Comrade Chancellor! It seems that the same Cyrillic letter is used for the 'G' in Lugansk (and other terms), but the Ukrainians pronounce it nearer to the 'H' in Hat.
Луганск - Russian Луганськ - Ukrainian
Russians pronounce 'h' in foreign languages as 'g', hence my original quip about "Gyde Park" where the weather is "gorrible" and always "vet and vindy".
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
I would agree, with two provisos. Firstly, it was presumably the TV station who ran with it, rather than the Yes campaign (no sign so far of the usual No Campaign type orchestration). Secondly, we don't know who the assailant was and therefore if his or her identity is significant politically.
And the other side have in fact been trying it on for a long time, often with much less excuse. Only the other week a Labour MP tried to concoct a story about Nat vandalism of his constituency office, complete with media and police. But it seems to have amounted to the odd sticker on the window, and some spraypainted slogans which turned out to be (a) old and (b) the local youth gang's territorial markers*. There is some very sharp investigative journalism and comment on this, inclouding a most interesting analysis of a Scotsman piece
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
'An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.'
Salmoan caught troughing again.
The real shocker is that Eck forsook the "Presidential Suite" for a "King Suite".
An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.
The Deputy First Minister recently defended Mr Salmond's controversial oversees expense claims by saying he would not get caught staying at New York's upmarket Benjamin Hotel like Jack McConnell, his Labour predecessor.
But The Telegraph can disclose Mr Salmond has in fact stayed at The Benjamin, spending three nights in a king suite there during a taxpayer-funded trip to the United States in October 2007.
Ha Ha Ha , no wonder you losers are circling the drain , nothing more important like child poverty , unemployment , bedroom tax etc to focus on. What a bunch of diddies.
Absolute corker of an own goal by Lego Nord. Thanks for the link.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
I would agree, with two provisos. Firstly, it was presumably the TV station who ran with it, rather than the Yes campaign (no sign so far of the usual No Campaign type orchestration). Secondly, we don't know who the assailant was and therefore if his or her identity is significant politically.
And the other side have in fact been trying it on for a long time, often with much less excuse. Only the other week a Labour MP tried to concoct a story about Nat vandalism of his constituency office, complete with media and police. But it seems to have amounted to the odd sticker on the window, and some spraypainted slogans which turned out to be (a) old and (b) the local youth gang's territorial markers*. There is some very sharp investigative journalism and comment on this, inclouding a most interesting analysis of a Scotsman piece
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
Exactly. Which is why I couldn't be bothered to post that story before. But I wouldn't say 'both' sides in anything like strict equivalence - such rubbish is being orchestrated far more from the No campaign. As things are, I really do wonder if it is possible to have a debate with people who act like that MP.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
I would agree, with two provisos. Firstly, it was presumably the TV station who ran with it, rather than the Yes campaign (no sign so far of the usual No Campaign type orchestration). Secondly, we don't know who the assailant was and therefore if his or her identity is significant politically.
And the other side have in fact been trying it on for a long time, often with much less excuse. Only the other week a Labour MP tried to concoct a story about Nat vandalism of his constituency office, complete with media and police. But it seems to have amounted to the odd sticker on the window, and some spraypainted slogans which turned out to be (a) old and (b) the local youth gang's territorial markers*. There is some very sharp investigative journalism and comment on this, inclouding a most interesting analysis of a Scotsman piece
'An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.'
Salmoan caught troughing again.
The real shocker is that Eck forsook the "Presidential Suite" for a "King Suite".
He probably thought it would look good to be seen slumming it.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
I wonder if the song "Rule Britannia" will be permitted at football in Scotland after a YES vote.
'An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.'
Salmoan caught troughing again.
The real shocker is that Eck forsook the "Presidential Suite" for a "King Suite".
I think that's probably an old stat Rod, afaiaa they've got a lot better in recent years at updating the registers regularly.
Maybe... I'd love to know the answer. I believe Glasgow is the worst in the UK.
Rod it is reckoned there are 400,000 potential voters missing from the registers in Scotland. The YESNP has been systematically tracking them down for some months. Not surprisingly, most are either students or people who live in areas identified as being 'deprived', i.e. safe rotten Labour burghs. It is this sort of dedicated ground work being done by the YES side which makes me think they will win. They are also going after the 2million Scots who were registered but didn't vote in 2011.
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
Seant, been warning for months on here that this Indy Ref campaign was going to get quite heated and very nasty before the vote. And it will also leave a lingering bitterness for a long time after the result in announced too. What ever the outcome of the Indy Ref, the SNP desire for Independence has finally managed to split the nation and pit Scot against Scot in a way that is causing arguments among families and friends up and down the country right now.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
All the froth about Eck's hotel expenses or George Robertson pinning the future of world peace on the outcome of IndyRef shows just how desperate the side I support, the Better Together team is getting. The vast majority of Scots will either not hear about it or totally disregard it.
My experience tells me there are far fewer undecided voters now and it will all come down to the weather and GOTV.
We are rapidly getting to the 'fcuk you we won't be told what to do' stage and as happened in 1998 from that tipping point on, it will all be one way, towards YES. I hear precious few positive reasons for holding the UK together and the more prominent figures based in London, especially Scots based in London, lecture the resident Scots on what is good for them, the more the votes will tip to YES.
Seant, been warning for months on here that this Indy Ref campaign was going to get quite heated and very nasty before the vote. And it will also leave a lingering bitterness for a long time after the result in announced too. What ever the outcome of the Indy Ref, the SNP desire for Independence has finally managed to split the nation and pit Scot against Scot in a way that is causing arguments among families and friends up and down the country right now.
I hear precious few positive reasons for holding the UK together
Probably because there aren't that many.
From an English viewpoint, I say 'Good bye and good luck'. There are clearly many benefits to the south for being apart from Scotland, and they shall be welcomed.
All the froth about Eck's hotel expenses or George Robertson pinning the future of world peace on the outcome of IndyRef shows just how desperate the side I support, the Better Together team is getting. The vast majority of Scots will either not hear about it or totally disregard it.
My experience tells me there are far fewer undecided voters now and it will all come down to the weather and GOTV.
We are rapidly getting to the 'fcuk you we won't be told what to do' stage and as happened in 1998 from that tipping point on, it will all be one way, towards YES. I hear precious few positive reasons for holding the UK together and the more prominent figures based in London, especially Scots based in London, lecture the resident Scots on what is good for them, the more the votes will tip to YES.
Surely the Maria Miller story shows that strange expenses claims are ultra-toxic in today's politics. I'm sure The Telegraph has got some cards up their sleeve on The Peninsula Hotel mystery.
Easterross, you don't worry that the almost OTT behaviour of some Yes supporters online etc is in fact not just turning some voters more determinedly off their campaign, but also making these voters less likely to raise their heads above the parapet and voice an opinion at all? Just look at the steady stream of abuse that some celebrities have been subjected to if they openly support the Scots voting to remain in the UK. I know that I tend to avoid discussing the Indy Ref and skim over the debate far more often than I used to here on PB these days. Way back in 1992 we discovered the shy Tory vote, I suspect that we are also going to discover the shy No vote come the day of the election.
I think that's probably an old stat Rod, afaiaa they've got a lot better in recent years at updating the registers regularly.
Maybe... I'd love to know the answer. I believe Glasgow is the worst in the UK.
Rod it is reckoned there are 400,000 potential voters missing from the registers in Scotland. The YESNP has been systematically tracking them down for some months. Not surprisingly, most are either students or people who live in areas identified as being 'deprived', i.e. safe rotten Labour burghs. It is this sort of dedicated ground work being done by the YES side which makes me think they will win. They are also going after the 2million Scots who were registered but didn't vote in 2011.
'An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.'
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
I think that's probably an old stat Rod, afaiaa they've got a lot bteresetter in recent years at updating the registers regularly.
Maybe... I'd love to know the answer. I believe Glasgow is the worst in the UK.
Rod it is reckoned there are 400,000 potential voters missing from the registers in Scotland. The YESNP has been systematically tracking them down for some months. Not surprisingly, most are either students or people who live in areas identified as being 'deprived', i.e. safe rotten Labour burghs. It is this sort of dedicated ground work being done by the YES side which makes me think they will win. They are also going after the 2million Scots who were registered but didn't vote in 2011.
This cuts both ways.
It is quite possible that there are 1000s of previously apathetic Scots, uninterested in politics, who had hitherto presumed NO would win easily. Now that YES is gaining they are maybe registering so they can do their best to stop it.
This referendum really is very hard to call, for a billion reasons. The huge disparity in results from different pollsters does not help.
Sean the pool of unregistered voters come from constituencies like the one I fought. The majority will identify with the Irish tricolour long before they identify with the Union Jack. They are overwhelmingly people who do not consider they have 'civic duties' but rather that the state is there to keep them. I heard a radio programme where a BBC team was accompanying YESNP team members on unregistered voter search in Easterhouse in Glasgow. One young woman even stopped a couple in the middle of a domestic row to encourage them to complete voter registration forms. She went back to check they had. Neither had ever voted and neither work.
I think that's probably an old stat Rod, afaiaa they've got a lot bteresetter in recent years at updating the registers regularly.
Maybe... I'd love to know the answer. I believe Glasgow is the worst in the UK.
Rod it is reckoned there are 400,000 potential voters missing from the registers in Scotland. The YESNP has been systematically tracking them down for some months. Not surprisingly, most are either students or people who live in areas identified as being 'deprived', i.e. safe rotten Labour burghs. It is this sort of dedicated ground work being done by the YES side which makes me think they will win. They are also going after the 2million Scots who were registered but didn't vote in 2011.
This cuts both ways.
It is quite possible that there are 1000s of previously apathetic Scots, uninterested in politics, who had hitherto presumed NO would win easily. Now that YES is gaining they are maybe registering so they can do their best to stop it.
This referendum really is very hard to call, for a billion reasons. The huge disparity in results from different pollsters does not help.
Seems naïve to think that if it is a close result, with either side winning by less than 8%, that there wont be some kind of aggro/division in Scotland in the aftermath. It would defy human nature
Seant, been warning for months on here that this Indy Ref campaign was going to get quite heated and very nasty before the vote. And it will also leave a lingering bitterness for a long time after the result in announced too. What ever the outcome of the Indy Ref, the SNP desire for Independence has finally managed to split the nation and pit Scot against Scot in a way that is causing arguments among families and friends up and down the country right now.
'An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.'
Salmoan caught troughing again.
Yes , big news , First minister stays in hotel
" But Ms Lamont wouldn't budge, demanding to know "how much taxpayers' cash Alex Salmond spent on himself in the Peninsula Hotel?"
Not that our politicians are petty, you understand, but Ms Sturgeon retorted that Jack McConnell used to stay in New York's Benjamin Hotel, as "frequented by Paul McCartney" " and Alex Salmond.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Seant, been warning for months on here that this Indy Ref campaign was going to get quite heated and very nasty before the vote. And it will also leave a lingering bitterness for a long time after the result in announced too. What ever the outcome of the Indy Ref, the SNP desire for Independence has finally managed to split the nation and pit Scot against Scot in a way that is causing arguments among families and friends up and down the country right now.
'An SNP attempt to downplay Alex Salmond's five-star hotel bills has backfired spectacularly after it emerged he stayed at luxury accommodation singled out by Nicola Sturgeon for direct criticism.'
Salmoan caught troughing again.
The real shocker is that Eck forsook the "Presidential Suite" for a "King Suite".
The man is economising, saving money for the celebrations.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
This affords me an excuse to repeat my second-favourite joke about Prince Charles.
Prince Charles is visiting a Scottish hospital. He enters a ward full of patients with no obvious sign of injury or illness and greets one. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires. The patient replies:
"Fair fa your honest sonsie face, Great chieftain o' th' puddin' race, Aboon them a' ye take yer place, Painch, tripe or the airm, As langs my airm."
Baffled, Charles just grins, fiddles with his cufflinks and moves on to the next patient. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires, hoping for a more intelligible answer. Unfortunately the reply is:
"Some hae meat an' canna eat, And some wad eat that want it, But we hae meat an' we can eat, So let the Lord be thankit."
Even more confused, and his grin now rictus-like, the Prince moves on to the next patient, who without waiting to be spoken to immediately declaims:
"Wee sleekit, cowerin', tim'rous beasty, O' th' panic in thy breasty, Thou needna' start awa' sae hastie, Wi bickering brattle."
Completely bewildered, Charles turns to the accompanying doctor and asks "So one presumes this is the psychiatric ward?"
I think that's probably an old stat Rod, afaiaa they've got a lot bteresetter in recent years at updating the registers regularly.
Maybe... I'd love to know the answer. I believe Glasgow is the worst in the UK.
Rod it is reckoned there are 400,000 potential voters missing from the registers in Scotland. The YESNP has been systematically tracking them down for some months. Not surprisingly, most are either students or people who live in areas identified as being 'deprived', i.e. safe rotten Labour burghs. It is this sort of dedicated ground work being done by the YES side which makes me think they will win. They are also going after the 2million Scots who were registered but didn't vote in 2011.
This cuts both ways.
It is quite possible that there are 1000s of previously apathetic Scots, uninterested in politics, who had hitherto presumed NO would win easily. Now that YES is gaining they are maybe registering so they can do their best to stop it.
This referendum really is very hard to call, for a billion reasons. The huge disparity in results from different pollsters does not help.
Sean the pool of unregistered voters come from constituencies like the one I fought. The majority will identify with the Irish tricolour long before they identify with the Union Jack. They are overwhelmingly people who do not consider they have 'civic duties' but rather that the state is there to keep them. I heard a radio programme where a BBC team was accompanying YESNP team members on unregistered voter search in Easterhouse in Glasgow. One young woman even stopped a couple in the middle of a domestic row to encourage them to complete voter registration forms. She went back to check they had. Neither had ever voted and neither work.
And there's why the English will be happy to see Scotland go.
Lucky old malcolmg's going to be paying for these slackers to keep their lazy lifestyle without the help of subsidies from south o' the border. Happy days.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
I wonder if the song "Rule Britannia" will be permitted at football in Scotland after a YES vote.
LOL< the only place that would ever be sung is at the Ramsden's runners up gaff
Seant, been warning for months on here that this Indy Ref campaign was going to get quite heated and very nasty before the vote. And it will also leave a lingering bitterness for a long time after the result in announced too. What ever the outcome of the Indy Ref, the SNP desire for Independence has finally managed to split the nation and pit Scot against Scot in a way that is causing arguments among families and friends up and down the country right now.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
I wonder if the song "Rule Britannia" will be permitted at football in Scotland after a YES vote.
LOL< the only place that would ever be sung is at the Ramsden's runners up gaff
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Exactly. Which is why I couldn't be bothered to post that story before. But I wouldn't say 'both' sides in anything like strict equivalence - such rubbish is being orchestrated far more from the No campaign. As things are, I really do wonder if it is possible to have a debate with people who act like that MP.
I'm not sure that anyone with a horse in the trace can truly judge which side is doing this sort of rubbish more - we all tend to notice things that advantage us, and ignore those that do not. It's human nature. (*) There are examples on both sides, as any campaign this large will attract idiots.
In addition, it's not just who does it *more*, but who uses it to the best effect, gets it noticed, fires up its supporters and gets undecided voters' notice.
(*) And before anyone says, I'm as bad as anyone else at this ...
One young woman even stopped a couple in the middle of a domestic row to encourage them to complete voter registration forms. She went back to check they had. Neither had ever voted and neither work.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Obv if you disagree with the way I have split the numbers up then it would be a lot different.
I haven't actually added any DNVs into it, which may make UKIP stronger, and compensate for adding too much from one party or another
Just took Ladbrokes 25/1 UKIP to win Telford as well
Yes, possible and value at 16/1. Thurrock is like Gt Yarmouth, a hole. You get good traction in a hole if you are agin the establishment.
2012 local elections in Thurrock Lab 39% Con 30% UKIP 18% Ind 7% LD 4%
16/1 good value from that start
BNP polled 21.3% in 2008 Thurrock locals
That's the idiot BNP though. It does show there is capacity for anti-establishment voting. I'm saying 16/1 is value, not that UKIP will take the seat. They will take Gt Yarmouth though.
All the froth about Eck's hotel expenses or George Robertson pinning the future of world peace on the outcome of IndyRef shows just how desperate the side I support, the Better Together team is getting. The vast majority of Scots will either not hear about it or totally disregard it.
My experience tells me there are far fewer undecided voters now and it will all come down to the weather and GOTV.
We are rapidly getting to the 'fcuk you we won't be told what to do' stage and as happened in 1998 from that tipping point on, it will all be one way, towards YES. I hear precious few positive reasons for holding the UK together and the more prominent figures based in London, especially Scots based in London, lecture the resident Scots on what is good for them, the more the votes will tip to YES.
Surely the Maria Miller story shows that strange expenses claims are ultra-toxic in today's politics. I'm sure The Telegraph has got some cards up their sleeve on The Peninsula Hotel mystery.
Doh, it is because they are not strange that no-one, apart from deranged Labour MSP's and you , cares a hoot about them. Normal people do not expect him to stay in a hostel when he is on official Government business.
Seant, been warning for months on here that this Indy Ref campaign was going to get quite heated and very nasty before the vote. And it will also leave a lingering bitterness for a long time after the result in announced too. What ever the outcome of the Indy Ref, the SNP desire for Independence has finally managed to split the nation and pit Scot against Scot in a way that is causing arguments among families and friends up and down the country right now.
Oh come on, it's called 'a debate'...
That is just so much bollocks it is unbelievable
Pray tell...
Fitalass's comedy post, sounds like she has been recruited for the legends.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Obv if you disagree with the way I have split the numbers up then it would be a lot different.
I haven't actually added any DNVs into it, which may make UKIP stronger, and compensate for adding too much from one party or another
Just took Ladbrokes 25/1 UKIP to win Telford as well
Yes, possible and value at 16/1. Thurrock is like Gt Yarmouth, a hole. You get good traction in a hole if you are agin the establishment.
2012 local elections in Thurrock Lab 39% Con 30% UKIP 18% Ind 7% LD 4%
16/1 good value from that start
BNP polled 21.3% in 2008 Thurrock locals
That's the idiot BNP though. It does show there is capacity for anti-establishment voting. I'm saying 16/1 is value, not that UKIP will take the seat. They will take Gt Yarmouth though.
On GE day in the 2010 Thurrock locals BNP got 13% and UKIP 8%
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
I wonder if the song "Rule Britannia" will be permitted at football in Scotland after a YES vote.
LOL< the only place that would ever be sung is at the Ramsden's runners up gaff
certainly not 'on the streets of Raith' as one English sports journalist so famously said
A deplorable incident. But taking the action of one man - which may or may not have been prompted by the independence conversation - and tarring an entire campaign with it seems rather desperate.
*of course, they may be voting ... but I don't think the spray painting was political!
I was referring to Malc saying that it was the no campaign getting ever more desperate, and having to resort to violence. Which is directly linking this incident and the campaign.
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
If and when it gets closer, it is going to get nastier. There are hundreds of thousands of Scots very attached to their British identitiy (check the terraces at any Rangers game) just as their are hundreds of thousands of Scots who revile Britishness, and are desperate for independence.
Nationalism is a demon, and once evoked it is hard to unsummon.
I wonder if the song "Rule Britannia" will be permitted at football in Scotland after a YES vote.
LOL< the only place that would ever be sung is at the Ramsden's runners up gaff
And the Scottish Cup semi on Sat
A thrashing will take place I am afraid, it will not be pretty and old Ally will be picking up his jotters. Great striker , crap manager.
I am fairly certain that even assuming Scotland votes YES, at both Ibrox Park and the Horseshoe Bar in Glasgow, the Union Jack and portraits of HM Elizabeth, Queen of Scots will continue to be displayed proudly.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
Monty Burns?
Rabbie you turnip
Who? Is he the fella from the Gregor Fisher TV show?
It's unclear whom the Yessers hate more: the English or the Noers.
We do not hate either, we just pity the latter for lack of backbone, what right person would choose to be a serf rather than a freeman.
Very naughty Malcolm, you are exposing your shoulder again to exhibit that chip! Many of us who happen to be Noers to use Mr Bond's expression are certainly not serfs and have never felt like that. If you had simply said that Yessers (ghastly word) support the concept of the small nation state as existed pre 1707, that would have been sufficient.
Of course apart from a few hotheads on both sides, no-one 'hates' anyone on the other side and if there is a YES vote, the overwhelming majority of those of us who are Scottish based noers will work equally hard to ensure the once again separate country called Scotland is successful, both at home and in our relations with the wider world including and especially with the other parts of the British Isles.
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Still no sign whatsoever of the kippers dropping below 5% curiously enough. No doubt there's another Osbrowne 'master strategy' ready and waiting to do just that.
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
This affords me an excuse to repeat my second-favourite joke about Prince Charles.
Prince Charles is visiting a Scottish hospital. He enters a ward full of patients with no obvious sign of injury or illness and greets one. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires. The patient replies:
"Fair fa your honest sonsie face, Great chieftain o' th' puddin' race, Aboon them a' ye take yer place, Painch, tripe or the airm, As langs my airm."
Baffled, Charles just grins, fiddles with his cufflinks and moves on to the next patient. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires, hoping for a more intelligible answer. Unfortunately the reply is:
"Some hae meat an' canna eat, And some wad eat that want it, But we hae meat an' we can eat, So let the Lord be thankit."
Even more confused, and his grin now rictus-like, the Prince moves on to the next patient, who without waiting to be spoken to immediately declaims:
"Wee sleekit, cowerin', tim'rous beasty, O' th' panic in thy breasty, Thou needna' start awa' sae hastie, Wi bickering brattle."
Completely bewildered, Charles turns to the accompanying doctor and asks "So one presumes this is the psychiatric ward?"
It's unclear whom the Yessers hate more: the English or the Noers.
We do not hate either, we just pity the latter for lack of backbone, what right person would choose to be a serf rather than a freeman.
So you despise half your countrymen as traitors and cowards, especially the women. Nice.
Where in your fevered mind did you see "despise", "traitors" , "cowards" in my reply. I merely said I pitied people who preferred to be looked after by someone else rather than handling their own affairs. Calm down dearie and curb your febrile imagination. Silly boy.
Sean, in 1979 Glasgow had more council housing (70+%) than Moscow. Even with the sale of council housing, there is still a large percentage of the population who have little or nothing beyond their pay packet on a Friday.
The £, the stock exchange, investment, property, growth - north and south of the border - will all suffer, for years.
Maybe so but for those people, as one prominent YES campaigner from that community pointed out, your comments are meaningless as these are matters which will never directly affect them as far as they are concerned.
Re expenses for MPs: someone said (apologies cannot remember who) that - "we'd like a system that was fair, simple and honest."
Well, yes: why can't MPs claim expenses which under Inland Revenue rules would be allowable, just like the rest of us? In short, I can't claim for travel to/from my place of work so neither should MPs.
Really, what is the problem with subjecting MPs to the same laws as the rest of us?
It's unclear whom the Yessers hate more: the English or the Noers.
We do not hate either, we just pity the latter for lack of backbone, what right person would choose to be a serf rather than a freeman.
Very naughty Malcolm, you are exposing your shoulder again to exhibit that chip! Many of us who happen to be Noers to use Mr Bond's expression are certainly not serfs and have never felt like that. If you had simply said that Yessers (ghastly word) support the concept of the small nation state as existed pre 1707, that would have been sufficient.
Of course apart from a few hotheads on both sides, no-one 'hates' anyone on the other side and if there is a YES vote, the overwhelming majority of those of us who are Scottish based noers will work equally hard to ensure the once again separate country called Scotland is successful, both at home and in our relations with the wider world including and especially with the other parts of the British Isles.
Easterross, It is hard not to poke fun at some of the posters on here, I know I should not do it but cannot resist. However I do believe we should be running our own affairs, it is not natural to want a bigger neighbour 500 miles away to decide how your money is spent, crazy in fact. I prefer to stand on my own two feet.
Re expenses for MPs: someone said (apologies cannot remember who) that - "we'd like a system that was fair, simple and honest."
Well, yes: why can't MPs claim expenses which under Inland Revenue rules would be allowable, just like the rest of us? In short, I can't claim for travel to/from my place of work so neither should MPs.
Really, what is the problem with subjecting MPs to the same laws as the rest of us?
That's one of the reasons a flat-salary system might be best, travel expenses excepted.
The other day I mentioned colleagues and associates that travel great distance for work from their homes. But that is their choice; they could choose to be nearer. It is their responsibility to ensure they are in the office when required, and do not get expenses for that travel. Some stay over locally during the week; again, they do not get rent paid.
The problem is that being an MP is not an ordinary job. An MP has two workplaces: the House of Commons and his/her constituency, and these can be at opposite ends of the country. Add in some fairly unsociable working hours (the HoC sittings not being the least), and you have a fairly unusual, or possibly unique, occupation in terms of requirements.
Therefore the HoC and the constituency are both work places, and travel between them should be claimable IMHO.
Re expenses for MPs: someone said (apologies cannot remember who) that - "we'd like a system that was fair, simple and honest."
Well, yes: why can't MPs claim expenses which under Inland Revenue rules would be allowable, just like the rest of us? In short, I can't claim for travel to/from my place of work so neither should MPs.
Really, what is the problem with subjecting MPs to the same laws as the rest of us?
Not usually able to comment while at work, so this is on the subject of the last thread:
The simple number of defectors to UKIP from 2010 Con, 2010 Lab, 2010 LD, etc, pools bunches of voters. The main segments of voters tend to be:
Tribal Tory (15%) Tribal Labour (15%) Tribal LD (demonstrably smaller than others) (5%) Tribal Others (5%) Anti-Tory (7%) Anti-Labour (5%) Anti-LD (usually far smaller than the anti-Big-Two, but overlapping now with the Anti-Tory) (3%) Anti-Others (different segments) (2%) Anti-Establishment (sod 'em all) (5%) Swing Voters (15%?) Can't be bothered (largest segment) (23%?)
(NB: Numbers are estimated by the PDOMA method)
You can usually discount the "Can't be bothered" because the scores are normalised against only those turning out. Winning elections tend to be by fashioning Coalitions of these. Eg most Tribal Tory + most anti-Labour + most Anti-LD + most Swing Voters = Maggie's victories
Tribal Labour + Anti-Tory + Swing Voters = Blair's victories
Tribal Tory + some swing voters + some anti-Labour = Cameron in 2010.
Blair's numbers fell election to election because he couldn't enthuse his own tribe to turn out. Cameron didn't get a majority because he couldn't convince the swing voters.
LD polling numbers have crashed because they've lost the leftover anti-Tory (which were swelled by the anti-Tory fraction that swung to them rather than Labour) and the anti-Establishment vote, and the tribal LDs are unenthused.
So - bearing in mind that 2010 Labour was pretty much just the Labour core plus a few anti-Tory and anti-LDs, peeling these away is most difficult.
The 2010 Con vote was the Tory core augmented by a big chunk of anti-Labour and swing voters (albeit not enough to get across the line), so that segment is the most weakly bound. You'd expect a big chunk of the defectors to be swingers* and anti-Labour. Probably with some core Tory that have never before had anywhere to go, but the frequent implication is that the big chunk is former core-Tory.
If it is the swingers, then they - by definition - are the most swingy of voters and have the biggest chance of reverting to the fold. In essence, the effect that you usually see of recovery to the Government as the election looms would be most likely to manifest in UKIP-Con returnees. In other cycles, these would have migrated to Labour in the intervening period; this time, they'll have wandered to UKIP.
*By "swinger", please read "swing voter", of course. I don't mean to imply that UKIP support has a large chunk of "excessively friendly" married voters ...
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Still no sign whatsoever of the kippers dropping below 5% curiously enough. No doubt there's another Osbrowne 'master strategy' ready and waiting to do just that.
Re expenses for MPs: someone said (apologies cannot remember who) that - "we'd like a system that was fair, simple and honest."
Well, yes: why can't MPs claim expenses which under Inland Revenue rules would be allowable, just like the rest of us? In short, I can't claim for travel to/from my place of work so neither should MPs.
Really, what is the problem with subjecting MPs to the same laws as the rest of us?
That's one of the reasons a flat-salary system might be best, travel expenses excepted.
The other day I mentioned colleagues and associates that travel great distance for work from their homes. But that is their choice; they could choose to be nearer. It is their responsibility to ensure they are in the office when required, and do not get expenses for that travel. Some stay over locally during the week; again, they do not get rent paid.
The problem is that being an MP is not an ordinary job. An MP has two workplaces: the House of Commons and his/her constituency, and these can be at opposite ends of the country. Add in some fairly unsociable working hours (the HoC sittings not being the least), and you have a fairly unusual, or possibly unique, occupation in terms of requirements.
Therefore the HoC and the constituency are both work places, and travel between them should be claimable IMHO.
A sales rep could well have his sales area at the other end of the country from the head office and have therefore 2 workplaces the same as an MP so the latter is neither fairly unusual and certainly not unique .
Sean, in 1979 Glasgow had more council housing (70+%) than Moscow. Even with the sale of council housing, there is still a large percentage of the population who have little or nothing beyond their pay packet on a Friday.
The £, the stock exchange, investment, property, growth - north and south of the border - will all suffer, for years.
Maybe so but for those people, as one prominent YES campaigner from that community pointed out, your comments are meaningless as these are matters which will never directly affect them as far as they are concerned.
Yes, but unless they are COMPLETE idiots - and I know a few people like this, and they aren't idiots - they know where their benefits come from. And they will know that their benefits/tax credits come from the British state.
It shouldn't be beyond the wit of Labour activists to put the fear of God in them, and get them worried that an indy Scotland will not be able to afford such generosity, at least for the first decade of independence (and this has the advantage of being probably true).
But again, this relies on Labour recognising the real danger of a YES, getting off their arses, and working the grimier streets of Glasgow and the central belt. If Labour can persuade their people to vote NO, the union is saved - its as simple as that. There aren't enough hardcore Nats to win it, by themselves.
Happily there are the first tiny signs of Labour waking up to the danger. Far too late, but better than nothing.
This is one reason I am writing these blogs in the Telegraph, to get Labour motivated. I'm doing my bit!
And now: a walk up Primrose Hill. Slainte.
Considering they know for sure their benefits will be cut if it is a NO vote , but may not be cut on a YES vote it is not a hard decision for them. Labour are a busted flush in Scotland.
A poll suggested that 80,000 Labour voters switched to the SNP during the four final days of campaigning.
Sarah Oates, professor of political communication at the University of Glasgow, agreed the negativity of Labour’s campaign had a major impact.
“Labour were negative, but they weren’t even good negative,” she said. “Labour once again went for the negative attack politics, I don’t know why because it hasn’t worked for them in the past. It has been a fascinating example in a failure to learn from your mistakes. Fair enough, Alex Salmond is very good, but Labour really did fail to learn from mistakes they made in 2007.
He said: “What we can certainly say is that positive campaigning worked to the SNP’s advantage.
“When we look back to 2007 again, it was one party being positive and the other negative. It makes it all the more intriguing as to why Labour repeated a failed strategy.
''Considering they know for sure their benefits will be cut if it is a NO vote , but may not be cut on a YES vote it is not a hard decision for them. Labour are a busted flush in Scotland. ''
I wonder what the future is for a country where the benefit vote is decisive...
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6 Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6 Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4 BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1 UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0 Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
Still no sign whatsoever of the kippers dropping below 5% curiously enough. No doubt there's another Osbrowne 'master strategy' ready and waiting to do just that.
Thanks
Looks to me like 7% in May 2012 and about 13% now
Think that should prob be factored in
The most pertinent recent change isn't the big obvious swings up and down but the fact that the kippers finished 2013 higher than they started even after all that movement around last May. That's the killer fact for those tories complacent enough to think they can just forget about the kippers after this May's EU and local elections.
MPs in Scottish seats are to be removed from the rUK Lower Legislature
why would the likes of Reid, Browne, Forsyth and dozens of others be allowed to remain in the rUK Upper Legislature when they are only there by virtue of the fact they are...
Cameron should also fire Grant Shapps at the same time. Or at least move him from CCHQ immediately. It must be so difficult for senior management to work when they know that someone with new ideas will be coming in in a 6 weeks.
The Tories are making exactly the same mistakes as what cost them the last general election.
I have to laugh at the way malcolmg, who unquestionably in real life sounds like Prince Charles, lards his posts with abstruse bits of Scotchspeak in an apparent attempt to sound more authentic.
After Googling for a few seconds I reckon I have identified how he does it. He finds his usual post wherever he has it saved written in normal English and pastes it into http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/scottish-translator.asp
And voila! Instant ethnic Scotch!
so "You English bastards saved our little arses and subsidise us so obviously we'll never forgive you" becomes, courtesy of scottish-translator, "Ye sassenach bastards saved uir wee arses an' subsidise us sae obvioosly we'll ne'er forgife ye."
In fact, it seems likeliest that the PB Nats are all actually 'bots from Somerset.
Good one Mr Bond , but just a little out unless you mean the real Bonnie Prince Charlie. I am just a country boy from Burns country.
This affords me an excuse to repeat my second-favourite joke about Prince Charles.
Prince Charles is visiting a Scottish hospital. He enters a ward full of patients with no obvious sign of injury or illness and greets one. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires. The patient replies:
"Fair fa your honest sonsie face, Great chieftain o' th' puddin' race, Aboon them a' ye take yer place, Painch, tripe or the airm, As langs my airm."
Baffled, Charles just grins, fiddles with his cufflinks and moves on to the next patient. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires, hoping for a more intelligible answer. Unfortunately the reply is:
"Some hae meat an' canna eat, And some wad eat that want it, But we hae meat an' we can eat, So let the Lord be thankit."
Even more confused, and his grin now rictus-like, the Prince moves on to the next patient, who without waiting to be spoken to immediately declaims:
"Wee sleekit, cowerin', tim'rous beasty, O' th' panic in thy breasty, Thou needna' start awa' sae hastie, Wi bickering brattle."
Completely bewildered, Charles turns to the accompanying doctor and asks "So one presumes this is the psychiatric ward?"
That's the killer fact for those tories complacent enough to think they can just forget about the kippers after this May's EU and local elections.
Are there any tories that complacent? I think most tories are terrified of UKIP in the Euros. I'm far more terrified of UKIP that labour. Labour look good at the polls but I think in this case there may be a big gap between poll and turnout. Ed isn;t particularly inspiring and labour voters couldn't give a t8ss about Europe.
Oh dear , Conservatives now saying that we would have £143B black hole, so we have to vote NO as it would be just impossible to survive. Can they get any sillier, it appears to be a competition now. Labour have us destabilising the world, Tories counterpunch with £143B black hole, one can only wait with bated breath for the Lib Dems play. http://www.scottishconservatives.com/2014/04/separate-scotland-write-ruk-iou-worth-billions/
Comments
Both sides are getting really silly on this. You're f'ing Scotsman, for God's sake. Act like it and not like a bunch of namby-pamby children. You're trying to debate the future way forward to Scotland, not act like kids in the schoolground.
http://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/11134022.Miller___I_have_let_you_down_/?ref=var_0
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/conservative-mps-expenses/10752820/Maria-Miller-could-cost-Tories-election-if-she-stays-say-MPs.html
Labour will keep quiet as they've got skin in the expenses game.
You might want to consult this article to see why: http://bit.ly/1hcWxYI
On second thoughts, given what Ed did to David, he might well try it on.
@dyedwoolie
General Election 2010: Thurrock[7]
Conservative Jackie Doyle-Price 16,869 36.8 +3.6
Labour Carl Morris 16,777 36.6 −9.6
Liberal Democrat Carys Davis 4,901 10.7 −0.4
BNP Emma Colgate 3,618 7.9 +2.1
UKIP Clive Broad 3,390 7.4 +4.0
Christian Peoples Arinola Araba 267 0.6 N/
The way I have worked it out, which is plausible I think.. if LDS keep 70% of their vote, Tories keep 60% of theirs, Labour 75% of their plus 15% of LDs, UKIP keep all of their plus 75% BNP, 30% Tory, 15% Labour and 15% LDs the result would be
UKIP 14415 (34%)
Labour 13317 (31.5%)
Tory 10121 (23.9%)
LD 3430 (8.1%)
BNP 723 (1.7%)
Obv if you disagree with the way I have split the numbers up then it would be a lot different.
I haven't actually added any DNVs into it, which may make UKIP stronger, and compensate for adding too much from one party or another
Just took Ladbrokes 25/1 UKIP to win Telford as well
My experience tells me there are far fewer undecided voters now and it will all come down to the weather and GOTV.
We are rapidly getting to the 'fcuk you we won't be told what to do' stage and as happened in 1998 from that tipping point on, it will all be one way, towards YES. I hear precious few positive reasons for holding the UK together and the more prominent figures based in London, especially Scots based in London, lecture the resident Scots on what is good for them, the more the votes will tip to YES.
From an English viewpoint, I say 'Good bye and good luck'. There are clearly many benefits to the south for being apart from Scotland, and they shall be welcomed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGYUd4mNaBM
ROFL
Not that our politicians are petty, you understand, but Ms Sturgeon retorted that Jack McConnell used to stay in New York's Benjamin Hotel, as "frequented by Paul McCartney" " and Alex Salmond.
Prince Charles is visiting a Scottish hospital. He enters a ward full of patients with no obvious sign of injury or illness and greets one. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires. The patient replies:
"Fair fa your honest sonsie face,
Great chieftain o' th' puddin' race,
Aboon them a' ye take yer place,
Painch, tripe or the airm,
As langs my airm."
Baffled, Charles just grins, fiddles with his cufflinks and moves on to the next patient. "Hellay. What are you suffering from?" he inquires, hoping for a more intelligible answer. Unfortunately the reply is:
"Some hae meat an' canna eat,
And some wad eat that want it,
But we hae meat an' we can eat,
So let the Lord be thankit."
Even more confused, and his grin now rictus-like, the Prince moves on to the next patient, who without waiting to be spoken to immediately declaims:
"Wee sleekit, cowerin', tim'rous beasty,
O' th' panic in thy breasty,
Thou needna' start awa' sae hastie,
Wi bickering brattle."
Completely bewildered, Charles turns to the accompanying doctor and asks "So one presumes this is the psychiatric ward?"
"No," replies the doctor, "it's the Burns Unit."
Lucky old malcolmg's going to be paying for these slackers to keep their lazy lifestyle without the help of subsidies from south o' the border. Happy days.
In addition, it's not just who does it *more*, but who uses it to the best effect, gets it noticed, fires up its supporters and gets undecided voters' notice.
(*) And before anyone says, I'm as bad as anyone else at this ...
Steve Reed @SteveReed16 4h
Interesting that the independent body that agreed an 11% MP pay increase can't be overruled but the independent body on MPs' expenses can!
Dr Russell Newcombe @TheNewImpostor 22h
David Cameron: Stop the 11% pay rise for MPs' salaries http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-stop-the-11-pay-rise-for-mps-salaries/ via @UKChange
345,000
Chris York @ChrisDYork 54m
The petition calling for Maria Miller to resign has just reached 160,000 http://huff.to/1hcRG9X pic.twitter.com/U2ZWg9Wp0n
165,000
I'm saying 16/1 is value, not that UKIP will take the seat.
They will take Gt Yarmouth though.
*chortle*
UKIP: 29%
Lab 28.5%
Con 28.5%
LD 6%
BNP 5%
Oth 3%
Of course apart from a few hotheads on both sides, no-one 'hates' anyone on the other side and if there is a YES vote, the overwhelming majority of those of us who are Scottish based noers will work equally hard to ensure the once again separate country called Scotland is successful, both at home and in our relations with the wider world including and especially with the other parts of the British Isles.
Afterwards? See for yourself.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
Still no sign whatsoever of the kippers dropping below 5% curiously enough.
No doubt there's another Osbrowne 'master strategy' ready and waiting to do just that.
Teabag ready .... kettle boiled .... pours water .... cup implodes ....
Bugger .... Oh well .... another £19.3M in the bin
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26935113
The £, the stock exchange, investment, property, growth - north and south of the border - will all suffer, for years.
Maybe so but for those people, as one prominent YES campaigner from that community pointed out, your comments are meaningless as these are matters which will never directly affect them as far as they are concerned.
Well, yes: why can't MPs claim expenses which under Inland Revenue rules would be allowable, just like the rest of us? In short, I can't claim for travel to/from my place of work so neither should MPs.
Really, what is the problem with subjecting MPs to the same laws as the rest of us?
I prefer to stand on my own two feet.
Ahem; Our Sven said he was preaching in China. Obviously the massive consumption of Gormless McBruin's feet has done wonders for his looks...!
The other day I mentioned colleagues and associates that travel great distance for work from their homes. But that is their choice; they could choose to be nearer. It is their responsibility to ensure they are in the office when required, and do not get expenses for that travel. Some stay over locally during the week; again, they do not get rent paid.
The problem is that being an MP is not an ordinary job. An MP has two workplaces: the House of Commons and his/her constituency, and these can be at opposite ends of the country. Add in some fairly unsociable working hours (the HoC sittings not being the least), and you have a fairly unusual, or possibly unique, occupation in terms of requirements.
Therefore the HoC and the constituency are both work places, and travel between them should be claimable IMHO.
The simple number of defectors to UKIP from 2010 Con, 2010 Lab, 2010 LD, etc, pools bunches of voters. The main segments of voters tend to be:
Tribal Tory (15%)
Tribal Labour (15%)
Tribal LD (demonstrably smaller than others) (5%)
Tribal Others (5%)
Anti-Tory (7%)
Anti-Labour (5%)
Anti-LD (usually far smaller than the anti-Big-Two, but overlapping now with the Anti-Tory) (3%)
Anti-Others (different segments) (2%)
Anti-Establishment (sod 'em all) (5%)
Swing Voters (15%?)
Can't be bothered (largest segment) (23%?)
(NB: Numbers are estimated by the PDOMA method)
You can usually discount the "Can't be bothered" because the scores are normalised against only those turning out.
Winning elections tend to be by fashioning Coalitions of these. Eg most Tribal Tory + most anti-Labour + most Anti-LD + most Swing Voters = Maggie's victories
Tribal Labour + Anti-Tory + Swing Voters = Blair's victories
Tribal Tory + some swing voters + some anti-Labour = Cameron in 2010.
Tribal LD + Leftover anti-Labour + leftover anti-Tory + leftover swing + anti-Establishment = 2005-2010 LD vote.
Blair's numbers fell election to election because he couldn't enthuse his own tribe to turn out. Cameron didn't get a majority because he couldn't convince the swing voters.
LD polling numbers have crashed because they've lost the leftover anti-Tory (which were swelled by the anti-Tory fraction that swung to them rather than Labour) and the anti-Establishment vote, and the tribal LDs are unenthused.
So - bearing in mind that 2010 Labour was pretty much just the Labour core plus a few anti-Tory and anti-LDs, peeling these away is most difficult.
The 2010 Con vote was the Tory core augmented by a big chunk of anti-Labour and swing voters (albeit not enough to get across the line), so that segment is the most weakly bound. You'd expect a big chunk of the defectors to be swingers* and anti-Labour. Probably with some core Tory that have never before had anywhere to go, but the frequent implication is that the big chunk is former core-Tory.
If it is the swingers, then they - by definition - are the most swingy of voters and have the biggest chance of reverting to the fold. In essence, the effect that you usually see of recovery to the Government as the election looms would be most likely to manifest in UKIP-Con returnees. In other cycles, these would have migrated to Labour in the intervening period; this time, they'll have wandered to UKIP.
*By "swinger", please read "swing voter", of course. I don't mean to imply that UKIP support has a large chunk of "excessively friendly" married voters ...
Looks to me like 7% in May 2012 and about 13% now
Think that should prob be factored in
If Scarlett Johansson can do it, Labour Party activists ought to be able to do it.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/tv-radio/scarlett-johansson-trawling-glasgow-streets-3229041
Election 2011: Negative campaigning falls flat
A poll suggested that 80,000 Labour voters switched to the SNP during the four final days of campaigning.
Sarah Oates, professor of political communication at the University of Glasgow, agreed the negativity of Labour’s campaign had a major impact.
“Labour were negative, but they weren’t even good negative,” she said.
“Labour once again went for the negative attack politics, I don’t know why because it hasn’t worked for them in the past. It has been a fascinating example in a failure to learn from your mistakes. Fair enough, Alex Salmond is very good, but Labour really did fail to learn from mistakes they made in 2007.
He said: “What we can certainly say is that positive campaigning worked to the SNP’s advantage.
“When we look back to 2007 again, it was one party being positive and the other negative. It makes it all the more intriguing as to why Labour repeated a failed strategy.
http://www.holyrood.com/2011/05/getting-the-message-across/
https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/maria-miller-mp-either-pay-back-45-000-in-fraudulent-expense-claims-or-resign
I wonder what the future is for a country where the benefit vote is decisive...
If...
MPs in Scottish seats are to be removed from the rUK Lower Legislature
why would the likes of Reid, Browne, Forsyth and dozens of others be allowed to remain in the rUK Upper Legislature when they are only there by virtue of the fact they are...
former MPs in Scottish seats?
The Tories are making exactly the same mistakes as what cost them the last general election.
Are there any tories that complacent? I think most tories are terrified of UKIP in the Euros. I'm far more terrified of UKIP that labour. Labour look good at the polls but I think in this case there may be a big gap between poll and turnout. Ed isn;t particularly inspiring and labour voters couldn't give a t8ss about Europe.
Labour have us destabilising the world, Tories counterpunch with £143B black hole, one can only wait with bated breath for the Lib Dems play.
http://www.scottishconservatives.com/2014/04/separate-scotland-write-ruk-iou-worth-billions/