To many who felt they were voting for a common trading market and not a federal government based in Brussels whose legislation has primacy over that of the UK Parliament, these people resent the deception of Ted Heath and fellow Europhiles whose policy of omission of many of their objectives, including giving up of UK's fishing rights, are fiercely resented today.
What I don't get about this line of argument is, if the voters were conned by the campaigns over simple, verifiable facts like the contents of the Treaty of Rome last time it was put to a referendum, what makes anyone think they'll be any better at getting to the truth next time around?
In 1975 the public relied upon what they were told by the political leaders - in particular the leaders of the two main parties - and by what they were told by the media. They were lied to from start to finish.
The difference this time is that we know we were lied to.
You don't think the fact that Cammie and most tories are terrified to make their case for staying IN the EU would be the biggest difference? Tory euroscepticism has had one direction of travel so any referendum would be a complete nightmare for them as the BOOers and hardline Eurosceptic tories would hardly stay silent. Quite the reverse. The split in the tory party would be immense and make John Major's Europe divisions look almost trivial.
Those tory BOOers and Eurosceptics are still biding their time waiting for the May election results as they know that will likely be their last chance to get heard before the looming GE in 2015 silences them and just about all talk of Europe.
Mr. Tyndall, there are two arguments against that. Firstly, we need more capacity and if we're building a whole new line it makes sense for it to be fast.
Secondly, it's my understanding that the main concern in Leeds is that we won't get it and that it'll either be a southern thing (to Birmingham) or, arguably more galling, it'll go to Manchester but not Leeds.
As far as greater capacity goes the way to deal with that is to improve regional railways whilst at the same time reducing rather than increasing the need for people to travel into London. As I know has been said before this is a 19th century solution for a 21st century problem.
They've looked at improving regional railways, and £37.5 billion is being spent on the traditional network in five years. But in the case of the WCML, the easy and cheap things were done years ago. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20938280
As for your other point, I think we've discussed this extensively before. Rail traffic started accelerating in the mid-1990s, and has gone in line with the growth in the Internet. The idea that the Internet will mean less people travelling is, like the paperless office, unproved.
Looks like they may approve HS2 2day. Pity: it ought to be OS2 ("Ordinary Speed 2").
Not at all popular up here.
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
Being over 60 and more likely to be working class,the chances are Ukip voters are going to need the NHS disproportionately and do not have private health insurance.Some are likely to have pre-existing conditions which no insurer will cover. Will they be happy with a party that says "the very existence of the NHS stifles competition"?
UKIPs policies on cutting back on government expenditure particularly on the NHS will not go down well with this group.
While Europe may irk them, I suspect they are at least as much bothered by non EU immigration and socially conservative issues. This is the last generation that remembers the fifties and sixties.
Another point is selective mortality. These are people who will be three years older in 2017 for the Tory Tory Euro referendum; but will be 7 years older if there is only a referendum after a 2020 election. The youngest will be 72 by that time, and as we know Kippers are disproportionally CDE and lower income, may simply not be around to vote.
These are the people who would have been aged 22+ when they voted on the referndum question, "Do you think the UK should stay in the European Community (Common Market)?".
To many who felt they were voting for a common trading market and not a federal government based in Brussels whose legislation has primacy over that of the UK Parliament, these people resent the deception of Ted Heath and fellow Europhiles whose policy of omission of many of their objectives, including giving up of UK's fishing rights, are fiercely resented today.
These people also resent the nigh uncontrolled immigration policy of TB and Labour that has resulted in a too rapid and in places an overwhelming culture change and also resent that they were called racists by the political intelligensia who tried to shut down that debate using PC and other methods.
For these people who feel that such policies by politicians who were mainly shielded from the effects of the policies that they imposed on the electorate, they have been waiting for a leader - warts and all - who could voice their long=held sense of injustice and will use this chance to make their voice heard.
However, their vote in 2015 may not stay with UKIP when the UK's internal policies are considered.
Many people who voted UKIP in 1999 will now be dead. But, UKIP support has increased fourfold since then. As people get older, they become more receptive to UKIP. Today's 60 + voters were young enthusiasts for the EEC, back in 1975.
Back in 1975 wasn't it labelled The Common Market. Then came the EEC, followed by the EC and now the EU.
And next will come the USE: United States of Europe. Then a country won't be allowed to secede; laying the groundwork for a future civil war.
From the BBC gossip page: "Former F1 driver John Watson feels that American Gene Haas's decisions to build his new F1 team from scratch and base it in the United States rather than in Europe are mistakes."
Looks like they may approve HS2 2day. Pity: it ought to be OS2 ("Ordinary Speed 2").
Not at all popular up here.
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
A good many tory MPs have actually noticed it would seem.
I've always felt that the Yes campaign was different from elections because the Independence option was so new and unfamiliar. So it was always going to begin low and then benefit from a slow ratchet effect as people, hitherto voting no or DK as a safe/default option, became more familiar with the arguments and some (but not all, of course) changed to yes. (BTW, if this applies to UKIP then things could get very interesting.)
That this is a factor is certainly consistent with what we have observed. So I was very interested a few weeks ago to read this piece - which makes a broadly similar argument and emphasises that many women are too busy/uninterested in politics to pay attention till the vote (and which may well explain the otherwise puzzling age distribution of the differential, which is focussed on teens and young adults).
Looks like they may approve HS2 2day. Pity: it ought to be OS2 ("Ordinary Speed 2").
Not at all popular up here.
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
A good many tory MPs have actually noticed it would seem.
Tory rebels on HS2 are going against their party due to their constituency interests, rather than the wider picture - Lord Deighton
It is an issue where the grassroots of all parties are split I think. The two places I know well in my life that will be affected, whre I live now just south of Sheffield and Coventry my hometown are both places not in favour.
GDP figures tomorrow. Big day for the government. Market expectations are bullish at 0.9%, I have it down as 0.7%, if it does come in at or above market expectations the government will need to be wary of any potential overheating.
Interesting that both Farage and Eck are always bigging up strong men but never strong women.
A young Margaret Thatcher would join Ukip, says Nigel Farage
"I can't believe that a young Margaret Thatcher leaving Oxford today would join the Conservative Party led by David Cameron. I think she would get involved in Ukip, and no doubt topple me within 12 months or so."
Mr. K, not sure it'll get that far, but I concur that civil unrest and perhaps war could very well accompany the end of the EU.
My premise is, that at the moment a country can leave the EU. If it became the United States of Europe, a country wouldn't be allowed to secede; thus laying the groundwork for a future civil war.
Mr. K, the economic needs and political cultures of the various euroland states are too divergent to function as a single economy with a single interest rate. Instead of disentangling the diabolical octopus of the Euro, the member states are instead insisting that only by wrapping my tentacles pressing more suckers to their skin will the single currency work properly.
They're moving towards banking and fiscal union. Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, and a dozen others. It's crazy. It can't work, and it won't.
But by the time the brakes are slammed on everything will be so integrated that extricating the countries from the train-wreck will be very difficult, very painful and not a very friendly process.
Yes, very funny it was too. Almost a carbon copy of what SLAB were saying in 2007 and 2011 as they tried to ignore the polls narrowing and we all know how well that turned out for them.
But by all means go back to ranting about the sophisticated analysis of 'Cybernats' as that isn't hilariously oblivious irony either.
Pork, you try too hard. You're as convincing a Nat as Malcolmg is as a Rangers supporter.
Monica, at your lying again , if you had enough brain cells or even read my previous posts , you would know that there are more than one Rangers teams in Scotland , and the one I support has never been bankrupt. Interesting that you are as fixated on The Rangers as much as Harry Flash, explains many of your posts.
To many who felt they were voting for a common trading market and not a federal government based in Brussels whose legislation has primacy over that of the UK Parliament, these people resent the deception of Ted Heath and fellow Europhiles whose policy of omission of many of their objectives, including giving up of UK's fishing rights, are fiercely resented today.
What I don't get about this line of argument is, if the voters were conned by the campaigns over simple, verifiable facts like the contents of the Treaty of Rome last time it was put to a referendum, what makes anyone think they'll be any better at getting to the truth next time around?
In 1975 the public relied upon what they were told by the political leaders - in particular the leaders of the two main parties - and by what they were told by the media. They were lied to from start to finish.
The difference this time is that we know we were lied to. All the arguments being raised in favour of continued EU membership have to be judged against the fact that we can repeatedly tell the public they were lied to by the politicians and that they are lying again. Do you really think that in the current climate a politician is going to make much headway against that?
You mean a politician telling lies? Yes, I do. The referendum campaigns we've had recently - AV and Scotland - have been pretty much entirely based on lies from both sides. The voters are probably dimly aware that they're being lied to, but that doesn't really help unless they have the time and energy to work it out for themselves. They end up splitting the difference between the lies of the two sides, and the winner is whoever is able to lie most boldly.
"This Euro-parliament is a failed experiment. Every election, it arouses less and less interest in the people of Europe. Every time we stage this farce, the turn-out goes down.
Note how he has to focus on the trend, which has been declining since the 1970s like pretty much all non-leadership elections in developed countries. The Euros give you that trend as a "lower every time" line rather than bouncing around above and below the trend line because the arbitrary stuff like combination with other elections and position in the electoral cycle averages out across the whole EU.
Boris can't talk about the actual level of turnout here because the turnout in the election that elected him, at 38.1%, is substantially lower than the turnout that elected the current EU Parliament, which was 43%, and he doesn't want to call his own job a "failed experiment".
Edmund the turnout at the last Euro elections in the UK was 34.1% so it was lower than the turnout in the Mayoral elections. Nick and I have a bet about whether it will go even lower this time. I think it will but maybe those hoards of angry old men from UKIP will confound me.
Looks like they may approve HS2 2day. Pity: it ought to be OS2 ("Ordinary Speed 2").
Not at all popular up here.
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
A good many tory MPs have actually noticed it would seem.
Tory rebels on HS2 are going against their party due to their constituency interests, rather than the wider picture - Lord Deighton
It is an issue where the grassroots of all parties are split I think.
Indeed but the ones who have ministerial jobs/positions and may have to quickly find an excuse to miss the vote are mostly tory MPs.
How hard the tory whips crack down and how the rebels play it should be interesting considering some of the past blunders made by the Cameroons in that area. Not to mention some votes and issues that just might 'pop up' in the future where discipline may be crucial and Labour don't decide to back the tory leadership.
Interesting that both Farage and Eck are always bigging up strong men but never strong women.
A young Margaret Thatcher would join Ukip, says Nigel Farage
"I can't believe that a young Margaret Thatcher leaving Oxford today would join the Conservative Party led by David Cameron. I think she would get involved in Ukip, and no doubt topple me within 12 months or so."
Looks like they may approve HS2 2day. Pity: it ought to be OS2 ("Ordinary Speed 2").
Not at all popular up here.
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
A good many tory MPs have actually noticed it would seem.
Tory rebels on HS2 are going against their party due to their constituency interests, rather than the wider picture - Lord Deighton
It is an issue where the grassroots of all parties are split I think.
Indeed but the ones who have ministerial jobs/positions and may have to quickly find an excuse to miss the vote are mostly tory MPs.
How hard the tory whips crack down and how the rebels play it should be interesting considering some of the past blunders made by the Cameroons in that area. Not to mention some votes and issues that just might 'pop up' in the future where discipline may be crucial and Labour don't decide to back the tory leadership.
It's a good job Ed Miliband always votes on what's best for the country and never for narrow party advantage then.
I've always felt that the Yes campaign was different from elections because the Independence option was so new and unfamiliar. So it was always going to begin low and then benefit from a slow ratchet effect as people, hitherto voting no or DK as a safe/default option, became more familiar with the arguments and some (but not all, of course) changed to yes. (BTW, if this applies to UKIP then things could get very interesting.)
That this is a factor is certainly consistent with what we have observed. So I was very interested a few weeks ago to read this piece - which makes a broadly similar argument and emphasises that many women are too busy/uninterested in politics to pay attention till the vote (and which may well explain the otherwise puzzling age distribution of the differential, which is focussed on teens and young adults).
Carnyx, it is bollocks, if you look at online media or attend meetings it is obvious there are lots of women involved and voting YES. It is called clutching at straws, they will soon be back to it will be English born people Salmond has issues with , followed by he wins by eating babies etc.
Regarding the image that many people on here, and in the political bubble have about UKIP being stuck in the past.
As a 39 yr old I have never known anything other than the UK being part of the EEC/ER/Common Market. Being an independent country with the ability to make our own decisions on everything seems like a new idea to me, not one from the past.
Similarly Grammar schools. When I was 11, my family couldn't afford a private school and there was no chance of going to a Grammar school, because there weren't any round here... I didn't even know what one was until I was in my twenties, and when I did they seemed like a new idea that made sense.
I think its only people who are both old enough to remember pre EEC times and Grammar schools, and be against them, that think of EU withdrawal and reinstatement of Grammar schools as old fashioned.
Fashions are circular not linear. Short back and sides is trendy now and was in the 50s, in the 60s and 90s people had Beatles haircuts, in between these haircuts seemed outdated. I see no reason why politics isn't the same
GDP figures tomorrow. Big day for the government. Market expectations are bullish at 0.9%, I have it down as 0.7%, if it does come in at or above market expectations the government will need to be wary of any potential overheating.
The BoE recently uprated their forecast for Q1 to 1.0% from 0.9%. At the time they did so they would have had preliminary results for at least the first 2 months. On the other hand Avery said the SWIFT estimate was 0.6% which seems extremely low. My guess (and that is all it is) is 0.9%.
I really don't think we need to worry about overheating for a long time yet. It will be Q2 before the peak output in 2008 is matched (at least until the underlying stats are corrected in September at which point we will find we exceeded it some time at the end of last year). What is at risk is the expectations of interest rate rises are increasing and this is already affecting the bond market and the currency in ways that are not optimal for growth.
But I think we have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that GDP figures on their own move no votes at all.
Looks like they may approve HS2 2day. Pity: it ought to be OS2 ("Ordinary Speed 2").
Not at all popular up here.
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
A good many tory MPs have actually noticed it would seem.
Tory rebels on HS2 are going against their party due to their constituency interests, rather than the wider picture - Lord Deighton
It is an issue where the grassroots of all parties are split I think.
Indeed but the ones who have ministerial jobs/positions and may have to quickly find an excuse to miss the vote are mostly tory MPs.
How hard the tory whips crack down and how the rebels play it should be interesting considering some of the past blunders made by the Cameroons in that area. Not to mention some votes and issues that just might 'pop up' in the future where discipline may be crucial and Labour don't decide to back the tory leadership.
It's a good job Ed Miliband always votes on what's best for the country and never for narrow party advantage then.
It's a very good job Europe won't be one of those issues that pops up again because as laughable as little Ed is even he won't hesitate to give tory Eurosceptics all the room they need to make trouble for Cammie after May. Nor will they need much prompting.
I've always felt that the Yes campaign was different from elections because the Independence option was so new and unfamiliar. So it was always going to begin low and then benefit from a slow ratchet effect as people, hitherto voting no or DK as a safe/default option, became more familiar with the arguments and some (but not all, of course) changed to yes. (BTW, if this applies to UKIP then things could get very interesting.)
That this is a factor is certainly consistent with what we have observed. So I was very interested a few weeks ago to read this piece - which makes a broadly similar argument and emphasises that many women are too busy/uninterested in politics to pay attention till the vote (and which may well explain the otherwise puzzling age distribution of the differential, which is focussed on teens and young adults).
I have heard several suggest that the long running debate about whether or not women are smarter than men will be officially over when the results of the referendum are known.
"This Euro-parliament is a failed experiment. Every election, it arouses less and less interest in the people of Europe. Every time we stage this farce, the turn-out goes down.
Note how he has to focus on the trend, which has been declining since the 1970s like pretty much all non-leadership elections in developed countries. The Euros give you that trend as a "lower every time" line rather than bouncing around above and below the trend line because the arbitrary stuff like combination with other elections and position in the electoral cycle averages out across the whole EU.
Boris can't talk about the actual level of turnout here because the turnout in the election that elected him, at 38.1%, is substantially lower than the turnout that elected the current EU Parliament, which was 43%, and he doesn't want to call his own job a "failed experiment".
Edmund the turnout at the last Euro elections in the UK was 34.1% so it was lower than the turnout in the Mayoral elections. Nick and I have a bet about whether it will go even lower this time. I think it will but maybe those hoards of angry old men from UKIP will confound me.
34.1% in the UK, but Boris is talking about the EU as a whole (which is the right one to look at since he's talking about whether the parliament is working, and it's an EU-wide parliament) and the number there is 43%.
Either way, the mayoral contest and the EU parliament contest are in the same general range. If the turnout makes the one a job a failed experiment, it makes the other one a failed experiment too. It's not just the London job either; A large and increasing proportion of voters in developed countries just aren't interested in elections that don't elect the leader, even for very important, consequential bodies like the US House and Senate. This obviously isn't a good thing, but I don't think it renders all those elections illegitimate or the bodies they elect failures.
It's not often that I defend Edward Heath and Harold Wilson, but I think it's a bit rich to blame them for the fact that the EU has evolved in ways different to what people thought they were getting at the time. It wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Single European Act in 1986. It wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992. It wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, or the Treaty of Nice in 2001. It wasn't Ted Heath who agreed to the accession of Romania and Bulgaria or who declined to take advantage of the provisions for restricting immigation from the other accession countries. And, above all, it wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Treaty of Lisbon having broken a pledge to put it to a referendum.
At any point in this series, the UK could have vetoed any aspects of the evolution of the EU which it didn't like. That we didn't do so is the responsibility not of Ted Heath, but of the successive governments of the time, in particular of Blair and Brown, responsible for the worst mistakes in this list.
Blimey they had UKIP on 9% twice this year... so blinding poll
@MickPork regularly links to a graph showing the ebb and flow of VI over the last couple of years, and seems to have predicted the UKIP rise that we are seeing now quite accurately.
Maybe an idea for a thread? Are positive ones for UKIP allowed?
It's not often that I defend Edward Heath and Harold Wilson, but I think it's a bit rich to blame them for the fact that the EU has evolved in ways different to what people thought they were getting at the time. It wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Single European Act in 1986. It wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992. It wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, or the Treaty of Nice in 2001. It wasn't Ted Heath who agreed to the accession of Romania and Bulgaria or who declined to take advantage of the provisions for restricting immigation from the other accession countries. And, above all, it wasn't Ted Heath who signed the Treaty of Lisbon having broken a pledge to put it to a referendum.
At any point in this series, the UK could have vetoed any aspects of the evolution of the EU which it didn't like. That we didn't do so is the responsibility not of Ted Heath, but of the successive governments of the time, in particular of Blair and Brown, responsible for the worst mistakes in this list.
If only the man the public wanted to be PM instead of Ted Heath had been in charge, none of this would have happened
@MickPork regularly links to a graph showing the ebb and flow of VI over the last couple of years, and seems to have predicted the UKIP rise that we are seeing now quite accurately.
Maybe an idea for a thread? Are positive ones for UKIP allowed?
Guido's suggesting that UKIP's strong popular support will cause the press to change their tone.
"Papers don’t like to back losers, expect the commentariat to fracture soon…"
Unbiased BBC. On Woman's hour this week they have 5 guest editors, of which 3 are clearly Labour supporters. One a donor, another a Lab peer and the third laverne a well known supporter of Lab. The other 2 are Kelly Holmes and Naomi Alderman (Guardian writer).
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
I'd be very interested in whether Conservative supporters agree with my view on this.
I'd vote tactically for the Lib Dems.
That said, I expect many Tories not to do so, there's something about some of the Lib Dem actions in Government that annoys a lot of Tories.
My only other caveat, is that, if it looks like a close election such as a Con most votes/Lab most seats situation, I'd vote Tory to ensure, the Tories could claim they comfortably won the popular vote.
I'd be very interested in whether Conservative supporters agree with my view on this.
Yep, I think it is right. There are a handful of LibDem ministers (Danny Alexander, David Laws, Steve Webb) who could attract Conservative voters, but, with the possible exception of Danny Alexander, they are not in constituencies where Con->LD tactical switching is relevant.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous have had UKIP in single figures 4 times this year out of a total of 5 from all pollsters, and as low as 8% in January, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Look at the figures from other pollsters around the time Populous had 8-9%, and then think why it might be described in such terms
Carnyx, it is bollocks, if you look at online media or attend meetings it is obvious there are lots of women involved and voting YES. It is called clutching at straws, they will soon be back to it will be English born people Salmond has issues with , followed by he wins by eating babies etc.
I know its different up north, but even north of the wall (in Game of Thrones) eating babies was well beyond acceptable behaviour.
Clearly anything goes for that one additional vote....
As for women I wonder if its more that they are looking in the wrong online places (i.e. just typical male bias).
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
"Nick Clegg is a “self-obsessed” and “revolting character” who is “so dishonest” that he cannot tell the difference between truth and lies, a former aide to Michael Gove has said.
Dominic Cummings, who repeatedly clashed with Mr Clegg’s team in his role as Mr Gove’s special adviser, said that Mr Clegg is the “worst kind of modern MP” and "only cares about his image".
He told The Sunday Times that whenever Mr Clegg gave a speech he used to demand "hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money" for his "latest absurd gimmick"."
Carnyx, it is bollocks, if you look at online media or attend meetings it is obvious there are lots of women involved and voting YES. It is called clutching at straws, they will soon be back to it will be English born people Salmond has issues with , followed by he wins by eating babies etc.
I know its different up north, but even north of the wall (in Game of Thrones) eating babies was well beyond acceptable behaviour.
Clearly anything goes for that one additional vote....
As for women I wonder if its more that they are looking in the wrong online places (i.e. just typical male bias).
No, it is just another feeble unionist excuse , they are getting beaten at every turn and have to clutch at straws.
Possibly a life changing year for me was going to Brighton Uni to study Humanities in 2010
The lecturers were Marxists, Communist and SWP members that preached an extreme leftist dogma . One of there key phrases was "There is no such thing as common sense" and they would go to all manner of lengths to prevent any form of traditional thinking.
That to me seemed ridiculously old fashioned, much more so than the notion of independence or Grammar schools. Thank God a party that favours the complete opposite is now the rising force in English politics
I'd be very interested in whether Conservative supporters agree with my view on this.
I may not be your typical tory supporter. I am Scottish, more socially liberal than most tories and have voted for the SDP and Lib Dems (when in the Alliance) in the past. But if I was in a seat like Edinburgh West I would vote for Mike Crockart in a heart beat (not that I think it would do him any good).
The problem you correctly identify is that in most Lib Dem seats the tories are already second so the inclination to vote for the Yellow Peril is slight. But I would give them credit for helping to provide us with sane and competent government when the country really needed it and have no doubt at all that their economics is a lot more credible than anything heard from Labour. So yes, in the right circumstances, this tory for one would be more inclined to vote Lib Dem than hitherto.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
I had my spreadsheet open with all the polls from this parliament and going back to the war.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
I've always felt that the Yes campaign was different from elections because the Independence option was so new and unfamiliar. So it was always going to begin low and then benefit from a slow ratchet effect as people, hitherto voting no or DK as a safe/default option, became more familiar with the arguments and some (but not all, of course) changed to yes. (BTW, if this applies to UKIP then things could get very interesting.)
That this is a factor is certainly consistent with what we have observed. So I was very interested a few weeks ago to read this piece - which makes a broadly similar argument and emphasises that many women are too busy/uninterested in politics to pay attention till the vote (and which may well explain the otherwise puzzling age distribution of the differential, which is focussed on teens and young adults).
Carnyx, it is bollocks, if you look at online media or attend meetings it is obvious there are lots of women involved and voting YES. It is called clutching at straws, they will soon be back to it will be English born people Salmond has issues with , followed by he wins by eating babies etc.
I am sure you are referring to the gender differential in Yes/No, rather than my comments(!), but it does seem to be a fairly reliable phenomenon in opinion polling and I was just suggesting another way to skin that particular pussy cat besides the interpretation which some of our colleagues on PB favour.
It certainly does not count as an absolute gender thing, as you say, and of course one has the likes of Winnie Ewing, Margo Macdonald and Nicola Sturgeon - who herself comes out very well in opinion polls, and is possibly one of the most highly rated politicians in the UK in public esteem (but I don't know enough about Wales or NI). To have Ms Sturgeon for a deputy is not obviously the act of a man afraid of women. And the Scottish cabinet has about 40% women which is not too bad these days (if with room for improvement, though probably also within statistical fluctuations) - and with a much better social class/origin balance than the likes of the Westminster Cabinet. I know they have resorted to arguing that women only control 13% of the budget or whatever it is, but without knowing the relative sizes of the budgets under each minister's control I can't assess how likely that is to come about by chance.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
I had my spreadsheet open with all the polls from this parliament and going back to the war.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
But will this work with coalition government?
Cool!
Regardless of who you follow, it is an interesting time to be a political poll watcher/stats nerd/gambler
Guido's piece on the commetariat not liking to be against a winner could be relevant to your article. Biased I know, but I am beginning to see why Farage said if UKIP win the Euros there will be a political earthquake.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
I had my spreadsheet open with all the polls from this parliament and going back to the war.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
But will this work with coalition government?
"Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election."
I guess the problem is that the "opposition" (Lab+LD) are also polling 40-45%
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
I had my spreadsheet open with all the polls from this parliament and going back to the war.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
But will this work with coalition government?
Cool!
Regardless of who you follow, it is an interesting time to be a political poll watcher/stats nerd/gambler
Guido's piece on the commetariat not liking to be against a winner could be relevant to your article. Biased I know, but I am beginning to see why Farage said if UKIP win the Euros there will be a political earthquake.
Put it this way, depending on the pollsters, The coalition has lost maybe 15-18% of their vote share since the General Election, and on average, Labour has picked up 6% of that vote loss, UKIP have generally picked up double that.
Astonishing and brilliant or worrying depending on your viewpoint.
In the past, the principal opposition generally hoovers up the majority of the votes lost by the Government in the polling.
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
"Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything"
Why not? The studies indicate otherwise. Classic compatible trains will run onto even phase 1 from the north. Yet alone the extra paths created for freight and passenger traffic on the classic routes.
"but do we want London to become even more important?"
If the regions served plan well for HS2, they can get very large advantages from it.
"Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere)."
"If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere."
Where? If you believe (as the studies show) that there is going to be a capacity crunch on the network, where is the 'elsewhere'? This has been looked into extensively, and none of the schemes give the same advantages as HS2. And also remember the chaos of the WCML upgrade.
Possibly a life changing year for me was going to Brighton Uni to study Humanities in 2010
The lecturers were Marxists, Communist and SWP members that preached an extreme leftist dogma . One of there key phrases was "There is no such thing as common sense" and they would go to all manner of lengths to prevent any form of traditional thinking.
That to me seemed ridiculously old fashioned, much more so than the notion of independence or Grammar schools. Thank God a party that favours the complete opposite is now the rising force in English politics
Sounds like they did a very good job in challenging you to develop your thinking on a variety of subjects.
"Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election."
I guess the problem is that the "opposition" (Lab+LD) are also polling 40-45%
I think the problem is that every main party is polling core support. The anti (a particular) party voters have finally found an acceptable anti-party, protest party (UKIP) rather than continuing to vote for the other side.
Its hardly a surprising considering how annoyed many anti-party (so protest voters voting lib dem in 2010) are with the resultant government... But it will make 2015 very hard to read...
Possibly a life changing year for me was going to Brighton Uni to study Humanities in 2010
The lecturers were Marxists, Communist and SWP members that preached an extreme leftist dogma . One of there key phrases was "There is no such thing as common sense" and they would go to all manner of lengths to prevent any form of traditional thinking.
That to me seemed ridiculously old fashioned, much more so than the notion of independence or Grammar schools. Thank God a party that favours the complete opposite is now the rising force in English politics
Sounds like they did a very good job in challenging you to develop your thinking on a variety of subjects.
Well yes
It kind of worked in reverse, I agreed with them when I started and when I realised what utter wallies they were, I found I had disagreed by the end!
I went in as Owen Jones and came out as Peter Hitchens
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
Of course we want London to become even more important. You should run your profits. London is an enormous asset to Britain and instead of anguishing about it, we should revel in it.
To answer your final question, off the top of my head Paris, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Brussels, Vienna, Budapest and Prague are also as nationally dominant (or more so).
@Josias - "High-speed rail is being used for this purposes in Spain, Italy, Germany and elsewhere. What makes you think that the UK is unique in not needing it?"
In Spain, Germany and Italy there are a number of cities of similar size and levels of success, so there is no centre sucking in all resources and investments. Distances to travel are also greater. In Spain, the first AVE was between Madrid and Seville - a distance of 331 miles. It cut journey times by half.
Presumably we are going to have endless posts on the Tory "slump" with Populus, over analysing a MOE variation to within an inch of its life and predicting impeding electoral disaster for the Conservative Party?
Just going on what I learned from Friday's dead heat.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
I had my spreadsheet open with all the polls from this parliament and going back to the war.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
But will this work with coalition government?
Cool!
Regardless of who you follow, it is an interesting time to be a political poll watcher/stats nerd/gambler
Guido's piece on the commetariat not liking to be against a winner could be relevant to your article. Biased I know, but I am beginning to see why Farage said if UKIP win the Euros there will be a political earthquake.
Put it this way, depending on the pollsters, The coalition has lost maybe 15-18% of their vote share since the General Election, and on average, Labour has picked up 6% of that vote loss, UKIP have generally picked up double that.
Astonishing and brilliant or worrying depending on your viewpoint.
In the past, the principal opposition generally hoovers up the majority of the votes lost by the Government in the polling.
I made that point yesterday. The downside for the tories is that if Labour have pretty much failed to pick up the protest vote (other than lefty Lib Dems) the possibilities of swingback might be much reduced and the Labour party might lose less support over the next year than oppositions generally do.
Put it this way, depending on the pollsters, The coalition has lost maybe 15-18% of their vote share since the General Election, and on average, Labour has picked up 6% of that vote loss, UKIP have generally picked up double that.
Astonishing and brilliant or worrying depending on your viewpoint.
In the past, the principal opposition generally hoovers up the majority of the votes lost by the Government in the polling.
Wise words.
Don't forget the Lib Dems also form part of the Government. Labour's lead may be very skinny this far out in a parliament but there are dampeners on potential swingback to the Conservatives every which way but loose.
1) The Conservatives and Lib Dems are both in Gov't so one can expect swingback to benefit the Lib Dems too. 2) The Conservatives start point is NOM, Con Most seats - swingback past this point is not swingback. 3) A fair amount of UKIP support is from NOTA so if they drop it will swing back to NOTA.
GDP figures tomorrow. Big day for the government. Market expectations are bullish at 0.9%, I have it down as 0.7%, if it does come in at or above market expectations the government will need to be wary of any potential overheating.
I made that point yesterday. The downside for the tories is that if Labour have pretty much failed to pick up the protest vote (other than lefty Lib Dems) the possibilities of swingback might be much reduced and the Labour party might lose less support over the next year than oppositions generally do.
UKIP are currently targeting Labour voters, and they're winning support.
Presumably we are going to have endless posts on the Tory "slump" with Populus, over analysing a MOE variation to within an inch of its life and predicting impeding electoral disaster for the Conservative Party?
Just going on what I learned from Friday's dead heat.
Labour on 35% twice is the most interesting feature of that pair of polls. But they're only two polls and really shouldn't be taken very seriously in isolation.
Mr. K, the economic needs and political cultures of the various euroland states are too divergent to function as a single economy with a single interest rate. Instead of disentangling the diabolical octopus of the Euro, the member states are instead insisting that only by wrapping my tentacles pressing more suckers to their skin will the single currency work properly.
They're moving towards banking and fiscal union. Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, and a dozen others. It's crazy. It can't work, and it won't.
But by the time the brakes are slammed on everything will be so integrated that extricating the countries from the train-wreck will be very difficult, very painful and not a very friendly process.
@Josias - "High-speed rail is being used for this purposes in Spain, Italy, Germany and elsewhere. What makes you think that the UK is unique in not needing it?"
In Spain, Germany and Italy there are a number of cities of similar size and levels of success, so there is no centre sucking in all resources and investments. Distances to travel are also greater. In Spain, the first AVE was between Madrid and Seville - a distance of 331 miles. It cut journey times by half.
But our situation is different to those in other ways as well: capacity being one. We can all point to ways that countries are different to prove our points. Instead, why not look at all of the reports on both sides of the argument? The pro-HS2 ones are certainly persuasive, to me at least.
And my other points? What are your answers? Where is the 'elsewhere' you mentioned?
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
Of course we want London to become even more important. You should run your profits. London is an enormous asset to Britain and instead of anguishing about it, we should revel in it.
To answer your final question, off the top of my head Paris, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Brussels, Vienna, Budapest and Prague are also as nationally dominant (or more so).
I can see your point to an extent on maximising a benefit, but that would imply we believe it is impossible for any other centre in the UK to be successful even on a scale that other regional centres in Europe are. Do we really believe that? And, if so, why?
Disagree about Paris. There are some very successful regional cities in France: Toulouse, Montpelier and Lyon spring to mind. Most of the others are probably fair enough (except Brussels, where I'd throw in Antwerp; and Stockholm - Gothenberg and Malmo), but that was my point about population.
The REAL Racists: UKIP is the Only Party That Doesn't Discriminate Against Non-Whites
"...UKIP’s immigration policy is the least racist of all four parties. Since EU immigrants are overwhelmingly white and non-EU immigrants are overwhelmingly non-white, the immigration policies of the Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems effectively discriminate in favour of white immigrants and against ethnic minorities. UKIP’s policy meanwhile would treat the overwhelmingly white EU immigrants the same as everyone else, by definition having the effect of being fairer to non-white immigrants from India, Asia and elsewhere.
In fact, UKIP’s immigration policy would actually mean a higher proportion of immigrants to Britain are ethnic minorities. Discriminating only on skill and not on EU membership, UKIP would proportionally let in fewer unskilled white workers from Europe and more skilled non-white workers from India and Asia."
Presumably we are going to have endless posts on the Tory "slump" with Populus, over analysing a MOE variation to within an inch of its life and predicting impeding electoral disaster for the Conservative Party?
Well, there's been one so far. But it's early yet.
Presumably we are going to have endless posts on the Tory "slump" with Populus, over analysing a MOE variation to within an inch of its life and predicting impeding electoral disaster for the Conservative Party?
Just going on what I learned from Friday's dead heat.
Labour on 35% twice is the most interesting feature of that pair of polls. But they're only two polls and really shouldn't be taken very seriously in isolation.
Not sure MikeL has done his weekly YG average this week, but it was 4.8. FWIW my impression is that the real figure is about 4 on YG assumptions, 2-3 on assumptions of other pollsters.
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
Populous are the only firm to have UKIP in single figures this year, so 15% with them is blinding as far as I am concerned
Jeez
Err ICM have had UKIP in single figures this year, and Populus changed their weightings and methodology in Feb, since then, UKIP have polled double figures.
Yeah sorry I changed it when I saw the one poll from ICM that had us on 9%
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
I had my spreadsheet open with all the polls from this parliament and going back to the war.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
But will this work with coalition government?
Cool!
Regardless of who you follow, it is an interesting time to be a political poll watcher/stats nerd/gambler
Guido's piece on the commetariat not liking to be against a winner could be relevant to your article. Biased I know, but I am beginning to see why Farage said if UKIP win the Euros there will be a political earthquake.
I wonder how many of the general public think like this too - you can see it in football in particular:
The main parties desperately need somebody working class to attack UKIP.
All the people doing it so far are shot down in a hail of 's8d off you comfortably off north london leftie' comments.
Anyone attacking UKIP at the moment is going to be shot down, as a lot of Tories who are not North London lefties are discovering. Seems to me the best tactic is to accept they are going to win the Euro's and develop strategies for the GE, which is the important one. An obvious line of attack for Labour at that point will UKIP's claim to be the true inheritors of Mrs T's legacy. That may be a good Tory line of attack too.
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
Of course we want London to become even more important. You should run your profits. London is an enormous asset to Britain and instead of anguishing about it, we should revel in it.
To answer your final question, off the top of my head Paris, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Brussels, Vienna, Budapest and Prague are also as nationally dominant (or more so).
I can see your point to an extent on maximising a benefit, but that would imply we believe it is impossible for any other centre in the UK to be successful even on a scale that other regional centres in Europe are. Do we really believe that? And, if so, why?
Disagree about Paris. There are some very successful regional cities in France: Toulouse, Montpelier and Lyon spring to mind. Most of the others are probably fair enough (except Brussels, where I'd throw in Antwerp; and Stockholm - Gothenberg and Malmo), but that was my point about population.
"The GDP and income per capita is one of the highest in the world; the Paris urban area concentrates more than 30% of France's wealth. In 2009, the GDP per capita (PPP) was $46.800 for 9.82 million people. The average income was 56.980$ in 2009, 41% higher than in the rest of the country."
Mr. Bond, quite the reverse (literally). Scotland has had increasing devolution for years. Europe is moving towards integration. Furthermore, Scotland always retained some level of difference (in law, for example), whereas EU law-making is becoming more prolific.
The UK is three centuries old, whereas the EU is younger and cramming together far more countries which are far more divergent than England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
I've always felt that the Yes campaign was different from elections because the Independence option was so new and unfamiliar. So it was always going to begin low and then benefit from a slow ratchet effect as people, hitherto voting no or DK as a safe/default option, became more familiar with the arguments and some (but not all, of course) changed to yes. (BTW, if this applies to UKIP then things could get very interesting.)
That this is a factor is certainly consistent with what we have observed. So I was very interested a few weeks ago to read this piece - which makes a broadly similar argument and emphasises that many women are too busy/uninterested in politics to pay attention till the vote (and which may well explain the otherwise puzzling age distribution of the differential, which is focussed on teens and young adults).
Carnyx, it is bollocks, if you look at online media or attend meetings it is obvious there are lots of women involved and voting YES. It is called clutching at straws, they will soon be back to it will be English born people Salmond has issues with , followed by he wins by eating babies etc.
I am sure you are referring to the gender differential in Yes/No, rather than my comments(!), but it does seem to be a fairly reliable phenomenon in opinion polling and I was just suggesting another way to skin that particular pussy cat besides the interpretation which some of our colleagues on PB favour.
Carnyx, it was indeed the topic I was referring to rather than your goodself. Re budgets, if you solely count it in such a stupid fashion then it will always be unbalanced given a couple of the portfolios have the lions share of the total budget. Importance of the portfolio is not based solely on the money spent in it. Once again unionists clutching at straws to try and hid the imbalance south of the border in the London parties.
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
Of course we want London to become even more important. You should run your profits. London is an enormous asset to Britain and instead of anguishing about it, we should revel in it.
To answer your final question, off the top of my head Paris, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Brussels, Vienna, Budapest and Prague are also as nationally dominant (or more so).
Also Athens, Helsinki and Warsaw. Dublin perhaps?
It's almost easier to do the opposite list; Italy, Spain...er...that's it.
The Netherlands strike as a neither / nor - besides Amsterdam they have Rotterdam and the Hague, but they are so geographically close that they hardly count as separate cities.
The main parties desperately need somebody working class to attack UKIP.
All the people doing it so far are shot down in a hail of 's8d off you comfortably off north london leftie' comments.
Anyone attacking UKIP at the moment is going to be shot down, as a lot of Tories who are not North London lefties are discovering. Seems to me the best tactic is to accept they are going to win the Euro's and develop strategies for the GE, which is the important one. An obvious line of attack for Labour at that point will UKIP's claim to be the true inheritors of Mrs T's legacy. That may be a good Tory line of attack too.
Lots of people will vote frivolously in the EU elections, as our host's thread header neatly demonstrates. They'll happily accept that UKIP is a joke party, but in a joke election that's fine.
Will the public vote for Nigel Farage's fag packet policies in a general election in the same numbers? I very much doubt it.
With the 8 polls now in for April for Populus the headline average vote, with March comparisons, C 33.5 ( -0.4) L 35.6 ( -1.0) LD 9.9 ( + 0.4) UKIP 13.4 ( + 1.2).
The main movements from March on the 2010 comparisons L》C 3.3% (- 1.3) L 》UKIP 5.1% ( + 1.7) LD 》L 23.5% (- 2.8) LD 》LD 30.3% ( + 1.9). These figures are gross, with don't knows still around 11%, 9% & 21% for 2010 C L &LD respectively.
This is worrying for Lab with a clear movement down in voting intention and 2010 LD starting to peel off.
No, it is just another feeble unionist excuse , they are getting beaten at every turn and have to clutch at straws.
That wasn't meant as an excuse, more a reason for yet another piece of unionist utter incompetency.
If I didn't know better I would think the unionist's were intentionally trying to lose the vote....
It does make you wonder as they go from blunder to blunder. Hard to believe they can be that bad, though Labour have proven it several times and keep to the same track believing it is the voters that are wrong rather than them , very odd.
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
Of course we want London to become even more important. You should run your profits. London is an enormous asset to Britain and instead of anguishing about it, we should revel in it.
To answer your final question, off the top of my head Paris, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Brussels, Vienna, Budapest and Prague are also as nationally dominant (or more so).
Also Athens, Helsinki and Warsaw. Dublin perhaps?
It's almost easier to do the opposite list; Italy, Spain...er...that's it.
The Netherlands strike as a neither / nor - besides Amsterdam they have Rotterdam and the Hague, but they are so geographically close that they hardly count as separate cities.
Spain - Barcelona; Italy- Milan/Turin - both cities are not the capital but centres of commerce.
In France, Paris is much more dominant than London is and the 'successful regional cities' I would suggest are very much on a par with the more successful regional cities of the UK. I guess they're sunnier?
One of the things that shocked me most about Paris, incidentally, is the shanty town that seems to exist just off the eurostar route in the north. Does London have anything comparable to this?
Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything - and even if you do it will be marginal. I can see how high speed trains over long distances can be beneficial to an extent, but do we want London to become even more important? Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere). I am not sure how HS2 would do that. If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere. Is there any other developed country with a population like ours in which one city so dominates?
"Unless you live and work in Brum HS2 is not going to make much difference to anything"
Why not? The studies indicate otherwise. Classic compatible trains will run onto even phase 1 from the north. Yet alone the extra paths created for freight and passenger traffic on the classic routes.
"but do we want London to become even more important?"
If the regions served plan well for HS2, they can get very large advantages from it.
"Surely, the best thing is to encourage the growth of our big regional cities independently of London - which is what seems to happen in most other European countries (and elsewhere)."
"If we have the resources HS2 is going to take up, surely they are better spent elsewhere."
Where? If you believe (as the studies show) that there is going to be a capacity crunch on the network, where is the 'elsewhere'? This has been looked into extensively, and none of the schemes give the same advantages as HS2. And also remember the chaos of the WCML upgrade.
JJ, a real motorway between Scotland's two major cities. Minimum dual carriageway of the A9, a decent link from south west Scotland to the motorway system are 3 for starters.
Mr. K, the economic needs and political cultures of the various euroland states are too divergent to function as a single economy with a single interest rate. Instead of disentangling the diabolical octopus of the Euro, the member states are instead insisting that only by wrapping my tentacles pressing more suckers to their skin will the single currency work properly.
They're moving towards banking and fiscal union. Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, and a dozen others. It's crazy. It can't work, and it won't.
But by the time the brakes are slammed on everything will be so integrated that extricating the countries from the train-wreck will be very difficult, very painful and not a very friendly process.
The Dyedwoolie monitor still has Lab largest party by a fraction, 20 short. UKIP will win the euros by at least 5 clear percent with the big beasts in the 20s somewhere. If Cam wants to remain PM, he needs to be polling mid thirties consistently by years end. For Ed to slip and lose, look for Labour polling 35 and under with the Lib Dems under 10. A UKIP GE result of greater than 13% would probably make it impossible for Cameron without a late direct swing from Lab to Con. Tory score of 31 on Sunday with YouGov will be a concern if replicated consistently.
Comments
Those tory BOOers and Eurosceptics are still biding their time waiting for the May election results as they know that will likely be their last chance to get heard before the looming GE in 2015 silences them and just about all talk of Europe.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20938280
As for your other point, I think we've discussed this extensively before. Rail traffic started accelerating in the mid-1990s, and has gone in line with the growth in the Internet. The idea that the Internet will mean less people travelling is, like the paperless office, unproved.
The Gove/Clegg differentiation posturing is kicking off again.
Nick Clegg is a 'self-obsessed, revolting character'
Dominic Cummings, a former special adviser to Michael Gove, says Nick Clegg is the 'worst kind of modern MP' and 'only cares about his image'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10791556/Nick-Clegg-is-a-self-obsessed-revolting-character.html
If UKIP actually bothered to campaign around here they could get closer in the ward - the anti HS2 stance could pick up alot of votes though it may have these already - will be interesting to see how they do.
(2 member ward, 2.5k Lab, 1k UKIP, 800 Con last time )
Will they be happy with a party that says "the very existence of the NHS stifles competition"?
http://www.paulnuttallmep.com/?p=712
"Former F1 driver John Watson feels that American Gene Haas's decisions to build his new F1 team from scratch and base it in the United States rather than in Europe are mistakes."
Well, quite.
BBC Radio 4 Today @BBCr4today 1h
Tory rebels on HS2 are going against their party due to their constituency interests, rather than the wider picture - Lord Deighton
http://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2014/04/19/nos-problem-with-men/
I've always felt that the Yes campaign was different from elections because the Independence option was so new and unfamiliar. So it was always going to begin low and then benefit from a slow ratchet effect as people, hitherto voting no or DK as a safe/default option, became more familiar with the arguments and some (but not all, of course) changed to yes. (BTW, if this applies to UKIP then things could get very interesting.)
That this is a factor is certainly consistent with what we have observed. So I was very interested a few weeks ago to read this piece - which makes a broadly similar argument and emphasises that many women are too busy/uninterested in politics to pay attention till the vote (and which may well explain the otherwise puzzling age distribution of the differential, which is focussed on teens and young adults).
"I can't believe that a young Margaret Thatcher leaving Oxford today would join the Conservative Party led by David Cameron. I think she would get involved in Ukip, and no doubt topple me within 12 months or so."
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/a-young-margaret-thatcher-would-join-ukip-says-nigel-farage-8585063.html
They're moving towards banking and fiscal union. Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, and a dozen others. It's crazy. It can't work, and it won't.
But by the time the brakes are slammed on everything will be so integrated that extricating the countries from the train-wreck will be very difficult, very painful and not a very friendly process.
Interesting that you are as fixated on The Rangers as much as Harry Flash, explains many of your posts.
It is odd the way Mr Clegg lies on TV.
That said, the recent Conservative Party PEB for the EU Elections seems to be anchored on lies.
How hard the tory whips crack down and how the rebels play it should be interesting considering some of the past blunders made by the Cameroons in that area. Not to mention some votes and issues that just might 'pop up' in the future where discipline may be crucial and Labour don't decide to back the tory leadership.
As a 39 yr old I have never known anything other than the UK being part of the EEC/ER/Common Market. Being an independent country with the ability to make our own decisions on everything seems like a new idea to me, not one from the past.
Similarly Grammar schools. When I was 11, my family couldn't afford a private school and there was no chance of going to a Grammar school, because there weren't any round here... I didn't even know what one was until I was in my twenties, and when I did they seemed like a new idea that made sense.
I think its only people who are both old enough to remember pre EEC times and Grammar schools, and be against them, that think of EU withdrawal and reinstatement of Grammar schools as old fashioned.
Fashions are circular not linear. Short back and sides is trendy now and was in the 50s, in the 60s and 90s people had Beatles haircuts, in between these haircuts seemed outdated. I see no reason why politics isn't the same
I really don't think we need to worry about overheating for a long time yet. It will be Q2 before the peak output in 2008 is matched (at least until the underlying stats are corrected in September at which point we will find we exceeded it some time at the end of last year). What is at risk is the expectations of interest rate rises are increasing and this is already affecting the bond market and the currency in ways that are not optimal for growth.
But I think we have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that GDP figures on their own move no votes at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014
Either way, the mayoral contest and the EU parliament contest are in the same general range. If the turnout makes the one a job a failed experiment, it makes the other one a failed experiment too. It's not just the London job either; A large and increasing proportion of voters in developed countries just aren't interested in elections that don't elect the leader, even for very important, consequential bodies like the US House and Senate. This obviously isn't a good thing, but I don't think it renders all those elections illegitimate or the bodies they elect failures.
At any point in this series, the UK could have vetoed any aspects of the evolution of the EU which it didn't like. That we didn't do so is the responsibility not of Ted Heath, but of the successive governments of the time, in particular of Blair and Brown, responsible for the worst mistakes in this list.
@MickPork regularly links to a graph showing the ebb and flow of VI over the last couple of years, and seems to have predicted the UKIP rise that we are seeing now quite accurately.
Maybe an idea for a thread? Are positive ones for UKIP allowed?
"Papers don’t like to back losers, expect the commentariat to fracture soon…"
http://order-order.com/2014/04/27/ukip-winning-despite-media-attacks/
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-untactical-right-conservative.html
I'd be very interested in whether Conservative supporters agree with my view on this.
27 April: men 16%, women 14%
24 April: men 15%, women 10%
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Online_VI_28-04-2014_BPC.pdf
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Online_VI_24-04-2014_BPC.pdf
The UKIP surge can be exaggerated - if we take Populus, for instance, 13-14 ratings have been common for a while, so 15 is good but "blinding" is a bit overstated. They're clearly doing well in the run-up to the Euros (I'm meeting quite a few people who plan to vote Lab nex year but UKIP now, and I'm sure the Tories are too), but the upswing is most strongly expressed in higher turnout intention.
That said, I expect many Tories not to do so, there's something about some of the Lib Dem actions in Government that annoys a lot of Tories.
My only other caveat, is that, if it looks like a close election such as a Con most votes/Lab most seats situation, I'd vote Tory to ensure, the Tories could claim they comfortably won the popular vote.
Look at the figures from other pollsters around the time Populous had 8-9%, and then think why it might be described in such terms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014
Clearly anything goes for that one additional vote....
As for women I wonder if its more that they are looking in the wrong online places (i.e. just typical male bias).
You were quick off the mark there, well done
4/5 of the single figure scores have been with Populous
But if they sorted out their methodology, fair do's.. at least some people are adjusting to the new dawn!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10791556/Nick-Clegg-is-a-self-obsessed-revolting-character.html
"Nick Clegg is a “self-obsessed” and “revolting character” who is “so dishonest” that he cannot tell the difference between truth and lies, a former aide to Michael Gove has said.
Dominic Cummings, who repeatedly clashed with Mr Clegg’s team in his role as Mr Gove’s special adviser, said that Mr Clegg is the “worst kind of modern MP” and "only cares about his image".
He told The Sunday Times that whenever Mr Clegg gave a speech he used to demand "hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money" for his "latest absurd gimmick"."
The lecturers were Marxists, Communist and SWP members that preached an extreme leftist dogma . One of there key phrases was "There is no such thing as common sense" and they would go to all manner of lengths to prevent any form of traditional thinking.
That to me seemed ridiculously old fashioned, much more so than the notion of independence or Grammar schools. Thank God a party that favours the complete opposite is now the rising force in English politics
The problem you correctly identify is that in most Lib Dem seats the tories are already second so the inclination to vote for the Yellow Peril is slight. But I would give them credit for helping to provide us with sane and competent government when the country really needed it and have no doubt at all that their economics is a lot more credible than anything heard from Labour. So yes, in the right circumstances, this tory for one would be more inclined to vote Lib Dem than hitherto.
You'll be delighted to know I'm writing a piece on UKIP's polling success and where it can go from here.
Other posters will be delighted to know, the piece has all evolved into an Ed is crap piece as well.
Jist of it is, Governing Party/Parties polling 40-45% of the vote with a year to go, is a pretty good launchpad for winning the General election.
But will this work with coalition government?
It certainly does not count as an absolute gender thing, as you say, and of course one has the likes of Winnie Ewing, Margo Macdonald and Nicola Sturgeon - who herself comes out very well in opinion polls, and is possibly one of the most highly rated politicians in the UK in public esteem (but I don't know enough about Wales or NI). To have Ms Sturgeon for a deputy is not obviously the act of a man afraid of women. And the Scottish cabinet has about 40% women which is not too bad these days (if with room for improvement, though probably also within statistical fluctuations) - and with a much better social class/origin balance than the likes of the Westminster Cabinet. I know they have resorted to arguing that women only control 13% of the budget or whatever it is, but without knowing the relative sizes of the budgets under each minister's control I can't assess how likely that is to come about by chance.
If I didn't know better I would think the unionist's were intentionally trying to lose the vote....
Regardless of who you follow, it is an interesting time to be a political poll watcher/stats nerd/gambler
Guido's piece on the commetariat not liking to be against a winner could be relevant to your article. Biased I know, but I am beginning to see why Farage said if UKIP win the Euros there will be a political earthquake.
I guess the problem is that the "opposition" (Lab+LD) are also polling 40-45%
Astonishing and brilliant or worrying depending on your viewpoint.
In the past, the principal opposition generally hoovers up the majority of the votes lost by the Government in the polling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Europe Where? If you believe (as the studies show) that there is going to be a capacity crunch on the network, where is the 'elsewhere'? This has been looked into extensively, and none of the schemes give the same advantages as HS2. And also remember the chaos of the WCML upgrade.
Below is a review of some of the alternative schemes to HS2:
http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-review-of-strategic-alternatives/hs2-review-of-strategic-alternatives.pdf
Election-data @election_data 44m
My map showing the 2010 winning margins of MPs along the HS2 Leeds line: @AndrewSparrow @PaulGoodmanCH pic.twitter.com/jeZMVdCxrt
Its hardly a surprising considering how annoyed many anti-party (so protest voters voting lib dem in 2010) are with the resultant government... But it will make 2015 very hard to read...
It kind of worked in reverse, I agreed with them when I started and when I realised what utter wallies they were, I found I had disagreed by the end!
I went in as Owen Jones and came out as Peter Hitchens
To answer your final question, off the top of my head Paris, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Brussels, Vienna, Budapest and Prague are also as nationally dominant (or more so).
In Spain, Germany and Italy there are a number of cities of similar size and levels of success, so there is no centre sucking in all resources and investments. Distances to travel are also greater. In Spain, the first AVE was between Madrid and Seville - a distance of 331 miles. It cut journey times by half.
Just going on what I learned from Friday's dead heat.
Don't forget the Lib Dems also form part of the Government. Labour's lead may be very skinny this far out in a parliament but there are dampeners on potential swingback to the Conservatives every which way but loose.
1) The Conservatives and Lib Dems are both in Gov't so one can expect swingback to benefit the Lib Dems too.
2) The Conservatives start point is NOM, Con Most seats - swingback past this point is not swingback.
3) A fair amount of UKIP support is from NOTA so if they drop it will swing back to NOTA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
And my other points? What are your answers? Where is the 'elsewhere' you mentioned?
Disagree about Paris. There are some very successful regional cities in France: Toulouse, Montpelier and Lyon spring to mind. Most of the others are probably fair enough (except Brussels, where I'd throw in Antwerp; and Stockholm - Gothenberg and Malmo), but that was my point about population.
All the people doing it so far are shot down in a hail of 's8d off you comfortably off north london leftie' comments.
The REAL Racists: UKIP is the Only Party That Doesn't Discriminate Against Non-Whites
"...UKIP’s immigration policy is the least racist of all four parties. Since EU immigrants are overwhelmingly white and non-EU immigrants are overwhelmingly non-white, the immigration policies of the Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems effectively discriminate in favour of white immigrants and against ethnic minorities. UKIP’s policy meanwhile would treat the overwhelmingly white EU immigrants the same as everyone else, by definition having the effect of being fairer to non-white immigrants from India, Asia and elsewhere.
In fact, UKIP’s immigration policy would actually mean a higher proportion of immigrants to Britain are ethnic minorities. Discriminating only on skill and not on EU membership, UKIP would proportionally let in fewer unskilled white workers from Europe and more skilled non-white workers from India and Asia."
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/04/28/Ironically-UKIP-s-immigration-policy-is-the-least-racist-of-all-four-parties
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-united-still-top-league-6709955
I bet Man City were nowhere near 9th in global shirt sales back in 1998 !
How will coming second be taken by the labour rank and file, if that is indeed what happens?
Success or failure for ed? or neither?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Paris
Paris is much more dominant of France than you appear to realise.
The UK is three centuries old, whereas the EU is younger and cramming together far more countries which are far more divergent than England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
It's almost easier to do the opposite list; Italy, Spain...er...that's it.
The Netherlands strike as a neither / nor - besides Amsterdam they have Rotterdam and the Hague, but they are so geographically close that they hardly count as separate cities.
Will the public vote for Nigel Farage's fag packet policies in a general election in the same numbers? I very much doubt it.
The main movements from March on the 2010 comparisons L》C 3.3% (- 1.3) L 》UKIP 5.1% ( + 1.7) LD 》L 23.5% (- 2.8) LD 》LD 30.3% ( + 1.9). These figures are gross, with don't knows still around 11%, 9% & 21% for 2010 C L &LD respectively.
This is worrying for Lab with a clear movement down in voting intention and 2010 LD starting to peel off.
In France, Paris is much more dominant than London is and the 'successful regional cities' I would suggest are very much on a par with the more successful regional cities of the UK. I guess they're sunnier?
One of the things that shocked me most about Paris, incidentally, is the shanty town that seems to exist just off the eurostar route in the north. Does London have anything comparable to this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Europe Where? If you believe (as the studies show) that there is going to be a capacity crunch on the network, where is the 'elsewhere'? This has been looked into extensively, and none of the schemes give the same advantages as HS2. And also remember the chaos of the WCML upgrade.
Below is a review of some of the alternative schemes to HS2:
http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-review-of-strategic-alternatives/hs2-review-of-strategic-alternatives.pdf
JJ, a real motorway between Scotland's two major cities. Minimum dual carriageway of the A9, a decent link from south west Scotland to the motorway system are 3 for starters.
A dying breed
If Cam wants to remain PM, he needs to be polling mid thirties consistently by years end. For Ed to slip and lose, look for Labour polling 35 and under with the Lib Dems under 10.
A UKIP GE result of greater than 13% would probably make it impossible for Cameron without a late direct swing from Lab to Con.
Tory score of 31 on Sunday with YouGov will be a concern if replicated consistently.