politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The jobs of one or more of Dave/Ed/Nigel/Nick could be on

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The jobs of one or more of Dave/Ed/Nigel/Nick could be on the line if the May 22nd elections don’t meet expectations

On May 22nd there are the Euro Elections and as well, for 58% of voters nationwide, local elections. This will be the biggest electoral test before the May 7 2015 general election. The outcomes could impact on the futures of all four main party leaders.

Read the full story here

foxinsoxuk

First!

foxinsoxuk

I think Clegg is the one most at risk, being personally linked to the campaign via the debates. It would also allow a natural break from coalition politics before the next election.

Farage is surely safe, and UKIP has flopped in the past with other leaders such as Lord Pearson of Rannoch.

Cameron and Miliband also seem secure. For all the bile of some, it is too close to an election for a change of leadership for either realistic party of government.

Quincel

Cameron is closing the gap quickly enough, Miliband is ahead in the polls by enough, and UKIP owe Farage too much to dump him if they gain 10% vote share in the Euros but come narrowly 3rd. Clegg could be at risk, but I think the party chose to stick with him until 2015 early on in the coalition and don't intend to change their minds now. Those who support him do so vehemently and those who want to replace him have decided that going after him in June 2015 is the best timing for them.

Millsy

Ukip have the highest expectations so probably have most to lose. Vice versa with the Conservatives. Labour voters don't care about the Euros and I wonder whether the party might perform worse than would be expected in these local council seats.

JosiasJessop

What foxinsox said.

DaemonBarber

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

foxinsoxuk

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Scott_P

FPT

MrJones said:

Salmon would do a lot better if he focused on the effect of London-based mega banks on Scotland rather than London-based politicians especially with the segment that thinks the London mega banks own the political class.

Apart from the fact that the largest mega bank was based in Edinburgh, loudly cheered on by former banker Alex Salmond, that's a brilliant idea.

"A separate Scotland would never again allow Scotsman Fred Goodwin to take over a Scottish bank, and set out to make it the largest in the World, loudly encouraged by the SNP First Minister, er, oh, wait..."

AveryLP

No change in leaders as a result of the May 22 elections.

The outcome of the EP elections is utterly inconsequential.

Far more important are prospects for the 2015 GE, where polling VI and academic modelling of probable outcomes are most significant.

Both the Tories and Labour can find sufficient comfort in current indicators not to want to risk their GE prospects by changing leader.

UKIP have no realistic GE prospects.

The Lib Dems are most under threat. Their problem is that swapping Clegg for Farron before the GE would only make a Tory majority more likely. This is because getting 2010 LDs to 'return home' would drive Labour's vote share down to the low thirties. The alternative of defending core LD seats and waiting to be kingmaker is far more likely to deliver for the party. Number of seats is relatively unimportant. It is power sharing through coalition which counts. And this is Clegg's strength. So no change here too.

MrJones

Three things that matter most: immigration, EU and the mega banks

Ukip talk about the first two
Con pretend to talk about first two
Lab pretend to talk about the first and last one
Lib don't talk about any

Obvious what Libs need to do but - no banking directorships for yooooo.

foxinsoxuk

UKIP are a party led by a City financier, who took over from another public school educated financier.

They are never going to be a bash the bankers party.

MrJones said:

Three things that matter most: immigration, EU and the mega banks

Ukip talk about the first two
Con pretend to talk about first two
Lab pretend to talk about the first and last one
Lib don't talk about any

Obvious what Libs need to do but - no banking directorships for yooooo.

Financier

Re: Today's YouGov

The major change was the 2010 LD split. Today it split in favour of Labour 39/33 (LAB/LD) whilst the rest of the week the split in favour of the LDs.

Both LAB and CONS received the lowest support for this week from their 2010 VIs.

Monksfield

The only result that would have any real ramifications would be UKIP polling top by any significant margin. And I don't think they will.

MrJones

Lib: would be better off without Clegg imo. I'd have thought that was painfully obvious.

Lab: personally can't see a better candidate that wouldn't lose more from extra internal conflict than was gained from the change

Con: would be better off without Cameron - or rather they'd be better off without a Cameroon - so basically they're stuck as all the top level are Cameroons.

JosiasJessop

This morning's Co-op results are awful. It's odd how the Labour supporters on here, who are usually first to bash big organisations that fail, are remaining remarkably silent on both the Group's and the Bank's utter failure.

MrJones

foxinsoxuk said:

UKIP are a party led by a City financier, who took over from another public school educated financier.

They are never going to be a bash the bankers party.

MrJones said:

Three things that matter most: immigration, EU and the mega banks

Ukip talk about the first two
Con pretend to talk about first two
Lab pretend to talk about the first and last one
Lib don't talk about any

Obvious what Libs need to do but - no banking directorships for yooooo.

I never said they would. You said Ukip *voters* would like someone who recently worked for a mega bank. I said that was the exact opposite of reality.

edit: unless they were slagging them off obv.

AveryLP

Monksfield said:

The only result that would have any real ramifications would be UKIP polling top by any significant margin. And I don't think they will.

An UKIP victory would have significance in Europe by highlighting and aggravating the threat of BrExit. This is likely to make EU reform easier to negotiate especially as the UK is not the only EU Member having problems with anti-EU and austerity protest parties. This benefits Cameron more than Farage.

The negative reaction would come from the financial markets who would add political risk premia to the UK's borrowing costs, thereby threatening the sustainability of the economic recovery.

Another impact would be on the media who would be forced into lining up behind either Cameron or Miliband for the GE to the exclusion of dallying with fruitcakes.

For the first and third reasons, an UKIP victory in the EP elections may be the best outcome for Cameron and the Tories.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

I agree that this isn't a risk for most leaders. Cameron/Miliband can't be moved with serious damage to their parties (and the election could be close enough that it would make the difference). Farage could be axed, but I suspect any new leader would end up putting off either the left or the right voters he's attracted.

Clegg could go... when's the new EU commissioner to be named? However, if he didn't want to then axing Clegg could lead to the Coalition's collapse and a sudden election (I know this would need a vote, but any party voting against it would risk looking cowardly).

I think Clegg's safe, however, simply because everybody expects the Lib Dems to come a pretty clear 4th. Unless they're beaten by the Natural Law Party it's hard to see them underperforming expectations.

MrJones

Scott_P said:

FPT

MrJones said:

Salmon would do a lot better if he focused on the effect of London-based mega banks on Scotland rather than London-based politicians especially with the segment that thinks the London mega banks own the political class.

Apart from the fact that the largest mega bank was based in Edinburgh, loudly cheered on by former banker Alex Salmond, that's a brilliant idea.

"A separate Scotland would never again allow Scotsman Fred Goodwin to take over a Scottish bank, and set out to make it the largest in the World, loudly encouraged by the SNP First Minister, er, oh, wait..."

Yes, Salmon chose the wrong strategy.

anotherDave

I can't imagine Mr Farage facing a challenge. UKIP don't need to win the EUP elections, a good second would be a good result too.

malcolmg

Scott_P said:

FPT

MrJones said:

Salmon would do a lot better if he focused on the effect of London-based mega banks on Scotland rather than London-based politicians especially with the segment that thinks the London mega banks own the political class.

Apart from the fact that the largest mega bank was based in Edinburgh, loudly cheered on by former banker Alex Salmond, that's a brilliant idea.

"A separate Scotland would never again allow Scotsman Fred Goodwin to take over a Scottish bank, and set out to make it the largest in the World, loudly encouraged by the SNP First Minister, er, oh, wait..."

Obviously written by a turnip since he cannot even spell the man's name. As ever you use selective Scottish tag to suit. Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell. Toom Tabard as ever.

SimonStClare

Glorious Spring morning to all.

On Topic: I do not see the Euro election results as a threat to any of the 4 leaders, but if one had to choose, then Farage is the least likely to go in my opinion.

anotherDave

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. G, do the SNP care about the euros at all, or is this like a pre-Grand Slam tennis tournament (ie entirely optional)?

Neil

Perhaps Natalie Bennett will announce she wont be standing in this year's Green party (England and Wales) leadership election in the aftermath of the Euros. The fact that hardly anyone would notice may or may not be a commentary on her term.

AveryLP

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

Morris_Dancer

Some graphs and an article on the NHS in the various bits of Britain:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26928204

Two points:
why does the deaths per 100,000 graph end in 2010? That's a bit rubbish, especially when the other goes to 2012-3

I find the Scottish and Welsh lines a bit difficult to tell apart. Purple and dark blue aren't clever lines to use when you only need four colours...

[As an aside, I've had a short play with the graph-making on Open Office Calc, their version of Excel, and I can make the F1 graphs I know you all enjoy. Not sure they'll be quite as big, though. I need to see how large I can make them].

anotherDave

Monksfield said:

The only result that would have any real ramifications would be UKIP polling top by any significant margin. And I don't think they will.

I've had some lovely day-dreams that begin with UKIP getting >50% in the EUP elections. :-)

Neil

Morris_Dancer said:

I think Clegg's safe, however, simply because everybody expects the Lib Dems to come a pretty clear 4th.

5th is unlikely but not totally impossible.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Neil, would that be behind the Greens?

anotherDave

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

I suspect their MPs would prefer to retain 57 seats. Their members must like the idea of seeing a positive result for their time too, instead of the static/declining vote share they've had since late 2010.

philiph

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

You can argue that way, but it is a very short term view to take. If you let your national vote share drop you will lose legitimacy in many ways, you will lose influence and you will encourage a speedy decline from that low point, which will decimate your 40 seats in the following election.

People vote by habit. Let them vote elsewhere at your (yellow) peril.

AveryLP

Neil said:

Perhaps Natalie Bennett will announce she wont be standing in this year's Green party (England and Wales) leadership election in the aftermath of the Euros. The fact that hardly anyone would notice may or may not be a commentary on her term.

The Greens could do with a charismatic leader. Someone, say, who went to Eton and Oxford, perhaps an heir to a baronetcy. Links in the family to a peerage, a commonwealth gubernatorial post and an Olympics medal might help too.

Can't think of anyone who would qualify though.

Morris_Dancer

Not a D&D player myself, but those who are might be interested in this article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26328105

It also reminds me slightly of the fears over videogame violence.

Scott_P

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

NickPalmer

Agree with most others that they're probably all safe. The only one who I can see going is Clegg, but even parties in trouble rarely want the turmoil of a leadership election just before a General Election. And is their problem is actually Clegg? - I've never met a Lib->Lab convert who cited him as the reason, and I've met lots. They simply don't like the coalition.

anotherDave

philiph said:

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

You can argue that way, but it is a very short term view to take. If you let your national vote share drop you will lose legitimacy in many ways, you will lose influence and you will encourage a speedy decline from that low point, which will decimate your 40 seats in the following election.

People vote by habit. Let them vote elsewhere at your (yellow) peril.

I do wonder how much of a financial hit losing all their MEPs would be for the LDs.

"£217,000 office allowance available to each MEP."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329554/EU-expenses-MEPs-Brussels-earn-740-average-citizen-enjoy-free-haircuts-gallons-petrol.html

Innocent_Abroad

Foxinsox [7.59 am] I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years

Well, seventy: they were in Churchill's wartime coalition. Their problem is not keeping Clegg or dumping Clegg, but being a Party of government. That's not what their voters want, mostly. And their activists are like a woman who says she doesn't want a baby and then "forgets" to take her Pill.

Now that there is another even half-credible protest Party (and one that's just racist enough, without being obsessed with memorabilia and so on) they seem pretty well dead in the water to me. When they'll notice is quite another question.

AveryLP

philiph said:

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

You can argue that way, but it is a very short term view to take. If you let your national vote share drop you will lose legitimacy in many ways, you will lose influence and you will encourage a speedy decline from that low point, which will decimate your 40 seats in the following election.

People vote by habit. Let them vote elsewhere at your (yellow) peril.

But it is acceptable short to medium-term tactics.

Probably best outcome for the Lib Dems would be a coalition with Labour next term, second best a continuation of the current coalition, third best a Labour minority government.

The party's prospects of rapidly building national vote share would be greatest under a (failing) Labour minority government. But the ministerial cars will be too tempting to choose to go into opposition. So it can wait until all opportunities for a coalition have passed.

AveryLP

anotherDave said:

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

I suspect their MPs would prefer to retain 57 seats. Their members must like the idea of seeing a positive result for their time too, instead of the static/declining vote share they've had since late 2010.

Of course. But I am not sure that is realistically 'on offer'.

philiph

AveryLP said:

Neil said:

Perhaps Natalie Bennett will announce she wont be standing in this year's Green party (England and Wales) leadership election in the aftermath of the Euros. The fact that hardly anyone would notice may or may not be a commentary on her term.

The Greens could do with a charismatic leader. Someone, say, who went to Eton and Oxford, perhaps an heir to a baronetcy. Links in the family to a peerage, a commonwealth gubernatorial post and an Olympics medal might help too.

Can't think of anyone who would qualify though.

The only one I can think of came 4th (I think), so didn't get an olympic medal.

Edit He is Charles Lawrence Somerset Clarke, seems young for leader of the Greens, unless the same criteria fit his father?

Carnyx

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

TGOHF

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

Lest we forget...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/revealed-salmond-s-support-for-goodwin-over-disastrous-rbs-deal-1.1046662

"In May 2007, just days after taking office, the First Minister wrote to Goodwin about the possible deal on ABN, which was then the subject of huge speculation in the City.

“I wanted you to know that I am watching events closely on the ABN front,” Salmond said. “It is in Scottish interests for RBS to be successful, and I would like to offer any assistance my office can provide."

anotherDave

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

AveryLP said:

anotherDave said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think Clegg deserves a lot of credit as being a key component of the Coalition, and for putting the LibDems into government for the first time in ninety years. It would have been better to have a proper ministerial brief rather than the non-job of deputy PM, and in particular the tuition fees shambles could have been handled better.

I am not anti-Clegg, but every political life draws to a close. It would be good to have a LD leadership election in the autumn, after the Indy ref which does have implications for the party.

DaemonBarber said:

Morning.

Define fail.
What would the result for each party need to be before it was considered so bad that the leader must go.
Given that this is the Euros, I thin k the leaders have a bit more latitude, but I think Mike has it about right:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP
Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?
Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?
Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Nothing the LDs have done in four years has been able to shift their poll numbers. A change of leadership is the obvious untried option.

The Lib Dems don't need a large national vote share. They just need to retain 40+ seats.

I suspect their MPs would prefer to retain 57 seats. Their members must like the idea of seeing a positive result for their time too, instead of the static/declining vote share they've had since late 2010.

Of course. But I am not sure that is realistically 'on offer'.

If you want something, you try the options you can see. Replacing Mr Clegg is one untried option.

SimonStClare

BBC - Co-op Bank apologises and confirms £1.3bn losses.

£1.3bn this year, £709m last year - if this carries on we could be talking serious money..!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26967020

Scott_P

Carnyx said:

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

The story of RBS is the ultimate chip on the SNP shoulder.

Right up until the crash it was a Scottish success, part of the Arc of prosperity, with the full and vocal backing of Eck and his chums.

As soon as it went bang, the line became "how can we blame the English?"

It was Scottish disaster, made in Scotland, by Scots. Wishing that away is infantile, but a typical reflection of SNPers to any intrusion of reality on their fantasy World.

All hail the great and mighty prophet Eck, who will deliver us from England Evil and lead us to the promised land...

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Carnyx, but under a system devised by a Scot and with two Scottish Chancellors during the nation's worst recession in history.

It's not legitimate to lay the blame for our current fiscal woe solely at the door of 'Westminster' as if Scots and Scottish institutions had no part to play in it. I'm not saying "Boo hiss, it's all your fault" just that there are Scottish elements to the cause of the problems we now face (as there are English ones, cf Bradford & Bingley and Northern Rock).

AveryLP

philiph said:

AveryLP said:

Neil said:

Perhaps Natalie Bennett will announce she wont be standing in this year's Green party (England and Wales) leadership election in the aftermath of the Euros. The fact that hardly anyone would notice may or may not be a commentary on her term.

The Greens could do with a charismatic leader. Someone, say, who went to Eton and Oxford, perhaps an heir to a baronetcy. Links in the family to a peerage, a commonwealth gubernatorial post and an Olympics medal might help too.

Can't think of anyone who would qualify though.

The only one I can think of came 4th (I think), so didn't get an olympic medal.

Edit He is Charles Lawrence Somerset Clarke, seems young for leader of the Greens, unless the same criteria fit his father?

Must have beaten into fourth by a minging Lib Dem!

[P.S. The person I can't think of is not Clarke!]

Neil

AveryLP said:

Neil said:

Perhaps Natalie Bennett will announce she wont be standing in this year's Green party (England and Wales) leadership election in the aftermath of the Euros. The fact that hardly anyone would notice may or may not be a commentary on her term.

The Greens could do with a charismatic leader. Someone, say, who went to Eton and Oxford, perhaps an heir to a baronetcy. Links in the family to a peerage, a commonwealth gubernatorial post and an Olympics medal might help too.

Can't think of anyone who would qualify though.

Avery ... is that you putting yourself forward? Vote Green Get Yellow (boxes)?

AveryLP

Neil said:

AveryLP said:

Neil said:

Perhaps Natalie Bennett will announce she wont be standing in this year's Green party (England and Wales) leadership election in the aftermath of the Euros. The fact that hardly anyone would notice may or may not be a commentary on her term.

The Greens could do with a charismatic leader. Someone, say, who went to Eton and Oxford, perhaps an heir to a baronetcy. Links in the family to a peerage, a commonwealth gubernatorial post and an Olympics medal might help too.

Can't think of anyone who would qualify though.

Avery ... is that you putting yourself forward? Vote Green Get Yellow (boxes)?

I am not an Old Etonian, Neil.

And I would never settle for anything less than a Gold!

[It would have to be one of the traditional 'sitting' sports though].

Pulpstar

Consistent poll leads a few points south of the 40s are creating a sense of uneasiness

Errm

Morris_Dancer

F1: my elite spy network (I read it on Twitter) are suggesting Haas will get confirmed for an F1 entry (I'd guess next year). There's been some murmuring about this. He apparently has deep pockets and some actual motorsport knowledge, so hopefully he'll avoid an HRT style cock-up (trying to base your team anywhere other than England is tricky. Ferrari can do it because they're Ferrari, Sauber's got a long history, but a new team trying to tempt engineers away from the cluster of team factories in England have a hard time).

Hmm. He might go for a US base because he was involve din the failed USF1 bid and might go for the patriotic angle to try and get US individuals and firms behind him, but there's also the possibility he'll go for the easier option of setting up shop in the little corner of England where over half the teams are based. Much easier to try and get engineers to join then, because they won't have to move house, let alone country.

There's scope for another team to join as well. If we have the current 11+2 that'll make 26 cars on the grid, which is a little more than has recently been the case, although still entirely workable. However, Tony Fernandes, disappointed with Caterham's ongoing poor performances, may well withdraw from the sport.

dr_spyn

What a wunch of bankers losing £1.3bn at The Co-Op Bank.

Isn't it time for a judge led inquiry into the culture and practices of The Co-Op Bank, and its close relationship with a political party?

£1.3bn loss, so much for ethical banking.

TGOHF

dr_spyn said:

What a wunch of bankers losing £1.3bn at The Co-Op Bank.

Isn't it time for a judge led inquiry into the culture and practices of The Co-Op Bank, and its close relationship with a political party?

£1.3bn loss, so much for ethical banking.

Surely the Coop bank is the ultimate stimulus programme - returning £1.3Bn to the economy ? How ethical.

Mick_Pork

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

Just enjoy that these closet labour supporters are going to have quite the job shouting "don't let labour ruin it again" when they are all cheering on Darling crashing the economy by hilariously trying to blame it all on a letter from Salmond. They can't even bring themselves to criticise Brown's chancellor. That says it all and they will be reminded of it time after time.

Remember the petulant shrieking from the witless tory fools when they were gullible enough to believe Osbrowne's posturing on currency. Oops! LOL

We all know who implemented and was responsible for the regulation of the bankers just as we also know who has the most to lose in bringing up expenses.


Nick Clegg calls for Alistair Darling to quit over expenses claims

Alistair Darling came under fresh pressure to quit as chancellor yesterday when the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, said he should be sacked for profiting from his parliamentary expenses.

Clegg has been making increasingly pointed attacks in the wake of the expenses scandal and was the only party leader to call for the Speaker, Michael Martin, to stand down. Yesterday he turned on the chancellor, accusing him of "flipping" the designation of his main and second homes and claiming public money for personal tax advice. This, Clegg insisted, meant Darling could no longer be trusted with the public finances.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/may/31/liberal-democrats-chancellor-parliamentary-expenses

Always remember the PB Golden Rule.

The PB tories are always wrong. The PB tories never learn.

Easterross

Morning all and very interesting that with polls being the way they are, Tories retained and regained very marginal council wards yesterday.

I suspect Nigel Farage and UKIP may get most egg on the face next month. Media and Farage have built up UKIP to win by a country mile. If they barely win or even come 2nd/3rd that will be seen by many as a fail. Ed and Labour has been almost invisible but as these are largely Labour defending councils controlled by them in London and metropolitan areas, it has most to lose as the Labour List article earlier this week pointed out http://labourlist.org/2014/04/labours-prospects-this-may/ .If they see 125 gains as a great success, it raises the question just what do they expect to win?

For the Tories, the media has already been talking down Tory prospects so if owing to a low turnout the Tories yet again win the Euro poll in terms of total votes and don't lose many MEPs or councillors, it will be seen as a success. The Tories will want to hold on to the Basildons of this world and if they do reasonably well in London, that will be encouraging for next year.

As for the LibDems, surely given the unrelenting media attacks and low polling numbers, holding on to anything will be seen as a success.

So coming back to the original question, I think of all the leaders, Nigel Farage has the most to lose if he doesn't deliver.

Financier

dr_spyn said:

What a wunch of bankers losing £1.3bn at The Co-Op Bank.

Isn't it time for a judge led inquiry into the culture and practices of The Co-Op Bank, and its close relationship with a political party?

£1.3bn loss, so much for ethical banking.

An even greater reason to put the squeeze on the Co-op Bank's debtors.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Pork, why Osbrowne? Are you suggesting Osborne's so incompetent he's comparable to a Scotsman?

Also, Darling didn't crash the economy. He was given a hospital pass by Brown and got spear-tackled.

It's certainly legitimate to state his dithering over Northern Rock (a six month wait, wasn't it, whilst he decided whether to let it fail or nationalise it) did not help matters, but the blame for our economic woe rests largely on the shoulders of Gordon "No more boom and bust" Brown.

TGOHF

Mick_Pork said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

Rememeber the petulant shrieking from the witless tory fools when they were gullible enough to believe Osbrowne's posturing on currency. Oops! LOL


Always remember the PB Golden Rule.

The PB tories are always wrong. The PB tories never learn.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day Pork

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5562093/voters-dont-want-to-share-pound-with-scotland-if-they-quit-uk.html

"By KEVIN SCHOFIELD, Chief Political Correspondent Published: 10th April 2014
MOST voters in England, Wales and Northern Ireland don't want to share the Pound with Scotland if it becomes independent, a new poll has revealed."

AveryLP

Mick_Pork said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

... closet ... shouting ... crashing ... Salmond ... petulant ... shrieking ... witless ... fools ... gullible ... posturing ... Oops! ... LOL ... Golden Rule ... wrong ... PB tories ... never learn.

Morning, Pork.

Neil

AveryLP said:

[It would have to be one of the traditional 'sitting' sports though].

One of the backward facing ones, I presume.

isam

UKIP vs Con Euro Match Bet

I have been banging on for almost a year about what a great bet this is w Ladbrokes.. and haven't had a penny on!

4/6 UKIP was a fantastic price, although not as good as the 11/10 last year

Now Lads have gone 1/2 but Paddy Power have entered the fray...1/5 UKIP!

So we have UKIP at 1/2 (66.6%) w Lads, and Cons at 3/1 (25%) w PP

9% guaranteed return on your money in a month..

NO NEED TO DO ANY RESEARCH!!

Innocent_Abroad

Easterross [9.07 am] Almost the first thing that Labour List article does is to explain why Labour's expectations are as they are. (Turnout.)

The irony of course is that if we didn't have the Fixed Term Parliament Act the pressure on Cammo to go the country would probably be irresistible.

Mick_Pork

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Pork, why Osbrowne? Are you suggesting Osborne's so incompetent he's comparable to a Scotsman?

Bit early to be hitting the bottle isn't is Mr Dancer? Dear oh dear. Pitiful but still amusing.

Morris_Dancer said:

Also, Darling didn't crash the economy.

That's a keeper. I think you'll find that Crosby and CCHQ are rather less sympathetic than you are when they start to rerun the economic crash with Darling in a starring role alongside Brown for "Don't let labour ruin it again." A campaign that they will almost certainly begin in earnest after the May elections if they are dire for the incompetent fop.

The longer the kippers are still nowhere near their 2010 3.1% the more certain it is that the chumocracy will have to make everything about the economic crash and labour's role in it. Which means no free pass for Darling even if that does upset his tory chums on PB.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Isam, whilst I enjoy a good Ave It impersonation as much as anyone I fear you're being a little over-enthusiastic. People should always consider bets carefully, even those offered by me on F1.

[Incidentally, my hit rate is quite good so far, 3/5, but the profit margin is surprisingly poor given that, under 50%. Still, to quote Kermit the Frog, it's not easy being green].

Mick_Pork

AveryLP said:

Mick_Pork said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Why is there an issue with a UK bank being based in the UK pray tell.

The only 'issue' is the farcical SNP pretence that RBS is not a Scottish bank, headquartered in Scotland, runs by Scots, egged on by Eck.

As ever, wishing away the facts just makes the Nats look gullible. Keep up the good work.

It was regulated by London and Westminster and that's the root of the matter. Mr Salmond got - I hope - a good scare out of it, but it wasn't his party that (de)regulated the banks and it wasn't his party or his MPs and peers that benefited hugely from the resulting food fight in the City of London till it all went sour. Credit where credit is due.

... closet ... shouting ... crashing ... Salmond ... petulant ... shrieking ... witless ... fools ... gullible ... posturing ... Oops! ... LOL ... Golden Rule ... wrong ... PB tories ... never learn.

Morning, Pork.

Morning Avery.

Going to remind us all about Patrick Rock again today are you? Or do you think your inept comedy spin on the fop's judgement is probably bad enough as it is?

Pulpstar

DaemonBarber said:

Cameron - a poor 3rd substantially behind UKIP

Fair enough

DaemonBarber said:

Ed - I'd say he's safe. Maybe if Labour poll 2nd, but that isn't going to happen is it?

Could well happen - Labour are not odds on to win even if they are narrow favourites.

DaemonBarber said:

Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?

A COMPLETE wipeout could be curtains but Lib Dems are braced for an awful night anyway. Won't be a total wipeout.

DaemonBarber said:

Nigel - I'd say coming behind Libs would be a potential problem.

Pigs have more chance of sprouting wings, finishing 3rd would be UKIP's 'bad night'

DaemonBarber said:

But then again, I don't think the Euros will unseat any of the above.

Me neither

Neil

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Isam, whilst I enjoy a good Ave It impersonation as much as anyone I fear you're being a little over-enthusiastic. People should always consider bets carefully, even those offered by me on F1.

It's an arb.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Neil, ah. Whoops.

I do apologise, Mr. Isam.

Mick_Pork

Equality Justice ‏@Avitusparta 17m

David Cameron claims 'Big Society' is the work of Jesus, as he calls himself 'Dyno-rod' (via @daily_express) http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/469706/David-Cameron-claims-Big-Society-is-the-work-of-Jesus-as-he-calls-himself-Dyno-rod …

Proof, as if it were needed, that CCHQs spinners and Cammie are almost as embarrassing and incompetent as Avery and the other comedy Cameroons on PB.

TheScreamingEagles

Populus are clearly the gold standard.

Populus ‏@PopulusPolls 1m

New Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2); Cons 34 (=); LD 11 (+2); UKIP 12 (-2); Oth 8 (+1) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140411

Bond_James_Bond

What a depressing quartet.

Pulpstar

Neil said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Isam, whilst I enjoy a good Ave It impersonation as much as anyone I fear you're being a little over-enthusiastic. People should always consider bets carefully, even those offered by me on F1.

It's an arb.

One is seats and the other bet votes.

Mick_Pork

Pulpstar said:

DaemonBarber said:

Clegg - Expectations are low so what happens if there is a total wipe-out?

A COMPLETE wipeout could be curtains but Lib Dems are braced for an awful night anyway. Won't be a total wipeout.

Trouble with that is that there is only so much lowering of expectations that can be done by Clegg's ostrich faction of spinners before the voter just naturally assumes the lib dems are basically a complete irrelevance now. Why even bother to vote for them if their own leader seems to imply they are going to be a waste of a vote and readily expects that outcome??

isam

Easterross said:

Morning all and very interesting that with polls being the way they are, Tories retained and regained very marginal council wards yesterday.

I suspect Nigel Farage and UKIP may get most egg on the face next month. Media and Farage have built up UKIP to win by a country mile. If they barely win or even come 2nd/3rd that will be seen by many as a fail. Ed and Labour has been almost invisible but as these are largely Labour defending councils controlled by them in London and metropolitan areas, it has most to lose as the Labour List article earlier this week pointed out http://labourlist.org/2014/04/labours-prospects-this-may/ .If they see 125 gains as a great success, it raises the question just what do they expect to win?

For the Tories, the media has already been talking down Tory prospects so if owing to a low turnout the Tories yet again win the Euro poll in terms of total votes and don't lose many MEPs or councillors, it will be seen as a success. The Tories will want to hold on to the Basildons of this world and if they do reasonably well in London, that will be encouraging for next year.

As for the LibDems, surely given the unrelenting media attacks and low polling numbers, holding on to anything will be seen as a success.

So coming back to the original question, I think of all the leaders, Nigel Farage has the most to lose if he doesn't deliver.

Ah the old fashioned technique of setting yourself a goal and trying to achieve it... rather refreshing I think

By the way, it is only political anoraks that would think 2nd for UKIP is a disaster... in the real world, it would be reported as "beating the Tories and running Labour close"

No one has said they would win by a country mile, you're just setting them up for a fall (in your head)

Google "Wythenshawe and Sale East" and see what the media made of UKIPs performance there compared to the PB editorial as an example

Financier

Totally OT but fun

Does a baby's name affect its chances in life?

Not very surprising that Eleanor, Peter, Simon, Ann and Katherine are far, far more likely to attend Oxford than Kayleigh, Jade, Paige, Shannon and Shane.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26634477

Surely it says more about their parents - that parents with a certain lifestyle, ambition and education level are more likely to name their children after 'celebrities' than those who think more deeply about the subject of naming children.

Innocent_Abroad

Mick_Pork said:

Equality Justice ‏@Avitusparta 17m

David Cameron claims 'Big Society' is the work of Jesus, as he calls himself 'Dyno-rod' (via @daily_express) http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/469706/David-Cameron-claims-Big-Society-is-the-work-of-Jesus-as-he-calls-himself-Dyno-rod …

Proof, as if it were needed, that CCHQs spinners and Cammie are almost as embarrassing and incompetent as Avery and the other comedy Cameroons on PB.

If the Government gave its supporters a free pass to shoot all the Labour supporters, it could abolish taxation too.

(Note to Moderator: please repost the above sentence every hour or so for the next several years, it appears to contain all that needs to be said as far as the majority of this site's commentators are concerned.)

MonikerDiCanio

Salmond starts to use his wife in an attempt to make Yes more attractive to Scottish women.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10758681/Alex-Salmond-uses-Twitter-to-publicise-his-wife.html
Currently only 28.5% of Scots women support Yes.

The_Woodpecker

a "wallop of council seats"! Very good.

isam

Pulpstar said:

Neil said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Isam, whilst I enjoy a good Ave It impersonation as much as anyone I fear you're being a little over-enthusiastic. People should always consider bets carefully, even those offered by me on F1.

It's an arb.

One is seats and the other bet votes.

GREAT RESEARCH!!!!

Oddschecker have it as "most votes" but PP site says "most seats", so its not an arb, DONT BACK IT!!!!!

TGOHF

TheScreamingEagles said:

Populus are clearly the gold standard.

Populus ‏@PopulusPolls 1m

New Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2); Cons 34 (=); LD 11 (+2); UKIP 12 (-2); Oth 8 (+1) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140411

Wow - it is obviously not Miller time.

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

Populus are clearly the gold standard.

Populus ‏@PopulusPolls 1m

New Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2); Cons 34 (=); LD 11 (+2); UKIP 12 (-2); Oth 8 (+1) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140411

Interesting, I feel like the level poll bet I have with Paddy for Q2 is like watching a football team hitting the crossbar at the moment.

TheScreamingEagles

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Populus are clearly the gold standard.

Populus ‏@PopulusPolls 1m

New Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2); Cons 34 (=); LD 11 (+2); UKIP 12 (-2); Oth 8 (+1) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140411

Wow - it is obviously not Miller time.

It's undoubtedly an outlier.

All eyes on next week's ICM.

saddo

Populus out

http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Online_VI_10-04-2014_BPC.pdf

Only 1 point lead for Lab again. Statistically level.

Mick_Pork

Innocent_Abroad said:

Mick_Pork said:

Equality Justice ‏@Avitusparta 17m

David Cameron claims 'Big Society' is the work of Jesus, as he calls himself 'Dyno-rod' (via @daily_express) http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/469706/David-Cameron-claims-Big-Society-is-the-work-of-Jesus-as-he-calls-himself-Dyno-rod …

Proof, as if it were needed, that CCHQs spinners and Cammie are almost as embarrassing and incompetent as Avery and the other comedy Cameroons on PB.

If the Government gave its supporters a free pass to shoot all the Labour supporters, it could abolish taxation too.

Seems to be an outbreak of early morning drinking going on among PB right-wingers.

Care to try and explain that remarkably eccentric comment or do you simply need reminding of just how badly Cameron's "Big Society" tanked during the 2010 election? Among tories most of all amusingly enough.

TGOHF

MonikerDiCanio said:

Salmond starts to use his wife in an attempt to make Yes more attractive to Scottish women.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10758681/Alex-Salmond-uses-Twitter-to-publicise-his-wife.html
Currently only 28.5% of Scots women support Yes.

Is he wheeling her out ? Literally.

Bond_James_Bond

Monksfield said:

The only result that would have any real ramifications would be UKIP polling top by any significant margin. And I don't think they will.

Indeed.

UKIP has exactly two public faces, Nigel Farage and Godfrey Bloom*. Nigel Farage cannot contest a single constituency anywhere in the UK with the prospect of being favourite to win. Not a one. Bloom has made them look foolish.

The oddest thing about the blazers is that their supporters - as exemplified by the below-the-line nutters at the Labourgraph - are not just the most delusional. It's that they actually get more delusional the further their prospects recede.

There is a shrill body of online UKIP opinion that thinks - or claims to think - they're going to be in government within two or three more GEs. It's not about 2015, see, it's about 2025. And this despite the fact that they can't identify a single seat they'll win.

* Yes I know but if you asked Joe Public to name two UKIPpers I suspect either nobody could, or the second would be Bloom.

Pulpstar

@isam

How are the prospective seat/vote correlations for UKIP/Conservatives in the Euros ? (One bet is seats, the other votes)

I arb errm... a fair bit (Betfair is miles up on them though ) - sort of thing that needs looking out for though...

TheScreamingEagles

This is a corker of a guardian correction

The parliamentary sketch on the first state visit of an Irish president to London (From Ireland to give a lesson in popularity, 9 April, page 4) said that Michael D Higgins had "name-checked the Magna Carta, Daniel O'Donnell [and] Constance Markiewicz, the first woman elected to parliament". It was not Daniel O'Donnell, the Irish singer and television presenter, he namechecked but Daniel O'Connell, the 19th-century Irish nationalist leader.

http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/series/correctionsandclarifications

Pulpstar

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

Neil said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Isam, whilst I enjoy a good Ave It impersonation as much as anyone I fear you're being a little over-enthusiastic. People should always consider bets carefully, even those offered by me on F1.

It's an arb.

One is seats and the other bet votes.

GREAT RESEARCH!!!!

Oddschecker have it as "most votes" but PP site says "most seats", so its not an arb, DONT BACK IT!!!!!

I clicked a bet for Irving at 10-1 (Which was a crackers price) for the Supreme Novices with 888 but the bet somehow landed up on Activial instead and it didn't even bloody run.

Oddschecker can be quirky at times.

Mick_Pork

Bond_James_Bond said:

The oddest thing about the blazers is that their supporters - as exemplified by the below-the-line nutters at the Labourgraph - are not just the most delusional. It's that they actually get more delusional the further their prospects recede.

You predicted the kippers were on the wane long ago Avery yet they self-evidently are not.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

Perhaps you would be better sticking to your yellow boxes that nobody takes seriously?

Mick_Pork

TGOHF said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Salmond starts to use his wife in an attempt to make Yes more attractive to Scottish women.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10758681/Alex-Salmond-uses-Twitter-to-publicise-his-wife.html
Currently only 28.5% of Scots women support Yes.

Is he wheeling her out ? Literally.

Are your trousers around your ankles as you creepily obsess about Salmond's wife again Harold? Literally.

AveryLP

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Populus are clearly the gold standard.

Populus ‏@PopulusPolls 1m

New Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2); Cons 34 (=); LD 11 (+2); UKIP 12 (-2); Oth 8 (+1) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140411

Wow - it is obviously not Miller time.

It's undoubtedly an outlier.

All eyes on next week's ICM.

TSE

So how big is the real Tory lead?

Any thoughts?

AlastairMeeks

They're all safe for the while. But the result that would cause maximum chaos would be something like:

UKIP 30%
Lab 25%
Con 23%
Greens 10%
Lib Dems 7%

It would be fun to see whose wailing and lamentations were loudest. It's plausible too.

The whooping from the purple nasties would be unbearable though.

MarqueeMark

How fitting the economically useless Labour Party should have such close ties to the Co-op Bank.

I think Labour Party finances might just be weighing heavily with Ed in the run-up to the election. I never could see why he chose this past year to pick a fight on reforming the link with the unions - that's the sort of thing you do when you have a period in the political wilderness, not when you are supposedly the Govt. in waiting....

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Financier, I much prefer old-fashioned names. Kings and Queens are a good guide, disciples work too (although it's a bit cruel to call a child Judas).

Pulpstar

Q.4 Regardless of which party, if any, you are likely to end up voting for at the next General Election due in May 2015 or are leaning towards at the moment, which political party would you say you have usually most closely identified yourself with?

Unweighted Weighted
UKIP 228 82
11% 4%

How is that even a weighting ?

MarqueeMark

Looks like Maria Miller may well be longest remembered round these parts for costing punters a packet by delaying the polling crossover....

isam

Bond_James_Bond said:

Monksfield said:

The only result that would have any real ramifications would be UKIP polling top by any significant margin. And I don't think they will.

Indeed.

UKIP has exactly two public faces, Nigel Farage and Godfrey Bloom*. Nigel Farage cannot contest a single constituency anywhere in the UK with the prospect of being favourite to win. Not a one. Bloom has made them look foolish.

The oddest thing about the blazers is that their supporters - as exemplified by the below-the-line nutters at the Labourgraph - are not just the most delusional. It's that they actually get more delusional the further their prospects recede.

There is a shrill body of online UKIP opinion that thinks - or claims to think - they're going to be in government within two or three more GEs. It's not about 2015, see, it's about 2025. And this despite the fact that they can't identify a single seat they'll win.

* Yes I know but if you asked Joe Public to name two UKIPpers I suspect either nobody could, or the second would be Bloom.

So what?

Its not unique to UKIP. I don't think anyone in my circle of friends could name more than 3 or 4 current politicians from any party

Tories.. Boris, Cameron, Osborne Gove and maybe Hague
Labour.. Miliband, Balls maybe Harman
LD.. Clegg and maybe Lembit Opik / Paddy Ashdown

MikeK

Cllr. Richard Lee ‏@CllrRichardLee 26m
@Nigel_Farage on @HIGNFY_official tonight, BBC1 9.00pm. Lets see if Paul Merton tries his cheap gags with him there.