politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » EU referendum poll blow for Farage only hours before the TV

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » EU referendum poll blow for Farage only hours before the TV clash with Clegg

The link to watch tonight's #NickvNigel debate live on LBC: http://t.co/bIcLElASpP pic.twitter.com/3bdeTxSxMM thanks to @LibDemMEPs

Read the full story here

compouter2

OGH - Is this the Yougov poll ?

Socrates

Surely Labour will be willing to commit to an EU referendum in this case then? They're polling in the lead and all the arguments are supposedly on their side...

BenM

No surprise that once all the - mainly Tory and rightwing - Eurosceptic effluent and BS was challenged the numbers turn.

isam

If that's what people want then fair enough.

Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.

You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former

The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.

I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me

sabretooth

well i think it's realistic. A lot of people don't want to leave the EU, that's too scary and radical. They just want more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions.

Pulpstar

More anticipated than Froch-Groves 2

Can Nick or Nigel land a knock out blow or will it be a split decision on the judge's scorecards ?

isam

The debate is live on Sky tonight as well isn't it?

Good that there is a poll on the day of the first debate, as it will be quite unarguable as to the effect the debates had on the public afterwards

Pulpstar

I reckon if we were out of the EU people wouldn't be in favour to go back in though.

edmundintokyo

Socrates said:

Surely Labour will be willing to commit to an EU referendum in this case then? They're polling in the lead and all the arguments are supposedly on their side...

Partway through a parliament run by an uncharismatic leader of a government with no money, elected on maybe 36% of the vote with 64% preferring someone else, you could have a referendum on motherhood and apple pie and still not be confident the government side would win it.

Pulpstar

edmundintokyo said:

Socrates said:

Surely Labour will be willing to commit to an EU referendum in this case then? They're polling in the lead and all the arguments are supposedly on their side...

Partway through a parliament run by an uncharismatic leader of a government with no money, elected on maybe 36% of the vote with 64% preferring someone else, you could have a referendum on motherhood and apple pie and still not be confident the government side would win it.

Both sides seem to piss themselves worrying that they aren't going to win.

When the SNP DOESN'T disappear in a puff of smoke after losing the Indy ref maybe politicians will realise that giving people a say doesn't necessarily spell disaster.

BenM

Nigel should phone in sick.

He's going to get clobbered.

edmundintokyo

isam said:

If that's what people want then fair enough.

Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.

You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former

The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.

I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me

Labour don't support open borders or anything close, sadly.

It's also probably not correct to say that they think immigration does net damage to working class communities. I know you think that, but not everyone does.

isam

edmundintokyo said:

isam said:

If that's what people want then fair enough.

Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.

You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former

The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.

I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me

Labour don't support open borders or anything close, sadly.

It's also probably not correct to say that they think immigration does net damage to working class communities. I know you think that, but not everyone does.

Here is what working class people left behind in such places affected think of it

7 mins 22 in is probably the closest to my view, David Aaronovitch at 3.20 is probably as out of touch as some people on here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK3JAL3hKRo

AndyJS

FPT:

Michael Moore reselected in Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk:

http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/news/2014/03/moore-reselected-borders-0

Easterross

AndyJS said:

FPT:

Michael Moore reselected in Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk:

http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/news/2014/03/moore-reselected-borders-0

He tweeted his thanks for being reselected days ago.

edmundintokyo

Pulpstar said:

edmundintokyo said:

Socrates said:

Surely Labour will be willing to commit to an EU referendum in this case then? They're polling in the lead and all the arguments are supposedly on their side...

Partway through a parliament run by an uncharismatic leader of a government with no money, elected on maybe 36% of the vote with 64% preferring someone else, you could have a referendum on motherhood and apple pie and still not be confident the government side would win it.

Both sides seem to piss themselves worrying that they aren't going to win.

When the SNP DOESN'T disappear in a puff of smoke after losing the Indy ref maybe politicians will realise that giving people a say doesn't necessarily spell disaster.

The issue for either side isn't disappearing in a puff of smoke, it's leaving the EU, or staying in it, respectively. For all the noise politicians make about the process when they think it will advance their cause, the parties are mainly concerned with the outcome.

Pulpstar

Today is a reasonably interesting day so far as cycling goes - Froome, Contador, Quintana, Purito and other GC contenders are all racing in the mountains of Catalonia.

Froome has had a lower back problem, whereas Contador has refound some old form winning Tirreno Adriatico. Quintana and Purito there too.

Tour De France clues day.

Easterross

I wonder how many people would suddenly change their views on EU membership in/out if their employers point out how much of their sales and exports (and therefore jobs) are dependent on Britain's membership of the EU. This problem will become a live issue for thousands of Scots after 19th September if their employers have to begin assessing the effect of Scotland being outside the EU and wanting in.

Tykejohnno

Wishing Farage all the best.

Go on Farage,rip the illiberal clegg apart.

MarqueeMark

FPT - Sabretooth, no not yet hooked up with any of the official BTO surveys. I wander around the area with my binoculars though, hoping to find something worthy of note. Enjoyed watching curl buntings on my walk with the dog this morning.

oxfordsimon

Why are these 'debates' being held so far ahead of the actual poll? Yes, the contents will be spun and repeated over the next 2 months - but in all honesty, shouldn't they be taking place during the period of active campaigning? Then people might actually pay attention.

rcs1000

Easterross said:

I wonder how many people would suddenly change their views on EU membership in/out if their employers point out how much of their sales and exports (and therefore jobs) are dependent on Britain's membership of the EU. This problem will become a live issue for thousands of Scots after 19th September if their employers have to begin assessing the effect of Scotland being outside the EU and wanting in.

I would point out that while leaving the European Economic Area would be a severe negative for many people's businesses, leaving just the EU would have a much smaller impact.

To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?

Pulpstar

Whoever wins I'd like one of the two to take an absolubte battering.

Nigel definitely shouldn't underestimate Nick as an opponent, he utterly outmanoeuvred Cameron on the boundary changes and a massive proportion of Lib Dem MPs are in Gov't now.

He doesn't do too badly when facing Hattie in (d)PMQs when Dave is out on international jollies.

Hope Nigel is well prepped.

surbiton

Not just for Farage; also for some of our parish. Major exceptions: Nabavi, Avery, Fitalass et al who lie low when Europe is mentioned because, to be fair, they are IN.

Shy on Europe could be an expression for them.

edmundintokyo

isam said:

edmundintokyo said:

isam said:

If that's what people want then fair enough.

Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.

You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former

The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.

I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me

Labour don't support open borders or anything close, sadly.

It's also probably not correct to say that they think immigration does net damage to working class communities. I know you think that, but not everyone does.

Here is what working class people left behind in such places affected think of it

7 mins 22 in is probably the closest to my view, David Aaronovitch at 3.20 is probably as out of touch as some people on here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK3JAL3hKRo

I think it's clear that immigration is unpopular with a lot of those voters. But where you came in was that you seemed to be saying Labour people typically thought immigration was making things objectively worse for them, not that Labour people thought the voters in question thought immigration was bad for them.

The common assumption in Labour, and probably among the Tory leadership too although they won't admit it, is more likely that immigration is generally good for those communities, but often in unintuitive ways (for example, people's intuitions make them think of a "lump of labour", but economists usually think this is a fallacy), which makes allowing immigration good government, but being seen to do it terrible politics.

Whether or not you think they're right about this and whether or not you agree with the attempted deception, it's a different thing to thinking the policy screws working class communities but wanting to do it anyway to help other demographics.

TGOHF

Much comment about how the loser in this debate may be Cameron and winners are Clegg and Farage.

By that logic then it surely makes sense for Salmond to debate with Darling - as Cameron will be the loser again ?

timmo

Pulpstar said:

Whoever wins I'd like one of the two to take an absolubte battering.

Nigel definitely shouldn't underestimate Nick as an opponent, he utterly outmanoeuvred Cameron on the boundary changes and a massive proportion of Lib Dem MPs are in Gov't now.

He doesn't do too badly when facing Hattie in (d)PMQs when Dave is out on international jollies.

Hope Nigel is well prepped.

I totally agree with you and think that Clegg will probably win this one..it also depends on how Nick Ferrari handles it and i dont hold out much hope of a fair and balanced debate after watching him handle "The great immigration row" on Channel 5 recently when he was useless..

Richard_Nabavi

rcs1000 said:

To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?

Yes, they have been completely incoherent on that, probably for the very good reason that they don't actually have a clue, and, where they do have a clue, they don't agree amongst themselves. In one breath Farage cites Norway as a model, then in the next he goes on about stopping immigration and having full control over our borders.

This incoherence is one reason why I think an Out result could never be obtained in a referendum. If UKIP really wanted us to leave the EU, they'd be urging supporters to vote Conservative to get the referendum, and spending the next three years deciding what exactly they are advocating and putting together a coherent case for it. (At the risk of awakening the Nats again, there's a useful model here in the SNP's failure to put together coherent answers on the currency, EU membership, and the Scottish financial services industry. That's how not to do it).

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying that such a case can't be made; I think it can. But you can't make it by cherry-picking the bits you like from three or four mutually-incompatible options.

Sean_F

OTOH, the Ashcroft Yougov poll had the numbers divide 41;41 between staying in and coming out, and Survation had a lead of 48:39 in favour of leaving.

isam

edmundintokyo said:

isam said:

edmundintokyo said:

isam said:

If that's what people want then fair enough.

Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.

You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former

The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.

I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me

Labour don't support open borders or anything close, sadly.

It's also probably not correct to say that they think immigration does net damage to working class communities. I know you think that, but not everyone does.

Here is what working class people left behind in such places affected think of it

7 mins 22 in is probably the closest to my view, David Aaronovitch at 3.20 is probably as out of touch as some people on here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK3JAL3hKRo

I think it's clear that immigration is unpopular with a lot of those voters. But where you came in was that you seemed to be saying Labour people typically thought immigration was making things objectively worse for them, not that Labour people thought the voters in question thought immigration was bad for them.

The common assumption in Labour, and probably among the Tory leadership too although they won't admit it, is more likely that immigration is generally good for those communities, but often in unintuitive ways (for example, people's intuitions make them think of a "lump of labour", but economists usually think this is a fallacy), which makes allowing immigration good government, but being seen to do it terrible politics.

Whether or not you think they're right about this and whether or not you agree with the attempted deception, it's a different thing to thinking the policy screws working class communities but wanting to do it anyway to help other demographics.

My belief is that they know it screws working class communities but they think its for the greater good. If they think that it is doing them good its because they mistakenly believe that people who are struggling to make ends meet care less about diversity, culture etc Those are concerns only the middle classes, leftie luvvie types, normally not living in the place they were born, can afford to be concerned about.

nigel4england

Easterross said:

I wonder how many people would suddenly change their views on EU membership in/out if their employers point out how much of their sales and exports (and therefore jobs) are dependent on Britain's membership of the EU. This problem will become a live issue for thousands of Scots after 19th September if their employers have to begin assessing the effect of Scotland being outside the EU and wanting in.

Three and a half million jobs according to Baroness Kramer on QT.

Probably the biggest insult to the intelligence of the British public I have ever heard.

Pulpstar

timmo said:

Pulpstar said:

Whoever wins I'd like one of the two to take an absolubte battering.

Nigel definitely shouldn't underestimate Nick as an opponent, he utterly outmanoeuvred Cameron on the boundary changes and a massive proportion of Lib Dem MPs are in Gov't now.

He doesn't do too badly when facing Hattie in (d)PMQs when Dave is out on international jollies.

Hope Nigel is well prepped.

I totally agree with you and think that Clegg will probably win this one..it also depends on how Nick Ferrari handles it and i dont hold out much hope of a fair and balanced debate after watching him handle "The great immigration row" on Channel 5 recently when he was useless..

Whatis always missing from these 'debates' are unbias facts and definitive counterfactuals. I am sure Clegg will bring up the 2, or is it 3? million jobs that would go awry.

But it is hard to know if that is an accurate statement of fact as EVERYONE involved in the EU debate seems to have an agenda or some such.

The Institute for Economic Badgers says EU bad, Fiscal Aylesbury Duck club* says EU good. Norway isn't in the EU they seem to be doing OK, but Greece is and they are doing less well.

True appraisals of fact and verifiable counter-factuals are extremely hard to calculate !

*Might have mad those up

Sean_F

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?

Yes, they have been completely incoherent on that, probably for the very good reason that they don't actually have a clue, and, where they do have a clue, they don't agree amongst themselves. In one breath Farage cites Norway as a model, then in the next he goes on about stopping immigration and having full control over our borders.

This incoherence is one reason why I think an Out result could never be obtained in a referendum. If UKIP really wanted us to leave the UK, they'd be urging supporters to vote Conservative to get the referendum, and spending the next three years putting together a coherent case. (At the risk of awakening the Nats again, there's a useful model here in the SNP's failure to put together coherent answers on the currency, EU membership, and the Scottish financial services industry. That's how not to do it).

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying that such a case can't be made; I think it can. But you can't make it by cherry-picking the bits you like from three or four mutually-incompatible options.

You know and I know that the only reason that any refendum promise was made was because Cameron feared losing votes to UKIP. If UKIP disappeared, so would any promise of a refendum.

That's leaving aside the fact that UKIP can't "gift" their votes to the Conservative Party, even should they wish to. 55% of current UKIP voters didn't vote Conservative in 2010. They wouldn't vote Conservative because Farage told them to.

But in any case, why would right wing and eurosceptic voters *want* to vote for a party that's been so bad at defending right wing and eurosceptic interests?

edmundintokyo

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?

Yes, they have been completely incoherent on that, probably for the very good reason that they don't actually have a clue, and, where they do have a clue, they don't agree amongst themselves. In one breath Farage cites Norway as a model, then in the next he goes on about stopping immigration and having full control over our borders.

This incoherence is one reason why I think an Out result could never be obtained in a referendum. If UKIP really wanted us to leave the UK, they'd be urging supporters to vote Conservative to get the referendum, and spending the next three years putting together a coherent case. (At the risk of awakening the Nats again, there's a useful model here in the SNP's failure to put together coherent answers on the currency, EU membership, and the Scottish financial services industry. That's how not to do it).

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying that such a case can't be made; I think it can. But you can't make it by cherry-picking the bits you like from three or four mutually-incompatible options.

A skilled campaign can get away with a lot in a referendum. It's an even better environment for outrageous political bullshitting than a general election, because once it's done it's done for a generation and it doesn't matter if you get rumbled. I don't think it's safe to assume that a campaign couldn't be won based on a combination of contradictory claims, especially if you need to know a bit about a wonkish subject like the EEA to see the contradictions.

SimonStClare

I am not expecting Queensberry rules to be strictly adhered to in the Clegg/Farage face off – As both party leaders hold opposing extremist views on the EU, I hope they tear chunks out of each other just for the entertainment value alone.


@MarqueMark – left a reply for you on previous thread.

Alanbrooke

rcs1000 said:

Easterross said:

I wonder how many people would suddenly change their views on EU membership in/out if their employers point out how much of their sales and exports (and therefore jobs) are dependent on Britain's membership of the EU. This problem will become a live issue for thousands of Scots after 19th September if their employers have to begin assessing the effect of Scotland being outside the EU and wanting in.

I would point out that while leaving the European Economic Area would be a severe negative for many people's businesses, leaving just the EU would have a much smaller impact.

To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?

Are you saying just yelling EUSSR isn't enough ?

CD13

As regards Europe. the biggest block seem to favour staying in but with changes. They're in favour of the trading issues but mission-creep has produced a form of political union too, and that's not so popular.

As regards the Nigel vs Nick debate, I expect a lot of heat and little light. Lots of prepared statements but no question-answering.

Happy to be proved wrong but ...

Stuart_Dickson

Danny565 said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Danny565 said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

dyedwoolie said:

No, quite. With Ming going, incumbency collapse magnified by the Lib Dem implosion in Scotland. SNP.the favourites to capitalise but Tories value at 16s. It's not Govan

I'd be bloody tempted to put a decent stake on CON in this seat at 16/1, simply as a trading bet. I cannot see them winning it due to their dire GOTV operation, but I can easily see that silly 16/1 price coming in.

I do think that's probably the hardest to call of the Lib Dem-held seats in Scotland though. I've got SNP gains for Gordon and Argyll & Bute, Labour gains for W Edinburgh, Dunbartonshire and Inverness (though with the SNP having a shot in the latter), and Tory gains in W Aberdeenshire and B'wickshire. Comfortable Lib Dem holds in Ross Skye & Lochaber and Orkney & Shetland Islands, and a narrow hold in Caithness.

I understand your logic in ne fife but even the best gotv in the world cannot win it for labour when they are starting from such a weak base.

Caithness? Agree close call but did you see the size of the snp maj in 2011? Over 7000.

Tbh, my NE Fife tip is predicated on the assumption that Labour would only need a 25-26% share to take the seat (which I think might be just about doable in a best case scenario for them), if that seat turns into a close 4-way fight. (Might UKIP also poll fairly well there because of what I understand is quite a large English population, thus dragging down the winning line further?) I don't say it with much confidence, though.

I think the difficulty with Caithness is that, for anti-LibDem tactical voters (is it safe to assume there will be quite a lot of these now, just as for many years in Scotland people have typically ganged up tactically and voted for whoever was best placed to beat the Tories?), it might be quite hard in some of those Highlands seats for the average voter to discern whether Labour or the SNP are in a stronger position to kick the LDs out, since Labour performed better than the SNP in 2010 in some of them, but the SNP have outperformed them (often by far) in Scottish Parliament and council elections. In Caithness, I can see Labour and the SNP both increasing their vote, probably the SNP moreso, but neither mustering enough votes to get past the Lib Dems on about 30%ish, assuming the sitting Lib Dem MP stays on.

Is there any serious talk of John Thurso not staying on? He is only 60. Bit early for a retirement I would have thought.

Do you really think that the Lib Dems could hold on to Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross on just 30% of the vote? If they drop that low then it looks like curtains.

Whatever, Shadsy's current LD price of 2/5 is too short, even if Thurso is the candidate again.

Richard_Nabavi

edmundintokyo said:

A skilled campaign can get away with a lot in a referendum. It's an even better environment for outrageous political bullshitting than a general election, because once it's done it's done for a generation and it doesn't matter if you get rumbled. I don't think it's safe to assume that a campaign couldn't be won based on a combination of contradictory claims, especially if you need to know a bit about a wonkish subject like the EEA to see the contradictions.

Up to a point, but incoherence opens the flank to Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. The Stay In side don't need to win any arguments, they just need to sow enough doubt.

Take Nick Clegg's '3 million jobs' line. It's ridiculous, of course, and no-one takes it seriously. But that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have an effect: voters will tend to split the difference, thinking 'well, I'm sure it won't be that many jobs lost, but it might be some'. That's a hard problem to overcome when you're arguing for a leap into what will seem like the dark, against a pretty consistent barrage of warnings of doom from the BBC, Labour, the LibDems, some Tories, the unions, the CBI, well-known businessmen, and politicians from the rest of the EU and even from the US.

Sunil_Prasannan

UKIP and Russia have a common foe - the EU!

SouthamObserver

Socrates said:

Surely Labour will be willing to commit to an EU referendum in this case then? They're polling in the lead and all the arguments are supposedly on their side...

Labour has made clear it does not want a referendum. The Tories have made clear they will deliver one. The choice is also very clear therefore: if you think a referendum is important you should vote Tory next year, it's the only realistic way to get one.

OblitusSumMe

edmundintokyo said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?

Yes, they have been completely incoherent on that, probably for the very good reason that they don't actually have a clue, and, where they do have a clue, they don't agree amongst themselves. In one breath Farage cites Norway as a model, then in the next he goes on about stopping immigration and having full control over our borders.

This incoherence is one reason why I think an Out result could never be obtained in a referendum. If UKIP really wanted us to leave the UK, they'd be urging supporters to vote Conservative to get the referendum, and spending the next three years putting together a coherent case. (At the risk of awakening the Nats again, there's a useful model here in the SNP's failure to put together coherent answers on the currency, EU membership, and the Scottish financial services industry. That's how not to do it).

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying that such a case can't be made; I think it can. But you can't make it by cherry-picking the bits you like from three or four mutually-incompatible options.

A skilled campaign can get away with a lot in a referendum. It's an even better environment for outrageous political bullshitting than a general election, because once it's done it's done for a generation and it doesn't matter if you get rumbled. I don't think it's safe to assume that a campaign couldn't be won based on a combination of contradictory claims, especially if you need to know a bit about a wonkish subject like the EEA to see the contradictions.

One only has to look at the chutzpah of the No to AV campaign to see that, though it also helped that the pro-AV campaign was inept.

Pulpstar

Stuart_Dickson said:

Is there any serious talk of John Thurso not staying on? He is only 60. Bit early for a retirement I would have thought.

Do you really think that the Lib Dems could hold on to Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross on just 30% of the vote? If they drop that low then it looks like curtains.

Whatever, Shadsy's current LD price of 2/5 is too short, even if Thurso is the candidate again.

I'm not betting on any Lib Dems in Scotland. No confidence in the yellow peril north of the border whatsoever. Well Orkney and Shetland will remain, but wee Danny could go.

Stuart_Dickson

Cyclefree said:

malcolmg said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Minorly pleasurable Indy Yougov last night, all grist to the trend mill.

John Curtice scathing about the Dambusters:

Nicola Sturgeon ‏@NicolaSturgeon 2 hrs
John Curtice in the Times - 'the no campaign...at risk of becoming an irritating background noise to which nobody listens anymore'

I see SEANT is panicking , arguing with James Kelly and WOS on twitter about NO lead in polls.
Unionists are getting ever more desperate.

I have said it before and will say it again. I would not be at all surprised to find Yes winning. The No campaign has been negative and dull and uninspiring, even if what it has said may be correct.

Sometimes ruling yourself is more important than whether you will be richer as part of another country. Self-respect matters and if the Scots vote for independence I wish them luck and hope that we can agree an amicable divorce and a good working relationship for the future.

Beyond that I simply don't care. I hope never to hear another Scots politician talking to English voters since all the ones I've been aware of have been largely either ghastly or atrocious in what they've done. I expect the Scots feel the same way about English politicians.

Self-respect is a concept that is clearly over the heads of a lot of contributors here.

It is rarely a good idea to allow yourselves to be governed by another country. The English dislike it when it happens to them, so they can hardly complain when other people question the wisdom of it.

Anorak

Richard_Nabavi said:

t's ridiculous, of course, and no-one takes it seriously. But that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have an effect: voters will tend to split the difference, thinking 'well, I'm sure it won't be that many jobs lost, but it might be some'. That's a hard problem to overcome when you're arguing for a leap into what will seem like the dark, against a pretty consistent barrage of warnings of doom from the BBC, Labour, the LibDems, some Tories, the unions, the CBI, well-known businessmen, and politicians from the rest of the EU and even from the US.

Are we discussing membership of the EU or Scottish Independence?

eek

Richard_Nabavi said:

Up to a point, but incoherence opens the flank to Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. The Stay In side don't need to win any arguments, they just need to sow enough doubt.

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

SouthamObserver

@EiT - "A skilled campaign can get away with a lot in a referendum. It's an even better environment for outrageous political bullshitting than a general election, because once it's done it's done for a generation and it doesn't matter if you get rumbled. I don't think it's safe to assume that a campaign couldn't be won based on a combination of contradictory claims ... "

Sounds very much like the Yes campaign in Scotland!!!

edmundintokyo

Richard_Nabavi said:

edmundintokyo said:

A skilled campaign can get away with a lot in a referendum. It's an even better environment for outrageous political bullshitting than a general election, because once it's done it's done for a generation and it doesn't matter if you get rumbled. I don't think it's safe to assume that a campaign couldn't be won based on a combination of contradictory claims, especially if you need to know a bit about a wonkish subject like the EEA to see the contradictions.

Up to a point, but incoherence opens the flank to Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. The Stay In side don't need to win any arguments, they just need to sow enough doubt.

Take Nick Clegg's '3 million jobs' line. It's ridiculous, of course, and no-one takes it seriously. But that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have an effect: voters will tend to split the difference, thinking 'well, I'm sure it won't be that many jobs lost, but it might be some'. That's a hard problem to overcome when you're arguing for a leap into what will seem like the dark, against a pretty consistent barrage of warnings of doom from the BBC, Labour, the LibDems, some Tories, the unions, the CBI, well-known businessmen, and politicians from the rest of the EU and even from the US.

There's certainly something in that. The counter-move to somebody trying to be vague and have everybody think something they like is to fill in the blanks yourself by shamelessly insisting on the worst possible thing you can think of. It's then hard for the vague side to counter the outrageous lie without coming off the fence and alienating somebody.

Richard_Nabavi

eek said:

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

Doubt favours the status quo, certainly. See 'No to AV' for the most recent example.

AndyJS

Easterross said:

AndyJS said:

FPT:

Michael Moore reselected in Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk:

http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/news/2014/03/moore-reselected-borders-0

He tweeted his thanks for being reselected days ago.

Not everyone checks Michael Moore's Twitter feed on a regular basis.

eek

Richard_Nabavi said:

eek said:

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

Doubt favours the status quo, certainly. See 'No to AV' for the most recent example.

Hardly a good example. Considering that Clegg couldn't even sell AV to the person who would benefit from it most a Mr D. Cameron of Downing Street.

AveryLP

Richard_Nabavi said:

eek said:

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

Doubt favours the status quo, certainly. See 'No to AV' for the most recent example.

The Scottish Independence referendum is like a criminal trial where a "yes" vote represents a jury vote of "guilty".

The prosecution need to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

The defence need to prove nothing.

That is why I think that Scotland, even allowing for much circumstantial evidence to the contrary, will very narrowly be found "not guilty".

eek

AveryLP said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

eek said:

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

Doubt favours the status quo, certainly. See 'No to AV' for the most recent example.

The Scottish Independence referendum is like a criminal trial where a "yes" vote represents a jury vote of "guilty".

The prosecution need to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

The defence need to prove nothing.

That is why I think that Scotland, even allowing for much circumstantial evidence to the contrary, will very narrowly be found "not guilty".

surely being Scotland the trial will end in a not proven verdict and we'll suffer it again a few years later....

Morris_Dancer

North Korean men now required to get Kim Jong-Un style haircuts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26747649

Sean_F

edmundintokyo said:

isam said:

edmundintokyo said:

isam said:

If that's what people want then fair enough.

Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.

You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former

The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.

I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me

Labour don't support open borders or anything close, sadly.

It's also probably not correct to say that they think immigration does net damage to working class communities. I know you think that, but not everyone does.

Here is what working class people left behind in such places affected think of it

7 mins 22 in is probably the closest to my view, David Aaronovitch at 3.20 is probably as out of touch as some people on here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK3JAL3hKRo

I think it's clear that immigration is unpopular with a lot of those voters. But where you came in was that you seemed to be saying Labour people typically thought immigration was making things objectively worse for them, not that Labour people thought the voters in question thought immigration was bad for them.

The common assumption in Labour, and probably among the Tory leadership too although they won't admit it, is more likely that immigration is generally good for those communities, but often in unintuitive ways (for example, people's intuitions make them think of a "lump of labour", but economists usually think this is a fallacy), which makes allowing immigration good government, but being seen to do it terrible politics.

Whether or not you think they're right about this and whether or not you agree with the attempted deception, it's a different thing to thinking the policy screws working class communities but wanting to do it anyway to help other demographics.

I think that both party leaderships are sensible enough to realise their both winners and losers from mass migration.

Theuniondivvie

AveryLP said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

eek said:

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

Doubt favours the status quo, certainly. See 'No to AV' for the most recent example.

The Scottish Independence referendum is like a criminal trial where a "yes" vote represents a jury vote of "guilty".

The prosecution need to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

The defence need to prove nothing.

That is why I think that Scotland, even allowing for much circumstantial evidence to the contrary, will very narrowly be found "not guilty".

If very narrowly not guilty, I think you'll find that fine old Scottish verdict 'not proven' will apply (with the distinction that a retrial will be along sooner or later).

Theuniondivvie

eek said:

AveryLP said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

eek said:

I don't want to make this another Scottish independence debate but is doubt enough to keep the status quo.... All that doubt really does it make what you perceive the least worst option is.

Doubt favours the status quo, certainly. See 'No to AV' for the most recent example.

The Scottish Independence referendum is like a criminal trial where a "yes" vote represents a jury vote of "guilty".

The prosecution need to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

The defence need to prove nothing.

That is why I think that Scotland, even allowing for much circumstantial evidence to the contrary, will very narrowly be found "not guilty".

surely being Scotland the trial will end in a not proven verdict and we'll suffer it again a few years later....

Snap, though I think in Scots Law double jeopardy applies to Not Proven.

AndyJS

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

sabretooth

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

Lots of fed-up mums with children in tow in Tescos today. Teachers sometimes have an inflated sense of entitlement (i work with them several days a week and hear it all the time).

MarqueeMark

Morris_Dancer said:

North Korean men now required to get Kim Jong-Un style haircuts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26747649

OGH counts his blessings he's in Bedford....

Snakehead meets Slaphead.

JackW

Morris_Dancer said:

North Korean men now required to get Kim Jong-Un style haircuts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26747649

Rumours are circulating, not as yet denied, that a certain Bedford gentleman was consulted and advised more extreme follicular shearing and the bald truth is I fear it may be a precursor to posting rights for a certain blog not entirely unrelated to politics, betting and F1 sport.

TGOHF

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. W, being bald offers superior aerodynamics, lower barber costs and abolishes shampoo expenses altogether. It's tri-winning.

Blueberry

Tykejohnno said:

Wishing Farage all the best.

Go on Farage,rip the illiberal clegg apart.

I'm feeling the same fighting spirit and I expect everyone in Farage's camp will feel the adrenaline flowing to a certain extent. It's probably because Farage is fighting for our territory - that most basic of animal instincts - and that makes people feel hyperaroused and patriotic. But he needs to enhance that emotion with reason if he's to win over more of the centre ground.

What will Clegg be feeling? He's defending a political theory of governance. One which isn't currently working very well. It's hard to be passionate about the EU so he'll have to rely on appealing to people's fears. Fair chance his arguments will be boring, so he'll probably resort to jokey ad homs to liven it up a bit.

TheWatcher

TGOHF said:

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

What do malingering teachers want now? Longer holidays, or more Inset days?

TGOHF

TheWatcher said:

TGOHF said:

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

What do malingering teachers want now? Longer holidays, or more Inset days?

They want to block performance related pay coming in next September - just the NUT holding out - the saner unions didn't participate this time.

TheWatcher

TGOHF said:

TheWatcher said:

TGOHF said:

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

What do malingering teachers want now? Longer holidays, or more Inset days?

They want to block performance related pay coming in next September - just the NUT holding out - the saner unions didn't participate this time.

Sadly the non NUT members will be tarred with the same brush.

Sunil_Prasannan

Morris_Dancer said:

North Korean men now required to get Kim Jong-Un style haircuts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26747649

The man has no Seoul!

Sunil_Prasannan

TGOHF said:

TheWatcher said:

TGOHF said:

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

What do malingering teachers want now? Longer holidays, or more Inset days?

They want to block performance related pay coming in next September - just the NUT holding out - the saner unions didn't participate this time.

To the Education Secretary:

NUTS!

The teaching Union

Richard_Nabavi

Labour being open, transparent and encouraging constructive criticism:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-26754300

Richard_Tyndall

sabretooth said:

well i think it's realistic. A lot of people don't want to leave the EU, that's too scary and radical. They just want more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions.

Which is exactly why it is unrealistic. Remaining in the EU whist having more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions is the one option which is definitely not on the table.

TGOHF

I have a feeling in my water that old Cleggy will do ok tonight - certainly Farage must be strong favourite before the off no ?

TGOHF

How many Labour webels voted against the benefits cap ?

CopperSulphate

Richard_Tyndall said:

sabretooth said:

well i think it's realistic. A lot of people don't want to leave the EU, that's too scary and radical. They just want more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions.

Which is exactly why it is unrealistic. Remaining in the EU whist having more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions is the one option which is definitely not on the table.

Yep. Whenever a UK minister tries to get a better deal for the country they get accused of being swivel-eyed loons by the pro-EU brigade.

They always say we should go along with whatever is proposed by the EU to have more leverage at some unspecified future date on some unspecified matter. Then when the next thing crops up we should go along with it again no questions asked.

This has been going on for 30 years.

Bond_James_Bond

Richard_Nabavi said:

If UKIP really wanted us to leave the EU, they'd be urging supporters to vote Conservative to get the referendum

Except that UKIP supporters anticipate that Cameron will welsh on this promise, either by not holding it all, or by losing it and then not acting on it. The available evidence suggests they are calling this right.

They therefore plan to vote UKIP, anticipating that Cameron will lose office and will be replaced by someone more pliable. The available evidence suggests they are calling this wrong.

Sean_F

Richard_Tyndall said:

sabretooth said:

well i think it's realistic. A lot of people don't want to leave the EU, that's too scary and radical. They just want more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions.

Which is exactly why it is unrealistic. Remaining in the EU whist having more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions is the one option which is definitely not on the table.

I could live with being part of the EU on those terms. Yougov's recent Europe-wide survey showed huge support for powers being returned to member states.

However, powers being returned to member states will never happen. Membership of the EU is a one-way street to ever more centralised control.

Sunil_Prasannan

TGOHF said:

I have a feeling in my water that old Cleggy will do ok tonight - certainly Farage must be strong favourite before the off no ?

"You have the charisma of a damp rag, and the appearance of a low-grade bank clerk. And the question that I want to ask, [...] that we're all going to ask, is "Who are you ?". I'd never heard of you. Nobody in Europe had ever heard of you. I would like to ask you, President, who voted for you, and what mechanism...oh, I know democracy isn't popular with you lot, and what mechanism the people of Europe have to remove you ? Is this European democracy ? Well, I sense, I sense though that you are competent and capable and dangerous, and I have no doubt in your intention, to be the quiet assassin of European democracy, and of the European nation states. You appear to have a loathing for the very concept of the existence of nation states - perhaps that's because you come from Belgium, which is pretty much a non-country. But since you took over, we've seen Greece reduced to nothing more than a protectorate. Sir, you have no legitimacy in this job at all, and I can say with confidence that I speak on behalf of the majority of British people in saying: we don't know you, we don't want you, and the sooner you're put out to grass, the better."

TGOHF

22 votes against benefits cap ... 520 for...

A few missing..

BobaFett

Just LOLing at the price freeze news.
It would be hilarious to reprint the threads at the time in which our Conservative friends assured us that the energy firms would put their prices up following Ed's policy.

LOL.

Stuart_Dickson

Former Scottish Lib Dem chief Andy Myles backs Yes. The tide is beginning to turn.

Richard_Nabavi

Bond_James_Bond said:

Except that UKIP supporters anticipate that Cameron will welsh on this promise, either by not holding it all, or by losing it and then not acting on it.

Quite so. That demonstrates either that they are completely bonkers, or, more likely, are looking for any excuse not to have their bluff called.

Let there be no doubt: there is not a snowflake's chance in hell that Cameron could welch on the referendum promise, even if he wanted to (which he doesn't). He would be absolutely crucified by the Conservative Party (including by Cameroons like me).

TGOHF

BobaFett said:

Just LOLing at the price freeze news.
It would be hilarious to reprint the threads at the time in which our Conservative friends assured us that the energy firms would put their prices up following Ed's policy.

LOL.

Ed's policy never happened - the government's did, green cr*p was removed and prices came down.

Surprising that you want to highlight this success...

TheWatcher

BobaFett said:

Just LOLing at the price freeze news.
It would be hilarious to reprint the threads at the time in which our Conservative friends assured us that the energy firms would put their prices up following Ed's policy.

LOL.

Go for it. Did you not archive all the posts when you were lurking?

timmo

TGOHF said:

22 votes against benefits cap ... 520 for...

A few missing..

I wonder how many Lib Dems didnt vote just to try and be able to posture both ways to their electorate...as per their own book of "How to win an election"
Just ask our very own Mark Pack..

CopperSulphate

TGOHF said:

How many Labour webels voted against the benefits cap ?

This rebelling against the benefit cap seems typical Labour cynicism to me. They don't want to be accused of being on the side of the workshy, but don't want to appear heartless either so are hedging their bets with this stage managed nonsense.

A bit like Ed voting against intervention in Syria, but secretly hoping to lose the vote.

SimonStClare

TGOHF said:

22 votes against benefits cap ... 520 for...

Blimey - I wonder how Ms Toynbee is going to spin this in her next column?

peter_from_putney

Dearie me - just WHEN are Ladbrokes going to sort out their website betting platform?
Having recently widened the scope of their Constituency betting offering - they had a dedicated website for just this purpose.
I've just attempted to visit there, only to find I'm re-directed to their main site, where surprise, surprise their constituency betting markets are simply nowhere to be found.
This is absolutely crazy and incredibly frustrating considering this is about their third attempt over the recent past to rectify their nightmarish website, still seemingly without any real success.

glw

BobaFett said:

Just LOLing at the price freeze news.
It would be hilarious to reprint the threads at the time in which our Conservative friends assured us that the energy firms would put their prices up following Ed's policy.

LOL.

But SSE did put its prices up after Ed's brilliant plan to cut fuel bills forever and ever was announced. SSE announced in October that they were raising prices by 8.2% from 15 November, they've now fixed those bills at this new higher level until January 2016.

Was that what Ed wanted?

Bond_James_Bond

Richard_Nabavi said:

Let there be no doubt: there is not a snowflake's chance in hell that Cameron could welch on the referendum promise, even if he wanted to (which he doesn't).

I'm not so sure. He has form on this: he welshed on Lisbon. We know the pretext - it had already been enacted - but in a counterfactual the following is possible:

- Cameron has a Lisbon referendum anyway ("should the HoC now repeal it")
- Armed with a Yes he then indicates that unless Britain's terms are changed he'll invoke Article whatever it is
- It is the EU's problem to figure out how to make this happen.

It is therefore probably truer to say Cameron is looking for any excuse not to have a referendum. It is not clear based on previous cast-iron guarantees that he considers himself in any way bound by any particular promise.

Of course he does not want any of the above, and does not want to alter Britain's terms. If he did, he'd want to enter such negotiations armed with a mandate to walk away if not appeased.

Otherwise the conversation will go as follows:

DC: Look, this really isn't good enough. I want some sovereignty back.
EU: No.
DC: Oh. OK.

(leaves room and addresses assembled press)

DC: I have triumphed! This is a great deal for Britain!

Charles

Pulpstar said:

Whoever wins I'd like one of the two to take an absolubte battering.

Nigel definitely shouldn't underestimate Nick as an opponent, he utterly outmanoeuvred Cameron on the boundary changes and a massive proportion of Lib Dem MPs are in Gov't now.

He doesn't do too badly when facing Hattie in (d)PMQs when Dave is out on international jollies.

Hope Nigel is well prepped.

I'm not sure that you can argue that Clegg "utterly outmanoeuvred Cameron" on the boundary changes.

He withheld his party's support for a previously agreed deal. I don't want to get into a discussion on whether Clegg was justified or a lying skunk for doing so (the latter, btw) because I doubt anyone's mind will be changed.

But that's not clever politics: it's just throwing your toys out of a pram. At the most, Cameron can be criticised for believing that Clegg was a man of his word.

Richard_Nabavi

peter_from_putney said:

I've just attempted to visit there, only to find I'm re-directed to their main site, where surprise, surprise their constituency betting markets are simply nowhere to be found.
This is absolutely crazy and incredibly frustrating considering this is about their third attempt over the recent past to rectify their nightmarish website, still seemingly without any real success.

The markets are there, but they are extremely well hidden - it is indeed the most user-hostile website known to mankind.

1) From the Politics page, click on 'See All' in the left-hand panel

2) You should get some extra categories appearing in the panel. One of them is 'UK General Election (1)'. You might naively think this means there's only one market available, but click on it all the same.

3) You should get one seat come up (currently Bermondsey & Southwark). In the header for that market, it says "04 May 2015 00:00 Next General Election Constitu..." followed by a number and a right arrow. The number is currently 104 (the number of constituency markets available). Click on the 104.

4) Voila!

Morris_Dancer

Mr. glw, yes, of course. We know from when Miliband was buggering things up as Energy and Crying Secretary that higher fuel prices due to green levies was something he supported.

TheWatcher

glw said:

BobaFett said:

Just LOLing at the price freeze news.
It would be hilarious to reprint the threads at the time in which our Conservative friends assured us that the energy firms would put their prices up following Ed's policy.

LOL.

But SSE did put its prices up after Ed's brilliant plan to cut fuel bills forever and ever was announced. SSE announced in October that they were raising prices by 8.2% from 15 November, they've now fixed those bills at this new higher level until January 2016.

Was that what Ed wanted?

It's a good campaign slogan for Ed; 'Labour - Freezing higher energy prices to prolong your cost of living crisis'.

AlastairMeeks

On topic, the public has barely started thinking properly about the idea of leaving the EU and is already coming to the conclusion that it's Better Off In. If we actually ever get a referendum on the subject, In will have a crushing majority.

Sean_F

Richard_Nabavi said:

Bond_James_Bond said:

Except that UKIP supporters anticipate that Cameron will welsh on this promise, either by not holding it all, or by losing it and then not acting on it.

Quite so. That demonstrates either that they are completely bonkers, or, more likely, are looking for any excuse not to have their bluff called.

Let there be no doubt: there is not a snowflake's chance in hell that Cameron could welch on the referendum promise, even if he wanted to (which he doesn't). He would be absolutely crucified by the Conservative Party (including by Cameroons like me).

Why should any eurosceptic trust Cameron to honour his promise?

It would be like trusting Sauron.

Charles

TGOHF said:

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

What are they striking over?

Morris_Dancer

Quite agree, Mr. Charles.

Just realised the debate clashes with Futurama on Pick. Decision, decisions. I think I'd vote for Leela ahead of any current party leader.

Charles

Richard_Tyndall said:

sabretooth said:

well i think it's realistic. A lot of people don't want to leave the EU, that's too scary and radical. They just want more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions.

Which is exactly why it is unrealistic. Remaining in the EU whist having more say and control over their own national agenda and decisions is the one option which is definitely not on the table.

But you have to prove it to normal, non-political, people.

That's why the best case for the Out campaign is "we tried to renegotiate but those damn French, Germans, Europeans weren't having any of it"

TGOHF

Charles said:

TGOHF said:

AndyJS said:

It'll be interesting to see if the teachers' strike has any effect on the opinion polls. It obviously wouldn't make much of a difference but it might shift a point one way or other.

If the mood at the school gate yesterday is anything to go by then Gove's popularity is on the up - this strike is about as popular as a porcupine at a nudist disco with parents.

What are they striking over?

See below - mainly performance related pay being introduced from next September. What parent doesn't approve of that for teachers ?

SimonStClare

Spectator: - “The Commons has just backed the government’s welfare cap by 520 votes to 22 against. As that figure for the Noes will include SNP MPs, this means a very small rebellion on the Labour benches – around 13.

Party sources were yesterday briefing they expected around two dozen of their backbenchers to vote against.”

Greg Hands has already 'tweeted' who they were.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/22-mps-rebel-on-welfare-cap/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=22-mps-rebel-on-welfare-cap