I think there are a few flaws in your argument. We do not know that pension pots would be counted as savings. The majority of over 55's do not have private pension pots.
And Labour needs to get its story straight. Is the problem with the budget that 55+ year olds will be ineligible for benefits? or after blowing the lot on beer and bingo that they will be dependent on benefits?
"If you do not trust yourself with your own money, vote Labour" is not a winning slogan.
By making the capital accessible it can be counted as savings in a future post election budget at the stroke of a chancellors pen.
And being emotionally blackmailed by your children or elderly parents to empty your pension pot paying for;
* their tuition fees (tripled by this same government) to avoid them paying an extra 9% income tax for the next 30 years
* the car they need to get to work (because the bus no longer runs due to cuts bythis government)
*to pay their elderly parents care home fees (as the council is only paying enough for a dickensian hovel due to this governments cuts)
* to help pay for their wedding (more expensive as this government has raised VAT from 15 to 20%)
is rather a different scenario from blowing it on beer and bingo and a situation a responsible government would protect people from (and has done in the past) and something that Labour ought really to have worked out by now and be shouting from the rooftops.
"neck and neck" over one year before a general election will translate into a reasonable Tory lead by polling day I'd have assumed?
Hung parliament - Tories having most seats, votes and winning national share with either a Conservative minority or another Con-Lib coalition has been my expectation for some time and still is.
Stuart is correct, we Scots Tories see the LibDems as cuckoos in around 8-10 of our seats and we want them back. In Caithness, Sutherland & ER we were delighted when Robbie Rowantree the LibDem got humped by Rob Gibson of the SNP in 2011 because the traitor had been Tory Chairman in the constituency, then stood as Tory candidate in Inverness before jumping ship just as Jamie Stone had done 30 years earlier to get elected as a LibDem on the council. Our joy was complete when having failed to hold the Holyrood seat, he also failed to get re-elected to Highland Council.
Danny might be an exception. There is a history in Inverness of Tories voting Liberal to keep the Liberal MP in. "We" did it for 30 years to keep Russell Johnston in post. I cant see (m)any Tories voting LibDem at the GE in Aberdeenshire, Argyll, NE Fife, Edinburgh or the Borders. The Euro elections will be very interesting in Scotland to see the split between Tories and LibDems.
You're expecting Yes to win the referendum, though, in which case this becomes academic.
Nope. As I have stated many times I haven't a clue who will win the indyref. My only predictions are: high turnout and both Y and N in the 40 to 60 percent range.
o/t - but it is possible (as it was under the previous comment system) to filter whose posts you can see on a thread? I am no longer a regular visitor due to the increasing shrillness of a number of the current posters - but if I could filter things then I might be more willing to read the rest of the more insightful contributions.
There are some desperate-sounding posts this evening from Labour supporters. Barring some major external catastrophe it's pretty obvious which way this one is going.
If you mean my post pointing out that Gideons pension reform may well mean the majority of over 55s being disbarred from state benefits I'm not a Labour supporter I'm a former tory supporter whos going to vote UKIP (as evidenced by previous posts)
I may be centre right with a lot of time for the "Tebbit right" but I find this government repulsive and uncaring about those who are not rich. As well as potentially disbarring over 55s from benefits Gideons idiotic new pension policy will condemn millions to an impoverished old age as now they have access to this capital they will inevitably suffer emotional pressure and blackmail to use it for their childrens tuition fees, first car to get them to work, weddings or their elderly persions care home fees (a lot of which will also attract VAT and therefore extra revenue for Gideon).
A caring centre right government would not have destroyed annuities through Weimar style money printing and would have properly regulated the annuity providers to stop them taking the P. This lot have just shafted the lower middle and upper working classes - again and will pay in 2015.
Not Gideon, George or Osborne, and the possessive is "Gideon's", not "Gideons" (wouldn't have pointed this out, but you do it twice). If you expressly support a party widely perceived as being made up of borderline-illiterate fruitcakes, you need - for the sake of that party - to pay attention to these details.
I think the funniest thread leader was the one suggesting the Cons had already given up. Amazing for a site that thinks it has its finger on the pulse.
Oh and Dave and Boris on the stump together? Get used to the sight.
One last comment. Aside from the budget the other moment of significance this week was that Cameron saw through Gove. That's the best news the Conservatives could have had because Gove is an electoral liability. He remains toxic to some core support.
The huge shame about Eric Joyce is that he has lots of very thoughtful observations to make and comes across as far more interesting than the average MP. He could have helped restore confidence in politicians. But his demons have consumed him.
Entirely. I was quite amazed by the clarity and concision of his website.
I think there are a few flaws in your argument. We do not know that pension pots would be counted as savings. The majority of over 55's do not have private pension pots.
And Labour needs to get its story straight. Is the problem with the budget that 55+ year olds will be ineligible for benefits? or after blowing the lot on beer and bingo that they will be dependent on benefits?
"If you do not trust yourself with your own money, vote Labour" is not a winning slogan.
By making the capital accessible it can be counted as savings in a future post election budget at the stroke of a chancellors pen.
And being emotionally blackmailed by your children or elderly parents to empty your pension pot paying for;
* their tuition fees (tripled by this same government) to avoid them paying an extra 9% income tax for the next 30 years
* the car they need to get to work (because the bus no longer runs due to cuts)
*to pay their elderly parents care home fees (as the council is only paying enough for a dickensian hovel due to this governments cuts)
* to help pay for their wedding (more expensive as this government has raised VAT from 15 to 20%)
is rather a different scenario from blowing it on beer and bingo and a situation a responsible government would protect people from (and has done in the past) and something that Labour ought really to have worked out by now and be shouting from the rooftops.
Stuart is correct, we Scots Tories see the LibDems as cuckoos in around 8-10 of our seats and we want them back. In Caithness, Sutherland & ER we were delighted when Robbie Rowantree the LibDem got humped by Rob Gibson of the SNP in 2011 because the traitor had been Tory Chairman in the constituency, then stood as Tory candidate in Inverness before jumping ship just as Jamie Stone had done 30 years earlier to get elected as a LibDem on the council. Our joy was complete when having failed to hold the Holyrood seat, he also failed to get re-elected to Highland Council.
Danny might be an exception. There is a history in Inverness of Tories voting Liberal to keep the Liberal MP in. "We" did it for 30 years to keep Russell Johnston in post. I cant see (m)any Tories voting LibDem at the GE in Aberdeenshire, Argyll, NE Fife, Edinburgh or the Borders. The Euro elections will be very interesting in Scotland to see the split between Tories and LibDems.
You're expecting Yes to win the referendum, though, in which case this becomes academic.
Nope. As I have stated many times I haven't a clue who will win the indyref. My only predictions are: high turnout and both Y and N in the 40 to 60 percent range.
Stuart I think Sean F was actually referring to me. I have been convinced for some YES will scrape a narrow win simply because on the ground they are highly organised and working on the 400,000 not currently registered and the 2 million who didn't vote in 2011. If YES wins I would expect Cameron to lodge a Parliament Act bill to disenfranchise the 59 Scots MPs from Easter 2015 when the current parliament is dissolved. We Scots would then concentrate on winning back our former seats at Holyrood as the SNP could be rewarded in 2016 the way Winston Churchill was in 1945.
Not Gideon, George or Osborne, and the possessive is "Gideon's", not "Gideons" (wouldn't have pointed this out, but you do it twice). If you expressly support a party widely perceived as being made up of borderline-illiterate fruitcakes, you need - for the sake of that party - to pay attention to these details.
LOL, in my opinion this appears to be a textbook example of playing the man not the ball:
From Wikipedia: "George Gideon Oliver Osborne,[1] MP (born Gideon Oliver Osborne; xx xx 1971)....."
The Danny Alexander price shortens yet again today in Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey (LD maj = 8,765)
LD 1/2 (from 4/6) Lab 7/2 SNP 4/1 Con 66/1
1/2 is just a daft price IMHO.
If national polls are replicated, Labour would win this seat. The Liberal position in Scotland is worse than in the uK as a whole.
However, the Tories will switch to help out "their" MP. If he loses, he will move South to a home county Tory seat.
Many of the recent Scottish sub samples so beloved of Mr Dickson show the Lib Dems now doing better in Scotland than in England ,. Certainly there has been an uplift in LD support in Scotland in 2014 .
Scottish sub-samples showing SLD armageddon = angry Mark
Scottish sub-samples showing SLDs holding on to 40% of their vote = solid statistical work according to Mark
I think there are a few flaws in your argument. We do not know that pension pots would be counted as savings. The majority of over 55's do not have private pension pots.
And Labour needs to get its story straight. Is the problem with the budget that 55+ year olds will be ineligible for benefits? or after blowing the lot on beer and bingo that they will be dependent on benefits?
"If you do not trust yourself with your own money, vote Labour" is not a winning slogan.
There are some desperate-sounding posts this evening from Labour supporters. Barring some major external catastrophe it's pretty obvious which way this one is going.
If you mean my post pointing out that Gideons pension reform may well mean the majority of over 55s being disbarred from state benefits I'm not a Labour supporter I'm a former tory supporter whos going to vote UKIP (as evidenced by previous posts)
I may be centre right with a lot of time for the "Tebbit right" but I find this government repulsive and uncaring about those who are not rich. As well as potentially disbarring over 55s from benefits Gideons idiotic new pension policy will condemn millions to an impoverished old age as now they have access to this capital they will inevitably suffer emotional pressure and blackmail to use it for their childrens tuition fees, first car to get them to work, weddings or their elderly persions care home fees (a lot of which will also attract VAT and therefore extra revenue for Gideon).
A caring centre right government would not have destroyed annuities through Weimar style money printing and would have properly regulated the annuity providers to stop them taking the P. This lot have just shafted the lower middle and upper working classes - again and will pay in 2015.
In fairness to all posters - it is a good and very basic point and I will be very interested to see who is right. Bear in mind that (presumably) the targeted voters are precisely the 50 something shifting from Labour to Tory but possibly drifting to Kipper or LD. If the Coalition have managed to bungle this then it is very important and not just for the pensioners..
Ok, so say we get the ever more likely, Labour most seats, Tories most votes scenario. Am I right in assuming the Libs would speak to the Tories first in that scenario, assuming the arithmetic is plausible?
I have to say that in the absence of a Cheshire farmer/wine salesman, this site has become a lot less unpleasant in recent months and even when people get a bit tetchy, they are rude to one another rather than down right offensive.
Right now I cant decide whether the Compouter/Avery or MalcolmG/Carlotta spats are the more entertaining.
I think the funniest thread leader was the one suggesting the Cons had already given up. Amazing for a site that thinks it has its finger on the pulse.
Oh and Dave and Boris on the stump together? Get used to the sight.
One last comment. Aside from the budget the other moment of significance this week was that Cameron saw through Gove. That's the best news the Conservatives could have had because Gove is an electoral liability. He remains toxic to some core support.
Why would Gove be toxic to the core Conservative support? That's an odd claim.
Just think, if it hadn't been for the game changing, political earthquake of Bingogate, Con's might have had a lead tonight!
After the greatest budget since the invention of sliced bread, all the Tories can manage is a 1 point ...deficit.
Even the flounce produced a lead ! I think Bingogate may have just tipped it off equal and into Labour lead. For Avery LP equal is when the two percentages ARE the same.
1% Lab lead with 12 months to go. You wouldn't say things are going great for Lab surely?
Just think, if it hadn't been for the game changing, political earthquake of Bingogate, Con's might have had a lead tonight!
I think Bingogate may have just tipped it off equal and into Labour lead. For Avery LP equal is when the two percentages ARE the same.
1% Lab lead with 12 months to go. You wouldn't say things are going great for Lab surely?
Within a few days we will be back to Labour 5/6% leads.
Perhaps. But the overall trajectory of most Parliaments is for voting intention to move towards the governing party as the election get's closer.
Given this has already been happening for some time in the current parliament it seems far fetched to think that it will suddenly stop between now and May 2015...
Stuart is correct, we Scots Tories see the LibDems as cuckoos in around 8-10 of our seats and we want them back. In Caithness, Sutherland & ER we were delighted when Robbie Rowantree the LibDem got humped by Rob Gibson of the SNP in 2011 because the traitor had been Tory Chairman in the constituency, then stood as Tory candidate in Inverness before jumping ship just as Jamie Stone had done 30 years earlier to get elected as a LibDem on the council. Our joy was complete when having failed to hold the Holyrood seat, he also failed to get re-elected to Highland Council.
Danny might be an exception. There is a history in Inverness of Tories voting Liberal to keep the Liberal MP in. "We" did it for 30 years to keep Russell Johnston in post. I cant see (m)any Tories voting LibDem at the GE in Aberdeenshire, Argyll, NE Fife, Edinburgh or the Borders. The Euro elections will be very interesting in Scotland to see the split between Tories and LibDems.
You're expecting Yes to win the referendum, though, in which case this becomes academic.
Nope. As I have stated many times I haven't a clue who will win the indyref. My only predictions are: high turnout and both Y and N in the 40 to 60 percent range.
Stuart I think Sean F was actually referring to me. I have been convinced for some YES will scrape a narrow win simply because on the ground they are highly organised and working on the 400,000 not currently registered and the 2 million who didn't vote in 2011. If YES wins I would expect Cameron to lodge a Parliament Act bill to disenfranchise the 59 Scots MPs from Easter 2015 when the current parliament is dissolved. We Scots would then concentrate on winning back our former seats at Holyrood as the SNP could be rewarded in 2016 the way Winston Churchill was in 1945.
If Yes wins in September then the SNP can fuck off as far as I am concerned. They will have fulfilled their purpose and can be safely discarded. I say this as a lifelong member.
The lead is obviously narrowing and crossover is obviously imminent and Ed is obviously crap. Because the Tories are reeling in the lead and it never goes in any other direction. As witnessed by the various neck and neck and +1% polls over the last 8 months or so.
I take it we will have the same level of pants-shitting excitement next week when the lead is back where it was? Again?
The lead is obviously narrowing and crossover is obviously imminent and Ed is obviously crap. Because the Tories are reeling in the lead and it never goes in any other direction. As witnessed by the various neck and neck and +1% polls over the last 8 months or so.
I take it we will have the same level of pants-shitting excitement next week when the lead is back where it was? Again?
No, then we go back to ignoring the polls and talking about something else...anything else. Commonly known as squirrel time or Basilicious.
So not allowing people to spend their money how they choose should be Labour policy?
And is Labour planning to reverse tuition fees? and if so how will it be funded?
Labour could pay for the reversing of the the tripling of tuition fees by reversing the tripling of tuition fees because it hasnow emerged that the new system will cost the taxpayers more than the old did.
This is becasuse the non repayment rate has gone through the roof (45%) due to people emigrating after graduating, not earning enough to repay it due to wages falling in the recession and a myriad other reasons.
I have to say that in the absence of a Cheshire farmer/wine salesman, this site has become a lot less unpleasant in recent months and even when people get a bit tetchy, they are rude to one another rather than down right offensive.
Right now I cant decide whether the Compouter/Avery or MalcolmG/Carlotta spats are the more entertaining.
I think we need a referendum and an election to clear the air!
Stuart is correct, we Scots Tories see the LibDems as cuckoos in around 8-10 of our seats and we want them back. In Caithness, Sutherland & ER we were delighted when Robbie Rowantree the LibDem got humped by Rob Gibson of the SNP in 2011 because the traitor had been Tory Chairman in the constituency, then stood as Tory candidate in Inverness before jumping ship just as Jamie Stone had done 30 years earlier to get elected as a LibDem on the council. Our joy was complete when having failed to hold the Holyrood seat, he also failed to get re-elected to Highland Council.
Danny might be an exception. There is a history in Inverness of Tories voting Liberal to keep the Liberal MP in. "We" did it for 30 years to keep Russell Johnston in post. I cant see (m)any Tories voting LibDem at the GE in Aberdeenshire, Argyll, NE Fife, Edinburgh or the Borders. The Euro elections will be very interesting in Scotland to see the split between Tories and LibDems.
You're expecting Yes to win the referendum, though, in which case this becomes academic.
Nope. As I have stated many times I haven't a clue who will win the indyref. My only predictions are: high turnout and both Y and N in the 40 to 60 percent range.
Stuart I think Sean F was actually referring to me. I have been convinced for some YES will scrape a narrow win simply because on the ground they are highly organised and working on the 400,000 not currently registered and the 2 million who didn't vote in 2011. If YES wins I would expect Cameron to lodge a Parliament Act bill to disenfranchise the 59 Scots MPs from Easter 2015 when the current parliament is dissolved. We Scots would then concentrate on winning back our former seats at Holyrood as the SNP could be rewarded in 2016 the way Winston Churchill was in 1945.
If Yes wins in September then the SNP can fuck off as far as I am concerned. They will have fulfilled their purpose and can be safely discarded. I say this as a lifelong member.
I have a similar view of UKIP, at least in its current form. If we vote to leave the EU then short of a massive transformation to a truly Libertarian party I see absolutely no purpose for it at all.
Not Gideon, George or Osborne, and the possessive is "Gideon's", not "Gideons" (wouldn't have pointed this out, but you do it twice). If you expressly support a party widely perceived as being made up of borderline-illiterate fruitcakes, you need - for the sake of that party - to pay attention to these details.
LOL, in my opinion this appears to be a textbook example of playing the man not the ball:
From Wikipedia: "George Gideon Oliver Osborne,[1] MP (born Gideon Oliver Osborne; xx xx 1971)....."
I think there are a few flaws in your argument. We do not know that pension pots would be counted as savings. The majority of over 55's do not have private pension pots.
And Labour needs to get its story straight. Is the problem with the budget that 55+ year olds will be ineligible for benefits? or after blowing the lot on beer and bingo that they will be dependent on benefits?
"If you do not trust yourself with your own money, vote Labour" is not a winning slogan.
There are some desperate-sounding posts this evening from Labour supporters. Barring some major external catastrophe it's pretty obvious which way this one is going.
If you mean my post pointing out that Gideons pension reform may well mean the majority of over 55s being disbarred from state benefits I'm not a Labour supporter I'm a former tory supporter whos going to vote UKIP (as evidenced by previous posts)
I may be centre right with a lot of time for the "Tebbit right" but I find this government repulsive and uncaring about those who are not rich. As well as potentially disbarring over 55s from benefits Gideons idiotic new pension policy will condemn millions to an impoverished old age as now they have access to this capital they will inevitably suffer emotional pressure and blackmail to use it for their childrens tuition fees, first car to get them to work, weddings or their elderly persions care home fees (a lot of which will also attract VAT and therefore extra revenue for Gideon).
A caring centre right government would not have destroyed annuities through Weimar style money printing and would have properly regulated the annuity providers to stop them taking the P. This lot have just shafted the lower middle and upper working classes - again and will pay in 2015.
In fairness to all posters - it is a good and very basic point and I will be very interested to see who is right. Bear in mind that (presumably) the targeted voters are precisely the 50 something shifting from Labour to Tory but possibly drifting to Kipper or LD. If the Coalition have managed to bungle this then it is very important and not just for the pensioners..
I think we are taking sides on a point depending on which side of the political fence we stand.
The problem with annuities was not annuities; it was the QE induced low interest rate regime.
So, people will not have to buy annuities. Fine, what would they do then ? As long as yields remain anaemic, the returns will be mediocre.
Plus the annuity market will become more costly because there will be fewer buyers.
I have to say that in the absence of a Cheshire farmer/wine salesman, this site has become a lot less unpleasant in recent months and even when people get a bit tetchy, they are rude to one another rather than down right offensive.
Right now I cant decide whether the Compouter/Avery or MalcolmG/Carlotta spats are the more entertaining.
Strongly disagree. Annoying shit as tim was he was in the Top 5 most insightful and talented Pbers. And the only Labourite in that pantheon. He is sorely missed.
So, Avery has been right all along... George played a blinder, Lets see how Labour confidence is in a few months time. Compouter will blow a fuse if Conservative momentum is maintained.
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister (copyright Jack W).
Not Gideon, George or Osborne, and the possessive is "Gideon's", not "Gideons" (wouldn't have pointed this out, but you do it twice). If you expressly support a party widely perceived as being made up of borderline-illiterate fruitcakes, you need - for the sake of that party - to pay attention to these details.
LOL, in my opinion this appears to be a textbook example of playing the man not the ball:
From Wikipedia: "George Gideon Oliver Osborne,[1] MP (born Gideon Oliver Osborne; xx xx 1971)....."
His real name is/was Gideon.
I don't recall having heard Gordon change his name by deed poll. If he did then he loses even more face.
Gideon was ashamed of the name given by his parents. He should be reminded of such a good upper class name !
More bad polls for Labour. Sure, the movement has mostly been Ukip voters moving to the Tories, but many of Ukip's voters are not died-in-the-wool Tories, they're floating voters who have voted Labour in the past and who (the evidence indicates) were saying they were going to vote Labour earlier in this parliament, especially in 2012. Labour could and should be winning them over.
For the 50millionth time, I still maintain this comes back to the fact they're not even CLOSE to defining themselves yet. Going on about "budget discipline" and the need for cuts while simultaneously lambasting the government for causing hardship doesn't make you look like you're in the centre-ground or reasonable, it makes you look an incoherent contradictory mess who has no idea what they stand for. Ed Miliband's feeble Budget response is an inevitvable consequence of being too scared to say anything radical or interesting or distinctive. For the love of God, if this isn't a wake-up call to Ed Balls and the other NewLabourites to drop their triangulation and laughable attempts to get "credibility" at the expense of definition (and for Ed Miliband to grow the balls to face down those NewLabourites), I don't know what will be.
I have to say that in the absence of a Cheshire farmer/wine salesman, this site has become a lot less unpleasant in recent months and even when people get a bit tetchy, they are rude to one another rather than down right offensive.
Right now I cant decide whether the Compouter/Avery or MalcolmG/Carlotta spats are the more entertaining.
Strongly disagree. Annoying shit as tim was he was in the Top 5 most insightful and talented Pbers. And the only Labourite in that pantheon. He is sorely missed.
FPT... Fitalass, I know you are not very bright , however Prestwick might suit people who live well south of Aberdeen. I can see you driving through Aberdeen to get to Glasgow airport but doubt you are stupid enough to keep on till Prestwick. However despite you doubting it there are people south of Glasgow who may find Prestwick rather local. Suit me better than driving to Aberdeen for instance, or London.
I await seeing the cut in tuition fees in the Labour manifesto then.
We do need to bear in mind that those who paid the trebled fees are in the second years of their courses, all the non-payers that you describe are those that are not re-paying the fees brought in by the last Labour government. These were, of course, voted through by the Scottish Labour MPs who are unaffected in their own constituencies.
So not allowing people to spend their money how they choose should be Labour policy?
And is Labour planning to reverse tuition fees? and if so how will it be funded?
Labour could pay for the reversing of the the tripling of tuition fees by reversing the tripling of tuition fees because it hasnow emerged that the new system will cost the taxpayers more than the old did.
This is becasuse the non repayment rate has gone through the roof (45%) due to people emigrating after graduating, not earning enough to repay it due to wages falling in the recession and a myriad other reasons.
Not Gideon, George or Osborne, and the possessive is "Gideon's", not "Gideons" (wouldn't have pointed this out, but you do it twice). If you expressly support a party widely perceived as being made up of borderline-illiterate fruitcakes, you need - for the sake of that party - to pay attention to these details.
LOL, in my opinion this appears to be a textbook example of playing the man not the ball:
From Wikipedia: "George Gideon Oliver Osborne,[1] MP (born Gideon Oliver Osborne; xx xx 1971)....."
His real name is/was Gideon.
The fact that you think that that is news to anyone, or is a valid reason for calling him that, amply confirms my point.
Agree QE has screwed annuities up (don't get me started!) but just because there are fewer buyers, it doesn't follow, to me at least, that annuities will become dearer. Quite the contrary I'd have thought, as insurance companies will need to compete in a real market, not one where hundreds of housands turn up every year legally compelled to buy.
It is pretty peurile to insist on calling George by his original name of Gideon.
We do not refer to Gordon Brown by his original name of James Brown
Indeed, we should do as his Bullingdon chums did and call him Oik.
It's not as if it's unusual for someone to decide they don't want to be called by their first given name. Such as James Harold Wilson or Leonard James Callaghan. Or is your point that Gideon sounds er... sort of Jewish?
It is pretty peurile to insist on calling George by his original name of Gideon.
We do not refer to Gordon Brown by his original name of James Brown
Indeed, we should do as his Bullingdon chums did and call him Oik.
It's not as if it's unusual for someone to decide they don't want to be called by their first given name. Such as James Harold Wilson or Leonard James Callaghan. Or is your point that Gideon sounds er... sort of Jewish?
What the feck has Gideon changing his name got to do with Gideon sounding Jewish....Christ on a bike.
Greetings mortals, been away for a few months/years. Not sure if it has been seen but there is an Online Populus showing on their website taken 19-20 March showing Lab 38 Con 34 Kippers 12 Lib Dem 9
It is pretty peurile to insist on calling George by his original name of Gideon.
We do not refer to Gordon Brown by his original name of James Brown
Indeed, we should do as his Bullingdon chums did and call him Oik.
It's not as if it's unusual for someone to decide they don't want to be called by their first given name. Such as James Harold Wilson or Leonard James Callaghan. Or is your point that Gideon sounds er... sort of Jewish?
What the feck has Gideon changing his name got to do with Gideon sounding Jewish....Christ on a bike.
So Callaghan is a tosser for not wanting to be called Len?
OGH now talking on Twitter about a new Survation Euro poll with Tories overtaking UKIP for 2nd place.
A poll the other day had the Tories 1% ahead of UKIP for the Euros.
A CON victory at the Euros would be a total gift to the YES campaign. Unlikely, but feasible. Now we just need England to reach the Last Eight and we are in with a good shout here.
OGH now talking on Twitter about a new Survation Euro poll with Tories overtaking UKIP for 2nd place.
A poll the other day had the Tories 1% ahead of UKIP for the Euros.
A CON victory at the Euros would be a total gift to the YES campaign. Unlikely, but feasible. Now we just need England to reach the Last Eight and we are in with a good shout here.
I've never believed in the too wee or too poor argument but too stupid is a cert. I mean a football match ? Just how fked up are you people ?
It is pretty peurile to insist on calling George by his original name of Gideon.
We do not refer to Gordon Brown by his original name of James Brown
Indeed, we should do as his Bullingdon chums did and call him Oik.
It's not as if it's unusual for someone to decide they don't want to be called by their first given name. Such as James Harold Wilson or Leonard James Callaghan. Or is your point that Gideon sounds er... sort of Jewish?
What the feck has Gideon changing his name got to do with Gideon sounding Jewish....Christ on a bike.
So Callaghan is a tosser for not wanting to be called Len?
Many very common forenames used in this country like, Simon, Luke, John, Andrew etc. and indeed James (as in James Brown) are also of Jewish origin. I really can't understand the point you are trying to make John.
Comments
And being emotionally blackmailed by your children or elderly parents to empty your pension pot paying for;
* their tuition fees (tripled by this same government) to avoid them paying an extra 9% income tax for the next 30 years
* the car they need to get to work (because the bus no longer runs due to cuts bythis government)
*to pay their elderly parents care home fees (as the council is only paying enough for a dickensian hovel due to this governments cuts)
* to help pay for their wedding (more expensive as this government has raised VAT from 15 to 20%)
is rather a different scenario from blowing it on beer and bingo and a situation a responsible government would protect people from (and has done in the past) and something that Labour ought really to have worked out by now and be shouting from the rooftops.
Hung parliament - Tories having most seats, votes and winning national share with either a Conservative minority or another Con-Lib coalition has been my expectation for some time and still is.
That is the highest Con for some time - and not much hit to Labour. Ukip in single figures ??
I do not use it, but can understand why some do.
Oh and Dave and Boris on the stump together? Get used to the sight.
One last comment. Aside from the budget the other moment of significance this week was that Cameron saw through Gove. That's the best news the Conservatives could have had because Gove is an electoral liability. He remains toxic to some core support.
And is Labour planning to reverse tuition fees? and if so how will it be funded?
[Sky News source]
Do we have the details in their full glory?
I see Basil is lying on the road shamming death."
Even Basil was laughing at that post.
From Wikipedia: "George Gideon Oliver Osborne,[1] MP (born Gideon Oliver Osborne; xx xx 1971)....."
His real name is/was Gideon.
Scottish sub-samples showing SLDs holding on to 40% of their vote = solid statistical work according to Mark
Pray tell us, how good was the orgasm ?
Right now I cant decide whether the Compouter/Avery or MalcolmG/Carlotta spats are the more entertaining.
'Pray tell us, how good was the orgasm ?'
Sour grapes already?
Given this has already been happening for some time in the current parliament it seems far fetched to think that it will suddenly stop between now and May 2015...
I take it we will have the same level of pants-shitting excitement next week when the lead is back where it was? Again?
15/1/2014: 18%
3/1/2014: 16%
21/11/2013: 18%
25/10/2013: 17%
18/10/2013: 16%
28/04/2013: 16%
25/1/2013: 14%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014
This is becasuse the non repayment rate has gone through the roof (45%) due to people emigrating after graduating, not earning enough to repay it due to wages falling in the recession and a myriad other reasons.
As reported by that well known nest of lefties:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/universities-and-colleges/10716024/Student-loans-fewer-will-be-repaid.html
Bet Clegg and co feel a bit silly now smashing their reputation over this.
We do not refer to Gordon Brown by his original name of James Brown.
The problem with annuities was not annuities; it was the QE induced low interest rate regime.
So, people will not have to buy annuities. Fine, what would they do then ? As long as yields remain anaemic, the returns will be mediocre.
Plus the annuity market will become more costly because there will be fewer buyers.
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Observer/Pix/pictures/2010/1/8/1262962773146/goal-hanging-squirrel-001.jpg
Avery - He thanks you tonight for your efforts to make him giggle.
Compouter will blow a fuse if Conservative momentum is maintained.
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister (copyright Jack W).
Gideon was ashamed of the name given by his parents. He should be reminded of such a good upper class name !
For the 50millionth time, I still maintain this comes back to the fact they're not even CLOSE to defining themselves yet. Going on about "budget discipline" and the need for cuts while simultaneously lambasting the government for causing hardship doesn't make you look like you're in the centre-ground or reasonable, it makes you look an incoherent contradictory mess who has no idea what they stand for. Ed Miliband's feeble Budget response is an inevitvable consequence of being too scared to say anything radical or interesting or distinctive. For the love of God, if this isn't a wake-up call to Ed Balls and the other NewLabourites to drop their triangulation and laughable attempts to get "credibility" at the expense of definition (and for Ed Miliband to grow the balls to face down those NewLabourites), I don't know what will be.
I see so if the polls say you are going to lose , you won't lose An interesting hypothesis.
Show me the Yougov Poll.......Show me the Yougov poll!
'Basil would like to point out he is still not happy'
He's still waiting for the winter NHS crisis.
well he has... and the overconfidence of the left is going to be seen for what it is, overconfidence.
James Wilson?
Maurice Macmillan?
Robert Eden?
Arthur Chamberlain?
James MacDonald?
Prestwick rather local.
Suit me better than driving to Aberdeen for instance, or London.
We do need to bear in mind that those who paid the trebled fees are in the second years of their courses, all the non-payers that you describe are those that are not re-paying the fees brought in by the last Labour government. These were, of course, voted through by the Scottish Labour MPs who are unaffected in their own constituencies.
Back to the drawing board, Paul
Agree QE has screwed annuities up (don't get me started!) but just because there are fewer buyers, it doesn't follow, to me at least, that annuities will become dearer. Quite the contrary I'd have thought, as insurance companies will need to compete in a real market, not one where hundreds of housands turn up every year legally compelled to buy.
'Gideon was ashamed of the name given by his parents. He should be reminded of such a good upper class name !'
Totally lost on budget revert to class war,great stuff.
But I draw the line at Edward Grylls renaming himself Bear.
Lab 27 (+14)
Con 22 (-4)
UKIP 17 (+4)
LD 0 (-11)
Grn 1 (-1)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
RED ON RED INCOMING IN S TIMES HEADER
"KNIVES COME OUT FOR MILIBAND"
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/95025/the_mail_on_sunday_sunday_23rd_march_2014.html
http://www.york-sheds.co.uk/boxes/box-yellow-01.png
Do Referees get fined ? Even if they are absolute a***holes !