little Ed is proving less than receptive to Clegg's somewhat pathetic overtures for any theoretical future coalition/lib lab pact
Here's why 'decapitation' is just a bit of a stretch.
Worth noting Nick Clegg has a 15k maj in #Sheffield Hallam.
Not to say it might not be a good idea tactically as it's painfully obvious the lib dem activist base is being hammered year on year while Clegg has made it quite clear that circling the wagons on the lib dems safest seats to protect them is priority number 1. If Clegg has to deploy a big effort just to make sure he wins comfortably then that is a finite resource he will be using in his own seat and not elsewhere.
Although interestingly there aren't a lot of LD seats all that close to Hallam (assuming you don't cross the pennines to the dark side and Cheadle, Hazel Grove etc. - they only have Leeds North West and Bradford East - so I am fairly sure that the whole of the Sheffield LD activist base would be in Hallam anyway.
Clegg will hold Sheffield Hallam easily in 2015.
Oh, I quite agree - my point was more that when we consider the LD strategy of concentrating on defense something to bear in mind which isn't talked of much is proximity to other LD seats and hence a diffusion of the local activist base over too many seats. If you consider Somerset they have the 4 Somerset seats, plus Bath to try and defend, and they are unlikely to get much help from Bristol as they will be in Bristol West, or Chippenham, and are unlikely to get much help from Exeter as they will be in Torbay or North Devon.
By contrast all the LD activists in Brighton, East Sussex and Kent can be in just the 2 seats of Lewes and Eastbourne as the next nearest places to defend are Portsmouth or South-West London.
But the problem is, there AREN'T many Lib Dem activists left in Sheffield (or anywhere in the general region for that matter) after their shellackings in local elections in recent years. By contrast, there's going to be a whole army of Labour activists from all over the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire, who won't have to worry about any of the other Sheffield seats since they're in the bag for Labour and so will be able to campaign hard in Hallam.
A reminder to Clegg's always amusing ostrich faction of spinners that absolutely nobody will be taking any lessons in trust from them for a referendum.
Roger calculates that if repeated at a Welsh Assembly election Labour would retain 30 seats, so still the tinest whisper short of an overall majority, and UKIP would enter the Assembly for the first time with 5 seats. If the European election intentions were repeated in May Labour would return two MEPs, the Conservatives and UKIP one each, meaning Plaid would lose out.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
I don't know what your definition of "very unlikely" is but if you take where we start, assume Labour gains, but also price in incumbency and some Tory improvement from where we are now as UKIP fizzles in the general election, it wouldn't fit mine.
What does become quite unlikely as the size of the LibDem contingent drops is that the LibDems will have kingmaker power.
Just imagine.
You'll need to. The band for where all the votes have to fall for a hung parliament is very narrow as it is and with all those lib dem MPs who are going to get booted out on their arse it gets even narrower. The polls aren't pointing to a hung parliament. Cammie failed to get his precious Boundary Changes remember.
Exactly. I really don't think a hung parliament is likely at all. Everyone but the most deluded LibDem activists expect them to take a heavy reduction in their seats, so unless their losses are made up by another minority party (I personally expect UKIP to do better than most people imagine, but I'm thinking 8-10 seats for them maximum -- probably not enough to recoup all the losses the Lib Dems will suffer) then statistically it's going to be extremely difficult for a hung parliament to occur. Even if Labour and the Conservatives are very close together, it still requires third parties to hold a large number of seats before a hung parliament becomes possible.
(Quoting somebody on Labour List): Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
At the risk of stating the obvious, Labour's easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, then working with them.
A hung parliament is still a very unlikely result under FPTP and all the more so the less lib dem MPs there are. Not that it wouldn't be hilarious watching little Ed trying to justify Clegg in a coalition again to labour voters and the public of course.
I don't know what your definition of "very unlikely" is but if you take where we start, assume Labour gains, but also price in incumbency and some Tory improvement from where we are now as UKIP fizzles in the general election, it wouldn't fit mine.
What does become quite unlikely as the size of the LibDem contingent drops is that the LibDems will have kingmaker power.
Just imagine.
You'll need to. The band for where all the votes have to fall for a hung parliament is very narrow as it is and with all those lib dem MPs who are going to get booted out on their arse it gets even narrower. The polls aren't pointing to a hung parliament. Cammie failed to get his precious Boundary Changes remember.
I've backed both Labour Majority and NOM - I certainly am not ruling out a majority for Ed, I am for Dave.
Every major politician has to have moments where they tell their public: "trust me on this one". They can't have too many or the public stop trusting them (unless the trust is visibly repaid).
Alex Salmond has decided that now is the time to invest his substantial political capital to get him past a sticky situation. He has done so on not terribly attractive terrain. But presumably he has decided that it's necessary if the referendum is to stand any kind of a chance. And since the referendum is more important to him than keeping his political capital, he's decided to spend it like a drunken sailor.
I think he's probably made the right call, given what a mess the SNP have made of the currency question. Is it enough? I don't know. But it's the best that he can do.
I don't think it's the best he can do. Like SeanT, I think he is a highly talented politician that runs rings round most of his opponents most of the time. However, in the last week he has had a critical test on very important matters, and he blew it. I think the "trust me, it'll work out" is probably the right strategy on the EU matter. On the currency matter his position is a joke. If the Chancellor and both shadow chancellors of the country you need to agree don't, and if the public of that country is behind them, it's simply highly unlikely to happen. And Salmond can't afford for even a 50-50 chance of Plan A falling through if he doesn't spell out a Plan B. He would have been on much better ground as saying he would like to work together with the UK after he left, but if the UK is unwilling to be co-operative than the alternative is a Scottish pound. And that the politics playing of George Osborne is why the UK Government can't be trusted to look out for Scotland's real interests. He would have looked mature and credible by doing that.
As it is, he not only looks chippy, he has also been forced into arguing that the rUK would have to change course on currency union, because there are so many problems with not having one. All that does is ramp up how bad it will be if he doesn't get it, as looks likely.
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
'If the unionists say one thing and those in favour of Independence say another then clearly the unionists must be telling the truth because there are more unionist parties at westminster'
You also have to wonder if Farage was just spouting platitudes when he said he would be making it a priority to make sure no extremists or BNP types would be jumping on the kipper bandwagon.
Clearly he was doing just that. If extremists and BNP types were successfully prevented from climbing on the kipper bandwagon, Farage would be on it more or less all by himself.
Interesting idea, Mr. Bond. Of the 34,000 UKIP members 33,999 are "extremists and BNP types"? Really? I mean really? Is that what you actually think?
Re Salmond, though I am a unionist, I have always had a healthy respect for him as a politician; he has done an amazing job, taking a fringe party into majority government, and winning a referendum that might yet deliver his dream.
However in the last few weeks a significant portion of that respect has gone; he looks devious, and, sometimes, clueless. I suggest this is undeniable, to any but the most blinkered. The Yes campaign might be better off without him at the top; Sturgeon is often more convincing.
YES can still win, but Salmond is a rapidly diminishing asset, like North Sea oil.
Independence was always a bridge too far.
DevoMax is still up for grabs though, and will likely be the SNPs endgame for now.
The first is their private polling shows around 15 to 20 per cent of current Labour supporters say they would still consider voting Lib Dem in 2015. “They have taken a lot from us,” says one Lib Dem strategist, “but that vote is soft.”
Hooray! Could there be another highly entertaining twitter spat far behind? Let's hope so.
a major survey of Scottish public opinion showed a majority of voters like the idea of handing more financial powers to Holyrood, including control over welfare.
However, support dropped sharply when it was pointed out this could mean them paying different rates of income tax or getting a different state pension than in England.
More than six out of ten Scots said they wanted the state pension to be paid from taxes collected across the UK as a whole, rather than Scotland only.
Yes just like oil , whisky , natural resources , etc , quick we better vote to stay in union ..............yawn A share of the pound is ours , a share of the BofE is ours , a share of all currency reserves is ours, ad infinitum
No: oil, whisky, etc are assets because they can monetised. £ sterling is a promisory note which the Bank of England has to honour if you present it at the cashier's desk. You have no right to rely on the Bank of England's full faith and credit for an undefined period unless you agree to the fiscal constraints that they set.
Currency reserves should be included in the net assets of the UK and then divided up on whatever agreed formula makes sense.
"I’ve just printed out a copy of that article and put it in my desk. I probably won’t need to look at it again, because the likelihood remains David Cameron will win an outright majority in 2015. "
Dan Hodges, as deluded as the Scottish Nats on independence.
Even better than a Hodges twitter spat, the scottish tory surgers are back and shrieking away pointlessly. But now they have Brown on their side! Their praise of Brown's economic wisdom shall be fulsome indeed. From here on in Brown's scottish tory surgers shall wear their allegiance with pride.
Every major politician has to have moments where they tell their public: "trust me on this one". They can't have too many or the public stop trusting them (unless the trust is visibly repaid).
Alex Salmond has decided that now is the time to invest his substantial political capital to get him past a sticky situation. He has done so on not terribly attractive terrain. But presumably he has decided that it's necessary if the referendum is to stand any kind of a chance. And since the referendum is more important to him than keeping his political capital, he's decided to spend it like a drunken sailor.
I think he's probably made the right call, given what a mess the SNP have made of the currency question. Is it enough? I don't know. But it's the best that he can do.
I don't think it's the best he can do. Like SeanT, I think he is a highly talented politician that runs rings round most of his opponents most of the time. However, in the last week he has had a critical test on very important matters, and he blew it. I think the "trust me, it'll work out" is probably the right strategy on the EU matter. On the currency matter his position is a joke. If the Chancellor and both shadow chancellors of the country you need to agree don't, and if the public of that country is behind them, it's simply highly unlikely to happen. And Salmond can't afford for even a 50-50 chance of Plan A falling through if he doesn't spell out a Plan B. He would have been on much better ground as saying he would like to work together with the UK after he left, but if the UK is unwilling to be co-operative than the alternative is a Scottish pound. And that the politics playing of George Osborne is why the UK Government can't be trusted to look out for Scotland's real interests. He would have looked mature and credible by doing that.
As it is, he not only looks chippy, he has also been forced into arguing that the rUK would have to change course on currency union, because there are so many problems with not having one. All that does is ramp up how bad it will be if he doesn't get it, as looks likely.
The SNP-led government have performed better than I expected, and that is a promising sign of Salmond's competence, along with that of his team. But it's clear that they simply were not ready for this referendum, and had not expected to have to call it so early. They may still win, but a win will be in spite of their lack of preparation.
The timing of the EU economic crash and the Euro's woes have not exactly helped, either.
Dan Hodges: "The Scots aren't going to vote for independence. The polls are clear." http://archive.is/7kmYq #indyref
Just think, Hodges could be almost as big an asset to the NO campaign as Osbrowne, Clegg or Cammie. Who doesn't realise just how popular they are with the scottish public?
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean (or any of the other terms come to that). They do seem to be obligatory, for at least some posters, when discussing Scottish matters so I include them so as not to appear discriminatory.
a major survey of Scottish public opinion showed a majority of voters like the idea of handing more financial powers to Holyrood, including control over welfare.
However, support dropped sharply when it was pointed out this could mean them paying different rates of income tax or getting a different state pension than in England.
More than six out of ten Scots said they wanted the state pension to be paid from taxes collected across the UK as a whole, rather than Scotland only.
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean
I can tell you for a fact that petulant whining from right wingers is only going to encourage me to use them more often. So by all means whine away.
Dan Hodges: "The Scots aren't going to vote for independence. The polls are clear." http://archive.is/7kmYq #indyref
Just think, Hodges could be almost as big an asset to the NO campaign as Osbrowne, Clegg or Cammie. Who doesn't realise just how popular they are with the scottish public?
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean (or any of the other terms come to that). They do seem to be obligatory, for at least some posters, when discussing Scottish matters so I include them so as not to appear discriminatory.
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean
I can tell you for a fact that petulant whining from right wingers is only going to encourage me to use them more often. So by all means whine away.
We all know you're nothing but a troll MP, but theres no need to be quite so obvious about it..
Every major politician has to have moments where they tell their public: "trust me on this one". They can't have too many or the public stop trusting them (unless the trust is visibly repaid).
Alex Salmond has decided that now is the time to invest his substantial political capital to get him past a sticky situation. He has done so on not terribly attractive terrain. But presumably he has decided that it's necessary if the referendum is to stand any kind of a chance. And since the referendum is more important to him than keeping his political capital, he's decided to spend it like a drunken sailor.
I think he's probably made the right call, given what a mess the SNP have made of the currency question. Is it enough? I don't know. But it's the best that he can do.
It is the right move by Salmond since he won't have to worry about it if Scotland votes NO - And if Scotland votes YES he has won the referendum anyway.
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean
I can tell you for a fact that petulant whining from right wingers is only going to encourage me to use them more often. So by all means whine away.
We all know you're nothing but a troll MP, but theres no need to be quite so obvious about it..
Yes, yes, whine whine whine, very good. Keep at it chum.
Dan Hodges: "The Scots aren't going to vote for independence. The polls are clear." http://archive.is/7kmYq #indyref
Just think, Hodges could be almost as big an asset to the NO campaign as Osbrowne, Clegg or Cammie. Who doesn't realise just how popular they are with the scottish public?
Who doesn't realise just how popular they are with the scottish public?
I see the real Gordon (Os)Brown is joining the warning chorus today (Telly). He must carry some weight north of the border, I would have thought.
He's in charge of the 'United with Labour' splinter group of better together that won't go near the tories. The fact is however it's not just at westminster where he's been all but invisible.
The more cynical political journos have already pointed out that for a man who holds grudges as fiercely as Brown does his entire reason for still being an MP might just to be to make certain little Ed doesn't promote anyone who crossed him. Someone in particular in fact.
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean
I can tell you for a fact that petulant whining from right wingers is only going to encourage me to use them more often. So by all means whine away.
Mr. Pork, I was not whining, let alone petulantly whining, I was answering a question honestly.
You will of course carry on using what ever terms and expressions you think helpful to what ever point you are trying to make and rightly so. I'll help you.
There you are, I am sure I have missed a few but as you seem to think that using slogans more often helps your arguments I have helped you rather than whined. Look I'll do it again:
"... or Scotland goes anyway , robbed but free..."
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual: Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
As you mentioned it, may I ask, what is the significance of Osbrowne if it isn't a spelling error?
Dammed if I know, any more than I understand what "PB Tories" and "PB Romney" mean
I can tell you for a fact that petulant whining from right wingers is only going to encourage me to use them more often. So by all means whine away.
Mr. Pork, I was not whining, let alone petulantly whining, I was answering a question honestly.
You will of course carry on using what ever terms and expressions you think helpful to what ever point you are trying to make and rightly so. I'll help you.
There you are, I am sure I have missed a few but as you seem to think that using slogans more often helps your arguments I have helped you rather than whined. Look I'll do it again:
"But the problem is, there AREN'T many Lib Dem activists left in Sheffield (or anywhere in the general region for that matter) after their shellackings in local elections in recent years. By contrast, there's going to be a whole army of Labour activists from all over the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire, who won't have to worry about any of the other Sheffield seats since they're in the bag for Labour and so will be able to campaign hard in Hallam."
Frankly any serious PBer who thinks Clegg is in any danger of losing in Sheffield Hallam requires medical attention of the padded cell variety.
On the flip side you and likeminded fellow travellers are providing hours of rib tickling chortleness for the rest of us and on that basis perhaps we might encourage your clinicians to allow you to post such humour from the secure facilities on a daily basis ?!?
Looking forward to the game tonight, City look overpriced at 3.1, also gone with Toure and Mascherano to be carded, and Barcelona are weak defending set pieces so gone with Kompany to score anytime at 16/1
About EU and Scotland. I know some of you don't like a non-unionist medium, but this piece is by Eric Joyce who (the last I heard) was a unionist. And who (honestly) wrote some of the most sensible comment on Falkirk.
[If it is better to suggest this for Nighthawks, please indicate how this is done. Many thanks.]
Comments
But it's Friday, the nearest bank is 100 miles away, and it closes in a 20 minutes. You say, "How are you going to get to the bank in time?" and they say, "I am confident I will be able to get to the bank in time". But to ease your concern, they also promise that in the event that they can't withdraw the money, they'll give you 1000 pounds.
So you either get to sell the car for 10,000 pounds, or you get 1000 pounds for the brief loan of your car. Great deal either way, right? Would you hand over the keys?
Oh, I quite agree - my point was more that when we consider the LD strategy of concentrating on defense something to bear in mind which isn't talked of much is proximity to other LD seats and hence a diffusion of the local activist base over too many seats. If you consider Somerset they have the 4 Somerset seats, plus Bath to try and defend, and they are unlikely to get much help from Bristol as they will be in Bristol West, or Chippenham, and are unlikely to get much help from Exeter as they will be in Torbay or North Devon.
By contrast all the LD activists in Brighton, East Sussex and Kent can be in just the 2 seats of Lewes and Eastbourne as the next nearest places to defend are Portsmouth or South-West London.
During the Eastleigh by-election, the coverage mentioned that a third of LD members live in London. (I think this was during a Spectator podcast)
"That means the internal battle within the Labour Party between those who think the Lib Dems should be accommodated and those who think they should be crushed has been won by the crushers. And the decisive response of Miliband, Douglas Alexander and Jonathan Ashworth suggests that several key components of Labour’s campaign machine (leader’s office, strategy and attack) are all united in seeking to crush the Lib Dems.
That’s a sensible position to take. Holding down the Lib Dem vote and ensuring that as much of it as possible transfers to Labour is absolutely key in delivering a majority winning vote for Labour in 2015. Lib Dem switchers – those who thought they were voting to stop the Tories but ended up enabling a Tory government – form the bulk of Labour’s increase in vote since 2010. A strategy which sees Labour hug Clegg might be all the notice some of these voters need to begin toying with the idea of voting yellow again come 2015. Nor is targeting Lib Dem votes defeatist – on the contrary, in 86 of the 87 target seats Labour seek to win from the Tories the Lib Dem vote share last time was larger than the Tory majority. Squeezing Lib Dem votes wins Tory seats.
The reaction from the party over the past 24 hours suggests that such a strategy is now in the ascendency in Brewer’s Green, and that Douglas Alexander and others are fully signed up to it. That’s a victory for Harriet Harman and others who have been making such arguments in public in recent weeks. But it’s also a victory for common sense. Labour’s easiest route to Downing Street involves crushing the Lib Dems, not working with them.
Wee Dougie strikes again.
' Alex Salmond never at any time said he had legal opinion on the EU.'
So why waste £20,000 of taxpayers money pretending he had legal opinion?
'Alex Salmond Spent £20,000 Trying To Hide EU Legal Advice ...
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/.../snp-eu-legal-advice_n_4075966.htm...
10 Oct 2013 - Alex Salmond Spent £20,000 Trying To Hide EU Legal Advice, ... on the SNP's folly of going to court to try and hide information that never even existed." .... they would block any application from Scotland to join the EU as an ...
Cam's stance on Europe may have won him no friends at home, but perhaps some powerful ones abroad.
Its in Merkel's gift to give Cam some meat to throw to his foamers if she chose.
And there are some reasons why the extremely clever Ms M. might want to keep Cammie afloat.
Didn't seem that all helpful in Whythenshawe though.
What does become quite unlikely as the size of the LibDem contingent drops is that the LibDems will have kingmaker power.
Is there an echo in here? ;-)
twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/435734229503049729/photo/1
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/feb/17/coop-group-survey-politics
"The leadership of the Co-operative Group was accused of conducting an ill-designed attempt to destroy the Labour-affiliated Co-operative party after releasing a questionnaire asking the public whether it should continue to fund political parties."
If Clegg's ostrich faction want to cling on to delusions of being powerbrokers from here on in, just because it happened in 2010, then they can have no complaints when they turn round and find their party has been hammered mercilessly while they were dreaming up grand lib/lab pact plans.
Now that specific questions are being posed, his lack of preparation has been exposed and he is floundering.
When a country goes independent it only owns the assets within its borders that are not legally held by third parties. However, any debts that it has, it is fully liable for those.
It can use another country's currency but does not have any control on the exchange rate or interest rate or any other currency related matter. For instance we invoice our clients in Lithuania in Euros (at their request) and not in Litas.
If Salmond's saviour is to be oil taxes, there are already signs of some oil companies getting out of the North Sea for more profitable ventures elsewhere, and it would only take a reasonable drop in oil prices to make the oil companies mothball the wells in the North Sea and Salmond would be without his major source of income. Any tax increase could only hasten this process.
Has Salmond done any budget sensitivity analysis with DCF that he is willing to publish? I expect not.
After losing the independence vote Salmond's SNP men and women are needed for supply and confidence in the WESTMINSTER Gov't.
That'd be an absolute hoot
It'd be even funnier if they won the referendum and were needed for Supply and Confidence on budget motions. Particularly hilarious for Scottish Labour.
I followed Mr. PulpStar's advice upthread and was able to get on too. I just hope everyone has done the same.
Mr. PulpStar,
A player not sending in a move can be soooo frustrating. Thanks for the info from the site admin.
DevoMax is still up for grabs though, and will likely be the SNPs endgame for now.
Alex Salmond has decided that now is the time to invest his substantial political capital to get him past a sticky situation. He has done so on not terribly attractive terrain. But presumably he has decided that it's necessary if the referendum is to stand any kind of a chance. And since the referendum is more important to him than keeping his political capital, he's decided to spend it like a drunken sailor.
I think he's probably made the right call, given what a mess the SNP have made of the currency question. Is it enough? I don't know. But it's the best that he can do.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100260091/labours-shipwrecked-survivors-flee-from-the-lib-dem-rescue-ship/
Oh, I quite agree - my point was more that when we consider the LD strategy of concentrating on defense something to bear in mind which isn't talked of much is proximity to other LD seats and hence a diffusion of the local activist base over too many seats. If you consider Somerset they have the 4 Somerset seats, plus Bath to try and defend, and they are unlikely to get much help from Bristol as they will be in Bristol West, or Chippenham, and are unlikely to get much help from Exeter as they will be in Torbay or North Devon.
By contrast all the LD activists in Brighton, East Sussex and Kent can be in just the 2 seats of Lewes and Eastbourne as the next nearest places to defend are Portsmouth or South-West London.
But the problem is, there AREN'T many Lib Dem activists left in Sheffield (or anywhere in the general region for that matter) after their shellackings in local elections in recent years. By contrast, there's going to be a whole army of Labour activists from all over the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire, who won't have to worry about any of the other Sheffield seats since they're in the bag for Labour and so will be able to campaign hard in Hallam.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/article6577894.ece/ALTERNATES/w460/No+to+AV+campaign+poster.jpg
http://dailyelection.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/say-no-to-president-clegg-poster-no-to-av.jpg
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Observer/Pix/pictures/2011/2/4/1296858816865/Get-Clegg-007.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5096/5543559787_5af14279c5_m.jpg
Westminster VI: CON 22%(+1), LAB 47%(+1), LD 7%(-1), Plaid 11%(-1), UKIP 9%(-1)
Welsh Assembly (Const): CON 21%(+2), LAB 42%(-1), LD 9%(nc), Plaid 19%(-1), UKIP 5%(-2)
Welsh Assembly (Reg): CON 19%(nc), LAB 39%(-1), LD 9%(nc), Plaid 17%(+2), UKIP 10%(nc)
European: CON 17%(-3), LAB 39%(-2), LDEM 7%(-1), Plaid 12%(-1), UKIP 18%(+5)
Roger calculates that if repeated at a Welsh Assembly election Labour would retain 30 seats, so still the tinest whisper short of an overall majority, and UKIP would enter the Assembly for the first time with 5 seats. If the European election intentions were repeated in May Labour would return two MEPs, the Conservatives and UKIP one each, meaning Plaid would lose out.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8634
*chortle*
As it is, he not only looks chippy, he has also been forced into arguing that the rUK would have to change course on currency union, because there are so many problems with not having one. All that does is ramp up how bad it will be if he doesn't get it, as looks likely.
Sounds like a deal to me. In fact probably the best result the English could hope for.
I know, I know. I promised myself I would stay out of these "debates", but I just couldn't resist that feeder line from Mr. G..
Oh, as I am commenting on a Scots Indy sub-thread I suppose I ought to include the usual:
Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter, chortle, unspoofable and so on.
A joke indeed.
LOL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Are_We_Not_Men?_We_Are_Devo!
Could there be another highly entertaining twitter spat far behind? Let's hope so.
Currency reserves should be included in the net assets of the UK and then divided up on whatever agreed formula makes sense.
Dan Hodges, as deluded as the Scottish Nats on independence.
The timing of the EU economic crash and the Euro's woes have not exactly helped, either.
People in wanting their cake and eating it shocker....
No of Scots aware of Mr Hodges ? 5 ?
I see the real Gordon (Os)Brown is joining the warning chorus today (Telly). He must carry some weight north of the border, I would have thought.
Like a stopped clock he's right occasionally.
The more cynical political journos have already pointed out that for a man who holds grudges as fiercely as Brown does his entire reason for still being an MP might just to be to make certain little Ed doesn't promote anyone who crossed him. Someone in particular in fact.
You will of course carry on using what ever terms and expressions you think helpful to what ever point you are trying to make and rightly so. I'll help you.
Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter , unspoofable, chortles.
There you are, I am sure I have missed a few but as you seem to think that using slogans more often helps your arguments I have helped you rather than whined. Look I'll do it again:
Cammie, Osbrowne, PB Tories, PB Romney, tears of laughter , unspoofable, chortles
"But the problem is, there AREN'T many Lib Dem activists left in Sheffield (or anywhere in the general region for that matter) after their shellackings in local elections in recent years. By contrast, there's going to be a whole army of Labour activists from all over the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire, who won't have to worry about any of the other Sheffield seats since they're in the bag for Labour and so will be able to campaign hard in Hallam."
................................................................................
Frankly any serious PBer who thinks Clegg is in any danger of losing in Sheffield Hallam requires medical attention of the padded cell variety.
On the flip side you and likeminded fellow travellers are providing hours of rib tickling chortleness for the rest of us and on that basis perhaps we might encourage your clinicians to allow you to post such humour from the secure facilities on a daily basis ?!?
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL Or something along those lines.
About EU and Scotland. I know some of you don't like a non-unionist medium, but this piece is by Eric Joyce who (the last I heard) was a unionist. And who (honestly) wrote some of the most sensible comment on Falkirk.
[If it is better to suggest this for Nighthawks, please indicate how this is done. Many thanks.]