is the table that should give pause for thought for those complacently assuming that Labour can expect to hold onto its existing supporters.
This Time It's Different are the four most expensive words in the English language.
Peter Kellner kind of alludes to that in the Sunday Times.
The best news for Osborne is to be found not in the latest YouGov polls but polls conducted at the same stage in past parliaments. Six times in the past half-century Conservative prime ministers have faced the electorate. In every case the final 14 months produced a swing from Labour to Tory. The average swing has been six points.....
....Indeed, if we take YouGov’s latest poll as our starting point, then a further six-point swing to the Conservatives would see them home with a 40-seat majority.
But Kellner doesn't expect history to repeat itself for two reasons
I) The Lib Dems being in government and not being able to hover up/retain ex Lab voters
II) UKIP doing better and hovering up votes from the Tories.
Hmm - this para from the Labour Uncut piece rang a bell...
The more Labour falls back on this approach, the deeper will be the hole in which the party finds itself. Clinging on to Lib Dem defectors and pointing to Labour’s consistency at 37% in the polls is the last redoubt of those who do not have anything substantive to say on policy or strategy.
This is the worst Spurs side for five or six seasons, at least. And Arsenal will always find a way. Any money you have put on Spurs for the CL has been well and truly wasted!
In Spain this would be like Real Sociedad or Villarreal fans constantly associating themselves with the Champions League. Why do Spurs fans think of their team in those terms?
The last four seasons for Spurs: 5th, 4th, 5th, 4th. Not sure how Real Sociedad and Villareal have done over the same time span, but it does not seem unreasonable for Spurs to aspire to CL football on the basis of what has been done over recent years. Obviously, we do not have close to the income that the CL regulars have, so it makes things harder, but if you do not have ambition, what is the point?
I made the comparison because they are teams that are rarely in the Champions League, and people in this country wouldn't associate them with Champions League football.
Spurs have been a bit unlucky in recent seasons, very unlucky in 11/12, but there just seems to be a perception from their fans that they are one of the big boys on a bad run, and "they always let us down" when the truth is they haven't won the league for 53 years, and have only qualified for the Champions league once. So they are what they are
It would be like Arsenal fans being annoyed at not winning the Champions League. We have never won it, we normally get to the latter stages and get knocked out by better teams. We are not being let down by anyone, that is our level
is the table that should give pause for thought for those complacently assuming that Labour can expect to hold onto its existing supporters.
This Time It's Different are the four most expensive words in the English language.
Peter Kellner kind of alludes to that in the Sunday Times.
The best news for Osborne is to be found not in the latest YouGov polls but polls conducted at the same stage in past parliaments. Six times in the past half-century Conservative prime ministers have faced the electorate. In every case the final 14 months produced a swing from Labour to Tory. The average swing has been six points.....
....Indeed, if we take YouGov’s latest poll as our starting point, then a further six-point swing to the Conservatives would see them home with a 40-seat majority.
But Kellner doesn't expect history to repeat itself for two reasons
I) The Lib Dems being in government and not being able to hover up/retain ex Lab voters
II) UKIP doing better and hovering up votes from the Tories.
The swing will be back to the 'Government' - LAB -> LD swing, some UKIP - CON swing. Thats my thoughts anyway.
''Clinging on to Lib Dem defectors and pointing to Labour’s consistency at 37% in the polls is the last redoubt of those who do not have anything substantive to say on policy or strategy. ''
Assume this is part of the Scotsman's ICM Indy poll:
'The SNP is leading Scottish Labour in the fight to win over voters ahead of the European Parliament elections, a new poll has found. The Nationalists are ahead of Labour by 12 percentage points, with 41% of the vote, compared with 29%, according to the survey conducted by ICM Research for the Scotsman newspaper. The Scottish Conservatives are in third place with 13%, Ukip have 6%, while the Scottish Liberal Democrats trail on five per cent.'
LDs being beaten by UKIP Scotland, the humiliation; Lyon is looking like a well known breakfast comestible.
At the risk of being accused of 'othering':
'The 1000 people polled were also asked how they would vote in a referendum on the UK's EU membership if there was ballot tomorrow. Results show that 47% of people would opt to stay in, while 30% would vote to leave. The remainder did not know.'
I've been trying to have a guess at each Euro region's seat allocation. Scotland looks quite easy, before this poll the only doubt looked to be whether the SNP or Lab would get 3 seats. SNP 3, LAB 2, CON 1.
shadsy, those prices are very interesting. However, I have sought in vain to find those markets on the Ladbrokes website, which is like a virtual Hampton Court Maze.
The Hague is like a ghost town today - apart from police motorcyclists.
The Nuclear Security Summit is in town with Obama, Xi, Cameron and all the rest (except that nice Mr.Putin). They've closed a bunch of roads and schools and told people to work from home pretty much.
A beautiful, cool sunny spring day and a very odd empty atmosphere.
Assume this is part of the Scotsman's ICM Indy poll:
'The SNP is leading Scottish Labour in the fight to win over voters ahead of the European Parliament elections, a new poll has found. The Nationalists are ahead of Labour by 12 percentage points, with 41% of the vote, compared with 29%, according to the survey conducted by ICM Research for the Scotsman newspaper. The Scottish Conservatives are in third place with 13%, Ukip have 6%, while the Scottish Liberal Democrats trail on five per cent.'
LDs being beaten by UKIP Scotland, the humiliation; Lyon is looking like a well known breakfast comestible.
At the risk of being accused of 'othering':
'The 1000 people polled were also asked how they would vote in a referendum on the UK's EU membership if there was ballot tomorrow. Results show that 47% of people would opt to stay in, while 30% would vote to leave. The remainder did not know.'
I've been trying to have a guess at each Euro region's seat allocation. Scotland looks quite easy, before this poll the only doubt looked to be whether the SNP or Lab would get 3 seats. SNP 3, LAB 2, CON 1.
Any chance of you putting up the following two markets on the European elections
1) UKIP to have an MEP in Scotland.
2) The SNP to end up with more MEPs than the Lib Dems have in Great Britain.
Thanks. Number 2 is definitely intriguing possibility.
Having just read the Labour Uncut article, I wonder what pricing Shadsy will put up for Ed Balls to hold/lose his ultra marginal seat?
It strikes me that, as fun as it might be for the Tories to defeat the odious Ed Balls, their interests would best be served by letting him keep his seat.
In the same way as Anthony Wedgwood-Benn was, he is a highly effective party asset.
shadsy, those prices are very interesting. However, I have sought in vain to find those markets on the Ladbrokes website, which is like a virtual Hampton Court Maze.
Try here (the ladbrokes website isn't as brilliant as its odds compiler)
Having just read the Labour Uncut article, I wonder what pricing Shadsy will put up for Ed Balls to hold/lose his ultra marginal seat?
It strikes me that, as fun as it might be for the Tories to defeat the odious Ed Balls, their interests would best be served by letting him keep his seat.
In the same way as Anthony Wedgwood-Benn was, he is a highly effective party asset.
Balls losing just isn't a credible scenario. He'll win by several thousand.
From my perspective, it's right to detail the financing problems small start-ups find.
Cambridge is, in parts at least, a jolly nice place with a few good pubs and, in my experience, fewer good restaurants. It is also full of people with brains the size of the average planet who are not only intelligent but interesting to talk to.
However, it has one massive drawback - in winter it is so freaking cold. That wind that whips in from the Urals across the North German Plain, the North Sea and the fens cuts to the bone. The fact that the refugee scholars from Oxford settled in Cambridge to found their new university suggests they were not that bright. With the whole country to pick from they chose the place where the could be really cold and miserable, what sort of intelligence is that?
The Hague is like a ghost town today ...A beautiful, cool sunny spring day and a very odd empty atmosphere.
When I live there in the 90s it felt like that every day, except it was usually cold and rainy...I had a nice flat though - opposite the conspicuously well-guarded US Embassy. I think I could have gone out all day with the windows open and not been burgled...
If the average pension pot is £25,000 as Boris says, there is absolutely no point in those who have that amount putting the money into an annuity, is there? They might as well spend it all and live off the state.
SO, what you are forgetting is whether they spend the money or not, they will get exactly the same pension from the state. It's a universal non-contributory pension.
So then it shouldn't matter to you whether they choose to spend £25,000 upfront, stick it in an annuity for £1,000 additional income a year or spend it on a few luxuries over a period of years.
I agree. If it were me, I'd take all the money out and do something with it immediately rather than add £90 a month to my state pension.
If you take the whole £25,000 in one go won't you end up paying nearly £4,000 in tax on it?
I would think that would provide an incentive to take it out in smaller chunks.
I wonder how many private sector workers on an average wage (£26,000) pay 8.3% of their salary each month into a pension. If they did, the average pot size would be a lot higher than £25,000.
To answer your question directly, I have done my best to put about 10% of my gross income into my pension since I got my first full time job.
How much you put in is only one part of the equation though. The key thing about the teachers' scheme, and other public sector schemes, is the amount the employer puts in on top, 14% in this case.
I have never had an employer put that much in. Most of the time my employers have put in nothing, and the most I've had is 8%. If I had the option of a pension scheme where I put in 8% to get 14% matched funding from my employer I'd snap it up.
This is the worst Spurs side for five or six seasons, at least. And Arsenal will always find a way. Any money you have put on Spurs for the CL has been well and truly wasted!
In Spain this would be like Real Sociedad or Villarreal fans constantly associating themselves with the Champions League. Why do Spurs fans think of their team in those terms?
The last four seasons for Spurs: 5th, 4th, 5th, 4th. Not sure how Real Sociedad and Villareal have done over the same time span, but it does not seem unreasonable for Spurs to aspire to CL football on the basis of what has been done over recent years. Obviously, we do not have close to the income that the CL regulars have, so it makes things harder, but if you do not have ambition, what is the point?
I made the comparison because they are teams that are rarely in the Champions League, and people in this country wouldn't associate them with Champions League football.
Spurs have been a bit unlucky in recent seasons, very unlucky in 11/12, but there just seems to be a perception from their fans that they are one of the big boys on a bad run, and "they always let us down" when the truth is they haven't won the league for 53 years, and have only qualified for the Champions league once. So they are what they are
It would be like Arsenal fans being annoyed at not winning the Champions League. We have never won it, we normally get to the latter stages and get knocked out by better teams. We are not being let down by anyone, that is our level
I imagine you can remember when Arsenal were not a regular top 4 side. The club still aspired to be one and eventually made it. It was the same with Chelsea and City. Are Liverpool fans wrong to believe they can win the league again? Spurs fans know we are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football without being in the CL. We don't expect success, far from it; but we believe the club has the capacity to compete. And we have shown now that we can, which is what makes this season so disappointing. I can't see the problem.
shadsy, those prices are very interesting. However, I have sought in vain to find those markets on the Ladbrokes website, which is like a virtual Hampton Court Maze.
Try here (the ladbrokes website isn't as brilliant as its odds compiler)
Yes, I am aware that it's a bit tricky to find some of our markets. Sometimes, the best bet is to use the search function which usually works quite well. It's also possible that I am posting these odds whilst the markets are actually being created, although that mostly doesn't take very long.
"10.25 Malaysia Airlines says Fariq Abdul Hamid was on his first flight on a Boeing 777 as a copilot. He had previously passed 5 practice flights with a check pilot."
The last four seasons for Spurs: 5th, 4th, 5th, 4th. Not sure how Real Sociedad and Villareal have done over the same time span, but it does not seem unreasonable for Spurs to aspire to CL football on the basis of what has been done over recent years. Obviously, we do not have close to the income that the CL regulars have, so it makes things harder, but if you do not have ambition, what is the point?
I made the comparison because they are teams that are rarely in the Champions League, and people in this country wouldn't associate them with Champions League football.
Spurs have been a bit unlucky in recent seasons, very unlucky in 11/12, but there just seems to be a perception from their fans that they are one of the big boys on a bad run, and "they always let us down" when the truth is they haven't won the league for 53 years, and have only qualified for the Champions league once. So they are what they are
It would be like Arsenal fans being annoyed at not winning the Champions League. We have never won it, we normally get to the latter stages and get knocked out by better teams. We are not being let down by anyone, that is our level
I imagine you can remember when Arsenal were not a regular top 4 side. The club still aspired to be one and eventually made it. It was the same with Chelsea and City. Are Liverpool fans wrong to believe they can win the league again? Spurs fans know we are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football without being in the CL. We don't expect success, far from it; but we believe the club has the capacity to compete. And we have shown now that we can, which is what makes this season so disappointing. I can't see the problem.
Liverpool have a fairly recent record of domination, and their current side is in a position to win the league that Spurs haven't been in my lifetime, so I don't really get that comparison.
Of course I am not saying Spurs fans shouldn't have ambition, just that I get the feeling from a lot of them I know that they kind of expect to be in the top four, and feel let down when they aren't, when the fact is that they very rarely have been that successful (if you feel top 4 finshes are success, which I do)
My own opinion on Spurs is that they change managers too often, and that Levy is typical of the attitude of Spurs fans I described. Why on earth did they sack Harry Redknapp?
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassing screechy.
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassing screechy.
No one will ever top this
We cannot be killed
'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority
“If you are a chief executive officer and you don’t have gender diversity or diversity in general as a top issue, then you’ve been asleep at the wheel for the last few years,”
So this clod actually imagines that companies like Glencore don't have women on the board because their institutionalised aversion to women outweighs their appetite for making money by having the most effective people in place.
I think if I had to summarise the one thing that I find most inane about Labour philosophy, it would be their belief that there is no institution that can't be improved by the application of the comprehensive principle. Whether it's schools, universities, parliamentary shortlists or global commodity players Labour appears to believe that the complete solution is to strive for mediocrity through tokenism.
If course Labour doesn't really believe this, otherwise there'd be no inclination to fiddle seats as they do for Will Straw, Euan Blair, Hilary and Emily Benn, Stephen Kinnock, etc. But you either believe in the hereditary principle, or you believe in Buggins' Turn, or you believe in meritocracy. You can't claim to believe in all three at the same depending on whether you're talking yourself or other people. Well, not honestly anyway.
“But if Labour plays the next election safe, hoping to win on the basis of Tory unpopularity, it will not have earned a mandate for such change. It must take into the election a vision of a much more equal and sustainable society and the support of a wider movement if these formidable challenges are to be met.”
As I wrote yesterday when talking about Labour’s polling angst:
“Such an agenda is there to be grasped by Miliband and co. A little boldness can go a long way – as we saw at last year’s conference when the energy price freeze threw the government into a state of confusion. But calmly creeping towards the election? Repeating old arguments rather than making new ones? Shrinking the offer? Refusing to take on the Tories over their budget for fear of upsetting anyone? That’s the kind of politics thats sees people become anxious. That’s the kind of politics that sees poll leads crumble.”
Labour needs to go bigger and bolder. Or as they say in Miliband’s office – go big or go home. Here’s the text of the letter:
Britain faces unprecedented challenges: a financial system still too big to fail or jail; austerity causing unnecessary hardship to those already at the bottom of a massively unequal society; climate change flooding people’s homes; and a democratic system that seems pretty irrelevant to any of these problems. To begin to tackle these challenges the country needs not just a change of government but a transformative change in direction.
That demands a Labour or Labour-led administration. But if Labour plays the next election safe, hoping to win on the basis of Tory unpopularity, it will not have earned a mandate for such change. It must take into the election a vision of a much more equal and sustainable society and the support of a wider movement if these formidable challenges are to be met.....
National government has a continuing strategic role to play but the days of politicians doing things “to people” are over. The era of building the capacity and platforms for people to “do things for themselves, together” is now upon us."
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassing screechy.
No one will ever top this
We cannot be killed
'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority
If the average pension pot is £25,000 as Boris says, there is absolutely no point in those who have that amount putting the money into an annuity, is there? They might as well spend it all and live off the state.
SO, what you are forgetting is whether they spend the money or not, they will get exactly the same pension from the state. It's a universal non-contributory pension.
So then it shouldn't matter to you whether they choose to spend £25,000 upfront, stick it in an annuity for £1,000 additional income a year or spend it on a few luxuries over a period of years.
I agree. If it were me, I'd take all the money out and do something with it immediately rather than add £90 a month to my state pension.
If you take the whole £25,000 in one go won't you end up paying nearly £4,000 in tax on it?
I would think that would provide an incentive to take it out in smaller chunks.
It would depend if there was likely to be any personal allowance available so you could take it out tax free. If there wasn't then you wouldn't lose anything by having it taxed at 20%.
Lets not forget you can take 25% out tax free as a lump sum to start off with...
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
I expect that Labour will recover a bit, at least in the short term. Immediate memories of the budget will fade.
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
From my perspective, it's right to detail the financing problems small start-ups find.
Cambridge is, in parts at least, a jolly nice place with a few good pubs and, in my experience, fewer good restaurants. It is also full of people with brains the size of the average planet who are not only intelligent but interesting to talk to.
However, it has one massive drawback - in winter it is so freaking cold. That wind that whips in from the Urals across the North German Plain, the North Sea and the fens cuts to the bone. The fact that the refugee scholars from Oxford settled in Cambridge to found their new university suggests they were not that bright. With the whole country to pick from they chose the place where the could be really cold and miserable, what sort of intelligence is that?
It depends what your criteria are. If you're looking to choose somewhere that is going to remain nice and quiet because most other people are scared away by the weather, but it's still close enough to London that you can petition the King for funding, and you don't have to worry too much about French warships, then they would have struggled to do better.
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
Wrong, actually; this is just the satisfying but slightly boring fulfillment of some rather obvious predictions we have been making for some time. And it isn't poll depression, the polls are just the symptom: it is ed-is-crap depression.
From my perspective, it's right to detail the financing problems small start-ups find.
Cambridge is, in parts at least, a jolly nice place with a few good pubs and, in my experience, fewer good restaurants. It is also full of people with brains the size of the average planet who are not only intelligent but interesting to talk to.
However, it has one massive drawback - in winter it is so freaking cold. That wind that whips in from the Urals across the North German Plain, the North Sea and the fens cuts to the bone. The fact that the refugee scholars from Oxford settled in Cambridge to found their new university suggests they were not that bright. With the whole country to pick from they chose the place where the could be really cold and miserable, what sort of intelligence is that?
You are right about the wind: a friend of ours built his house (complete with crashed space rocket) in Soham, and got told by the architect that it was the highest point from the steppes. You really feel it when the wind comes from the quarter.
But we also get only half the national average of rainfall. ;-)
You ask a god question: why did the Oxonians who so wisely left their inferior town choose to settle in Cambridge? It was a wealthy trading place even before they arrived.
Liverpool have a fairly recent record of domination, and their current side is in a position to win the league that Spurs haven't been in my lifetime, so I don't really get that comparison.
Of course I am not saying Spurs fans shouldn't have ambition, just that I get the feeling from a lot of them I know that they kind of expect to be in the top four, and feel let down when they aren't, when the fact is that they very rarely have been that successful (if you feel top 4 finshes are success, which I do)
My own opinion on Spurs is that they change managers too often, and that Levy is typical of the attitude of Spurs fans I described. Why on earth did they sack Harry Redknapp?
Because he is rubbish as QPR are proving. He also refused to sign a new contract as he thought he was getting the England job, then when Hodgson got it he went back to Levy who rightly told him to get lost.
He also has more than a history of dodgy dealings behind him, and before the mods come after me it's all recorded in Tom Bower's excellent book. If Bower was wrong Redknapp would have sued, but of course he didn't.
He comes across as a cheeky chappie with an excellent line in banter, but ask his former best mate Billy Bonds to find out what he is really like.
If as expected Van Gaal takes over in the summer Spurs will be a force to reckon with and we will have seven teams going for the top four places.
a friend of ours built his house (complete with crashed space rocket) in Soham, and got told by the architect that it was the highest point from the steppes. You really feel it when the wind comes from the quarter.
But we also get only half the national average of rainfall. ;-)
You ask a god question: why did the Oxonians who so wisely left their inferior town choose to settle in Cambridge? It was a wealthy trading place even before they arrived.
I don't recall Cambridge being that cold, although we did refer to East Anglia as the tundra on occasion; accurately it seems.
The only reason I picked Cambridge was because my brother had decided on Oxford, and therefore I certainly wasn't bloody going there. I think I got the best end of the deal because the university bit of Cambridge feels quite small, self-contained and villagey. At Oxford it seems to be distributed through a larger, more intrusive and in places quite unpleasant city, which you can't but notice. You are bordered by dumps like Cowley and Blackbird Leys, for example. Cambridge University is in contrast bordered by Madingley, Grantchester, the Cam and the Grafton Centre.
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
I expect that Labour will recover a bit, at least in the short term. Immediate memories of the budget will fade.
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
Actually no. The "high thirties" figure is from YouGov. The YouGov poll had Labour on 37 as per the usual range (I usually claim 38 as the steady YouGov figure +/-2.) Depending on methodology, other polls consistently have Labour at other levels, with no obvious trend. Populus, for instance, which is bouncier than most, had Labour 2 up on Friday and 3 down today..
The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead.
If there were several YouGovs running with Labour down to 35 or over 40, I'd think that significant. (Hello, hostage to fortune!)
The dodgy dealings wouldn't be a reason for sacking him though. If there were any Im sure Levy knew.
Really the point Im making is that Spurs fans seem to expect success that they have never really had before. For instance, @SouthamObserver said downthread
"...this season has been so disappointing"
Why disappointing? They sold their best player, who single handedly got them to 5th place last season, and are on course to finish 5th again. In any other walk of life that would be a decent consolidation, they could easily have fallen apart post Bale. Its the reason I, as an Arsenal fan, wasn't disappointed when we kept finshing 3rd or 4th after selling Nasri & Fabregas, and then van Persie. I was pleased we managed to continue achieving what we had been doing. Only people with false expectations would consider it disappointing
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
I expect that Labour will recover a bit, at least in the short term. Immediate memories of the budget will fade.
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
Actually no. The "high thirties" figure is from YouGov. The YouGov poll had Labour on 37 as per the usual range (I usually claim 38 as the steady YouGov figure +/-2.) Depending on methodology, other polls consistently have Labour at other levels, with no obvious trend. Populus, for instance, which is bouncier than most, had Labour 2 up on Friday and 3 down today..
The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead.
If there were several YouGovs running with Labour down to 35 or over 40, I'd think that significant. (Hello, hostage to fortune!)
Today you're disclaiming high thirties when at the weekend you were stating it as the benchmark. And they say a week is a long time in politics.
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
I expect that Labour will recover a bit, at least in the short term. Immediate memories of the budget will fade.
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
Actually no. The "high thirties" figure is from YouGov. The YouGov poll had Labour on 37 as per the usual range (I usually claim 38 as the steady YouGov figure +/-2.) Depending on methodology, other polls consistently have Labour at other levels, with no obvious trend. Populus, for instance, which is bouncier than most, had Labour 2 up on Friday and 3 down today..
The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead.
If there were several YouGovs running with Labour down to 35 or over 40, I'd think that significant. (Hello, hostage to fortune!)
"The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead."
UKIP went up a point in todays poll didn't they? With Labour down three?
Assume this is part of the Scotsman's ICM Indy poll:
'The SNP is leading Scottish Labour in the fight to win over voters ahead of the European Parliament elections, a new poll has found. The Nationalists are ahead of Labour by 12 percentage points, with 41% of the vote, compared with 29%, according to the survey conducted by ICM Research for the Scotsman newspaper. The Scottish Conservatives are in third place with 13%, Ukip have 6%, while the Scottish Liberal Democrats trail on five per cent.'
LDs being beaten by UKIP Scotland, the humiliation; Lyon is looking like a well known breakfast comestible.
At the risk of being accused of 'othering':
'The 1000 people polled were also asked how they would vote in a referendum on the UK's EU membership if there was ballot tomorrow. Results show that 47% of people would opt to stay in, while 30% would vote to leave. The remainder did not know.'
I've been trying to have a guess at each Euro region's seat allocation. Scotland looks quite easy, before this poll the only doubt looked to be whether the SNP or Lab would get 3 seats. SNP 3, LAB 2, CON 1.
Any chance of you putting up the following two markets on the European elections
1) UKIP to have an MEP in Scotland.
2) The SNP to end up with more MEPs than the Lib Dems have in Great Britain.
Thanks. Number 2 is definitely intriguing possibility.
Agreed. I'd love to see how Shadsy priced that. The SNP are going to return either 2 or 3 MEPs (2 more likely than 3), so the whole bet rests on one's assumprions regarding Lib Dem MEPs. Surely they can hold on to at least one in SE England, but thereafter it becomes a bit tricky.
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
I expect that Labour will recover a bit, at least in the short term. Immediate memories of the budget will fade.
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
Actually no. The "high thirties" figure is from YouGov. The YouGov poll had Labour on 37 as per the usual range (I usually claim 38 as the steady YouGov figure +/-2.) Depending on methodology, other polls consistently have Labour at other levels, with no obvious trend. Populus, for instance, which is bouncier than most, had Labour 2 up on Friday and 3 down today..
The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead.
If there were several YouGovs running with Labour down to 35 or over 40, I'd think that significant. (Hello, hostage to fortune!)
It's looking bleak for Labour. EdM is an unmanageable liability, worse than Brown and maybe even Foot.
Like a general securing a bridgehead on D-Day, George Osborne has secured his immediate objective. YouGov’s latest survey for the Sunday Times gives him and his Budget their highest marks since the earliest days of coalition harmony. No wonder Labour’s lead has crumbled to a single point.
It is too early to be sure whether our latest voting figures are a blip or a trend. Labour’s lead might well rise again as the news agenda moves on. But the public’s response to the Chancellor and his measures shows how the balance of forces on the biggest election battleground of all – the future of Britain’s economy – may have moved in the Conservatives’ favour.
Angela Smith, ex Lab MP and now Peeress confirms why Labour cannot be trusted to ever run the country again. She claims Labour was making a brilliant job of running the country and it is the Coalition which has ruined the economy. Daily Politics
Poll depression for Labour. But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip. Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
I expect that Labour will recover a bit, at least in the short term. Immediate memories of the budget will fade.
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
Actually no. The "high thirties" figure is from YouGov. The YouGov poll had Labour on 37 as per the usual range (I usually claim 38 as the steady YouGov figure +/-2.) Depending on methodology, other polls consistently have Labour at other levels, with no obvious trend. Populus, for instance, which is bouncier than most, had Labour 2 up on Friday and 3 down today..
The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead.
If there were several YouGovs running with Labour down to 35 or over 40, I'd think that significant. (Hello, hostage to fortune!)
It's looking bleak for Labour. EdM is an unmanageable liability, worse than Brown and maybe even Foot.
Ed could exceed Gordon by bringing his special brand of popularity North of the border (if that still matters by then).
I get the sense we are getting (relatively) good at major infrastructure - starting from T5, then the Olympics (which I was convinced we'd screw up) and now CrossRail.......who knows how HS2 will turn out......
Maybe in England. Scotland's not doing so well. (cough) Edinburgh tram (/cough) (cough) Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine (/cough)
The Edinburgh tram fiasco was one I was well aware of, the train line not:
The line, which was the first to be built in Scotland after devolution, cost more than twice its budget, and was finished two and a half years late in 2008.
Both were labour pet projects , what else would you expect. Their planning involves sticking a digit up an orifice and guessing a small number and an early date.
And the Railtrack disaster. I don't know if those affected the Alloa line project?
Ah! Blame shifting?
Network Rail, which did not build the 13-mile line, said the first shutdown would be in the week starting on 23 February, and affect only coal trains.
Public spending watchdogs criticised the management of the project, which was run by Clackmannanshire Council and the now-scrapped City of Edinburgh Council transport body Tie, before being taken over by the Scottish Government’s Transport Scotland agency in 2007. An Audit Scotland report in 2008 blamed “weak project governance” and “misaligned roles and responsibilities".
No - in part, serious questions given the problems caused by the Hatfield derailment for Railtrack and the ensuing rail project management. And, in part, we wouldn't want anyone suggesting that the Alloa line problems were directly to do with devolution and the Scottish parliament, would we?
Any tenuous link or lie will do as long as it ties it to the Scottish Government
Labour with Populus in December: 40, 38, 41, 38, 40, 40, 37 Labour with Populus so far in March: 37, 37, 38, 35, 36, 38, 35
Labour with YouGov in the first week of December: 38, 40, 40, 41, 39 Labour with YouGov in the last week: 40, 38, 38, 39, 37
Both seem to show a falling off in Labour support. It's more marked with Populus.
It is certain to be more marked with Populus as their methodology change in January knocked 2% of each of Labour and Lib Dem figures and added 4% to UKIP figures .
I get the sense we are getting (relatively) good at major infrastructure - starting from T5, then the Olympics (which I was convinced we'd screw up) and now CrossRail.......who knows how HS2 will turn out......
Maybe in England. Scotland's not doing so well. (cough) Edinburgh tram (/cough) (cough) Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine (/cough)
Have you heard how the new Forth bridge is doing?
Not well. They've had terrible trouble with the foundation caissons in the firth. However, the SNP government appear to have done a good deal (*), and the contractors *should* take any financial hit. However contractors have been very good in the past (sometimes justifiably) in getting extra costs passed to the client.
(*) Just to clarify for MalcolmG: this is an Englishman praising the SNP government.
I can read , and worth noting the difference between SNP projects and previous labour/Lib Dem fiascos. SNP are able to count and also use more than two brain cells when setting up the projects. The others just get themselves and pals jobs so that they benefit from them, without a care of who is paying.
Labour with Populus in December: 40, 38, 41, 38, 40, 40, 37 Labour with Populus so far in March: 37, 37, 38, 35, 36, 38, 35
Labour with YouGov in the first week of December: 38, 40, 40, 41, 39 Labour with YouGov in the last week: 40, 38, 38, 39, 37
Both seem to show a falling off in Labour support. It's more marked with Populus.
Even more worrying for Labour, this drop appears to coincide with Labour having to start talking to the voters about what they would do if they were in power...
Everybody assumes that Gordon Brown was a disaster and how Labour must surely do better under anyone other than Gordon. Well, maybe. Gordon was a weird sort, very difficult to connect with but driven by a ferocious personal ambition to get to the top. As is Ed Miliband.
What Gordon could offer though was an argument that he had saved the world in its darkest financial crisis of our life time. When he went to the country in May 2010, he had (admittedly by manipulating the system for his own political ends) delivered a growing economy (albeit one where "sustainable" was never able to be uttered).
And there were people who voted for Gordon Brown on the basis that he had saved the UK from the brink of financial armageddon. I met them on the doorstep in 2010. The current Labour Party does not have that to offer in 2015. Quite the reverse - they have been shown to be continually wrong in how they would have dealt with the economy since 2010.
If it is "the economy, stupid", then in 2015 Labour is arguably more exposed than it was in 2010. Ed Miliband and Ed Balls have spent 4 years getting it badly wrong. I see little to no evidence that they have any idea how to address the voters' concerns about their management of the economy, just at the time when the Toffs will again be showing they don't know much - but they know about money.
Entertaining though the poll frothing is, we do need to point to a few niggling facts:
1. We've had leads as low as zero before and repeatedly 1pt, and gone back every time to the usual 2-6pt Labour lead. Not sure why the current 1pt is any different 2. Labour remain comfortably within the 38 +/-2 range they've been in for ages. The Tories have moved up a touch seemingly at the expense of UKIP. Happily there isn't a Euro election this year otherwise we'd have to suffer Farage wall to wall reminding the Tory>Kipper switchers why they moved in the first place. Should such a thing be in the diary it wouldn't be unreasonable to think the weakening of the UKIP score was unproven in the long term.
Anyway, that Labour manifesto. It HAS to be bold. People are sick of voting in fear for the least worst option, they want someone defining whats wrong and offering a way out. The much derided "break up the big 6" policy on energy resonated, and as we have the Federation of Small Business supporting the OFGEM report which is about to call for a deeper Competition report into how to make the uncompetitive market competitive again, its only derided by people who would deride anything Labour said or did.
Guido reporting that next years Ukip conference will be in Doncaster - Ed's day keeps on getting better ..
Its at the racecourse I think
Did Devon Loch ever run there?
Devon Lochs infamous belly flop was at Aintree in the Grand National...it was shot soon after. Though I am sure you can get a tenuous link to Crap Ed in there.
Even more worrying for Labour, this drop appears to coincide with Labour having to start talking to the voters about what they would do if they were in power...
I don't think it does. The last time the voters were paying attention to Labour was when they announced the energy price pander, and they seemed to like it.
Labour with Populus in December: 40, 38, 41, 38, 40, 40, 37 Labour with Populus so far in March: 37, 37, 38, 35, 36, 38, 35
Labour with YouGov in the first week of December: 38, 40, 40, 41, 39 Labour with YouGov in the last week: 40, 38, 38, 39, 37
Both seem to show a falling off in Labour support. It's more marked with Populus.
Even more worrying for Labour, this drop appears to coincide with Labour having to start talking to the voters about what they would do if they were in power...
Everybody assumes that Gordon Brown was a disaster and how Labour must surely do better under anyone other than Gordon. Well, maybe. Gordon was a weird sort, very difficult to connect with but driven by a ferocious personal ambition to get to the top. As is Ed Miliband.
What Gordon could offer though was an argument that he had saved the world in its darkest financial crisis of our life time. When he went to the country in May 2010, he had (admittedly by manipulating the system for his own political ends) delivered a growing economy (albeit one where "sustainable" was never able to be uttered).
And there were people who voted for Gordon Brown on the basis that he had saved the UK from the brink of financial armageddon. I met them on the doorstep in 2010. The current Labour Party does not have that to offer in 2015. Quite the reverse - they have been shown to be continually wrong in how they would have dealt with the economy since 2010.
If it is "the economy, stupid", then in 2015 Labour is arguably more exposed than it was in 2010. Ed Miliband and Ed Balls have spent 4 years getting it badly wrong. I see little to no evidence that they have any idea how to address the voters' concerns about their management of the economy, just at the time when the Toffs will again be showing they don't know much - but they know about money.
Nice theory but repeat , the Labour fall with Populus is almost all down to their methodology change in January .
Guido reporting that next years Ukip conference will be in Doncaster - Ed's day keeps on getting better ..
Its at the racecourse I think
Did Devon Loch ever run there?
Devon Lochs infamous belly flop was at Aintree in the Grand National...it was shot soon after. Though I am sure you can get a tenuous link to Crap Ed in there.
Being shot seems a bit harsh for Ed - perhaps a job swap with his brother ?
Following form on here, if the next poll shows Labour 4%-6% ahead it will be totally ignored and the discussion will move on to kettles or granny knots or something else that has nothing to do with polls.
What's horrific about MH370 is that if the plane flew on under autopilot till it crashed, then presumably the flight deck crew were dead or incapacitated. But the passengers were presumably alive and aware of what must happen for hours, until it did.
Guido reporting that next years Ukip conference will be in Doncaster - Ed's day keeps on getting better ..
Its at the racecourse I think
Did Devon Loch ever run there?
Devon Lochs infamous belly flop was at Aintree in the Grand National...it was shot soon after. Though I am sure you can get a tenuous link to Crap Ed in there.
Being shot seems a bit harsh for Ed - perhaps a job swap with his brother ?
No. We don't want his brother. We are not Dan Hodges'.
Comments
The best news for Osborne is to be found not in the latest YouGov polls but polls conducted at the same stage in past parliaments. Six times in the past half-century Conservative prime ministers have faced the electorate. In every case the final 14 months produced a swing from Labour to Tory. The average swing has been six points.....
....Indeed, if we take YouGov’s latest poll as our starting point, then a further six-point swing to the Conservatives would see them home with a 40-seat majority.
But Kellner doesn't expect history to repeat itself for two reasons
I) The Lib Dems being in government and not being able to hover up/retain ex Lab voters
II) UKIP doing better and hovering up votes from the Tories.
The more Labour falls back on this approach, the deeper will be the hole in which the party finds itself. Clinging on to Lib Dem defectors and pointing to Labour’s consistency at 37% in the polls is the last redoubt of those who do not have anything substantive to say on policy or strategy.
Spurs have been a bit unlucky in recent seasons, very unlucky in 11/12, but there just seems to be a perception from their fans that they are one of the big boys on a bad run, and "they always let us down" when the truth is they haven't won the league for 53 years, and have only qualified for the Champions league once. So they are what they are
It would be like Arsenal fans being annoyed at not winning the Champions League. We have never won it, we normally get to the latter stages and get knocked out by better teams. We are not being let down by anyone, that is our level
The definition of Mr Compouter's attitude.
http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/2008313.article?cmpid=pmalert_187503
SNP 3, LAB 2, CON 1.
Next UK EU Commissioner
Fav
1 Apr 08:00 UK
----------------------
Paddy Power
EU 2014 - UK's Next EU Commissioner
Sunday 30th March 2014, 12:00
-----------------------
When is the actual announcement ?
The Nuclear Security Summit is in town with Obama, Xi, Cameron and all the rest (except that nice Mr.Putin). They've closed a bunch of roads and schools and told people to work from home pretty much.
A beautiful, cool sunny spring day and a very odd empty atmosphere.
1) UKIP to have an MEP in Scotland.
2) The SNP to end up with more MEPs than the Lib Dems have in Great Britain.
Thanks. Number 2 is definitely intriguing possibility.
In the same way as Anthony Wedgwood-Benn was, he is a highly effective party asset.
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/UK-General-Election/Next-General-Election-Constituency-Betting/Politics-N-1z140vgZ1z140v7Z1z141ne/
In a new poll, London voters add their say to the speculation around Boris Johnson's next move
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/03/24/Londoners-expect-Boris-to-try-for-PM/
Cambridge is, in parts at least, a jolly nice place with a few good pubs and, in my experience, fewer good restaurants. It is also full of people with brains the size of the average planet who are not only intelligent but interesting to talk to.
However, it has one massive drawback - in winter it is so freaking cold. That wind that whips in from the Urals across the North German Plain, the North Sea and the fens cuts to the bone. The fact that the refugee scholars from Oxford settled in Cambridge to found their new university suggests they were not that bright. With the whole country to pick from they chose the place where the could be really cold and miserable, what sort of intelligence is that?
I would think that would provide an incentive to take it out in smaller chunks.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/budget-2014-three-more-scary-graphs-about-the-crunch-to-come/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=budget-2014-three-more-scary-graphs-about-the-crunch-to-come
How much you put in is only one part of the equation though. The key thing about the teachers' scheme, and other public sector schemes, is the amount the employer puts in on top, 14% in this case.
I have never had an employer put that much in. Most of the time my employers have put in nothing, and the most I've had is 8%. If I had the option of a pension scheme where I put in 8% to get 14% matched funding from my employer I'd snap it up.
"Were you still up for Balls?"
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Were-You-Still-Up-Portillo/dp/0140272372
Ed Balls - my part in his downfall.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/malaysia/10718181/Malaysia-Airlines-MH370-live.html
Of course I am not saying Spurs fans shouldn't have ambition, just that I get the feeling from a lot of them I know that they kind of expect to be in the top four, and feel let down when they aren't, when the fact is that they very rarely have been that successful (if you feel top 4 finshes are success, which I do)
My own opinion on Spurs is that they change managers too often, and that Levy is typical of the attitude of Spurs fans I described. Why on earth did they sack Harry Redknapp?
But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip.
Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassing screechy.
But there are going to be some serious red faces from our Conservative friends it it's a blip.
Some of the posts over the weekend have been embarrassingly screechy.
We cannot be killed
'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/10717946/Lord-Davies-to-shame-50-all-male-boards.html
“If you are a chief executive officer and you don’t have gender diversity or diversity in general as a top issue, then you’ve been asleep at the wheel for the last few years,”
So this clod actually imagines that companies like Glencore don't have women on the board because their institutionalised aversion to women outweighs their appetite for making money by having the most effective people in place.
I think if I had to summarise the one thing that I find most inane about Labour philosophy, it would be their belief that there is no institution that can't be improved by the application of the comprehensive principle. Whether it's schools, universities, parliamentary shortlists or global commodity players Labour appears to believe that the complete solution is to strive for mediocrity through tokenism.
If course Labour doesn't really believe this, otherwise there'd be no inclination to fiddle seats as they do for Will Straw, Euan Blair, Hilary and Emily Benn, Stephen Kinnock, etc. But you either believe in the hereditary principle, or you believe in Buggins' Turn, or you believe in meritocracy. You can't claim to believe in all three at the same depending on whether you're talking yourself or other people. Well, not honestly anyway.
“But if Labour plays the next election safe, hoping to win on the basis of Tory unpopularity, it will not have earned a mandate for such change. It must take into the election a vision of a much more equal and sustainable society and the support of a wider movement if these formidable challenges are to be met.”
As I wrote yesterday when talking about Labour’s polling angst:
“Such an agenda is there to be grasped by Miliband and co. A little boldness can go a long way – as we saw at last year’s conference when the energy price freeze threw the government into a state of confusion. But calmly creeping towards the election? Repeating old arguments rather than making new ones? Shrinking the offer? Refusing to take on the Tories over their budget for fear of upsetting anyone? That’s the kind of politics thats sees people become anxious. That’s the kind of politics that sees poll leads crumble.”
Labour needs to go bigger and bolder. Or as they say in Miliband’s office – go big or go home. Here’s the text of the letter:
Britain faces unprecedented challenges: a financial system still too big to fail or jail; austerity causing unnecessary hardship to those already at the bottom of a massively unequal society; climate change flooding people’s homes; and a democratic system that seems pretty irrelevant to any of these problems. To begin to tackle these challenges the country needs not just a change of government but a transformative change in direction.
That demands a Labour or Labour-led administration. But if Labour plays the next election safe, hoping to win on the basis of Tory unpopularity, it will not have earned a mandate for such change. It must take into the election a vision of a much more equal and sustainable society and the support of a wider movement if these formidable challenges are to be met.....
National government has a continuing strategic role to play but the days of politicians doing things “to people” are over. The era of building the capacity and platforms for people to “do things for themselves, together” is now upon us."
Lets not forget you can take 25% out tax free as a lump sum to start off with...
The last week's polling have, however, strongly suggested that the idea of an immovable Labour voting bloc in the high 30s is just not true.
But we also get only half the national average of rainfall. ;-)
You ask a god question: why did the Oxonians who so wisely left their inferior town choose to settle in Cambridge? It was a wealthy trading place even before they arrived.
The only reason I picked Cambridge was because my brother had decided on Oxford, and therefore I certainly wasn't bloody going there. I think I got the best end of the deal because the university bit of Cambridge feels quite small, self-contained and villagey. At Oxford it seems to be distributed through a larger, more intrusive and in places quite unpleasant city, which you can't but notice. You are bordered by dumps like Cowley and Blackbird Leys, for example. Cambridge University is in contrast bordered by Madingley, Grantchester, the Cam and the Grafton Centre.
The obvious trend is a hardening Tory share, mostly at UKIP's expense. This, of course, produces a narrowing Labour lead.
If there were several YouGovs running with Labour down to 35 or over 40, I'd think that significant. (Hello, hostage to fortune!)
Wonder what that's about.......
The dodgy dealings wouldn't be a reason for sacking him though. If there were any Im sure Levy knew.
Really the point Im making is that Spurs fans seem to expect success that they have never really had before. For instance, @SouthamObserver said downthread
"...this season has been so disappointing"
Why disappointing? They sold their best player, who single handedly got them to 5th place last season, and are on course to finish 5th again. In any other walk of life that would be a decent consolidation, they could easily have fallen apart post Bale. Its the reason I, as an Arsenal fan, wasn't disappointed when we kept finshing 3rd or 4th after selling Nasri & Fabregas, and then van Persie. I was pleased we managed to continue achieving what we had been doing. Only people with false expectations would consider it disappointing
UKIP went up a point in todays poll didn't they? With Labour down three?
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-03-24/99p-music-downloads-threatened-by-vat-crackdown/
Like a general securing a bridgehead on D-Day, George Osborne has secured his immediate objective. YouGov’s latest survey for the Sunday Times gives him and his Budget their highest marks since the earliest days of coalition harmony. No wonder Labour’s lead has crumbled to a single point.
It is too early to be sure whether our latest voting figures are a blip or a trend. Labour’s lead might well rise again as the news agenda moves on. But the public’s response to the Chancellor and his measures shows how the balance of forces on the biggest election battleground of all – the future of Britain’s economy – may have moved in the Conservatives’ favour.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/03/24/budget-boost-tories/
Labour with Populus in December: 40, 38, 41, 38, 40, 40, 37
Labour with Populus so far in March: 37, 37, 38, 35, 36, 38, 35
Labour with YouGov in the first week of December: 38, 40, 40, 41, 39
Labour with YouGov in the last week: 40, 38, 38, 39, 37
Both seem to show a falling off in Labour support. It's more marked with Populus.
The Chinese relatives have been saying information has been kept for them, and this sort of thing tends to prove them right.
Everybody assumes that Gordon Brown was a disaster and how Labour must surely do better under anyone other than Gordon. Well, maybe. Gordon was a weird sort, very difficult to connect with but driven by a ferocious personal ambition to get to the top. As is Ed Miliband.
What Gordon could offer though was an argument that he had saved the world in its darkest financial crisis of our life time. When he went to the country in May 2010, he had (admittedly by manipulating the system for his own political ends) delivered a growing economy (albeit one where "sustainable" was never able to be uttered).
And there were people who voted for Gordon Brown on the basis that he had saved the UK from the brink of financial armageddon. I met them on the doorstep in 2010. The current Labour Party does not have that to offer in 2015. Quite the reverse - they have been shown to be continually wrong in how they would have dealt with the economy since 2010.
If it is "the economy, stupid", then in 2015 Labour is arguably more exposed than it was in 2010. Ed Miliband and Ed Balls have spent 4 years getting it badly wrong. I see little to no evidence that they have any idea how to address the voters' concerns about their management of the economy, just at the time when the Toffs will again be showing they don't know much - but they know about money.
1. We've had leads as low as zero before and repeatedly 1pt, and gone back every time to the usual 2-6pt Labour lead. Not sure why the current 1pt is any different
2. Labour remain comfortably within the 38 +/-2 range they've been in for ages. The Tories have moved up a touch seemingly at the expense of UKIP. Happily there isn't a Euro election this year otherwise we'd have to suffer Farage wall to wall reminding the Tory>Kipper switchers why they moved in the first place. Should such a thing be in the diary it wouldn't be unreasonable to think the weakening of the UKIP score was unproven in the long term.
Anyway, that Labour manifesto. It HAS to be bold. People are sick of voting in fear for the least worst option, they want someone defining whats wrong and offering a way out. The much derided "break up the big 6" policy on energy resonated, and as we have the Federation of Small Business supporting the OFGEM report which is about to call for a deeper Competition report into how to make the uncompetitive market competitive again, its only derided by people who would deride anything Labour said or did.
Malaysian PM to hold emergency press conference in 1 hour.
Malaysian Airlines holding emergency meeting with relatives in China.