Mr. Dave, although the historical nature of the data means we can't use it as a direct comparison it'd still be interesting to see how the Liberal/Labour change affected the percentage voting for the two main parties.
Now I come to think of it, the present situation's different not only due to the Coalition but also because there's been a more gradual return of the Liberals (as Lib Dems, alas). It'll be interesting to see whether UKIP also increases gradually or has more substantial gains like they enjoyed in the locals.
It gets a little muddy as the rise of Labour began when Eire was still part of the UK. But it is interesting to see that FPTP doesn't enforce a two party system.
As was pointed out quite some time ago. When Cammie couldn't win a majority there were quite a few tories who immediately pointed at the UKIP 3.1% and said that had been enough to cause crucial losses in marginals and cost the majority. Any figure above that will cause the precise same voices to be joined by all those who have moved OUTwards since the Eurocrisis. OUT is going to be at or near the top of any future leadership battle.
"With the EU question resolved "
That makes it sound relatively simple when the truth is such a battle concentrated on IN or OUT has the power to split the tories and cause carnage that would make all previous Europe splits look tame in comparison. BOO tories will not have it all their own way because so many in the leadership and party heirarchy (including funders) are not going to give up without a fight. BOO might well hold sway in the tory membership and party as a whole but it is far from assured that they can get a majority of MPs onside.
Were there any seats where the UKIP vote exceeded the Lab or LD majority?
IIUC there were a couple, but not by enough for UKIP's presence to have plausibly swung it.
It's by no means definitive but there were tories who believed it and apparently had some data to back them up.
General Election 2010: Ukip challenge 'cost Tories a Commons majority'
The UK Independence Party's small but significant showing at the polls may have cost David Cameron a majority in the Commons, voting figures suggest.
Although the Eurosceptic group suffered a dismal election night, failing to make a breakthrough in mainstream politics, it may inadvertently have handed the pro-European Liberal Democrats the possibility of a role in government.
Analysis of results shows that in at least 21 key marginal seats, Ukip’s share of the vote proved enough to allow Labour or the Lib Dems to see off strong Tory challenges.
The extra victories would have been enough to fill the 20-seat shortfall needed to hand David Cameron an outright majority in the Commons.
Schools secretary Ed Balls' Morley and Outwood constituency was among key seats where the result might have been different without Ukip.
Mr Balls survived with a majority of only 1,101 while Ukip polled 1,506 in the contest.
It all depends how you choose to allocate the kipper vote I suppose. I think it's questionable that it can all be attributed to the UKIP vote myself but it absolutely played a part in marginals. It's how big a part. And that was only on 3.1% remember. Very few believe UKIP will somehow get less than that in 2015.
He (Tebbit) is equally merciless about the Coalition, which he compares to a marriage on the rocks. “Extremely unhappy, unwise, should never have happened. Divorce is coming because one of the partners is dallying with another would-be partner. Oh yes. I think Mr Clegg’s ambition I ask Tebbit what he thinks of Cameron. There is a long pause. The silence deepens. You can hear the geraniums growing in their pots in the courtyard beyond the French windows. Tebbit strokes his chin as if he were discovering that protuberance for the first time. Eventually, he says: “Last time I spoke to him one to one was before the 2010 election. My first question was, 'Why do you think the nearer we get to the election the narrower is your lead in the opinion polls?’ ” Hmm. And how did that go down? “He got very angry. He said that Margaret Thatcher never had a lead of 20 per cent in the polls. I said she had sufficient to win elections. Your lead is diminishing, why do you think that is and what are you going to do about it?” Let me guess; he was a bit put out? “He got very, very cross indeed. The interview came to a rather sulky end.” David Cameron was rude to you? “Oh, yes.”
This little story summerises all one needs to know about Cammo.
Looks like the voters are ready for four party politics.
But the voters have decided that FPTP will be in place for at least 25 years. FPTP is, as I keep saying, metastable. With four parties the results will be at best odd.
When the Lib Dems were underrepresented in the Commons they merely moaned and were ignored. I suspect other groupings may be more insistent.
MikeK: if Thatcher and Tebbitt (or their latterday equivalents) were in charge of the Conservative party, we would have a Labour government. This is not the 1980s; arguably then, homophobia had some electoral appeal - now it loses more votes than it gains (thankfully).
OT If you haven't seen it - rather good new series called The Politician's Husband - think its on BBC3 - stars David Tennant. Well worth looking up on iPlayer - its Borgen meets House of Cards.
Looks like the voters are ready for four party politics.
But the voters have decided that FPTP will be in place for at least 25 years. FPTP is, as I keep saying, metastable. With four parties the results will be at best odd.
When the Lib Dems were underrepresented in the Commons they merely moaned and were ignored. I suspect other groupings may be more insistent.
It will just favour minority governments, rather than majority governments (I think the current lot have discredited coalitions).
That could/should produce better policies as the government will have to win support on merit of each individual bill, rather than just relying on the party vote.
MikeK: if Thatcher and Tebbitt (or their latterday equivalents) were in charge of the Conservative party, we would have a Labour government. This is not the 1980s; arguably then, homophobia had some electoral appeal - now it loses more votes than it gains (thankfully).
If you read the following carefully, you will find that Gay Marriage is not a marriage at all but a dagger hanging over everyone who is not gay:
Re UKIP, I too think their vote share will fall back to 6-7% in 2015. I think that they will be contenders in a handful of constituencies, and could win 3 or 4. The best strategy for the Conservatives is simply to portray Labour as the greater evil, something that UKIP voters seem receptive to. I think that UKIP are probably a permanent feature in local elections. Their local council candidates should get some very good results, next year, on the back of the Euro elections, but will be squeezed in turn, in 2015.
Re UKIP, I too think their vote share will fall back to 6-7% in 2015. I think that they will be contenders in a handful of constituencies, and could win 3 or 4. The best strategy for the Conservatives is simply to portray Labour as the greater evil, something that UKIP voters seem receptive to. I think that UKIP are probably a permanent feature in local elections. Their local council candidates should get some very good results, next year, on the back of the Euro elections, but will be squeezed in turn, in 2015.
Another prayer, or is it some voodoo mantra to keep away the bogyman.
Re UKIP, I too think their vote share will fall back to 6-7% in 2015. I think that they will be contenders in a handful of constituencies, and could win 3 or 4. The best strategy for the Conservatives is simply to portray Labour as the greater evil, something that UKIP voters seem receptive to. I think that UKIP are probably a permanent feature in local elections. Their local council candidates should get some very good results, next year, on the back of the Euro elections, but will be squeezed in turn, in 2015.
I'm wondering if the fixed term parliaments thing was a mistake, and that after five year terms the government of the day will have stored up a stronger 'change' vote, which would favour UKIP in 2015.
OT If you haven't seen it - rather good new series called The Politician's Husband - think its on BBC3 - stars David Tennant. Well worth looking up on iPlayer - its Borgen meets House of Cards.
Yup. Reasonably good. But as you put it, not quite Borgen.
Re UKIP, I too think their vote share will fall back to 6-7% in 2015. I think that they will be contenders in a handful of constituencies, and could win 3 or 4. The best strategy for the Conservatives is simply to portray Labour as the greater evil, something that UKIP voters seem receptive to. I think that UKIP are probably a permanent feature in local elections. Their local council candidates should get some very good results, next year, on the back of the Euro elections, but will be squeezed in turn, in 2015.
Broadly agree, although it's particularly difficult to see any HoC representation on 6-7% of the vote - perhaps Farage in an east coast constituency ?
Mike 6-7% would be a good result. It would amount to c. 2m votes.
Speaking personally, if UKIP could add 10% to it's vote share of May 2nd, and win the next general election, I'd be delighted, but I just don't see it happening, this time around.
I just don't see UKIP quietly agreeing to be absorbed by the Conservative party under any circumstances, save after Britain leaving the EU. No Conservative MP is going to stand aside in 2020 for a UKIP member.
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
OT If you haven't seen it - rather good new series called The Politician's Husband - think its on BBC3 - stars David Tennant. Well worth looking up on iPlayer - its Borgen meets House of Cards.
Just seen the first episode. FInding it a bit odd that Emily Watson's character so rarely speaks. Guessing it was deliberately done to give her the air of a doe caught in a car headlights, but does seem out of character for one half of a political power couple.
Allison Pearson should not have mentioned what she understood about Margaret Tebbit's health. She did not have permission to do so. Some things should be left unsaid, no matter what the motivation for revealing them.
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
Mike 6-7% would be a good result. It would amount to c. 2m votes.
Speaking personally, if UKIP could add 10% to it's vote share of May 2nd, and win the next general election, I'd be delighted, but I just don't see it happening, this time around.
If they can keep their new website on line (I don't think their IT dept gets much love or funding) it gives them the opportunity to capture contact details for an awful lot of soft supporters and zealous converts.
Turning a fraction of their vote into activists would show up the weakness of the other parties.
Mr. Dave, although the historical nature of the data means we can't use it as a direct comparison it'd still be interesting to see how the Liberal/Labour change affected the percentage voting for the two main parties.
Now I come to think of it, the present situation's different not only due to the Coalition but also because there's been a more gradual return of the Liberals (as Lib Dems, alas). It'll be interesting to see whether UKIP also increases gradually or has more substantial gains like they enjoyed in the locals.
It gets a little muddy as the rise of Labour began when Eire was still part of the UK. But it is interesting to see that FPTP doesn't enforce a two party system.
It does to a certain extent - the third placed LDs have less than 10% of Westminster seats.
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
But UKIP did win in Thanet on Thursday.
There you go then, add Thanet to the list. The other one I meant was when either you or TSE was salivating about and Labour won by a thousand votes !
Mr. Dave, although the historical nature of the data means we can't use it as a direct comparison it'd still be interesting to see how the Liberal/Labour change affected the percentage voting for the two main parties.
Now I come to think of it, the present situation's different not only due to the Coalition but also because there's been a more gradual return of the Liberals (as Lib Dems, alas). It'll be interesting to see whether UKIP also increases gradually or has more substantial gains like they enjoyed in the locals.
Morris, how is the book doing, can I buy it on amazon yet.
Mr. Dave, although the historical nature of the data means we can't use it as a direct comparison it'd still be interesting to see how the Liberal/Labour change affected the percentage voting for the two main parties.
Now I come to think of it, the present situation's different not only due to the Coalition but also because there's been a more gradual return of the Liberals (as Lib Dems, alas). It'll be interesting to see whether UKIP also increases gradually or has more substantial gains like they enjoyed in the locals.
It gets a little muddy as the rise of Labour began when Eire was still part of the UK. But it is interesting to see that FPTP doesn't enforce a two party system.
It does to a certain extent - the third placed LDs have less than 10% of Westminster seats.
Yes, but if you look back to earlier periods, even now with N.Irish and celtic parties, what you see is regional parties.
Thats the only thing about FPTP, it stops politicos being able to rely on single issue politics, they have to convince the local population, not just a sliver.
Until 14 May you can also buy it with 66% off here: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/313503 with code XK87G (can't directly download to Kindle but you can download a Kindle file to your computer and from there to your eReader).
The best possible result for UKIP in 2015 would be another hung Parliament, with the Lib Dems in coalition again. That would help to increase the voters' frustration with the big 3, while keeping protest voters away from the Lib Dems.
Until 14 May you can also buy it with 66% off here: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/313503 with code XK87G (can't directly download to Kindle but you can download a Kindle file to your computer and from there to your eReader).
do you benefit from me paying full price, if so I will take easy option
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
But UKIP did win in Thanet on Thursday.
There you go then, add Thanet to the list. The other one I meant was when either you or TSE was salivating about and Labour won by a thousand votes !
Isn't the mainstream Conservative party now UKIP-lite ?
Really, surbiton, next you'll be saying "the Tories are UKIP for P*ssies!"
No. It appears that a majority in the Conservative party has now become so obsessive about Europe that getting out of Europe has become a bigger issue to them than all other issues. Immigration is part of the same thread.
If the topic really gets discussed in the wider world, you will get strange bedfellows: Trade Unionists and the City. Dare I say even the *ankers.
Once, the pro-Europeans get their act together and, unlike AV, there will be no shortage of money, there will be plenty to talk about.
As I wrote here before, after a full campaign, the result will be 2 - 1 to stay in.
@tim - and just 3% between you and us, sonny, and two years still to go. You're seriously unnerved, aren't you, that the economy might now be beginning to recover and more rapidly - you'll have seen the NIESR forecast - than many had believed possible. And if the rate of growth does accelerate, you know and I know what the electoral consequences are likely to be in 2015. Your thrashing about like a demented gerbil, overdosing on bile, has been heart-warming these last few days. Keep it up.
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
But UKIP did win in Thanet on Thursday.
There you go then, add Thanet to the list. The other one I meant was when either you or TSE was salivating about and Labour won by a thousand votes !
Imagine the fun tim would have if a UKIP supporter confused TSE with Sunil
MikeK: if Thatcher and Tebbitt (or their latterday equivalents) were in charge of the Conservative party, we would have a Labour government. This is not the 1980s; arguably then, homophobia had some electoral appeal - now it loses more votes than it gains (thankfully).
If you read the following carefully, you will find that Gay Marriage is not a marriage at all but a dagger hanging over everyone who is not gay:
Backed Vergne to reach Q3 at 3.8 (hedge at 1.6). He was top 10 in every practice session, including 10th in P3. However, critically, he didn't actually do a fast lap on the medium tyre in that session.
I'll write my piece and look around to see if anything else jumps out. Mr. Putney's 34 tip on Massa to win is looking pretty good right now.
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
But UKIP did win in Thanet on Thursday.
There you go then, add Thanet to the list. The other one I meant was when either you or TSE was salivating about and Labour won by a thousand votes !
Imagine the fun tim would have if a UKIP supporter confused TSE with Sunil
AS we saw in the Thanet local by-election, it does not follow that UKIP will necessarily win in all favourable seats. Boston, Lincs could be a possibility. Folkstone ?
But UKIP did win in Thanet on Thursday.
There you go then, add Thanet to the list. The other one I meant was when either you or TSE was salivating about and Labour won by a thousand votes !
Imagine the fun tim would have if a UKIP supporter confused TSE with Sunil
Just looking at the Betfair pole market and trying to work out if the market's mental or I am. I really wouldn't have Vettel as favourite, even at 3.3.
@tim - Oh, UKIP's success at Eastleigh and on May 2nd was bound to increase the salience of the EU within the Tory party and so it has. But compare Cameron's position now to where it was before the Great Oration and he (and the party as a whole) are still in a far better place.
Of course it can all go wrong big-time if the Blues ignore David Kendrick's words of wisdom on this Board about the importance (minor) of the EU to UKIP's current popularity, and restart the obsession, and the Cashes and Barons are self-indulgent plonkers of the first order. But my sense is that the prevailing sentiment is a realisation that we hang together or hang separately.
And that will be enhanced hugely if the economy regains its momentum, and two years out from the GE is the ideal time politically for that to happen.
Which is why I have a mild spring in my step in pleasing contrast to the deranged (panic induced?) frothing which has become your hallmark over recent weeks.
@tim - and just 3% between you and us, sonny, and two years still to go. You're seriously unnerved, aren't you, that the economy might now be beginning to recover and more rapidly - you'll have seen the NIESR forecast - than many had believed possible. And if the rate of growth does accelerate, you know and I know what the electoral consequences are likely to be in 2015. Your thrashing about like a demented gerbil, overdosing on bile, has been heart-warming these last few days. Keep it up.
Nonsense John. The election will be decided on the burning issue of the day - who would win in a fight between George Osborne and Ed Balls.
Seriously though there are encouraging signs that the economy has started to turn the corner. If and it remains a big if, the economy grows more quickly than currently expected in the run up to 2015, then I think the electoral outlook is pretty good for us.
Isn't the mainstream Conservative party now UKIP-lite ?
Really, surbiton, next you'll be saying "the Tories are UKIP for P*ssies!"
No. It appears that a majority in the Conservative party has now become so obsessive about Europe that getting out of Europe has become a bigger issue to them than all other issues. Immigration is part of the same thread.
If the topic really gets discussed in the wider world, you will get strange bedfellows: Trade Unionists and the City. Dare I say even the *ankers.
Once, the pro-Europeans get their act together and, unlike AV, there will be no shortage of money, there will be plenty to talk about.
As I wrote here before, after a full campaign, the result will be 2 - 1 to stay in.
"The EU can have a strong influence on the weak-minded!"
As well as the Vergne tip I've backed Massa for pole at 14.5, hedged at 5. Slightly nervous about that, but he was fastest in P3 and those odds seem silly to me.
As was pointed out quite some time ago. When Cammie couldn't win a majority there were quite a few tories who immediately pointed at the UKIP 3.1% and said that had been enough to cause crucial losses in marginals and cost the majority. Any figure above that will cause the precise same voices to be joined by all those who have moved OUTwards since the Eurocrisis. OUT is going to be at or near the top of any future leadership battle.
"With the EU question resolved "
That makes it sound relatively simple when the truth is such a battle concentrated on IN or OUT has the power to split the tories and cause carnage that would make all previous Europe splits look tame in comparison. BOO tories will not have it all their own way because so many in the leadership and party heirarchy (including funders) are not going to give up without a fight. BOO might well hold sway in the tory membership and party as a whole but it is far from assured that they can get a majority of MPs onside.
Were there any seats where the UKIP vote exceeded the Lab or LD majority?
IIUC there were a couple, but not by enough for UKIP's presence to have plausibly swung it.
It's by no means definitive but there were tories who believed it and apparently had some data to back them up.
General Election 2010: Ukip challenge 'cost Tories a Commons majority'
The UK Independence Party's small but significant showing at the polls may have cost David Cameron a majority in the Commons, voting figures suggest.
Although the Eurosceptic group suffered a dismal election night, failing to make a breakthrough in mainstream politics, it may inadvertently have handed the pro-European Liberal Democrats the possibility of a role in government.
Analysis of results shows that in at least 21 key marginal seats, Ukip’s share of the vote proved enough to allow Labour or the Lib Dems to see off strong Tory challenges.
The extra victories would have been enough to fill the 20-seat shortfall needed to hand David Cameron an outright majority in the Commons.
Schools secretary Ed Balls' Morley and Outwood constituency was among key seats where the result might have been different without Ukip.
Mr Balls survived with a majority of only 1,101 while Ukip polled 1,506 in the contest.
It all depends how you choose to allocate the kipper vote I suppose. I think it's questionable that it can all be attributed to the UKIP vote myself but it absolutely played a part in marginals. It's how big a part. And that was only on 3.1% remember. Very few believe UKIP will somehow get less than that in 2015.
The Telegraph's "analysis" seems to be based on the idea that all the UKIP voters would otherwise have gone Tory, which is obviously mad. In the Ed Balls case a plausible breakdown of what would have happened without UKIP would be something like: 300 non-vote 200 other 750 Con 250 Lab ...which only shaves 500 off the majority.
Obviously they're more likely to make a difference next time, though.
@tim - What corruscating sarcasm and contrived vituperation. I can almost hear the posh-boys braying. But being a grammar school lad, I smile indulgently.
On-topic, and an excellent piece from David. I would contend that while initially Europe was the main point of difference, we are seeing the emerging divergence of the liberal and social wings of conservatism which have not always comfortably co-existed in the Conservative "big tent".
My view a couple of weeks ago was that UKIP's long-term political future wasn't all that good and that a defeated Conservative Party post-2015 would spare no time parking its tanks on Mr Farage's lawn and would emasculate UKIP in first policy and then membership terms. I'm now becoming less convinced this will be the case. Cameron's "liberal conservatism" isn't just about Europe but a line on a range of social issues against which a significant number of people inside the Conservative party and in the ranks of UKIP, are opposed. On a range of issues from gay marriage to nuclear power, UKIP finds itself opposed to Cameron Conservative policy.
The two overlapping strands of Conservative thinking - the liberal conservative and the social conservative - will presumably have the opportunity to fight for the soul of the party post-2015 if in Opposition. Is there a single figure (Boris?) who could reconcile these differences? If not, there are two routes - either the next Conservative leader will be Cameron-esque or they will be more amenable to the social conservatism of UKIP. Either way, it's hard not to think there is potential for either prolonged internal conflict or outright schism. UKIP have shown that in the current environment it is possible for a socially conservative fourth party to eke out an existence (I remain convinced 5% and five seats in 2015 will be far better for UKIP than 10% and no seats). The fact of where UKIP did and did not perform ten days ago tells you all you need to know (the same was true of the SDP).
As the election approaches and the "Vote UKIP get Labour" line is trotted out ad infinitum and ad nauseam, this will do nothing to cool tempers or resolve differences. That said, parties rarely schism - Labour did in 1981 and the results of that were far more profound than was recognised at the time (arguably Tony Blair and David Cameron are the direct consequence of those events). IF, post 2015, the Conservative Party chooses to revert to a more hardline socially conservative ethos (which it has every right to do if that's what its members want), it will overwhelm and absorb UKIP but the corollary of that is that those supporting Cameron-esque policies may see no future in that kind of party and may go their own way. Europe may again be the flashpoint or the "Checkpoint Charlie" of these tensions especailly as any referendum on EU membership looms.
The irony is that the 1975 Referendum served only to accentuate pre-existing differences in Labour ranks and was a big step on the road to the creation of the SDP. The next EU referendum may well do the same for the Conservatives.
@Max - A most welcome visitation (doffs cap) from your good self! We just need fitalass to join us and the class of Cameroonies 2005 is renuited!
I'll hopefully be a more frequent visitor now I'm back from a stint in Qatar (where growth is a sluggish 5-6% per quarter). 50 degree heat and Scottish skin are a poor combination. Good to be back in booming Britain!
Ten Tories 'in UKIP talks' Ten Conservative MPs are in talks with UKIP about the possibility of defecting, the eurosceptic party has claimed.
UKIP treasurer Stuart Wheeler said nine Tory MPs had accepted an invitation to join him for lunch, claiming there was a “better than 50%” chance of securing a defection before 2015.
UKIP chief executive Will Gilpin told the Times a tenth Conservative backbencher had contacted UKIP in the past week, with “serious discussions” now underway. (PoliticsHome) ----------------- The above is news to me; lets see if it comes off. Mind you I have more than mixed feelings about Mr Wheeler, as I've posted before.
As was pointed out quite some time ago. When Cammie couldn't win a majority there were quite a few tories who immediately pointed at the UKIP 3.1% and said that had been enough to cause crucial losses in marginals and cost the majority. Any figure above that will cause the precise same voices to be joined by all those who have moved OUTwards since the Eurocrisis. OUT is going to be at or near the top of any future leadership battle.
"With the EU question resolved "
That makes it sound relatively simple when the truth is such a battle concentrated on IN or OUT has the power to split the tories and cause carnage that would make all previous Europe splits look tame in comparison. BOO tories will not have it all their own way because so many in the leadership and party heirarchy (including funders) are not going to give up without a fight. BOO might well hold sway in the tory membership and party as a whole but it is far from assured that they can get a majority of MPs onside.
Were there any seats where the UKIP vote exceeded the Lab or LD majority?
IIUC there were a couple, but not by enough for UKIP's presence to have plausibly swung it.
It's by no means definitive but there were tories who believed it and apparently had some data to back them up.
General Election 2010: Ukip challenge 'cost Tories a Commons majority'
The UK Independence Party's small but significant showing at the polls may have cost David Cameron a majority in the Commons, voting figures suggest.
Although the Eurosceptic group suffered a dismal election night, failing to make a breakthrough in mainstream politics, it may inadvertently have handed the pro-European Liberal Democrats the possibility of a role in government.
Analysis of results shows that in at least 21 key marginal seats, Ukip’s share of the vote proved enough to allow Labour or the Lib Dems to see off strong Tory challenges.
The extra victories would have been enough to fill the 20-seat shortfall needed to hand David Cameron an outright majority in the Commons.
Schools secretary Ed Balls' Morley and Outwood constituency was among key seats where the result might have been different without Ukip.
Mr Balls survived with a majority of only 1,101 while Ukip polled 1,506 in the contest.
It all depends how you choose to allocate the kipper vote I suppose. I think it's questionable that it can all be attributed to the UKIP vote myself but it absolutely played a part in marginals. It's how big a part. And that was only on 3.1% remember. Very few believe UKIP will somehow get less than that in 2015.
The Telegraph's "analysis" seems to be based on the idea that all the UKIP voters would otherwise have gone Tory, which is obviously mad. In the Ed Balls case a plausible breakdown of what would have happened without UKIP would be something like: 300 non-vote 200 other 750 Con 250 Lab ...which only shaves 500 off the majority.
Obviously they're more likely to make a difference next time, though.Anthony Wells suggested five seats.
The Yorkshire Post reports on the success of Doncaster Labour's job creation scheme - job creation scheme for Doncaster Labour councillors that is:
" DONCASTER’S newly-elected mayor faced criticism as it emerged her new 10-strong cabinet would cost the taxpayer almost £100,000 more than her predecessor’s team.
Labour’s Ros Jones, who beat former independent mayor Peter Davies to the job by just 639 votes a week ago, unveiled her new cabinet late Thursday.
But her opponents immediately questioned the requirement for nine people plus herself, and criticised the allowance bill for her top team, which will total £249,000.
Mr Davies’s cabinet consisted of six people, including himself, with allowances adding up to £153,000. "
Perhaps the local MPs would like to comment on this exciting example of 'Labour investment'.
As was pointed out quite some time ago. When Cammie couldn't win a majority there were quite a few tories who immediately pointed at the UKIP 3.1% and said that had been enough to cause crucial losses in marginals and cost the majority. Any figure above that will cause the precise same voices to be joined by all those who have moved OUTwards since the Eurocrisis. OUT is going to be at or near the top of any future leadership battle.
"With the EU question resolved "
That makes it sound relatively simple when the truth is such a battle concentrated on IN or OUT has the power to split the tories and cause carnage that would make all previous Europe splits look tame in comparison. BOO tories will not have it all their own way because so many in the leadership and party heirarchy (including funders) are not going to give up without a fight. BOO might well hold sway in the tory membership and party as a whole but it is far from assured that they can get a majority of MPs onside.
Were there any seats where the UKIP vote exceeded the Lab or LD majority?
IIUC there were a couple, but not by enough for UKIP's presence to have plausibly swung it.
It's by no means definitive but there were tories who believed it and apparently had some data to back them up.
General Election 2010: Ukip challenge 'cost Tories a Commons majority'
The UK Independence Party's small but significant showing at the polls may have cost David Cameron a majority in the Commons, voting figures suggest.
Although the Eurosceptic group suffered a dismal election night, failing to make a breakthrough in mainstream politics, it may inadvertently have handed the pro-European Liberal Democrats the possibility of a role in government.
Analysis of results shows that in at least 21 key marginal seats, Ukip’s share of the vote proved enough to allow Labour or the Lib Dems to see off strong Tory challenges.
The extra victories would have been enough to fill the 20-seat shortfall needed to hand David Cameron an outright majority in the Commons.
Schools secretary Ed Balls' Morley and Outwood constituency was among key seats where the result might have been different without Ukip.
Mr Balls survived with a majority of only 1,101 while Ukip polled 1,506 in the contest.
It all depends how you choose to allocate the kipper vote I suppose. I think it's questionable that it can all be attributed to the UKIP vote myself but it absolutely played a part in marginals. It's how big a part. And that was only on 3.1% remember. Very few believe UKIP will somehow get less than that in 2015.
The Telegraph's "analysis" seems to be based on the idea that all the UKIP voters would otherwise have gone Tory, which is obviously mad. In the Ed Balls case a plausible breakdown of what would have happened without UKIP would be something like: 300 non-vote 200 other 750 Con 250 Lab ...which only shaves 500 off the majority.
Obviously they're more likely to make a difference next time, though.
Ahh, JohnO, if he pulled it off even partially he will have deserved some kudos. It's not that hes an old Etonian that I disparage; it's that he sometime doesn't know when to stop shooting his mouth off.
OT I'm a teeny bit tempted to try to watch The Wire again - I gave in a few episodes into S1 - it was largely macho aggressive shouty swearing and filmed in the dark.
Whilst I can take a bit of this sort of nonsense - my boredom chip overrode and I pressed Off.
I've read reviews on IMDb that says its the BESTEST THING EVAH and ones that seemed to agree with my first impressions. It got as far as S5 so I assume it must have some merit.
Opinions welcome here. I've found the IMDb Most Recommended tables a strange beast - things I thought were mediocre/tedious have gained much higher reviews than I'd expect. I can only assume their demographic isn't mine.
"Five more years of Euro-socialism"!! What on earth does that mean, Mr Herdson, in an EU dominated by centre right parties?
One of the reasons for the rise of UKIP is that people won't vote Tory. They just don't like the party and the privilege they believe it stands for. This seems to apply not only to those on the left, but also to quite a few on the right. In the YouGov nice/nasty but dim poll discussed earlier this week, the Labour leads on questions relating to understanding ordinary voters were striking. It would be interesting to see similar UKIP/Tory polling.
Perhaps Obama should buy a box of dog treats for his visitor, a good spaniel needs rewarding.
Mr A. Richard - you provide an interesting right of centre perspective, but almost every post rubbishes Cameron et al - is it possible to read what you think without blaming them/their parents for where they sent them to school/where they live/what they call tea for everything. You're making Mr D. Hodges look totally ambivalent re EdM.
Have I today made reference to where Cameron went to school ?
Whatever the reasons behind Cameron repeatedly making a fawning prat of himself towards Obama the fact remains that Cameron repeatedly makes a fawning prat of himself towards Obama.
The 'you only oppose Cameron because of where he went to school' line isn't going to work when the personalites, views and incompetances of Cameron and his chums are on public display.
The Telegraph's "analysis" seems to be based on the idea that all the UKIP voters would otherwise have gone Tory, which is obviously mad.
Obviously they would not all break for UKIP. I did say that it was questionable but how it would break is equally obviously speculation so we just don't know. Five could well be right. It might have been more it might have been less.
The point about highlighting the Telegraph was that it perfectly highlights the thinking of those tories at the time who did seem convinced that if not for UKIP a majority might have been in reach.
That's why the article has the likes of this in it.
"Former Tories who defected to the Eurosceptic party said that disappointment over Mr Cameron's position on a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty could have cost him a majority."
Doesn't matter if you, I or Wells don't think it's true. We aren't the ones trying to outkip the kippers. What matters is that if Cammie loses then you can be absolutely certain his backbenchers are hardly going to blame themselves and after this weeks anger over not getting an EU referendum before 2015 it doesn't take much imagination to guess who and what they will blame it on.
"Freerunner Mat Armitage completes the world's most notorious equestrian cross country course without the aid of a horse.
The 22-year-old from the Wirral, Merseyside jumped over all 28 of the course fences, some of which are nearly five feet high, even besting royal equestrian Zara Phillips, who crashed out of the event part-way round the course on Sunday.
The video shows Mr Armitage clearing the double brush fence in the water on the course in Badminton in Gloucestershire with ease, at the exact same spot where Phillips was forced to retire from the competition after her horse, High Kingdom, crashed into a fence flag.
However despite clearing all the fences with plenty of room to spare, he was considerably over the 11-minute 13-second time limit, taking almost four hours to complete the 6km course.
Mr Armitage said he was challenged to jump the course by his girlfriend, event rider Amy Williams. He said: "I have been free running for almost eight years now and this was one of the toughest courses I've run.
"It was a lot more difficult than it looked. I had to count out my strides up to each fence, the same way a horse and rider would, to make sure I made it over.
Conservative selection process for 2014 Euro elections is moving ahead. In Scotland they've already done the full ranking. In English regions, they will draw up shortlists this month. For ex South West and North West meetings take place today. Shortlisting stage is done by a college made up of Association Chairmen, Regional party officers, Area officers. I believe that if incumbents get 60% of the college, they are entitled to directly to the top of the list. Members will rank candidates in a ballot to be held in July.
David Herdson is barking up the wrong tree this time. UKIP as a party and as a force is here to stay. It will, to put it bluntly, stay as an independent party, free of any tory links or grand alliances. I believe that if Nigel Farage even proposed a minor pact with the blues, over half the present membership of UKIP would leave: chick, chuck! So against this proposition happening are the majority, that except for local arrangements, it's a non starter.
Indeed the desire of UKIP is to supplant the Tories as the leading party of the liberal right.
Everything, even political parties have a life span. There is no doubt now that after 80 years of first, appeasement to Germany, Then many in the party wanting to surrender to Hitler, (saved only by Churchills bravery and stubbornness), then after the war, surrendering to social democracy, and then the final surrender, to the common market; that the conservatives have run their course.
The Blues are a decaying party, they are dying bit by little bit.
People of your political persuasion make this case time and again.
Ultimately, though, the realisation dawns that the Ultras/Ditchers/Kippers/whatever can't win a majority (and under FPTP they just hand power to the left). The best example is the 19th century - from about 1845 to 1875 the Tories had only about 30 months in government.
Comments
The public favours gay marriage by around 2:1 and even Conservatives are only marginally against. I'm unsure of the Ukip numbers, are there any ?
He (Tebbit) is equally merciless about the Coalition, which he compares to a marriage on the rocks. “Extremely unhappy, unwise, should never have happened. Divorce is coming because one of the partners is dallying with another would-be partner. Oh yes. I think Mr Clegg’s ambition
I ask Tebbit what he thinks of Cameron. There is a long pause. The silence deepens. You can hear the geraniums growing in their pots in the courtyard beyond the French windows. Tebbit strokes his chin as if he were discovering that protuberance for the first time. Eventually, he says: “Last time I spoke to him one to one was before the 2010 election. My first question was, 'Why do you think the nearer we get to the election the narrower is your lead in the opinion polls?’ ”
Hmm. And how did that go down? “He got very angry. He said that Margaret Thatcher never had a lead of 20 per cent in the polls. I said she had sufficient to win elections. Your lead is diminishing, why do you think that is and what are you going to do about it?”
Let me guess; he was a bit put out?
“He got very, very cross indeed. The interview came to a rather sulky end.”
David Cameron was rude to you?
“Oh, yes.”
This little story summerises all one needs to know about Cammo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10050590/Lord-Tebbit-interview-If-only-Margaret-Thatcher-and-I-were-still-in-charge.html
When the Lib Dems were underrepresented in the Commons they merely moaned and were ignored. I suspect other groupings may be more insistent.
That could/should produce better policies as the government will have to win support on merit of each individual bill, rather than just relying on the party vote.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10049451/David-Cameron-would-like-to-forget-gay-marriage-but-it-will-haunt-him.html
And although I'm a kipper. all done and salted, I'm not homophobic in the least: MODERATED
Of course , you are not.
You are not likely to start a sentence wilth:
"I am not homophobic but..." or
"I am not racist but..."
Ah tim but some stereotypes are true. You are a famous example of one.
The secret to UKIP's success is not any merit of its own but the fifth column in the Conservative party that is deliberately working for it.
Speaking personally, if UKIP could add 10% to it's vote share of May 2nd, and win the next general election, I'd be delighted, but I just don't see it happening, this time around.
Turning a fraction of their vote into activists would show up the weakness of the other parties.
Thats the only thing about FPTP, it stops politicos being able to rely on single issue politics, they have to convince the local population, not just a sliver.
Until 14 May you can also buy it with 66% off here: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/313503 with code XK87G (can't directly download to Kindle but you can download a Kindle file to your computer and from there to your eReader).
Labour under EdM are Vacuum-Lite.
If the topic really gets discussed in the wider world, you will get strange bedfellows: Trade Unionists and the City. Dare I say even the *ankers.
Once, the pro-Europeans get their act together and, unlike AV, there will be no shortage of money, there will be plenty to talk about.
As I wrote here before, after a full campaign, the result will be 2 - 1 to stay in.
Some teams (Toro Rosso, Williams) have made a step forward, Sauber and McLaren look to be treading water.
Now purchased
Betting PostBacked Vergne to reach Q3 at 3.8 (hedge at 1.6). He was top 10 in every practice session, including 10th in P3. However, critically, he didn't actually do a fast lap on the medium tyre in that session.
I'll write my piece and look around to see if anything else jumps out. Mr. Putney's 34 tip on Massa to win is looking pretty good right now.
When is this Chelsea centre backs court case?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4800119/Football-anti-racism-champion-Paul-Elliott-uses-n-word.html
One Nation!
Of course it can all go wrong big-time if the Blues ignore David Kendrick's words of wisdom on this Board about the importance (minor) of the EU to UKIP's current popularity, and restart the obsession, and the Cashes and Barons are self-indulgent plonkers of the first order. But my sense is that the prevailing sentiment is a realisation that we hang together or hang separately.
And that will be enhanced hugely if the economy regains its momentum, and two years out from the GE is the ideal time politically for that to happen.
Which is why I have a mild spring in my step in pleasing contrast to the deranged (panic induced?) frothing which has become your hallmark over recent weeks.
Replace Cameron, Clegg and Miliband with David Davis, Ian Swales and Jon Cruddas and you get more establishment sympathy towards the needs of the wwc.
UKIP would have grown anyway because of the effects of globalisation but the Notting and Primrose Hill boys gave it a boost.
Seriously though there are encouraging signs that the economy has started to turn the corner. If and it remains a big if, the economy grows more quickly than currently expected in the run up to 2015, then I think the electoral outlook is pretty good for us.
Betting PostLopsided gait? Follow Morris Dancer's tips to lighten your wallet and restore your stride:
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/spain-pre-qualifying.html
As well as the Vergne tip I've backed Massa for pole at 14.5, hedged at 5. Slightly nervous about that, but he was fastest in P3 and those odds seem silly to me.
The Telegraph's "analysis" seems to be based on the idea that all the UKIP voters would otherwise have gone Tory, which is obviously mad. In the Ed Balls case a plausible breakdown of what would have happened without UKIP would be something like:
300 non-vote
200 other
750 Con
250 Lab
...which only shaves 500 off the majority.
Obviously they're more likely to make a difference next time, though.
.......on the Peaks of Darien............
https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/333166739535822849/photo/1
On-topic, and an excellent piece from David. I would contend that while initially Europe was the main point of difference, we are seeing the emerging divergence of the liberal and social wings of conservatism which have not always comfortably co-existed in the Conservative "big tent".
My view a couple of weeks ago was that UKIP's long-term political future wasn't all that good and that a defeated Conservative Party post-2015 would spare no time parking its tanks on Mr Farage's lawn and would emasculate UKIP in first policy and then membership terms. I'm now becoming less convinced this will be the case. Cameron's "liberal conservatism" isn't just about Europe but a line on a range of social issues against which a significant number of people inside the Conservative party and in the ranks of UKIP, are opposed. On a range of issues from gay marriage to nuclear power, UKIP finds itself opposed to Cameron Conservative policy.
The two overlapping strands of Conservative thinking - the liberal conservative and the social conservative - will presumably have the opportunity to fight for the soul of the party post-2015 if in Opposition. Is there a single figure (Boris?) who could reconcile these differences? If not, there are two routes - either the next Conservative leader will be Cameron-esque or they will be more amenable to the social conservatism of UKIP. Either way, it's hard not to think there is potential for either prolonged internal conflict or outright schism. UKIP have shown that in the current environment it is possible for a socially conservative fourth party to eke out an existence (I remain convinced 5% and five seats in 2015 will be far better for UKIP than 10% and no seats). The fact of where UKIP did and did not perform ten days ago tells you all you need to know (the same was true of the SDP).
As the election approaches and the "Vote UKIP get Labour" line is trotted out ad infinitum and ad nauseam, this will do nothing to cool tempers or resolve differences. That said, parties rarely schism - Labour did in 1981 and the results of that were far more profound than was recognised at the time (arguably Tony Blair and David Cameron are the direct consequence of those events). IF, post 2015, the Conservative Party chooses to revert to a more hardline socially conservative ethos (which it has every right to do if that's what its members want), it will overwhelm and absorb UKIP but the corollary of that is that those supporting Cameron-esque policies may see no future in that kind of party and may go their own way. Europe may again be the flashpoint or the "Checkpoint Charlie" of these tensions especailly as any referendum on EU membership looms.
The irony is that the 1975 Referendum served only to accentuate pre-existing differences in Labour ranks and was a big step on the road to the creation of the SDP. The next EU referendum may well do the same for the Conservatives.
Ten Conservative MPs are in talks with UKIP about the possibility of defecting, the eurosceptic party has claimed.
UKIP treasurer Stuart Wheeler said nine Tory MPs had accepted an invitation to join him for lunch, claiming there was a “better than 50%” chance of securing a defection before 2015.
UKIP chief executive Will Gilpin told the Times a tenth Conservative backbencher had contacted UKIP in the past week, with “serious discussions” now underway. (PoliticsHome)
-----------------
The above is news to me; lets see if it comes off. Mind you I have more than mixed feelings about Mr Wheeler, as I've posted before.
300 non-vote
200 other
750 Con
250 Lab
...which only shaves 500 off the majority.
Obviously they're more likely to make a difference next time, though.Anthony Wells suggested five seats.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/4444
" DONCASTER’S newly-elected mayor faced criticism as it emerged her new 10-strong cabinet would cost the taxpayer almost £100,000 more than her predecessor’s team.
Labour’s Ros Jones, who beat former independent mayor Peter Davies to the job by just 639 votes a week ago, unveiled her new cabinet late Thursday.
But her opponents immediately questioned the requirement for nine people plus herself, and criticised the allowance bill for her top team, which will total £249,000.
Mr Davies’s cabinet consisted of six people, including himself, with allowances adding up to £153,000. "
Perhaps the local MPs would like to comment on this exciting example of 'Labour investment'.
We might have been saved the horrors of the worst election campaign in a generation.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/4444
Thanks, that sounds plausible.
It's not that hes an old Etonian that I disparage; it's that he sometime doesn't know when to stop shooting his mouth off.
Or that any self-annointed master strategist like Osborne would listen to someone like Tebbit ?
http://www.crimaz.com/pay-per-views/550-watch-wwe-extreme-rules-2013-may-19-2013-05-19-2013-*full-replay-720p*-watch-online-download.html
Whilst I can take a bit of this sort of nonsense - my boredom chip overrode and I pressed Off.
I've read reviews on IMDb that says its the BESTEST THING EVAH and ones that seemed to agree with my first impressions. It got as far as S5 so I assume it must have some merit.
Opinions welcome here. I've found the IMDb Most Recommended tables a strange beast - things I thought were mediocre/tedious have gained much higher reviews than I'd expect. I can only assume their demographic isn't mine.
Miliband proves that Labour stand for the ruling class, by refusing to trust the working class with a say on the EU. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10050367/Ed-Miliband-says-an-EU-referendum-is-wrong.html
@politicshomeuk: Kate Hoey says she "cannot see" Labour voting against giving British public a referendum on EU on BBC's Week in Westminster.
@politicshomeuk: Kate Hoey "quite happy to be voting to come out" of EU if not enough powers repatriated calling for referendum "as soon as possible".
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/statuses/333156932837838848
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100216163/david-cameron-should-stop-grovelling-to-barack-obama-and-stand-up-for-britain-over-the-falklands/
Perhaps Obama should buy a box of dog treats for his visitor, a good spaniel needs rewarding.
One of the reasons for the rise of UKIP is that people won't vote Tory. They just don't like the party and the privilege they believe it stands for. This seems to apply not only to those on the left, but also to quite a few on the right. In the YouGov nice/nasty but dim poll discussed earlier this week, the Labour leads on questions relating to understanding ordinary voters were striking. It would be interesting to see similar UKIP/Tory polling.
Have I today made reference to where Cameron went to school ?
Whatever the reasons behind Cameron repeatedly making a fawning prat of himself towards Obama the fact remains that Cameron repeatedly makes a fawning prat of himself towards Obama.
The 'you only oppose Cameron because of where he went to school' line isn't going to work when the personalites, views and incompetances of Cameron and his chums are on public display.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K68THqDqPKc
The point about highlighting the Telegraph was that it perfectly highlights the thinking of those tories at the time who did seem convinced that if not for UKIP a majority might have been in reach.
That's why the article has the likes of this in it. Doesn't matter if you, I or Wells don't think it's true. We aren't the ones trying to outkip the kippers. What matters is that if Cammie loses then you can be absolutely certain his backbenchers are hardly going to blame themselves and after this weeks anger over not getting an EU referendum before 2015 it doesn't take much imagination to guess who and what they will blame it on.
"Freerunner Mat Armitage completes the world's most notorious equestrian cross country course without the aid of a horse.
The 22-year-old from the Wirral, Merseyside jumped over all 28 of the course fences, some of which are nearly five feet high, even besting royal equestrian Zara Phillips, who crashed out of the event part-way round the course on Sunday.
The video shows Mr Armitage clearing the double brush fence in the water on the course in Badminton in Gloucestershire with ease, at the exact same spot where Phillips was forced to retire from the competition after her horse, High Kingdom, crashed into a fence flag.
However despite clearing all the fences with plenty of room to spare, he was considerably over the 11-minute 13-second time limit, taking almost four hours to complete the 6km course.
Mr Armitage said he was challenged to jump the course by his girlfriend, event rider Amy Williams. He said: "I have been free running for almost eight years now and this was one of the toughest courses I've run.
"It was a lot more difficult than it looked. I had to count out my strides up to each fence, the same way a horse and rider would, to make sure I made it over.
"The fences are much bigger up close than they appear when you see them on the TV, and I did struggle with a couple of them. He added: "My girlfriend still thinks it's more difficult to get around on a horse – but I'd disagree." " http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/10048397/Freerunner-completes-Badminton-Horse-Trial-course-on-foot.html with added video
Shortlisting stage is done by a college made up of Association Chairmen, Regional party officers, Area officers.
I believe that if incumbents get 60% of the college, they are entitled to directly to the top of the list.
Members will rank candidates in a ballot to be held in July.
Ultimately, though, the realisation dawns that the Ultras/Ditchers/Kippers/whatever can't win a majority (and under FPTP they just hand power to the left). The best example is the 19th century - from about 1845 to 1875 the Tories had only about 30 months in government.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyost2DI6m8