I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Go on. I'll grant you that Milligan and Price exceeded 50% so there was a plurality, but I suspect the Con vote still has a floor at about 20%.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
UKIP are small government conservatives. That Tories haven't voted tactically for Lab/LD is a different thing.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
But they might, on rare occasions, be minded to vote strategically. OL.
Is Pritchard being a little precious? We all accept that anyone arrested may be released without charge, and that those charged are entitled to a presumption of innocence until a court decides the reality.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.
Historically, the Conservative Party has been an alliance between business and the metropolitan elites on the one side, and the small 'c' conservatives in the shires. Together they were almost unbeatable.
However, these two elements are diverging - big business and the urban elite, by and large, want close links with Europe, and are keen on freedom of movement. The small 'c' conservatives in the shires, feel that these things dilute British-ness, and change the country in ways they don't like. They feel - rightly or wrongly - that they are the ones who are competing for jobs with immigrants, while investment bankers in Hampstead enjoy cheaper builders and cleaners.
There is no clean way to heal this divide, because the two main sponsors of Conservatism are moving in different directions.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional.
That would probably explain, or at least contribute to the explanation, of why their support and percetion has altered so much in the past couple of years.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
But they might, on rare occasions, be minded to vote strategically. OL.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
In Canada, the Reform Party (UKIP) absorbed the Conservative Party (Cameroons).
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.
Historically, the Conservative Party has been an alliance between business and the metropolitan elites on the one side, and the small 'c' conservatives in the shires. Together they were almost unbeatable.
However, these two elements are diverging - big business and the urban elite, by and large, want close links with Europe, and are keen on freedom of movement. The small 'c' conservatives in the shires, feel that these things dilute British-ness, and change the country in ways they don't like. They feel - rightly or wrongly - that they are the ones who are competing for jobs with immigrants, while investment bankers in Hampstead enjoy cheaper builders and cleaners.
There is no clean way to heal this divide, because the two main sponsors of Conservatism are moving in different directions.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
All the stuff after
"I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support."
is why the corrupt monster-state is vital.
It creates the possibility of an alliance between trad tories and a large chunk of the trad working class - not only the chunk Thatcher had but the Tories lost after the ERM / sleaze etc but also another chunk who want revenge on Labour.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
In Canada, the Reform Party (UKIP) absorbed the Conservative Party (Cameroons).
Not that I think it is likely, but it would be a truly ignominious end for such a old and established political party.
Personally I'd prefer two large centrish parties, for left and right, and significant but smaller parties of the left and right (without the 'centre' prefix) to offer some proper choice - such that when voters wanted to go more extreme, the outside parties were larger, large enough for coalition and influence, and if the voters want moderation, they stick with the centre parties and the more extreme ones can shout from the sidelines without worrying about being disloyal to their party like the tory right at present.
Regardless of practical factors Ukips's best weapon is "they're all the same" i.e. the political class is a caste who operate against the public on issues where the different wings of the caste all agree - like the EU. The shenanigans around the Lisbon non-referendum is one of the best examples of that.
The Euro double mandates had been banned in 2004 with sitting MEPs having a sunset clause until 2009. The government had to make a special law in the meantime for LibDem Baroness Ludford as the Euro law talked about National Parliaments including the House of Lords.
The Euro double mandates had been banned in 2004 with sitting MEPs having a sunset clause until 2009. The government had to make a special law in the meantime for LibDem Baroness Ludford as the Euro law talked about National Parliaments including the House of Lords.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
In Canada, the Reform Party (UKIP) absorbed the Conservative Party (Cameroons).
And that wasn't about Europe either :-)
(And the Canadian Conservatives, i.e. the old Reform lot, support same sex marriage these days too, so I wouldn't push the analogy too far.)
It creates the possibility of an alliance between trad tories and a large chunk of the trad working class - not only the chunk Thatcher had but the Tories lost after the ERM / sleaze etc but also another chunk who want revenge on Labour.
But it only creates such an alliance for as long as Europe remains as an issue. Should we leave the EU, but remain members of the EEA (like Switzerland or Norway), then Europe would be largely neutralised as a political issue, I would have thought.
In which case, how long do you think the coalition between the traditional working classes and the country squires will last?
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
In Canada, the Reform Party (UKIP) absorbed the Conservative Party (Cameroons).
Not that I think it is likely, but it would be a truly ignominious end for such a old and established political party.
Personally I'd prefer two large centrish parties, for left and right, and significant but smaller parties of the left and right (without the 'centre' prefix) to offer some proper choice - such that when voters wanted to go more extreme, the outside parties were larger, large enough for coalition and influence, and if the voters want moderation, they stick with the centre parties and the more extreme ones can shout from the sidelines without worrying about being disloyal to their party like the tory right at present.
If candidates were selected by primaries it might not matter. The party would change to suit the electorate.
You could also have multi-member constituencies and excess candidates to increase choice combining primary and election in one shot.
Centralisation of political power in Brussels and Westminster has been mirrored within the party structures too.
I looked at Notts results. I expected a more comfortable Lab gain because I thought Labour would have gained more seats in Ashefield. The LibDems did pretty well.
Just 31% of people said they could see Miliband as prime minister, with 11% saying they could "definitely" envisage him in Downing Street and 20% saying they could probably see him the top job.
Even among Labour supporters, only 71% said they could see him as PM (30% definitely and 41% probably). 21% of Labour supporters said they could "probably not" see him as PM and 3% said they could "definitely not" envisage him in Downing Street.
The findings represent a small improvement on September last year, when only 28% of voters said they saw him as a potential prime minister.
The net approval ratings for the three party leaders put Cameron narrowly ahead on a net score of -19 (32% approving and 51% disapproving) compared to -20 for Miliband (23% approving and 43% disapproving) while Nick Clegg is on -45 (14% approving and 59% disapproving).
It's also worth mentioning that Lepidus, Mark Antony and Octavian did a deal too.
I always feel sorry for poor Lepidus - whatever the historical reality, the guy is so little remembered next to the other two. His portrayal in the show Rome by a low key second string Alan Rickman type was pretty funny.
The Euro double mandates had been banned in 2004 with sitting MEPs having a sunset clause until 2009. The government had to make a special law in the meantime for LibDem Baroness Ludford as the Euro law talked about National Parliaments including the House of Lords.
As always I defer to your expert knowledge!
That's ok, I'm sure I speak for PBers of all political persuasions, that we really appreciate the hard work you put in for the site.
Mr. kle4, yeah. Even more than Crassus, who had the distinction of being arguably the richest man ever and the, uh, career-defining Battle of Carrhae, Lepidus is a bit of a non-entity. Particularly sad for him, given the second triumvirate actually had some legal footing, unlike the first one, which was a friends' agreement.
It was so wonderful to watch it all blow up in ther faces at the weekend, the Kenneth Clarke outburst followed by the visible gulp, and the cold sweat, as they wondered suddenly ‘what if they actually do take votes from us?’
And now Mr Slippery is bleating that he is sorry: “We need to show respect for people who have taken the choice to support this party and we are going to work really hard to win them back.”
Surely nobody will believe this. Respect? Fear, more likely. What he means is “ Blast! We counted on them remaining loyal whatever we did, and now find that we were wrong. They are more intelligent than we gave them credit for, and we have hurt their feelings. But we are not intelligent enough to see that the cat is out of the bag. They know what we’re really like and will never forget it. So we will once again treat them as if they were stupid. We will pretend, really hard, that we actually like them, at least until the votes are counted at the next general election, after which we will go back to doing what we always did.”
If an MP is charged with such an offence, would they have to stand down ? It would be a bit difficult to continue representing constituents, so I would think they would have to, unless parliament has a system where neighbouring MP's offer cover.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
UKIP are small government conservatives. That Tories haven't voted tactically for Lab/LD is a different thing.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
UKIP are small government conservatives. That Tories haven't voted tactically for Lab/LD is a different thing.
Very true *like*
From the mid 1990's to 2010 the Lib Dems were in strong sympathy with New Labour, so it would be unlikely for Tories to vote for them to keep Labour out. There may be some exceptions, such as Sheffield Hallam which was a safe Conservative seat through the 80's and 90's. Those voters now vote Lib Dem to keep out Labour.
Tories voting tactically for UKIP is a far more reasonable expectation. Indeed highly likely next time round in a few places like Eastleigh.
If an MP is charged with such an offence, would they have to stand down ? It would be a bit difficult to continue representing constituents, so I would think they would have to, unless parliament has a system where neighbouring MP's offer cover.
Innocent until proven guilty.
He could follow the example of the former MP for Eastleigh, resign as Deputy Speaker, but carry on until after the jury have delivered their verdict.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
In Canada, the Reform Party (UKIP) absorbed the Conservative Party (Cameroons).
And that wasn't about Europe either :-)
(And the Canadian Conservatives, i.e. the old Reform lot, support same sex marriage these days too, so I wouldn't push the analogy too far.)
If it came to pass there would be a final outing of that well worn Canadian phrase...a terrrrrrrrrible night for the Tories.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
UKIP are small government conservatives. That Tories haven't voted tactically for Lab/LD is a different thing.
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Tories don't vote tactically.
UKIP are small government conservatives. That Tories haven't voted tactically for Lab/LD is a different thing.
Very true *like*
From the mid 1990's to 2010 the Lib Dems were in strong sympathy with New Labour, so it would be unlikely for Tories to vote for them to keep Labour out. There may be some exceptions, such as Sheffield Hallam which was a safe Conservative seat through the 80's and 90's. Those voters now vote Lib Dem to keep out Labour.
Tories voting tactically for UKIP is a far more reasonable expectation. Indeed highly likely next time round in a few places like Eastleigh.
And Eastleigh residents should be used to bar charts by now: "Only UKIP can beat the LDs!"
It creates the possibility of an alliance between trad tories and a large chunk of the trad working class - not only the chunk Thatcher had but the Tories lost after the ERM / sleaze etc but also another chunk who want revenge on Labour.
But it only creates such an alliance for as long as Europe remains as an issue. Should we leave the EU, but remain members of the EEA (like Switzerland or Norway), then Europe would be largely neutralised as a political issue, I would have thought.
In which case, how long do you think the coalition between the traditional working classes and the country squires will last?
Well it's not just squires is it. Under normal circumstances in socio-economic terms the people near the mid-point tend to split in opposite directions towards centre-right or centre-left even though they're quite close on the spectrum. So there's potentially quite a lot of them.
As to the main point, politics is balkanizing so there are other dynamics at play pushing in the same direction but yes if you stripped all those out then leaving the EU would stop being a unifying issue after we left it.
Regardless of practical factors Ukips's best weapon is "they're all the same" i.e. the political class is a caste who operate against the public on issues where the different wings of the caste all agree - like the EU. The shenanigans around the Lisbon non-referendum is one of the best examples of that.
I think you're absolutely right. In the near term, UKIP will be able to ride the 'new politics' bandwagon. We are the only people who listen; they are all the same; our policies are in your interest and we won't lie to you.
Unfortunately, their website betrays that they exactly like all the other political parties. I love the idea of a flat tax - as a 45% tax payer, I would benefit enormously. Unfortunately, with a third of all income taxes coming from the top one percent of tax payers, cutting our taxes in half would do nothing to cut the deficit.
And yes, 50% of GDP coming from the state is too much. Unfortunately, their plans to cut spending (which would need to fall 30% to balance the budget after you've cut my tax in half) are laughable. It would be good to cut the welfare bill, yes: unfortunately, their policies won't achieve that. Take pensions (which accounts for half of all welfares spending). They want a flat 'Citizen's pension" of 130 pounds per week, that is non-means tested, etc. Which is great. Unfortunately multiplying the proposed amount by the number of pensioners gets us pretty much to current spending on state pensions. And there are a lot of people who would qualify for more than UKIP's proposed citizens pensiong, gven the Basic State Pension is just two-third of the current bill. So, the proposed Citizens' Pension would result in the largest component of welfare increasing.
I have written in the past about the absurdity of UKIP's energy policies and shan't do so again, beyond saying that no political party can meaningfully reduce the cost of electricity in this country.
So, remind me: outside the USP of Europe, what are the actual policies of UKIP that are meaningfully more aligned with reality than those of other political parties?
What's the situation with the Sutton Coldfield by-election? We expecting it any time soon?
Could they hold SC and Ribble Valley on the same day?
Neither seems particularly fertile UKIP territory, but if the Kippers could come up with a decent candidate they might have a chance in RV.
The Vacancy for our European Commissioner isn't until next year, so no by-election until then.
Thanks TSE. I was puzzled by the refs to it I had seen.
Could they just leave the seat empty until the GE? There couldn't be much more than a year to run. (Not that I think holding Sutton Coldfield would be difficult for the Tories to hold, even at the height of a UKIP epidemic.)
I see Ladbrokes have suspended the UKIP price on Eastleigh on the next GE..
Not surprised...Lib Dems could be toast
Why?
Because its becoming obvious that the Tories will vote tactically in Eastleigh for UKIP. To kick the Lib Dems out. It's the old Lib Dem trick turned on them...what lovely irony
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.
I disagree. While the effect you are talking about is true, I think major pillars of UKIP's attraction are being anti-EU, and anti-mass immigration. If we leave the EU, the first would obviously go, and the major parties would control European immigration. That would be two pillars gone, and UKIP would struggle to go on without them, IMO.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.
I disagree. While the effect you are talking about is true, I think major pillars of UKIP's attraction are being anti-EU, and anti-mass immigration. If we leave the EU, the first would obviously go, and the major parties would control European immigration. That would be two pillars gone, and UKIP would struggle to go on without them, IMO.
If that's true, why is it that UKIP has done disproportionately better in places with fewer European immigrants, and worse in places with more?
What's the situation with the Sutton Coldfield by-election? We expecting it any time soon?
Could they hold SC and Ribble Valley on the same day?
Neither seems particularly fertile UKIP territory, but if the Kippers could come up with a decent candidate they might have a chance in RV.
The Vacancy for our European Commissioner isn't until next year, so no by-election until then.
Thanks TSE. I was puzzled by the refs to it I had seen.
Could they just leave the seat empty until the GE? There couldn't be much more than a year to run. (Not that I think holding Sutton Coldfield would be difficult for the Tories to hold, even at the height of a UKIP epidemic.)
There is a possibility that another party could move the writ for the by-election.
Regardless of practical factors Ukips's best weapon is "they're all the same" i.e. the political class is a caste who operate against the public on issues where the different wings of the caste all agree - like the EU. The shenanigans around the Lisbon non-referendum is one of the best examples of that.
I think you're absolutely right. In the near term, UKIP will be able to ride the 'new politics' bandwagon. We are the only people who listen; they are all the same; our policies are in your interest and we won't lie to you.
Unfortunately, their website betrays that they exactly like all the other political parties. I love the idea of a flat tax - as a 45% tax payer, I would benefit enormously. Unfortunately, with a third of all income taxes coming from the top one percent of tax payers, cutting our taxes in half would do nothing to cut the deficit.
And yes, 50% of GDP coming from the state is too much. Unfortunately, their plans to cut spending (which would need to fall 30% to balance the budget after you've cut my tax in half) are laughable. It would be good to cut the welfare bill, yes: unfortunately, their policies won't achieve that. Take pensions (which accounts for half of all welfares spending). They want a flat 'Citizen's pension" of 130 pounds per week, that is non-means tested, etc. Which is great. Unfortunately multiplying the proposed amount by the number of pensioners gets us pretty much to current spending on state pensions. And there are a lot of people who would qualify for more than UKIP's proposed citizens pensiong, gven the Basic State Pension is just two-third of the current bill. So, the proposed Citizens' Pension would result in the largest component of welfare increasing.
I have written in the past about the absurdity of UKIP's energy policies and shan't do so again, beyond saying that no political party can meaningfully reduce the cost of electricity in this country.
So, remind me: outside the USP of Europe, what are the actual policies of UKIP that are meaningfully more aligned with reality than those of other political parties?
Which version of reality - the BBC one or the real one?
Given that the latest tory hilarity is a referendum on a referendum, little Ed could boldly top that with a referendum on a referendum on a referendum.
The kippers won't know what's hit them. Nor will anyone else for that matter.
@suttonnick: Observer front page - "Tories call for rapid Europe vote to halt Farage surge" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers http://t.co/iK9Y6MQbKz
What is Ed's offering?
Labour just doubled its councillors in the places where votes took place on Thursday. Despite trying to tar everyone with the same brush, the UKIP problem is primarily a Tory one.
Regardless of practical factors Ukips's best weapon is "they're all the same" i.e. the political class is a caste who operate against the public on issues where the different wings of the caste all agree - like the EU. The shenanigans around the Lisbon non-referendum is one of the best examples of that.
I think you're absolutely right. In the near term, UKIP will be able to ride the 'new politics' bandwagon. We are the only people who listen; they are all the same; our policies are in your interest and we won't lie to you.
Unfortunately, their website betrays that they exactly like all the other political parties. I love the idea of a flat tax - as a 45% tax payer, I would benefit enormously. Unfortunately, with a third of all income taxes coming from the top one percent of tax payers, cutting our taxes in half would do nothing to cut the deficit.
And yes, 50% of GDP coming from the state is too much. Unfortunately, their plans to cut spending (which would need to fall 30% to balance the budget after you've cut my tax in half) are laughable. It would be good to cut the welfare bill, yes: unfortunately, their policies won't achieve that. Take pensions (which accounts for half of all welfares spending). They want a flat 'Citizen's pension" of 130 pounds per week, that is non-means tested, etc. Which is great. Unfortunately multiplying the proposed amount by the number of pensioners gets us pretty much to current spending on state pensions. And there are a lot of people who would qualify for more than UKIP's proposed citizens pensiong, gven the Basic State Pension is just two-third of the current bill. So, the proposed Citizens' Pension would result in the largest component of welfare increasing.
I have written in the past about the absurdity of UKIP's energy policies and shan't do so again, beyond saying that no political party can meaningfully reduce the cost of electricity in this country.
So, remind me: outside the USP of Europe, what are the actual policies of UKIP that are meaningfully more aligned with reality than those of other political parties?
Which version of reality - the BBC one or the real one?
My point is that all politicians lie to the people about what is achievable and what is affordable. UKIP's USP to me is not Europe, but that they say that, "unlike all the others, we will tell you the truth". Yet their selection of policies is as unrealistic as any one elses. In fact from a straight 'doing the sums on the deficit' basis it's much worse than the Tories, a little worse than the Labour Party, and may even rival the Liberal Democrats for utter economic illiteracy.
I am not saying UKIP is terrible or awful or anything like that. I am merely pointing out that their claim to be something fundamentally different and more honest is vacuous and false.
What's the situation with the Sutton Coldfield by-election? We expecting it any time soon?
Could they hold SC and Ribble Valley on the same day?
Neither seems particularly fertile UKIP territory, but if the Kippers could come up with a decent candidate they might have a chance in RV.
The Vacancy for our European Commissioner isn't until next year, so no by-election until then.
Thanks TSE. I was puzzled by the refs to it I had seen.
Could they just leave the seat empty until the GE? There couldn't be much more than a year to run. (Not that I think holding Sutton Coldfield would be difficult for the Tories to hold, even at the height of a UKIP epidemic.)
There is a possibility that another party could move the writ for the by-election.
Noted with thanx, TSE.
So it's perfectly possible Dave could be faced with a couple of awkward by-elections fairly close to the GE.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.
I disagree. While the effect you are talking about is true, I think major pillars of UKIP's attraction are being anti-EU, and anti-mass immigration. If we leave the EU, the first would obviously go, and the major parties would control European immigration. That would be two pillars gone, and UKIP would struggle to go on without them, IMO.
If that's true, why is it that UKIP has done disproportionately better in places with fewer European immigrants, and worse in places with more?
THere aren't too many Europeans in Folkesone as I just saw on Sky. All 3 wards fell to UKIP.
The complainant's husband was dying of cancer, which he had been battling for five years. He start muscle spasms and needed an injection which "could only be administered by a qualified nurse".
She spent half an hour on the phone after dialling 111. She reports a poor response, which is quite probably true, but the real question to be asked is why she called 111 in the first place. Surely the service is not there to deal with the circumstances described.
What's the situation with the Sutton Coldfield by-election? We expecting it any time soon?
Could they hold SC and Ribble Valley on the same day?
Neither seems particularly fertile UKIP territory, but if the Kippers could come up with a decent candidate they might have a chance in RV.
The Vacancy for our European Commissioner isn't until next year, so no by-election until then.
Thanks TSE. I was puzzled by the refs to it I had seen.
Could they just leave the seat empty until the GE? There couldn't be much more than a year to run. (Not that I think holding Sutton Coldfield would be difficult for the Tories to hold, even at the height of a UKIP epidemic.)
There is a possibility that another party could move the writ for the by-election.
Noted with thanx, TSE.
So it's perfectly possible Dave could be faced with a couple of awkward by-elections fairly close to the GE.
Not been a good week for him, has it?
IMHO, this week has been rather good for Dave/The Tories in some/a lot of ways.
Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.
I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.
I disagree. While the effect you are talking about is true, I think major pillars of UKIP's attraction are being anti-EU, and anti-mass immigration. If we leave the EU, the first would obviously go, and the major parties would control European immigration. That would be two pillars gone, and UKIP would struggle to go on without them, IMO.
If that's true, why is it that UKIP has done disproportionately better in places with fewer European immigrants, and worse in places with more?
THere aren't too many Europeans in Folkesone as I just saw on Sky. All 3 wards fell to UKIP.
The BBC version of reality leaves out a lot of stuff that's been happening in the south coast towns over the last ten-ish years.
Regardless of practical factors Ukips's best weapon is "they're all the same" i.e. the political class is a caste who operate against the public on issues where the different wings of the caste all agree - like the EU. The shenanigans around the Lisbon non-referendum is one of the best examples of that.
I think you're absolutely right. In the near term, UKIP will be able to ride the 'new politics' bandwagon. We are the only people who listen; they are all the same; our policies are in your interest and we won't lie to you.
Unfortunately, their website betrays that they exactly like all the other political parties. I love the idea of a flat tax - as a 45% tax payer, I would benefit enormously. Unfortunately, with a third of all income taxes coming from the top one percent of tax payers, cutting our taxes in half would do nothing to cut the deficit.
And yes, 50% of GDP coming from the state is too much. Unfortunately, their plans to cut spending (which would need to fall 30% to balance the budget after you've cut my tax in half) are laughable. It would be good to cut the welfare bill, yes: unfortunately, their policies won't achieve that. Take pensions (which accounts for half of all welfares spending). They want a flat 'Citizen's pension" of 130 pounds per week, that is non-means tested, etc. Which is great. Unfortunately multiplying the proposed amount by the number of pensioners gets us pretty much to current spending on state pensions. And there are a lot of people who would qualify for more than UKIP's proposed citizens pensiong, gven the Basic State Pension is just two-third of the current bill. So, the proposed Citizens' Pension would result in the largest component of welfare increasing.
I have written in the past about the absurdity of UKIP's energy policies and shan't do so again, beyond saying that no political party can meaningfully reduce the cost of electricity in this country.
So, remind me: outside the USP of Europe, what are the actual policies of UKIP that are meaningfully more aligned with reality than those of other political parties?
Which version of reality - the BBC one or the real one?
I am not saying UKIP is terrible or awful or anything like that. I am merely pointing out that their claim to be something fundamentally different and more honest is vacuous and false.
Indeed - I think at present people are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, in part because of anger at 'all the rest', but at the end of the day they are a political party like any other, as manu of the issues people hate about our political leaders are not partisan issues, they are political issues, and so UKIP are as prone to them as any other. They're just tapping into public support the others currently are not, for several reasons.
One does wonder if even spinners have their limits though.
You might, I don't. Not that little Ed has covered himself in glory either but purely on where the tories and Cameron stand it's pretty self-evident that this is not a week of good news.
Comments
Niall Ferguson apologises for anti-gay remarks towards John Maynard Keynes
In speech at conference, Harvard professor implied economist lacked foresight because he was childless and gay
Considering how eccentric/bonkers some sun headlines have been lately I wonder how they will cover it.
Just this once mind.
Is Pritchard being a little precious? We all accept that anyone arrested may be released without charge, and that those charged are entitled to a presumption of innocence until a court decides the reality.
Historically, the Conservative Party has been an alliance between business and the metropolitan elites on the one side, and the small 'c' conservatives in the shires. Together they were almost unbeatable.
However, these two elements are diverging - big business and the urban elite, by and large, want close links with Europe, and are keen on freedom of movement. The small 'c' conservatives in the shires, feel that these things dilute British-ness, and change the country in ways they don't like. They feel - rightly or wrongly - that they are the ones who are competing for jobs with immigrants, while investment bankers in Hampstead enjoy cheaper builders and cleaners.
There is no clean way to heal this divide, because the two main sponsors of Conservatism are moving in different directions.
Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
That's the way!
Unless he's Tory
And he's Gay...
*chuckle*
Google Hedgehog and Eton Boating Song - might fill in the blanks in a manner of speaking.
All the stuff after
"I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support."
is why the corrupt monster-state is vital.
It creates the possibility of an alliance between trad tories and a large chunk of the trad working class - not only the chunk Thatcher had but the Tories lost after the ERM / sleaze etc but also another chunk who want revenge on Labour.
The Sunday Times say UKIP say they will do a deal with Boris.
I'll post the details when the full article is up
Either that or the song "On the first day of Christmas, my truelove sent to me, My Lord Montague of Beaulieu".
It is always difficult to know what subject causes the French most offence.
Personally I'd prefer two large centrish parties, for left and right, and significant but smaller parties of the left and right (without the 'centre' prefix) to offer some proper choice - such that when voters wanted to go more extreme, the outside parties were larger, large enough for coalition and influence, and if the voters want moderation, they stick with the centre parties and the more extreme ones can shout from the sidelines without worrying about being disloyal to their party like the tory right at present.
I didn't have a proper rest. Too many results, divisions, wards, kippers, boudary changes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0YdMng1P4A
Unless they mean a deal in the election after next.
(And the Canadian Conservatives, i.e. the old Reform lot, support same sex marriage these days too, so I wouldn't push the analogy too far.)
http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/
It creates the possibility of an alliance between trad tories and a large chunk of the trad working class - not only the chunk Thatcher had but the Tories lost after the ERM / sleaze etc but also another chunk who want revenge on Labour.
But it only creates such an alliance for as long as Europe remains as an issue. Should we leave the EU, but remain members of the EEA (like Switzerland or Norway), then Europe would be largely neutralised as a political issue, I would have thought.
In which case, how long do you think the coalition between the traditional working classes and the country squires will last?
Labour nc
Tories minus 1
UKIP nc
LD plus 1
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/04/poll-ed-miliband-next-pm
You could also have multi-member constituencies and excess candidates to increase choice combining primary and election in one shot.
Centralisation of political power in Brussels and Westminster has been mirrored within the party structures too.
(Ferdinand Mount's "The New Few" touches on this)
Must be something to do with On the third day of Christmas...
I looked at Notts results. I expected a more comfortable Lab gain because I thought Labour would have gained more seats in Ashefield. The LibDems did pretty well.
Even among Labour supporters, only 71% said they could see him as PM (30% definitely and 41% probably). 21% of Labour supporters said they could "probably not" see him as PM and 3% said they could "definitely not" envisage him in Downing Street.
The findings represent a small improvement on September last year, when only 28% of voters said they saw him as a potential prime minister.
The net approval ratings for the three party leaders put Cameron narrowly ahead on a net score of -19 (32% approving and 51% disapproving) compared to -20 for Miliband (23% approving and 43% disapproving) while Nick Clegg is on -45 (14% approving and 59% disapproving).
Tory/UKIP 45%
Lab/LD 44%
So we could say it was the greatest Triumvirate in history
Could they hold SC and Ribble Valley on the same day?
Neither seems particularly fertile UKIP territory, but if the Kippers could come up with a decent candidate they might have a chance in RV.
Edited extra bit: what's wrong with a duumvirate?
Peter Hitchens lets rip at Mr Slippery:
It was so wonderful to watch it all blow up in ther faces at the weekend, the Kenneth Clarke outburst followed by the visible gulp, and the cold sweat, as they wondered suddenly ‘what if they actually do take votes from us?’
And now Mr Slippery is bleating that he is sorry: “We need to show respect for people who have taken the choice to support this party and we are going to work really hard to win them back.”
Surely nobody will believe this. Respect? Fear, more likely. What he means is “ Blast! We counted on them remaining loyal whatever we did, and now find that we were wrong. They are more intelligent than we gave them credit for, and we have hurt their feelings. But we are not intelligent enough to see that the cat is out of the bag. They know what we’re really like and will never forget it. So we will once again treat them as if they were stupid. We will pretend, really hard, that we actually like them, at least until the votes are counted at the next general election, after which we will go back to doing what we always did.”
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/05/its-too-late-to-say-youre-sorry-mr-slippery.html
How's the "modernisation" project going, Mr Finklestein?
From the mid 1990's to 2010 the Lib Dems were in strong sympathy with New Labour, so it would be unlikely for Tories to vote for them to keep Labour out. There may be some exceptions, such as Sheffield Hallam which was a safe Conservative seat through the 80's and 90's. Those voters now vote Lib Dem to keep out Labour.
Tories voting tactically for UKIP is a far more reasonable expectation. Indeed highly likely next time round in a few places like Eastleigh.
I'm assuming the results day UKIP fest will move the numbers.
I put parts of Staffs Moorlands in Stafford rather than Stone in the previous thread!
If Sunil had been an expert also of train stations, I could have been killed because of my lack of geo knowledge!
Really? You might as well refer to a cryumvirate.
Anyway, I am off for the night.
He could follow the example of the former MP for Eastleigh, resign as Deputy Speaker, but carry on until after the jury have delivered their verdict.
The Curry House Triumvirate.
Well it's not just squires is it. Under normal circumstances in socio-economic terms the people near the mid-point tend to split in opposite directions towards centre-right or centre-left even though they're quite close on the spectrum. So there's potentially quite a lot of them.
As to the main point, politics is balkanizing so there are other dynamics at play pushing in the same direction but yes if you stripped all those out then leaving the EU would stop being a unifying issue after we left it.
Unfortunately, their website betrays that they exactly like all the other political parties. I love the idea of a flat tax - as a 45% tax payer, I would benefit enormously. Unfortunately, with a third of all income taxes coming from the top one percent of tax payers, cutting our taxes in half would do nothing to cut the deficit.
And yes, 50% of GDP coming from the state is too much. Unfortunately, their plans to cut spending (which would need to fall 30% to balance the budget after you've cut my tax in half) are laughable. It would be good to cut the welfare bill, yes: unfortunately, their policies won't achieve that. Take pensions (which accounts for half of all welfares spending). They want a flat 'Citizen's pension" of 130 pounds per week, that is non-means tested, etc. Which is great. Unfortunately multiplying the proposed amount by the number of pensioners gets us pretty much to current spending on state pensions. And there are a lot of people who would qualify for more than UKIP's proposed citizens pensiong, gven the Basic State Pension is just two-third of the current bill. So, the proposed Citizens' Pension would result in the largest component of welfare increasing.
I have written in the past about the absurdity of UKIP's energy policies and shan't do so again, beyond saying that no political party can meaningfully reduce the cost of electricity in this country.
So, remind me: outside the USP of Europe, what are the actual policies of UKIP that are meaningfully more aligned with reality than those of other political parties?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/5335134.stm
Could they just leave the seat empty until the GE? There couldn't be much more than a year to run. (Not that I think holding Sutton Coldfield would be difficult for the Tories to hold, even at the height of a UKIP epidemic.)
Classy.
Are they expecting a statement?
5 Con gain from LD (Cheltenham, Malvern Hills, Spelthorne, Vale of White Horse, South Cambs)
2 Con gain from Lab (Wellingborough, Wycombe)
5 UKIP gain from Con (Basildon, Boston, Adur, Epping Forest, Forest of Dean)
4 Ind gain from Con (East Herts, East Devon, Runnymade, Scarborough
3 Lab gain from Con (Tamworth, Scarborough, Stroud)
3 LD gain from Con (South Cambridgeshire, South Ribble,Vale of White Horse)
1 Liberal gain from Con (Reydale)
1 UKIP gain from LD (East Lindsey)
2 Lab gain from LD (Ipswich, Mendip)
1 Lab gain from Green (Cambridge)
1 Ind gain from LD (Uttlesford )
All other contests were retained by the party defending
If that's true, why is it that UKIP has done disproportionately better in places with fewer European immigrants, and worse in places with more?
The kippers won't know what's hit them. Nor will anyone else for that matter.
You may well be right about a big Labour majority but you have absolutely no idea what drives Ukip supporters.
I am not saying UKIP is terrible or awful or anything like that. I am merely pointing out that their claim to be something fundamentally different and more honest is vacuous and false.
So it's perfectly possible Dave could be faced with a couple of awkward by-elections fairly close to the GE.
Not been a good week for him, has it?
And I have on several occasions advocated a looser relationship with Europe than our current one. I believe the word I used was 'semi detached'.
Trust me, us urban elite don't want a bunch of bearded liberals running the country.
The complainant's husband was dying of cancer, which he had been battling for five years. He start muscle spasms and needed an injection which "could only be administered by a qualified nurse".
She spent half an hour on the phone after dialling 111. She reports a poor response, which is quite probably true, but the real question to be asked is why she called 111 in the first place. Surely the service is not there to deal with the circumstances described.
Would be interested to hear from Dr. Sox on this.
My father going there is the reason I am not a tab.
I empathise fully Robert.
Not that little Ed has covered himself in glory either but purely on where the tories and Cameron stand it's pretty self-evident that this is not a week of good news.