Isn't there a pleasing irony that UKIP supporters, who always bang on about all their opponents being the same, are getting really upset that there's another party that's seeking to look like UKIP?
You're a lawyer. Isn't this more an attempt to pass themselves off as UKIP?
Like Richard Nabavi, I'd be more concerned about the strapline than the party name. While I regard anyone who gets fixated on the EU as bonkers, I recognise that there are a lot of bonkers people. There's room for more than one anti-EU party. We saw earlier today that MaxPB was alienated by UKIP's current direction. Perhaps Mr Nattrass can appeal more to him.
We had No2EU covering similar ground from a leftwing perspective.
What's really irking the Kippers is that yet again we're seeing the consequences of UKIP being a party of egomaniacs.
What we are seeing is people that support LD/Cons/Lab not being fussed about something that they would go nuts about if it were their party
Senior Liberal Democrat Danny Alexander has ruled out suggestions his party could support a minority Labour or Tory government after the next election.
The Treasury minister said the Lib Dems would be willing to form a coalition with Labour as much the Conservatives, despite differences over the economy.
But a minority government would "not be in the national interest", he argued
Fathers who look after their children have “more cojones” and only “dinosaurs” think men shouldn’t share childcare, Miriam Clegg has said.
Nick Clegg’s wife, who is a high profile lawyer, interrupted her husband’s press conference to ask the Deputy Prime Minister to take a public stand for men who look after their children.
In a rare move, which will be seen as highly political, Mrs Clegg took the microphone at the launch of Cityfathers to demand that “modern working fathers” announce "loudly and proudly" that taking responsibility for your own children does not “affect your level of testosterone. “
Isn't there a pleasing irony that UKIP supporters, who always bang on about all their opponents being the same, are getting really upset that there's another party that's seeking to look like UKIP?
You're a lawyer. Isn't this more an attempt to pass themselves off as UKIP?
Like Richard Nabavi, I'd be more concerned about the strapline than the party name. While I regard anyone who gets fixated on the EU as bonkers, I recognise that there are a lot of bonkers people. There's room for more than one anti-EU party. We saw earlier today that MaxPB was alienated by UKIP's current direction. Perhaps Mr Nattrass can appeal more to him.
We had No2EU covering similar ground from a leftwing perspective.
What's really irking the Kippers is that yet again we're seeing the consequences of UKIP being a party of egomaniacs.
What we are seeing is people that support LD/Cons/Lab not being fussed about something that they would go nuts about if it were their party
The Literal Democrat in 1994 took 4.3% of the vote in the Constituency he was standing in, compared to the 31.4% for the Liberal Democrats - this was almost one vote in eight of the combined vote total.
If we assume a similar impact for the An Independence from Europe Party, then the 27% for UKIP in the previous thread's YouGov poll could be reduced by about three and a half percentage points.
I'm not entirely convinced by the arguments made that "it will be different this time".
Confusing some of the people some of the time is considerably easier than confusing most of the people most of the time.
On topic, it seems like twattish behaviour from someone who can't bear the idea that his political career is at an end.
I don't doubt you are right, and if it had just been a 'one off' example of a UKIP MEP falling out with Farage, there'd be no question. However, there have been multiple examples. I'm sure Oscar Wilde might have something to say about that .
It's hard not to question if there's something Farage might not be getting quite right too.
It is surely the freedom of movement of labour (in the "we wanted workers and we got people" sense) that is most controversial. EFTA and the EEA would subscribe to the four freedoms (fine, if as you do, that's a good thing - but very different to what I think many people would want).
I am genuinely shocked that people think they have some kind of god given right to choose who lives on this island.
It is as alien a concept to me as the idea that the government should be able to choose what hairstyles people are allowed.
I'm genuinely shocked that you're genuinely shocked.
I've previously mentioned the three methods Europhiles use to argue:
(1) Speak in high level, positive but arbitrary terms that are far divorced from real world effects
(2) Give credit to the EU for things that would happen anyway via misleading statistics
(3) Smear your opponent as a racist and/or reactionary
You're a decent guy so avoid using (3), but you've just switched back to (1) when I've called you out on (2)
My ideal view of how the UK would be in order:
It is surely the freedom of movement of labour (in the "we wanted workers and we got people" sense) that is most controversial. EFTA and the EEA would subscribe to the four freedoms (fine, if as you do, that's a good thing - but very different to what I think many people would want).
I am genuinely shocked that people think they have some kind of god given right to choose who lives on this island.
It is as alien a concept to me as the idea that the government should be able to choose what hairstyles people are allowed.
It's not a God-given right; it's the right of sovereignty, which is a distinctly human and common one. And parliament could choose what hairstyles people are allowed, should it be daft enough to. (The crown in) Parliament is theoretically absolutely sovereign.
Indeed. If you accept this argument, it's hard to argue that nations, which are defined by their geographies (and therefore their whiole demos and legal system) have any relevance at all. They are all based on people commonly identifying with each other and accepting to be bound by decisions made by the majority.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
Volodya is only interested in Eastern and Southern Scotland.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
What would Putin do if he found a gap in Scotland's defences?
PS. It shows how totally stupid the 2010 SDR was. 'Assuming' several years notice of any new emergent strategic threat to the UK. How much hubris can you get?
It was actually the policy that led to me resigning from the Conservative party. I haven't considered rejoining since. They should have frozen the budget and plugged the defence hole from government contingent reserves, and/or no guarantees on increasing pensions and NHS spending in real terms.
The sensible thing to do would be to review the lot in 2015, put the army cuts on hold, halt the drawdown from Germany, review if we have enough survelliance/fighter squadrons and possibly order another 2 destroyers and 4 frigates for the navy.
The Literal Democrat in 1994 took 4.3% of the vote in the Constituency he was standing in, compared to the 31.4% for the Liberal Democrats - this was almost one vote in eight of the combined vote total.
If we assume a similar impact for the An Independence from Europe Party, then the 27% for UKIP in the previous thread's YouGov poll could be reduced by about three and a half percentage points.
I'm not entirely convinced by the arguments made that "it will be different this time".
Confusing some of the people some of the time is considerably easier than confusing most of the people most of the time.
One thing that may stop that happening is that most people intending to vote UKIP will be expecting to look near the bottom of the ballot paper. The confusing thing about the Literal Democrats in 1994 was that the name began in almost the same way as the LDs. That's not the case here.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
What would Putin do if he found a gap in Scotland's defences?
The sensible thing to do would be to review the lot in 2015, put the army cuts on hold, halt the drawdown from Germany, review if we have enough survelliance/fighter squadrons and possibly order another 2 destroyers and 4 frigates for the navy.
If we're prepared to fight the Russkies in Ukraine then it would need to be more than that, and if we're not then we may as well cut further....
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
Yes, but is it? I don't know why Sky news is quoting it as breaking news, I presume there is a reason and it was unexpected.
Besides which, doing so now with all the tensions going on is incredibly provocative - it's not the Cold War anymore. And, no, I don't think NATO is deliberately testing Russian airspace reactions right now, although I do accept a few NATO jets may be patrolling the Baltic States airspace (very near Russian airspace) but that's patrolling a NATO member's airspace, not flying 800 miles over the sea to deliberately (to quote Top Gun) piss us off.
@FraserNelson: Brilliant from Oxford's Paul Collier: the SNP's pettiness and parochial mindset brings menacing global implications: http://t.co/JAKgHPP2le
@FraserNelson: Brilliant from Oxford's Paul Collier: the SNP's pettiness and parochial mindset brings menacing global implications: http://t.co/JAKgHPP2le
I thought it was the most ridiculous thing I'd read in the FT in ages. It's in the paper edition so it's not a spoof.
The sensible thing to do would be to review the lot in 2015, put the army cuts on hold, halt the drawdown from Germany, review if we have enough survelliance/fighter squadrons and possibly order another 2 destroyers and 4 frigates for the navy.
If we're prepared to fight the Russkies in Ukraine then it would need to be more than that, and if we're not then we may as well cut further....
Um, no. This is about us having the minimum force necessary to meet our NATO commitments and provide a credible national defence.
We had nothing like the 'necessary' forces to fight the Soviet Union in Germany during the Cold War either - I think the BAOR averaged around 50,000 troops until the very late 80s - but it was enough to provide a very credible initial front-line defence in conjunction with our allies.
This will not have the same impact as 1994. In 1994 this was one candidate who lost his seat in one seat, now with the huge regions, of which the SW is only 1 of 11, and PR it will be extremely unlikely this affects the national vote totals unless it is very tight indeed between Labour and UKIP for top spot, and in any case UKIP could then still claim a 'moral' victory anyway without much impact on the number of candidates elected either way
The Literal Democrat in 1994 took 4.3% of the vote in the Constituency he was standing in, compared to the 31.4% for the Liberal Democrats - this was almost one vote in eight of the combined vote total.
If we assume a similar impact for the An Independence from Europe Party, then the 27% for UKIP in the previous thread's YouGov poll could be reduced by about three and a half percentage points.
I'm not entirely convinced by the arguments made that "it will be different this time".
Confusing some of the people some of the time is considerably easier than confusing most of the people most of the time.
One thing that may stop that happening is that most people intending to vote UKIP will be expecting to look near the bottom of the ballot paper. The confusing thing about the Literal Democrats in 1994 was that the name began in almost the same way as the LDs. That's not the case here.
Fair points. At the same time many people won't particularly be aware in advance that ballot papers are in alphabetical order. Most people on here may know that but Joe Public is not looking at a ballot paper on a regular basis.
Even if the effect is less than the Literal Democrat (12% of votes misplaced), it could still easily be in the region of 5%.
ie if UKIP should get 25% to 30% that would be 1.25% to 1.5% of the total vote - not massive but could make the difference if it's close.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
Yes, but is it? I don't know why Sky news is quoting it as breaking news, I presume there is a reason and it was unexpected.
Besides which, doing so now with all the tensions going on is incredibly provocative - it's not the Cold War anymore. And, no, I don't think NATO is deliberately testing Russian airspace reactions right now, although I do accept a few NATO jets may be patrolling the Baltic States airspace (very near Russian airspace) but that's patrolling a NATO member's airspace, not flying 800 miles over the sea to deliberately (to quote Top Gun) piss us off.
Why are Sky running the story now? It makes for dramatic news.
'Sky's Defence Correspondent Alistair Bunkall said foreign planes often fly close to UK airspace, with eight similar incidents reported in 2013.
"The RAF Typhoon is one of Britain's quick reaction aircraft and would have gone up, made contact with the Russian planes and ensured they did not plan to fly into British airspace," he said.
"These sorts of events happen quite regularly and that maybe surprising for some people.
"It's all about testing defences and seeing exactly what your 'enemy' is capable of."'
The big story tonight is clearly Danny Alexander's statement the LDs will not support a minority government. As a Tory majority remains very unlikely, unless they get UKIP down to below 5% (which even on the most optimistic scenarios looks all but impossible), if the Tories nonetheless are largest party in another hung parliament then the present Tory-LD coalition looks almost certain to continue. In my view, though a Labour-LD Coalition also has to be factored in, the 2 plausible results next year are either a small Labour majority or a second Tory-LD government
@FraserNelson: Brilliant from Oxford's Paul Collier: the SNP's pettiness and parochial mindset brings menacing global implications: http://t.co/JAKgHPP2le
I thought it was the most ridiculous thing I'd read in the FT in ages. It's in the paper edition so it's not a spoof.
The 'Oxford's' is a particularly fine touch. Unionists seem to be finding a 'brilliant', 'best' or 'definitive' piece to support their case just about every day now. The next 5 months is obviously going to be a golden age of journalism.
@FraserNelson: Brilliant from Oxford's Paul Collier: the SNP's pettiness and parochial mindset brings menacing global implications: http://t.co/JAKgHPP2le
I thought it was the most ridiculous thing I'd read in the FT in ages. It's in the paper edition so it's not a spoof.
The 'Oxford's' is a particularly fine touch. Unionists seem to be finding a 'brilliant', 'best' or 'definitive' piece to support their case just about every day now. The next 5 months is obviously going to be a golden age of journalism.
Tbf it's not particularly an argument for or against independence. It's an article about how an aspect of independence should be handled. A really muddled article from a professor at Oxford's school of government. I wonder what grade he would have given it if a student had written it.
Mr. Divvie, worry not, I'll be here to distract pb.com with the marvels of F1. I'll see about posting my Mercedes 2013-2014 comparison article this weekend. It's actually quite intriguing (well, I think so).
I also wonder if the Russian Grand Prix will end up being cancelled/suspended. I would guess the circuit might favour Rosberg (looks slow. He tended to best Hamilton at street circuits last year).
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
Some of us predicted this sort of line-crossing from the very beginning. Dictators like Putin will keep on pushing the line until they get a credible response. If you're going to have give a credible response eventually, you may as well do it up front, so that the aggressor gains less from it.
Anyway, the defence cuts are looking more and more stupid now. Bob Gates has said we don't look like a credible US partner any more and he's right. With a resurgent Russia, we need to fix this.
Corporeal, Firstly , coming on here and insulting me when I have never said a word to you beggars belief. Secondly if I look bad to mealy mouthed insulting halfwits like you, then it is of no concern. Thirdly , where in your stupid deluded brain did you get that I said where the rumpUK will build ships is not dependent on the rUK. Learn to read before you start hurling insults you halfwitted big jessie.
PS: Hope that meets you caricature of me nicely.
You caricature yourself, and a high number of your comments seem to include insults.
This is what seemed to imply that the one that was dependent on rUK was EU membership based on their veto ability.
"Only one of these is dependent on rumpUK and they will never veto EU membership, even they are not that stupid"
It was the only one , as I said there would be ships built at Govan , Scotland will need navy ships and will build them there, as for rumprn ships that will be up to how much money rumpUK want to give BAE, ie pay once for ships in Scotland or pay BAE to build a new facility and then pay for ships as well. So depends on how rich they feel.
To be fair to Brown (oh how it hurts to say that), at least he is trying to give positive reasons for the Union along with the usual FUD.
Yes telling an obvious pack of lies will really help the NO campaign
Hasn't done the Yes campaign any harm.....EU....currency.....warship 'guarantee'......shall I go on?
Please do and possibly you could explain the supposed lies , ie we will easily negotiate EU membership , we will use the pound , we will build warships at Govan. Only one of these is dependent on rumpUK and they will never veto EU membership, even they are not that stupid.
Firstly you seem to often have a very aggressive nature on here, usually including some insult or other that makes you look bad rather than the people you're insulting.
Secondly, unless I misunderstand you you're saying that where the rUK will build warships is not dependent on the rUK, which is a rather bizarre claim.
Corporeal, Firstly , coming on here and insulting me when I have never said a word to you beggars belief. Secondly if I look bad to mealy mouthed insulting halfwits like you, then it is of no concern. Thirdly , where in your stupid deluded brain did you get that I said where the rumpUK will build ships is not dependent on the rUK. Learn to read before you start hurling insults you halfwitted big jessie.
PS: Hope that meets you caricature of me nicely.
You caricature yourself, and a high number of your comments seem to include insults.
This is what seemed to imply that the one that was dependent on rUK was EU membership based on their veto ability.
"Only one of these is dependent on rumpUK and they will never veto EU membership, even they are not that stupid"
The Scottish Caricature needs to lay off the drinking.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
Yes, but is it? I don't know why Sky news is quoting it as breaking news, I presume there is a reason and it was unexpected.
Besides which, doing so now with all the tensions going on is incredibly provocative - it's not the Cold War anymore. And, no, I don't think NATO is deliberately testing Russian airspace reactions right now, although I do accept a few NATO jets may be patrolling the Baltic States airspace (very near Russian airspace) but that's patrolling a NATO member's airspace, not flying 800 miles over the sea to deliberately (to quote Top Gun) piss us off.
Why are Sky running the story now? It makes for dramatic news.
'Sky's Defence Correspondent Alistair Bunkall said foreign planes often fly close to UK airspace, with eight similar incidents reported in 2013.
"The RAF Typhoon is one of Britain's quick reaction aircraft and would have gone up, made contact with the Russian planes and ensured they did not plan to fly into British airspace," he said.
"These sorts of events happen quite regularly and that maybe surprising for some people.
"It's all about testing defences and seeing exactly what your 'enemy' is capable of."'
The big story tonight is clearly Danny Alexander's statement the LDs will not support a minority government. As a Tory majority remains very unlikely, unless they get UKIP down to below 5% (which even on the most optimistic scenarios looks all but impossible), if the Tories nonetheless are largest party in another hung parliament then the present Tory-LD coalition looks almost certain to continue. In my view, though a Labour-LD Coalition also has to be factored in, the 2 plausible results next year are either a small Labour majority or a second Tory-LD government
very likely to get close to 5% I would say 3-5% most likely.
Don't forget that come GE2015 people will have to do more than answer a telephone poll saying "screw them all". Some will be in it for the long game and good luck to them; some will just want to register their NOTA preference; while some others (bonjour @Sam) are sick of the hypocrisy of and abandonment by Lab. Fine = 3-5% in la la land or who are looking at 2059.
But for the majority (of the current 10-12%) they will accept the harsh reality that although UKIP might represent the best possible set of policies for them (and don't forget their policies on non-EU issues are all over the shop) they will in the end have to vote for the best set possible.
The future will tell whether it is a fact or not , at present it is an educated opinion and may well become a fact or not as the case may be. Just because a loser like yourself does not like it does not make it an untruth.
Glad to see you around. Is this educated opinion the same one that thinks the new Statesman is gospel when it comes to economics.... or is that just a similar case where the education is classics but the opinion subject is theoretical quantum mechanics...
Hard to reply to gibberish, but I see you are still trying to pretend about bank bailouts and who actually saved the UK banks.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
When the pathetic UK does it they get captured and get their ipods taken away , leaving them crying for days.
The big story tonight is clearly Danny Alexander's statement the LDs will not support a minority government. As a Tory majority remains very unlikely, unless they get UKIP down to below 5% (which even on the most optimistic scenarios looks all but impossible), if the Tories nonetheless are largest party in another hung parliament then the present Tory-LD coalition looks almost certain to continue. In my view, though a Labour-LD Coalition also has to be factored in, the 2 plausible results next year are either a small Labour majority or a second Tory-LD government
very likely to get close to 5% I would say 3-5% most likely.
Don't forget that come GE2015 people will have to do more than answer a telephone poll saying "screw them all". Some will be in it for the long game and good luck to them; some will just want to register their NOTA preference; while some others (bonjour @Sam) are sick of the hypocrisy of and abandonment by Lab. Fine = 3-5% in la la land or who are looking at 2059.
But for the majority (of the current 10-12%) they will accept the harsh reality that although UKIP might represent the best possible set of policies for them (and don't forget their policies on non-EU issues are all over the shop) they will in the end have to vote for the best set possible.
And that means a tick in the Cons box.
How ? Since 2010 cameron has done bugger all to get key voters on-side. The default option for most pissed off blues is stay at home.
Hoping Ed will frighten the voters to the ballot box won't work up here. If he taxes the ass off the SE, it doesn't really have much impact in the rest of the country. me ne freggo.
The big story tonight is clearly Danny Alexander's statement the LDs will not support a minority government. As a Tory majority remains very unlikely, unless they get UKIP down to below 5% (which even on the most optimistic scenarios looks all but impossible), if the Tories nonetheless are largest party in another hung parliament then the present Tory-LD coalition looks almost certain to continue. In my view, though a Labour-LD Coalition also has to be factored in, the 2 plausible results next year are either a small Labour majority or a second Tory-LD government
very likely to get close to 5% I would say 3-5% most likely.
Don't forget that come GE2015 people will have to do more than answer a telephone poll saying "screw them all". Some will be in it for the long game and good luck to them; some will just want to register their NOTA preference; while some others (bonjour @Sam) are sick of the hypocrisy of and abandonment by Lab. Fine = 3-5% in la la land or who are looking at 2059.
But for the majority (of the current 10-12%) they will accept the harsh reality that although UKIP might represent the best possible set of policies for them (and don't forget their policies on non-EU issues are all over the shop) they will in the end have to vote for the best set possible.
And that means a tick in the Cons box.
How ? Since 2010 cameron has done bugger all to get key voters on-side. The default option for most pissed off blues is stay at home.
Hoping Ed will frighten the voters to the ballot box won't work up here. If he taxes the ass off the SE, it doesn't really have much impact in the rest of the country. me ne freggo.
TOPPING Even if they cut UKIP down to 5% (and that would see well over half of UKIP's present support drift away) that still may not be enough for a Tory majority, for which the Tories need a lead over Labour of 7% now the LD vote has been slashed. Even in 2010 UKIP got 3% and most of those would have voted for Thatcher and Major from '79-92 when they won majorities, although perhaps they may have switched to the Referendum Party in '97 and added to the Tories woes. This was why the Tories were such idiots to oppose AV, for as long as UKIP is around as a significant minor party AV would have benefited the Tories more than Labour, unless the Greens were to outpoll UKIP, which seems unlikely in the foreseeable future. So, the best the Tories can hope for in 2015 is probably another Coalition government with Clegg and Alexander
The big story tonight is clearly Danny Alexander's statement the LDs will not support a minority government. As a Tory majority remains very unlikely, unless they get UKIP down to below 5% (which even on the most optimistic scenarios looks all but impossible), if the Tories nonetheless are largest party in another hung parliament then the present Tory-LD coalition looks almost certain to continue. In my view, though a Labour-LD Coalition also has to be factored in, the 2 plausible results next year are either a small Labour majority or a second Tory-LD government
very likely to get close to 5% I would say 3-5% most likely.
Don't forget that come GE2015 people will have to do more than answer a telephone poll saying "screw them all". Some will be in it for the long game and good luck to them; some will just want to register their NOTA preference; while some others (bonjour @Sam) are sick of the hypocrisy of and abandonment by Lab. Fine = 3-5% in la la land or who are looking at 2059.
But for the majority (of the current 10-12%) they will accept the harsh reality that although UKIP might represent the best possible set of policies for them (and don't forget their policies on non-EU issues are all over the shop) they will in the end have to vote for the best set possible.
And that means a tick in the Cons box.
How ? Since 2010 cameron has done bugger all to get key voters on-side. The default option for most pissed off blues is stay at home.
Hoping Ed will frighten the voters to the ballot box won't work up here. If he taxes the ass off the SE, it doesn't really have much impact in the rest of the country. me ne freggo.
He has to sit tight.
Economic news may be so much noise to most of the population (and there is the temptation by intellectuals to dismiss hoi polloi) but triple-dip media storm in a teacup aside, the actual economic news has been relentlessly good. There really couldn't have been a better timeline of output (jobs, debt, deficit, inflation, wages) if GO (I know your bete noire) had written it himself.
That I believe will filter through to the electorate no matter their state of sophistication economics-wise.
In living memory we have been through hell (prop. Labour) and a recovery (prop. Cons). Of course we can all argue the toss about whose fault and counterfactuals we should have borrowed more, etc but that will bring back Cons voters in the cold light of day come May 2015.
Add in the CBI report today and the investment boom it appeared to be promising and this starts to look as if it might be a remarkable year with rapidly falling unemployment and a further significant reduction in borrowing too.
Is it really credible that a government that has manipulated the growth cycle and the electoral cycle so perfectly will be thrown out of office? What Osborne has achieved is remarkable.
The big story tonight is clearly Danny Alexander's statement the LDs will not support a minority government. As a Tory majority remains very unlikely, unless they get UKIP down to below 5% (which even on the most optimistic scenarios looks all but impossible), if the Tories nonetheless are largest party in another hung parliament then the present Tory-LD coalition looks almost certain to continue. In my view, though a Labour-LD Coalition also has to be factored in, the 2 plausible results next year are either a small Labour majority or a second Tory-LD government
very likely to get close to 5% I would say 3-5% most likely.
Don't forget that come GE2015 people will have to do more than answer a telephone poll in the end have to vote for the best set possible.
And that means a tick in the Cons box.
How ? Since 2010 cameron has done bugger all to get key voters on-side. The default option for most pissed off blues is stay at home.
Hoping Ed will frighten the voters to the ballot box won't work up here. If he taxes the ass off the SE, it doesn't really have much impact in the rest of the country. me ne freggo.
He has to sit tight.
Economic news may be so much noise to most of the population (and there is the temptation by intellectuals to dismiss hoi polloi) but triple-dip media storm in a teacup aside, the actual economic news has been relentlessly good. There really couldn't have been a better timeline of output (jobs, debt, deficit, inflation, wages) if GO (I know your bete noire) had written it himself.
That I believe will filter through to the electorate no matter their state of sophistication economics-wise.
In living memory we have been through hell (prop. Labour) and a recovery (prop. Cons). Of course we can all argue the toss about whose fault and counterfactuals we should have borrowed more, etc but that will bring back Cons voters in the cold light of day come May 2015.
I don't doubt there will be some swingback and that the Cons will top the polls, but they won't get enough for a majority and they'll pile up too many votes in the wrong places. cui bono another 10,000 votes in rural Sussex ?
The daft things about all this is if Cameron had played his cards right he would be staring down the barrel of a majority at this point. But he cocked it up and will never be PM in his own right.
Kinda reminds me of 1997 when under Clark's stewardship the economy had turned around big time. Trouble was, it wasn't showing enough in the real economy to torpedo labour's laughable 'things can only get better' meme. Tony then inherited the earth in 1998 and 1999.
Can Ossie make enough people feel good enough quickly enough to be given another go? that is the question.
If he had 24 months I'd say definitely. But he only has 12.
Kinda reminds me of 1997 when under Clark's stewardship the economy had turned around big time. Trouble was, it wasn't showing enough in the real economy to torpedo labour's laughable 'things can only get better' meme. Tony then inherited the earth in 1998 and 1999.
Can Ossie make enough people feel good enough quickly enough to be given another go? that is the question.
If he had 24 months I'd say definitely. But he only has 12.
People (including me) were sick and tired of the Cons by that time it had been a whole generation under the Tories and they were beset by sleaze and lack of imagination and all sorts.
Today the abiding collective memory is Lab not fixing the roof while the sun was shining and the Cons coming in and fixing it. It was and is a very powerful narrative.
Corporeal, Firstly , coming on here and insulting me when I have never said a word to you beggars belief. Secondly if I look bad to mealy mouthed insulting halfwits like you, then it is of no concern. Thirdly , where in your stupid deluded brain did you get that I said where the rumpUK will build ships is not dependent on the rUK. Learn to read before you start hurling insults you halfwitted big jessie.
PS: Hope that meets you caricature of me nicely.
You caricature yourself, and a high number of your comments seem to include insults.
This is what seemed to imply that the one that was dependent on rUK was EU membership based on their veto ability.
"Only one of these is dependent on rumpUK and they will never veto EU membership, even they are not that stupid"
It was the only one , as I said there would be ships built at Govan , Scotland will need navy ships and will build them there, as for rumprn ships that will be up to how much money rumpUK want to give BAE, ie pay once for ships in Scotland or pay BAE to build a new facility and then pay for ships as well. So depends on how rich they feel.
There was a suggestion that the UK should team up with Australia for navy ships.
Kinda reminds me of 1997 when under Clark's stewardship the economy had turned around big time. Trouble was, it wasn't showing enough in the real economy to torpedo labour's laughable 'things can only get better' meme. Tony then inherited the earth in 1998 and 1999.
Can Ossie make enough people feel good enough quickly enough to be given another go? that is the question.
If he had 24 months I'd say definitely. But he only has 12.
Clarke did well but the tories' reputation for economic competence had been destroyed by Black Wednesday and the apparently invisible "green shoots" of recovery (which were subsequently found to have existed after all).
Osborne does not have that sort of baggage and in 1997 Brown's psychosis was much better hidden by Blair's smarm. On present form I really can't see the 2 Eds producing an even vaguely credible alternative.
I am starting to feel that remaining the largest party is in reach for the tories.
Corporeal, Firstly , coming on here and insulting me when I have never said a word to you beggars belief. Secondly if I look bad to mealy mouthed insulting halfwits like you, then it is of no concern. Thirdly , where in your stupid deluded brain did you get that I said where the rumpUK will build ships is not dependent on the rUK. Learn to read before you start hurling insults you halfwitted big jessie.
PS: Hope that meets you caricature of me nicely.
You caricature yourself, and a high number of your comments seem to include insults.
This is what seemed to imply that the one that was dependent on rUK was EU membership based on their veto ability.
"Only one of these is dependent on rumpUK and they will never veto EU membership, even they are not that stupid"
It was the only one , as I said there would be ships built at Govan , Scotland will need navy ships and will build them there, as for rumprn ships that will be up to how much money rumpUK want to give BAE, ie pay once for ships in Scotland or pay BAE to build a new facility and then pay for ships as well. So depends on how rich they feel.
There was a suggestion that the UK should team up with Australia for navy ships.
But engagement has failed to check the Russian advance - or force an about-turn in Moscow. Russia acted fast in annexing Crimea, and the worst-case scenario is that it could swallow up more of Ukraine and move on to other areas with large Russian populations, such as Moldova's Trans-Dniester region. The West's tacit concession of the Crimea issue has done nothing to strengthen its diplomatic hand.
Alanbrooke The irony is that Cameron opposed AV, which probably would have given him a majority in 2015 with UKIP and Cleggite LD preferences, as it is, under FPTP and with no AV nor boundary changes a coalition is the best he can hope for and he will probably have 10 years in Downing Street without even winning a majority as John Major managed
Hard to reply to gibberish, but I see you are still trying to pretend about bank bailouts and who actually saved the UK banks.
I was being polite but I will be blunt. You don't have a clue what you are talking about as posting that article demonstrated.
Whatever your education was in, it definitely wasn't in economics or business.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Kinda reminds me of 1997 when under Clark's stewardship the economy had turned around big time. Trouble was, it wasn't showing enough in the real economy to torpedo labour's laughable 'things can only get better' meme. Tony then inherited the earth in 1998 and 1999.
Can Ossie make enough people feel good enough quickly enough to be given another go? that is the question.
If he had 24 months I'd say definitely. But he only has 12.
People (including me) were sick and tired of the Cons by that time it had been a whole generation under the Tories and they were beset by sleaze and lack of imagination and all sorts.
Today the abiding collective memory is Lab not fixing the roof while the sun was shining and the Cons coming in and fixing it. It was and is a very powerful narrative.
The cons have fixed nothing. They've simply stopped the rate at which the hole is growing. Were still borrowing the equivalent of the GDP of New Zealand every year and trying to cure it through house price inflation.
Fiscal consolidation isn't recovery, nor does it address those economic fundamentals where the UK has huge problems. Until we get a reforming chancellor there's nothing happening to fix the holes in the roof. And Osborne isn't one.
Taffys Agree with TOPPING 1997, was after 18 years of Tory government and with Labour led by a good looking, charismatic, centrist JFK clone. 2015 will be 5 years into a Coalition government, not even a Tory majority, against a man who is about as cool and charismatic as Mr Bean (and he was at least funny) and is the most leftwing leader of his party in a generation.
It's a long time since I wrote my PhD, so this is a genuine question for others of mathematical bent. Why haven't we been getting any outlier Tory leads, or outlier double digit Labour leads? Assume that the real Labour lead is, say, 38-34, and has been for some time. Presumably random distribution of polling leads will be a normal distribution. Then you'd expect one poll in 20 to be outside two standard deviations, wouldn't you? And that should normally be about 2*2.5? We ought to be seeing some 9-point Labour leads and 1-point Tory leads now and then. Is there a mathematical reason why the standard deviation is tighter?
Alanbrooke The irony is that Cameron opposed AV, which probably would have given him a majority in 2015 with UKIP and Cleggite LD preferences, as it is, under FPTP and with no AV nor boundary changes a coalition is the best he can hope for and he will probably have 10 years in Downing Street without even winning a majority as John Major managed
I'm afraid Cameron didn't have the cojones to address some of the more glaring issues.
He could have cut a deal on boundary reform for sensible HoL reform. As it is Blues can now have the choice if Ed gets in of HoL reform on Labour's terms not Cameron's or a labour govt with no checks and balances as per Blair. If there's lots of squealing post 2015 the blues should simply remember they had their chance and didn't take it.
Hard to reply to gibberish, but I see you are still trying to pretend about bank bailouts and who actually saved the UK banks.
I was being polite but I will be blunt. You don't have a clue what you are talking about as posting that article demonstrated.
Whatever your education was in, it definitely wasn't in economics or business.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Hard to reply to gibberish, but I see you are still trying to pretend about bank bailouts and who actually saved the UK banks.
I was being polite but I will be blunt. You don't have a clue what you are talking about as posting that article demonstrated.
Whatever your education was in, it definitely wasn't in economics or business.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Um, I post under the same pseudonym everywhere online and have done for 18 years so its not difficult to find out who I really am.
And if that's the best you can come up with you really need to learn how to troll properly. I will, however offer, 1 piece of advice from a couple of the billionaires of my acquaintance, the wise understand how little they really know.
It's a long time since I wrote my PhD, so this is a genuine question for others of mathematical bent. Why haven't we been getting any outlier Tory leads, or outlier double digit Labour leads? Assume that the real Labour lead is, say, 38-34, and has been for some time. Presumably random distribution of polling leads will be a normal distribution. Then you'd expect one poll in 20 to be outside two standard deviations, wouldn't you? And that should normally be about 2*2.5? We ought to be seeing some 9-point Labour leads and 1-point Tory leads now and then. Is there a mathematical reason why the standard deviation is tighter?
Hard to reply to gibberish, but I see you are still trying to pretend about bank bailouts and who actually saved the UK banks.
I was being polite but I will be blunt. You don't have a clue what you are talking about as posting that article demonstrated.
Whatever your education was in, it definitely wasn't in economics or business.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Um, I post under the same pseudonym everywhere online and have done for 18 years so its not difficult to find out who I really am.
And if that's the best you can come up with you really need to learn how to troll properly. I will, however offer, 1 piece of advice from a couple of the billionaires of my acquaintance, the wise understand how little they really know.
Get a life cretin. Bet you had to look up the spelling of that big word. Go pester another loser like that cretin Watcher , you two will be well suited, pair of fantasist losers.
It's a long time since I wrote my PhD, so this is a genuine question for others of mathematical bent. Why haven't we been getting any outlier Tory leads, or outlier double digit Labour leads? Assume that the real Labour lead is, say, 38-34, and has been for some time. Presumably random distribution of polling leads will be a normal distribution. Then you'd expect one poll in 20 to be outside two standard deviations, wouldn't you? And that should normally be about 2*2.5? We ought to be seeing some 9-point Labour leads and 1-point Tory leads now and then. Is there a mathematical reason why the standard deviation is tighter?
Can't help you with the maths Nick but the number of polls with a Labour lead of 1 without a single poll where the parties are equal or even a tory lead of 1 is indeed remarkable. One has to wonder if there is a degree of smoothing going on, possibly by the weighting being applied to alleged past voting habits. Whether this is accurate or not it certainly seems to reduce the volatility of polls.
What I find even odder is that the tories can be so close to Labour with UKIP at its current levels. If 45%+ of UKIP support is coming from the tories they really should be struggling to make 30%.
@SkyNewsBreak: RAF Typhoon scrambled after two Russian planes strayed close to UK airspace off north east Scotland this afternoon
What on earth do they think they're playing at? Has Putin gone mad? He seems to be crossing virtually every red line we lay down for him (hoping) he'd never be stupid enough to cross it.
Yet where will he stop?
They're doing what they've done regularly for the last 60 years. And they've been escorted on their way, as has happened countless times before. It's nothing new.
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
When the pathetic UK does it they get captured and get their ipods taken away , leaving them crying for days.
Kinda reminds me of 1997 when under Clark's stewardship the economy had turned around big time. Trouble was, it wasn't showing enough in the real economy to torpedo labour's laughable 'things can only get better' meme. Tony then inherited the earth in 1998 and 1999.
Can Ossie make enough people feel good enough quickly enough to be given another go? that is the question.
If he had 24 months I'd say definitely. But he only has 12.
People (including me) were sick and tired of the Cons by that time it had been a whole generation under the Tories and they were beset by sleaze and lack of imagination and all sorts.
Today the abiding collective memory is Lab not fixing the roof while the sun was shining and the Cons coming in and fixing it. It was and is a very powerful narrative.
The cons have fixed nothing. They've simply stopped the rate at which the hole is growing. Were still borrowing the equivalent of the GDP of New Zealand every year and trying to cure it through house price inflation.
Fiscal consolidation isn't recovery, nor does it address those economic fundamentals where the UK has huge problems. Until we get a reforming chancellor there's nothing happening to fix the holes in the roof. And Osborne isn't one.
It's a start. Debt-to-GDP as has been well-rehearsed wasn't crazy in 2007; the craziness was private debt. It spiralled out of control. We all laughed at those credit offers that popped through the letterbox but the point was that with self-certifying mortgages and easy credit it would have taken a super-human public not to have geared up as they did.
And I think (your preference for?) a cold turkey strategy in 2010 would have brought people out onto the streets. They have now delevered to an extant while but still face dangers, the greatest of which was always losing their job, as this would have rendered debt service impossible.
And without throwing more borrowed money at it, which the capital markets wouldn't have countenanced, GO managed to reverse this threat and, as even the Guardian points out today wrt young people, the jobs situation has improved steadily and continues to improve.
So just halting everything in its tracks, letting companies and individuals pay down some debt, while maintaining what are higher but still manageable bond yields, is a pretty amazing achievement.
Alanbrooke Agreed, which is partly why I hope the Coalition continues for at least one more term, not only to finish the job on the economy, but also to push through much needed constitutional reform
It's a long time since I wrote my PhD, so this is a genuine question for others of mathematical bent. Why haven't we been getting any outlier Tory leads, or outlier double digit Labour leads? Assume that the real Labour lead is, say, 38-34, and has been for some time. Presumably random distribution of polling leads will be a normal distribution. Then you'd expect one poll in 20 to be outside two standard deviations, wouldn't you? And that should normally be about 2*2.5? We ought to be seeing some 9-point Labour leads and 1-point Tory leads now and then. Is there a mathematical reason why the standard deviation is tighter?
It's a good question, and one I've already lost money on (luckily only tuppence ha'penny, which is all Paddy would allow me to stake) - I was convinced, on exactly that argument, that there would be at least one YouGov in Q1 showing level-pegging or a Tory lead.
(It's not quite a normal distribution, because of rounding and perhaps other artefacts of the polling methodology).
It's a long time since I wrote my PhD, so this is a genuine question for others of mathematical bent. Why haven't we been getting any outlier Tory leads, or outlier double digit Labour leads? Assume that the real Labour lead is, say, 38-34, and has been for some time. Presumably random distribution of polling leads will be a normal distribution. Then you'd expect one poll in 20 to be outside two standard deviations, wouldn't you? And that should normally be about 2*2.5? We ought to be seeing some 9-point Labour leads and 1-point Tory leads now and then. Is there a mathematical reason why the standard deviation is tighter?
Good question. Maybe it's something to do with the amount of fine tuning that goes on these days with polls, so that outliers are less likely.
Hard to reply to gibberish, but I see you are still trying to pretend about bank bailouts and who actually saved the UK banks.
I was being polite but I will be blunt. You don't have a clue what you are talking about as posting that article demonstrated.
Whatever your education was in, it definitely wasn't in economics or business.
Bully for you smartarse, I presume you are a genius. Have to post under a pathetic made up name as you are too scared to post under a real name. Piss off and stalk someone else who gives a hoot you cretin, you are not as smart as you think you are. Contrary to your belief I am doing very well in business thank you, enjoy spending your Giro.
Comments
Wait, that's not right...
The Treasury minister said the Lib Dems would be willing to form a coalition with Labour as much the Conservatives, despite differences over the economy.
But a minority government would "not be in the national interest", he argued
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27129817
James Martin @Pundamentalism 1h
These UKIP posters are starting to get silly. pic.twitter.com/WcalrScOiH
"Lib Dems 'won't back Tory or Labour minority rule'":
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27129817
I guess this makes the chance of a second election within 18 months of the 2015 election more likely.
Hmm, create a punchline.
He shouts "there's a turn-up for the books"?
Best I can do on short notice I'm afraid.
If we assume a similar impact for the An Independence from Europe Party, then the 27% for UKIP in the previous thread's YouGov poll could be reduced by about three and a half percentage points.
I'm not entirely convinced by the arguments made that "it will be different this time".
Confusing some of the people some of the time is considerably easier than confusing most of the people most of the time.
It's hard not to question if there's something Farage might not be getting quite right too.
Unfortunately due to cutbacks, it was one of these
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgTJZ_cWaT0
Yet where will he stop?
Do you not think that NATO forces do the same, probing Russian air defences to look for gaps?
He is unlikely to go further west than Edinburgh.
He is afraid of Malcolm's judo skills.
Sneak in and register a vote in the IndyRef?
It was actually the policy that led to me resigning from the Conservative party. I haven't considered rejoining since. They should have frozen the budget and plugged the defence hole from government contingent reserves, and/or no guarantees on increasing pensions and NHS spending in real terms.
The sensible thing to do would be to review the lot in 2015, put the army cuts on hold, halt the drawdown from Germany, review if we have enough survelliance/fighter squadrons and possibly order another 2 destroyers and 4 frigates for the navy.
But pigs will fly first.
He could start by buying Alan Cumming's flat.
'Wings over Moscow'
Sorry, I wouldn't support them. It is too cold up there !
Besides which, doing so now with all the tensions going on is incredibly provocative - it's not the Cold War anymore. And, no, I don't think NATO is deliberately testing Russian airspace reactions right now, although I do accept a few NATO jets may be patrolling the Baltic States airspace (very near Russian airspace) but that's patrolling a NATO member's airspace, not flying 800 miles over the sea to deliberately (to quote Top Gun) piss us off.
We had nothing like the 'necessary' forces to fight the Soviet Union in Germany during the Cold War either - I think the BAOR averaged around 50,000 troops until the very late 80s - but it was enough to provide a very credible initial front-line defence in conjunction with our allies.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27129817
Isn't this tautological?
Even if the effect is less than the Literal Democrat (12% of votes misplaced), it could still easily be in the region of 5%.
ie if UKIP should get 25% to 30% that would be 1.25% to 1.5% of the total vote - not massive but could make the difference if it's close.
'Sky's Defence Correspondent Alistair Bunkall said foreign planes often fly close to UK airspace, with eight similar incidents reported in 2013.
"The RAF Typhoon is one of Britain's quick reaction aircraft and would have gone up, made contact with the Russian planes and ensured they did not plan to fly into British airspace," he said.
"These sorts of events happen quite regularly and that maybe surprising for some people.
"It's all about testing defences and seeing exactly what your 'enemy' is capable of."'
http://news.sky.com/story/1247985/raf-jet-chases-russian-planes-away-from-uk
The Reds would likely have been picked up by the Swedish, Danish and Norwegian air forces on their travels too.
Unionists seem to be finding a 'brilliant', 'best' or 'definitive' piece to support their case just about every day now. The next 5 months is obviously going to be a golden age of journalism.
I also wonder if the Russian Grand Prix will end up being cancelled/suspended. I would guess the circuit might favour Rosberg (looks slow. He tended to best Hamilton at street circuits last year).
"In April this year 1.6m jobs across the EU were advertised for all EU citizens...
900,000 in the UK...
3 in Bulgaria"
It's a two way street!!! We can go there too!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkzKCZgIbxs#action=share
Anyway, the defence cuts are looking more and more stupid now. Bob Gates has said we don't look like a credible US partner any more and he's right. With a resurgent Russia, we need to fix this.
http://www.careersinbulgaria.eu/jobs-in-bulgaria/
So depends on how rich they feel.
Don't forget that come GE2015 people will have to do more than answer a telephone poll saying "screw them all". Some will be in it for the long game and good luck to them; some will just want to register their NOTA preference; while some others (bonjour @Sam) are sick of the hypocrisy of and abandonment by Lab. Fine = 3-5% in la la land or who are looking at 2059.
But for the majority (of the current 10-12%) they will accept the harsh reality that although UKIP might represent the best possible set of policies for them (and don't forget their policies on non-EU issues are all over the shop) they will in the end have to vote for the best set possible.
And that means a tick in the Cons box.
I thought it was good, (apart from Farage's slightly weird half laugh that was a bit off). See if it goes anywhere beyond a normal PPB.
Hoping Ed will frighten the voters to the ballot box won't work up here. If he taxes the ass off the SE, it doesn't really have much impact in the rest of the country. me ne freggo.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27134988
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/23/ukip-vote-against-ivory-trade_n_5197278.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
Economic news may be so much noise to most of the population (and there is the temptation by intellectuals to dismiss hoi polloi) but triple-dip media storm in a teacup aside, the actual economic news has been relentlessly good. There really couldn't have been a better timeline of output (jobs, debt, deficit, inflation, wages) if GO (I know your bete noire) had written it himself.
That I believe will filter through to the electorate no matter their state of sophistication economics-wise.
In living memory we have been through hell (prop. Labour) and a recovery (prop. Cons). Of course we can all argue the toss about whose fault and counterfactuals we should have borrowed more, etc but that will bring back Cons voters in the cold light of day come May 2015.
Add in the CBI report today and the investment boom it appeared to be promising and this starts to look as if it might be a remarkable year with rapidly falling unemployment and a further significant reduction in borrowing too.
Is it really credible that a government that has manipulated the growth cycle and the electoral cycle so perfectly will be thrown out of office? What Osborne has achieved is remarkable.
The daft things about all this is if Cameron had played his cards right he would be staring down the barrel of a majority at this point. But he cocked it up and will never be PM in his own right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27123966
Kinda reminds me of 1997 when under Clark's stewardship the economy had turned around big time. Trouble was, it wasn't showing enough in the real economy to torpedo labour's laughable 'things can only get better' meme. Tony then inherited the earth in 1998 and 1999.
Can Ossie make enough people feel good enough quickly enough to be given another go? that is the question.
If he had 24 months I'd say definitely. But he only has 12.
Today the abiding collective memory is Lab not fixing the roof while the sun was shining and the Cons coming in and fixing it. It was and is a very powerful narrative.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2013/January/18/130118-UK-and-Aus-Type26
Whatever your education was in, it definitely wasn't in economics or business.
Osborne does not have that sort of baggage and in 1997 Brown's psychosis was much better hidden by Blair's smarm. On present form I really can't see the 2 Eds producing an even vaguely credible alternative.
I am starting to feel that remaining the largest party is in reach for the tories.
Just a thought...
But engagement has failed to check the Russian advance - or force an about-turn in Moscow. Russia acted fast in annexing Crimea, and the worst-case scenario is that it could swallow up more of Ukraine and move on to other areas with large Russian populations, such as Moldova's Trans-Dniester region. The West's tacit concession of the Crimea issue has done nothing to strengthen its diplomatic hand.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27126837
Where's Nick Palmer's gloating about us "sabre-rattlers" now? Who has ended up being made to look stupid by Putin as the ceasefire didn't hold at all?
Fiscal consolidation isn't recovery, nor does it address those economic fundamentals where the UK has huge problems. Until we get a reforming chancellor there's nothing happening to fix the holes in the roof. And Osborne isn't one.
He could have cut a deal on boundary reform for sensible HoL reform. As it is Blues can now have the choice if Ed gets in of HoL reform on Labour's terms not Cameron's or a labour govt with no checks and balances as per Blair. If there's lots of squealing post 2015 the blues should simply remember they had their chance and didn't take it.
And if that's the best you can come up with you really need to learn how to troll properly. I will, however offer, 1 piece of advice from a couple of the billionaires of my acquaintance, the wise understand how little they really know.
PS found you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eek,_a_Penis!
I thought was OK. Liked the 5% business stat. Liked that the 2nd half was upbeat. Liked that they included the url at the end.
Also, I didn't see any obvious lies!
What I find even odder is that the tories can be so close to Labour with UKIP at its current levels. If 45%+ of UKIP support is coming from the tories they really should be struggling to make 30%.
And I think (your preference for?) a cold turkey strategy in 2010 would have brought people out onto the streets. They have now delevered to an extant while but still face dangers, the greatest of which was always losing their job, as this would have rendered debt service impossible.
And without throwing more borrowed money at it, which the capital markets wouldn't have countenanced, GO managed to reverse this threat and, as even the Guardian points out today wrt young people, the jobs situation has improved steadily and continues to improve.
So just halting everything in its tracks, letting companies and individuals pay down some debt, while maintaining what are higher but still manageable bond yields, is a pretty amazing achievement.
(It's not quite a normal distribution, because of rounding and perhaps other artefacts of the polling methodology).