We can perhaps think of those saying UKIP in GE polling as falling into two camps. Firstly, those who will actually vote UKIP in the GE; these are predominantly ex-Conservatives or ex-abstainers. Secondly, the froth that is linked to the Euro campaign; these are more ex-Labour (hence our polling dip), but will return to the fold when the Euro excitement dies down, and UKIP are back at 10% in the GE polling, bring Labour back above 35%. At least, I hope that's what is happening.
The ICM write up says Labour's polling dip is due to a shift to Don't Know, rather than a shift to UKIP.
@afneil: RT @scott_eff: @afneil Jim Murphy says the Mail story of Darling being replaced is a total fabrication.
@jimmurphymp: Alistair Darling very much alive and well and in charge of a campaign that had a 20% lead in latest poll. Daily Mail story is total fiction.
Just seen last night's polling - LOL - very amusing.
Welcome back Plato, - why not stick around a little longer?, you're missing all the fun ; )
Hi Guys!
I saw the story in the Times and couldn't resist having a looksee - this is rib-tickling stuff.
Can anyone give me a quick update on what's been happening? I've been talking US TV shows/renewals/cancellations/newbies for weeks and no idea re polling recently.
Tories on here are wetting their pants and Ed is crap sums it up.
I wonder if that buried poll we heard of showing the Nats in with a shout could be behind this? Whatever, with the Tory Renaissance in the polls, keeping the union together is going to be ever harder.
@Carlotta - you are right. While supporters of the three main parties tear their hair out at their own leaders' inadequacies, Kippers and Nats see their leaders as messiahs. In many ways though, that's what makes them such tricky and at times formidable opponents.
Is that really surprising? UKIP and the SNP each have a distinct aim which is the motivating force behind their support, have risen to prominence pretty quickly, and could be said to be on the brink of something spectacular. Conservatives and LibDem supporters both have reasons to think their leader has compromised them where as Labours is unpopular with their own supporters.
The real reason for the "messiah" complex you speak of is probably because Salmond and Farage are leading a party that could actually make a tangible, historical change rather than fiddle at the margins of current status quo, and while the cause is gaining momentum, human nature dictates that any follies are overlooked by supporters. All that matters is the end of the Union/EU membership
ISAM, I was not aware that UKIP had been on the go for 80 years or even 40 for that matter.
We can perhaps think of those saying UKIP in GE polling as falling into two camps. Firstly, those who will actually vote UKIP in the GE; these are predominantly ex-Conservatives or ex-abstainers. Secondly, the froth that is linked to the Euro campaign; these are more ex-Labour (hence our polling dip), but will return to the fold when the Euro excitement dies down, and UKIP are back at 10% in the GE polling, bring Labour back above 35%. At least, I hope that's what is happening.
Unfortunately, when the UKIP vote deflated in the opinion polls last summer exactly the opposite occurred - the Conservatives won back some of their lost voters but Labour did not.
Maybe it will be different this time, but if it isn't...
@NickPalmer Have a word with Labour HQ about the PPB, its a disaster and it could cost you Broxtowe mate ! I need Labour to come down a touch but not too far or too fast too.
Yes it was awful wasn't it. Labour can do good PPB's (see the Kinnock one!) but they have to be positive. Class war may have worked (a bit) when Labour could credibly claim they were working class people but Labour politicians today come from the same stock as tory ones . Makes them look dishonest as well as negative
Just seen last night's polling - LOL - very amusing.
Welcome back Plato, - why not stick around a little longer?, you're missing all the fun ; )
Can anyone give me a quick update on what's been happening? I've been talking US TV shows/renewals/cancellations/newbies for weeks and no idea re polling recently.
Not much really - but oddly enough for a political betting site, today the subject of ‘AGW’ became much more important than yesterday’s mammoth polling results. ; )
If a scientific theory predicts a certain result but that result does not conform to observations of the real world then that theory is demonstrably flawed. It may be total nonsense or it may need to be refined, either way until the theory matches the data the theory is false.
Does the Hockey stick theory match the data? Does it explain the lack of warming over the past decade? Does it explain the warm period in recorded history?
Mr Llama,
I think you've got it the wrong way around. The hockey stick is produced from data, and AGW is a theory as to how it has come about.
Personally I treat the hockey stick data with a certain amount of contempt: you have to be very careful when analysing such data, especially when there are so few data points, and your assumptions need to be made clear. And the scientists' behaviour has hardly been exemplary.
Just seen last night's polling - LOL - very amusing.
Welcome back Plato. You've arrived in time for the May 22nd excitement, and if you stay after that, the 50 weeks countdown to the 2015 GE. All that will cause fainting fits, hysterical collapses, sudden spurts of euforia and climbing the walls, so bring your smelling salts.
IndyRef continues to provide endless fun, but I think Nicola Sturgeon's argument that people should vote for independence so that Scotland can maintain its proud tradition of having one of the lowest life expectancies in Europe is perhaps the funniest political point I've ever heard.
People may like the thought of an early pension , 50 sounds about right. Certainly beats going up chimneys till you are 70 or dying early without pension to fund healthy fat rich oicks in the south of England.
Just seen last night's polling - LOL - very amusing.
Welcome back Plato, - why not stick around a little longer?, you're missing all the fun ; )
Can anyone give me a quick update on what's been happening? I've been talking US TV shows/renewals/cancellations/newbies for weeks and no idea re polling recently.
Not much really - but oddly enough for a political betting site, today the subject of ‘AGW’ became much more important than yesterday’s mammoth polling results. ; )
Yes, sorry about that, but for some reason people only respond to my posts about climate science rather than polling.
Mr. Jim, once saw an amusing if silly comparison of maps that showed the extent of British realms a few decades before and after women got the vote. The difference was startling.
Mind you, a better map yet was in the Mail a few months ago, showing which countries we hadn't ever had a war with (there were only about 10, including Mongolia).
Really, anyone who believes such rubbish as "The hockey stick was a work of fiction" has to take a long hard look at themselves and their credulity of charlatans.
Where is your scepticism?
Sorry Mr Me but the hockey stick was disproved back in 2005 when the first of a series of papers emerged showing that the statistical underpinning of the data for the paper was fatally flawed. Subsequent (and previous) papers also showed that the base assumption of the hockey stick which required the removal of the Medieval Warming Period was also flawed.
Mann, basing his work on that of Keith Briffa, claimed that the MWP had only been a regional effect and had no bearing on overall temperatures. This position has been fundamentally debunked by a whole series of papers from around the world showing evidence for the MWP (and the early Roman and Minoan warming periods) on every continent.
Just taking a few papers off my shelf:
MWP in Japan
D.P. Adhikari · F. Kumon (2001) Climatic changes during the past 1300 years as deduced from the sediments of Lake Nakatsuna, central Japan
MWP in California and South America
S. Stine (1994) Extreme and persistent drought in California and Patagonia during mediaeval time
MWP in Northern Europe
B. Christiansen and F. C. Ljungqvist (2012) The extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere temperature in the last two millennia: reconstructions of low-frequency variability
MWP in central and southern Europe and China
F. C. Ljungqvist (2010) A regional approach to the medieval warm period and the little ice age
MWP in New Zealand
Lorrey, A., Williams, P., Salinger, J., Martin, T., Palmer, J., Fowler, A., Zhao, J.-X. and Neil, H. (2008). Speleothem stable isotope records interpreted within a multi-proxy framework and implications for New Zealand palaeoclimate reconstruction
MWP in the Pacific
Y.Rosenthal B.K. Linsley D.W. Oppo (2013)
Pacific Ocean Heat Content During the Past 10,000 Years
By the way I am still up for that meeting sometime if you fancy
If a scientific theory predicts a certain result but that result does not conform to observations of the real world then that theory is demonstrably flawed. It may be total nonsense or it may need to be refined, either way until the theory matches the data the theory is false.
Does the Hockey stick theory match the data? Does it explain the lack of warming over the past decade? Does it explain the warm period in recorded history?
Mr Llama,
I think you've got it the wrong way around. The hockey stick is produced from data, and AGW is a theory as to how it has come about.
Personally I treat the hockey stick data with a certain amount of contempt: you have to be very careful when analysing such data, especially when there are so few data points, and your assumptions need to be made clear. And the scientists' behaviour has hardly been exemplary.
Mr. Jim, once saw an amusing if silly comparison of maps that showed the extent of British realms a few decades before and after women got the vote. The difference was startling.
Mind you, a better map yet was in the Mail a few months ago, showing which countries we hadn't ever had a war with (there were only about 10, including Mongolia).
Yes and it's the Germans who are considered bellicose.
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
The OMRLP policy of passports for pets was eventually implemented by the previous Labour government. I propose that they should suggest extending the franchise to pets, this vote to be exercised by the pet owner by proxy.
One can then introduce a law to remove the right to vote from beings that defecate or urinate in public, which would encourage cat/dog owners to exercise more control over their pet's toilet habits and also neatly disenfranchise those people who drink so much of a weekend that they are unable to control their bladders.
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
Picture them naked.. If that doesn't scar you for life nothing will
If a scientific theory predicts a certain result but that result does not conform to observations of the real world then that theory is demonstrably flawed. It may be total nonsense or it may need to be refined, either way until the theory matches the data the theory is false.
Does the Hockey stick theory match the data? Does it explain the lack of warming over the past decade? Does it explain the warm period in recorded history?
Mr Llama,
I think you've got it the wrong way around. The hockey stick is produced from data, and AGW is a theory as to how it has come about.
Personally I treat the hockey stick data with a certain amount of contempt: you have to be very careful when analysing such data, especially when there are so few data points, and your assumptions need to be made clear. And the scientists' behaviour has hardly been exemplary.
The lying scientists should have the hockey stick inserted where the sun don't shine. Global warming my arse.
"Climate change is not a distant ungraspable threat. It's not something that's going to happen to our children and to their children. It's something that is already happening and its effects are already being felt," Salmond said.
Why don't you get your head out of Eck's vast sunless crevice ?
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
If you think you're shouting you are probably at the right volume. Speak more slowly than you would normally as that way you will keep your pitch consistent.
All we know is that the climate is changing/has changed/has become more extreme in recent years. However as MD says, such events are not unknown during our recorded history. But the root cause/causes of this change and previous changes is by no means fully understood.
Also there is a huge amount of money at present in the climate change industry/academia. Have first hand experience of this, as a consultancy, we do a lot of verification of applications for funding bodies on applications for funding for research on climate change and renewable energy. Many of these applications we find are built on incomplete/erroneous science and are recommended for rejection.
We do a lot of modelling, but all our modelling is based on the results of very large scale experiments - many square miles in size and very expensive. However, the major problem is scaling up the results of such experiments over a time-scale which is sufficient long. It is there that such modelling can fall down.
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
Not sure what public speaking experience you have, but the vast majority of inexperienced speakers make two mistakes: theyspeak too quickly, and (not unrelated) attempt to bolster their argument with more and more facets to make it stronger, when the reality is that a straightforward and clear message in infinitely preferable. I don't know about local election husts: on the one hand, a local election candidate cannot be expect to launch a full manifesto and voters will vote on at most a couple of issues and for many none at all; on the other hand I assume husts are a stratification of the people who care the most.
One interesting little quirk in the ICM data tables. Not a single respondent from Wales said that they would be voting Lib Dem in the European Elections.
Admittedly, this is just from a sample of 25 [who say they will vote and name a party. There are 52 in the sample as a whole], but UKIP and the Greens both had at least one respondent for every region.
But boy the triumphalism is palpable here today. There are going to be some very red faces if it proves a short term blip.
Complacency, and panic...
Aren't most of the Tories saying 'Labour will probably be back on top tomorrow'?
You're projecting again.
Meanwhile;
And while we’re talking about the Lib Dems – our relentless week long attack on them has seen them go up in the polls, whilst UKIP remain unchallenged.
FWIW, I doubt the Labour PPB had ANY influence on the polling - its just the first MOE excursion into crossover territory that's been a long time coming.....
"In Scotland, males and females can expect to live shorter lives (by 2.5 years and 2.1 years respectively) than in England, where male and female life expectancy is the highest in the UK."
~ 2.3 years/person is a financial saving not to be sniffed at tbh. Why should the early dieing Scots fund the long living English ?
Is there any INDEPENDENT literature to show if Scots were to be better or worse off assuming
a) They take their share of the debt according to population b) The oil boundary is at the 'median line' c) They continue to use Sterling but have no influence over monetary policy, and can not use the Bank of England in the same way the treasury does.
Just seen last night's polling - LOL - very amusing.
Welcome back Plato, - why not stick around a little longer?, you're missing all the fun ; )
Hi Guys!
I saw the story in the Times and couldn't resist having a looksee - this is rib-tickling stuff.
Can anyone give me a quick update on what's been happening? I've been talking US TV shows/renewals/cancellations/newbies for weeks and no idea re polling recently.
@afneil: RT @scott_eff: @afneil Jim Murphy says the Mail story of Darling being replaced is a total fabrication.
@jimmurphymp: Alistair Darling very much alive and well and in charge of a campaign that had a 20% lead in latest poll. Daily Mail story is total fiction.
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
If a scientific theory predicts a certain result but that result does not conform to observations of the real world then that theory is demonstrably flawed. It may be total nonsense or it may need to be refined, either way until the theory matches the data the theory is false.
Does the Hockey stick theory match the data? Does it explain the lack of warming over the past decade? Does it explain the warm period in recorded history?
Mr Llama,
I think you've got it the wrong way around. The hockey stick is produced from data, and AGW is a theory as to how it has come about.
Personally I treat the hockey stick data with a certain amount of contempt: you have to be very careful when analysing such data, especially when there are so few data points, and your assumptions need to be made clear. And the scientists' behaviour has hardly been exemplary.
The lying scientists should have the hockey stick inserted where the sun don't shine. Global warming my arse.
"Climate change is not a distant ungraspable threat. It's not something that's going to happen to our children and to their children. It's something that is already happening and its effects are already being felt," Salmond said.
Why don't you get your head out of Eck's vast sunless crevice ?
Monica you need to get out , shop get a boyfriend, help you get over your Salmond fixation. You are also very coarse for a girl, your mother would not be happy with that kind of expression.
What's interesting is its difficult to put one's finger on what has caused such a big shift....
One aspect appears to be that some of the 2010 Lib Dems who used to say they would vote Labour now say that they will vote Green. It is likely that after the Euro elections pass this will fade, and so one would expect Labour to then regain their 35% bridgehead.
I am so glad that we will have weekly phone polls from Ashcroft to keep us updated on this.
All we know is that the climate is changing/has changed/has become more extreme in recent years. However as MD says, such events are not unknown during our recorded history. But the root cause/causes of this change and previous changes is by no means fully understood.
Also there is a huge amount of money at present in the climate change industry/academia. Have first hand experience of this, as a consultancy, we do a lot of verification of applications for funding bodies on applications for funding for research on climate change and renewable energy. Many of these applications we find are built on incomplete/erroneous science and are recommended for rejection.
We do a lot of modelling, but all our modelling is based on the results of very large scale experiments - many square miles in size and very expensive. However, the major problem is scaling up the results of such experiments over a time-scale which is sufficient long. It is there that such modelling can fall down.
How does building Airfix relate to Global Warming, you been out in the sun. Is there anything you are not an expert on so we can have it as a thread.
What's interesting is its difficult to put one's finger on what has caused such a big shift....
One aspect appears to be that some of the 2010 Lib Dems who used to say they would vote Labour now say that they will vote Green. It is likely that after the Euro elections pass this will fade, and so one would expect Labour to then regain their 35% bridgehead.
I am so glad that we will have weekly phone polls from Ashcroft to keep us updated on this.
That explanation makes sense. The Euros can not end fast enough for Labour.
"In Scotland, males and females can expect to live shorter lives (by 2.5 years and 2.1 years respectively) than in England, where male and female life expectancy is the highest in the UK."
~ 2.3 years/person is a financial saving not to be sniffed at tbh. Why should the early dieing Scots fund the long living English ?
Is there any INDEPENDENT literature to show if Scots were to be better or worse off assuming
a) They take their share of the debt according to population b) The oil boundary is at the 'median line' c) They continue to use Sterling but have no influence over monetary policy, and can not use the Bank of England in the same way the treasury does.
Given it will all be based on estimated numbers it is a moot point. No-one really knows how rich we will be long term as it is all guesswork. Personally I think we would be a little bit better off longer term and would be spending the money differently and would hopefully be a much better country.
CIF - Labour got the right Miliband. But the party needs to lose an Ed
If Ed Miliband wants to recover from poor poll ratings and win the next general election, he must be brave and ditch Ed Balls”
Less than a year before the election is far too late for Labour even to think about replacing its leader. Miliband will take the party into the next election and stand or fall by the result. But he can change his team, and the weakest link by far is Ed Balls. The shadow chancellor is unpersuasive in his commons and media performances by comparison with Osborne. He is fatally associated with the failures of Gordon Brown, and the early upturn in the economy – whether felt by most Labour voters or not – risks leaving his central message on living standards outdated.
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
Not sure what public speaking experience you have, but the vast majority of inexperienced speakers make two mistakes: theyspeak too quickly, and (not unrelated) attempt to bolster their argument with more and more facets to make it stronger, when the reality is that a straightforward and clear message in infinitely preferable. I don't know about local election husts: on the one hand, a local election candidate cannot be expect to launch a full manifesto and voters will vote on at most a couple of issues and for many none at all; on the other hand I assume husts are a stratification of the people who care the most.
Thanks - have a reasonable amount of public speaking experience (although almost all in situations where the 'audience' are silent) so that bit doesn't worry me particularly - my question was more about interaction between candidates and the sort of questions likely to be asked.
CIF - Labour got the right Miliband. But the party needs to lose an Ed
If Ed Miliband wants to recover from poor poll ratings and win the next general election, he must be brave and ditch Ed Balls”
Less than a year before the election is far too late for Labour even to think about replacing its leader. Miliband will take the party into the next election and stand or fall by the result. But he can change his team, and the weakest link by far is Ed Balls. The shadow chancellor is unpersuasive in his commons and media performances by comparison with Osborne. He is fatally associated with the failures of Gordon Brown, and the early upturn in the economy – whether felt by most Labour voters or not – risks leaving his central message on living standards outdated.
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
Not sure what public speaking experience you have, but the vast majority of inexperienced speakers make two mistakes: theyspeak too quickly, and (not unrelated) attempt to bolster their argument with more and more facets to make it stronger, when the reality is that a straightforward and clear message in infinitely preferable. I don't know about local election husts: on the one hand, a local election candidate cannot be expect to launch a full manifesto and voters will vote on at most a couple of issues and for many none at all; on the other hand I assume husts are a stratification of the people who care the most.
Thanks - have a reasonable amount of public speaking experience (although almost all in situations where the 'audience' are silent) so that bit doesn't worry me particularly - my question was more about interaction between candidates and the sort of questions likely to be asked.
Sorts of question will depend on local issues. If someone asks your opinion on a really abstract point, always ask them what their view is a it a) gives you time to come up with an answer and b) steers you as to how not to answer
The finale of UKIP's May campaign will be a public meeting in Eastleigh on May 20th.
twitter.com/UKIP/status/466145892920492032
A clear win over the LDs in the Eastleigh local elections would be encouraging.
Very sensible from UKIP, Eastleigh must represent their best chance of a Westminster seat at next GE. Diane James is a massive plus there, and Conservatives there could vote tactically UKIP to beat the Lib Dems too.
All we know is that the climate is changing/has changed/has become more extreme in recent years. However as MD says, such events are not unknown during our recorded history. But the root cause/causes of this change and previous changes is by no means fully understood.
Also there is a huge amount of money at present in the climate change industry/academia. Have first hand experience of this, as a consultancy, we do a lot of verification of applications for funding bodies on applications for funding for research on climate change and renewable energy. Many of these applications we find are built on incomplete/erroneous science and are recommended for rejection.
We do a lot of modelling, but all our modelling is based on the results of very large scale experiments - many square miles in size and very expensive. However, the major problem is scaling up the results of such experiments over a time-scale which is sufficient long. It is there that such modelling can fall down.
How does building Airfix relate to Global Warming, you been out in the sun. Is there anything you are not an expert on so we can have it as a thread.
You haven't a clue about the subject. Your reference to Airfix and modelling just shows you up again.
@Malcolmg, Just out of curiosity have you, or do you plan to go out and canvass/campaign for yes?
I've just got this vision of you out campaigning and meeting no voters and your response to them.
TSE, LOL. No I am not involved in any group or campaigning. I have to say it may be fun but likely to be too much cursing and boxing, I am a bit too direct to stick to script. Must be hard when you get these diehards who will not use their brains and just follow party lines like sheep, we still have plenty of "my grandfather voted Labour so I do as well".
PS TSE , I am actually cute and cuddly and very nice in real life.
I wonder if that buried poll we heard of showing the Nats in with a shout could be behind this? Whatever, with the Tory Renaissance in the polls, keeping the union together is going to be ever harder.
@Carlotta - you are right. While supporters of the three main parties tear their hair out at their own leaders' inadequacies, Kippers and Nats see their leaders as messiahs. In many ways though, that's what makes them such tricky and at times formidable opponents.
Is that really surprising? UKIP and the SNP each have a distinct aim which is the motivating force behind their support, have risen to prominence pretty quickly, and could be said to be on the brink of something spectacular. Conservatives and LibDem supporters both have reasons to think their leader has compromised them where as Labours is unpopular with their own supporters.
The real reason for the "messiah" complex you speak of is probably because Salmond and Farage are leading a party that could actually make a tangible, historical change rather than fiddle at the margins of current status quo, and while the cause is gaining momentum, human nature dictates that any follies are overlooked by supporters. All that matters is the end of the Union/EU membership
ISAM, I was not aware that UKIP had been on the go for 80 years or even 40 for that matter.
@Malcolmg, Just out of curiosity have you, or do you plan to go out and canvass/campaign for yes?
I've just got this vision of you out campaigning and meeting no voters and your response to them.
TSE, LOL. No I am not involved in any group or campaigning. I have to say it may be fun but likely to be too much cursing and boxing, I am a bit too direct to stick to script. Must be hard when you get these diehards who will not use their brains and just follow party lines like sheep, we still have plenty of "my grandfather voted Labour so I do as well".
PS TSE , I am actually cute and cuddly and very nice in real life.
That's one of the reasons I don't go campaigning. I'm commendably (if recklessly) honest.
"Well that Dave might be a bit crap, but Ed would be much much worse" wouldn't be the best line to win votes.
Edit: As an aside, my comment wasn't having a go at you. I really do admire your passion for Scotland.
All we know is that the climate is changing/has changed/has become more extreme in recent years. However as MD says, such events are not unknown during our recorded history. But the root cause/causes of this change and previous changes is by no means fully understood.
Also there is a huge amount of money at present in the climate change industry/academia. Have first hand experience of this, as a consultancy, we do a lot of verification of applications for funding bodies on applications for funding for research on climate change and renewable energy. Many of these applications we find are built on incomplete/erroneous science and are recommended for rejection.
We do a lot of modelling, but all our modelling is based on the results of very large scale experiments - many square miles in size and very expensive. However, the major problem is scaling up the results of such experiments over a time-scale which is sufficient long. It is there that such modelling can fall down.
How does building Airfix relate to Global Warming, you been out in the sun. Is there anything you are not an expert on so we can have it as a thread.
You haven't a clue about the subject. Your reference to Airfix and modelling just shows you up again.
Your lack of a sense of humour and stupidity astound me.
Appreciate that it's somewhat OT, particularly with all this poll excitement going on, but I am speaking at my first ever local hustings this evening - any tips from the PB knowledge base?
You are talking to someone three rows from the back. Don't look down at the front too much. If you are nervous, clench your buttocks, as that stops you from shaking at all.
Mr. Pulpstar, indeed, it would reinforce the (correct) perception that Labour have lost the economic argument.
After the reds gave us the worst recession in history they needed to rebuild some credibility. MIliband's just offered endless state intervention, copying Hollande, and attempted to employ quantum mechanics to bankers' bonuses.
"... the next Welsh Political Barometer poll, which will include findings for voting intention in the European election, is due to be released next Monday. "
I wonder if that buried poll we heard of showing the Nats in with a shout could be behind this? Whatever, with the Tory Renaissance in the polls, keeping the union together is going to be ever harder.
@Carlotta - you are right. While supporters of the three main parties tear their hair out at their own leaders' inadequacies, Kippers and Nats see their leaders as messiahs. In many ways though, that's what makes them such tricky and at times formidable opponents.
Is that really surprising? UKIP and the SNP each have a distinct aim which is the motivating force behind their support, have risen to prominence pretty quickly, and could be said to be on the brink of something spectacular. Conservatives and LibDem supporters both have reasons to think their leader has compromised them where as Labours is unpopular with their own supporters.
The real reason for the "messiah" complex you speak of is probably because Salmond and Farage are leading a party that could actually make a tangible, historical change rather than fiddle at the margins of current status quo, and while the cause is gaining momentum, human nature dictates that any follies are overlooked by supporters. All that matters is the end of the Union/EU membership
ISAM, I was not aware that UKIP had been on the go for 80 years or even 40 for that matter.
They havent, I dont get what you are saying?
You seemed to be saying that SNP started at similar time to UKIP, when they have been 80 years getting to where they are. I don't see many similarities between the SNP and UKIP, so was wondering why you thought they were the same or similar.
"... the next Welsh Political Barometer poll, which will include findings for voting intention in the European election, is due to be released next Monday. "
@Malcolmg, Just out of curiosity have you, or do you plan to go out and canvass/campaign for yes?
I've just got this vision of you out campaigning and meeting no voters and your response to them.
TSE, LOL. No I am not involved in any group or campaigning. I have to say it may be fun but likely to be too much cursing and boxing, I am a bit too direct to stick to script. Must be hard when you get these diehards who will not use their brains and just follow party lines like sheep, we still have plenty of "my grandfather voted Labour so I do as well".
PS TSE , I am actually cute and cuddly and very nice in real life.
That's one of the reasons I don't go campaigning. I'm commendably (if recklessly) honest.
"Well that Dave might be a bit crap, but Ed would be much much worse" wouldn't be the best line to win votes.
Edit: As an aside, my comment wasn't having a go at you. I really do admire your passion for Scotland.
Actually what Salmond said is probably a good reflection of the future if Scotland is independent.
Access to the Norwegian fishing grounds (where 'access' is used in its accepted term when referring to fishing as meaning 'the right to fish') is probably entirely dependent on Scotland remaining in the EU. If Scotland leaves then the treaty agreement that gives Norway access to Scottish fishing grounds will no longer apply. In that case Norway will be allowing access to its own fishing grounds in return for nothing.
At that point I suspect the Norwegians will pull out of the deal, citing the loss of access to Scottish waters as a justifiable grounds.
Really, anyone who believes such rubbish as "The hockey stick was a work of fiction" has to take a long hard look at themselves and their credulity of charlatans.
Where is your scepticism?
Sorry Mr Me but the hockey stick was disproved back in 2005 when the first of a series of papers emerged showing that the statistical underpinning of the data for the paper was fatally flawed. Subsequent (and previous) papers also showed that the base assumption of the hockey stick which required the removal of the Medieval Warming Period was also flawed.
*snip* cut and paste of cherry-picked reports from some denier site *snip*
"Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, accompanied by sea-level rise, a strong decline in Arctic sea ice, and other climate-related changes." Feb 2014
Who to believe? Richard T or the Royal Society? Who has access to the best data? Who is more likely to be the expert in climatology? Tough call. I'll clearly have to think on it a while.
Mr. Eagles, no, and it's hugely unlikely. Still reckon UKIP will win, although second and third seem less certain now. Second and third could be close, as could fourth and fifth. If Clegg loses to the Greens...
Hopefully Dave's victory, were it to happen, will be as comprehensive as Caesar's victory at Pharsalus
It couldn't possibly be as emphatic as my victory over the Carthaginians at Leptis Magna last night in Rome: Total War. I totally pwned those b1tches.
Actually what Salmond said is probably a good reflection of the future if Scotland is independent.
Access to the Norwegian fishing grounds (where 'access' is used in its accepted term when referring to fishing as meaning 'the right to fish') is probably entirely dependent on Scotland remaining in the EU. If Scotland leaves then the treaty agreement that gives Norway access to Scottish fishing grounds will no longer apply. In that case Norway will be allowing access to its own fishing grounds in return for nothing.
At that point I suspect the Norwegians will pull out of the deal, citing the loss of access to Scottish waters as a justifiable grounds.
Didn't he say that the fishing fleets of 12 countries would be denied access to Norwegian waters as a consequence?
I've had a LABOUR leaflet with Ed M prominent on the front page and Labour curing the cost of living crisis. No warning, no plain brown paper covering it, a flagrant explicit photo of him.
In leafy Bucks, down the road from Jack W.
I'm outraged this has made it inside our borders...
I've NEVER had a Labour leaflet before.
I hope they haven't breached the Harpenden 'keep' defences?
It must be down to immigration.
Time to vote UKIP at this scandalous breach of security - only they can save us now.
I'm off to see on Zoopla how much my house value has just fallen!
My lack of posting over recent years reflects my complete dismay with UK politics, but with an impending return to the UK from Florence, I think I better get engaged again. So hello to all pbERS, I have followed many of your threads with some level of interest. First, my opinion of Miliband has not improved. Hollande appears to be a man of considerable charm, leadership and charisma by comparison. I don't quite see the point of the Labour party in its present guise. Do they realise that these meaningless slogans- squeezed middle just turn people off? Do they realise that people see through tactical, politicised policymaking as just that? One day gas bills, one day railways. I mean please... At least the Tories have maintained their integrity and value base- a party of the rich, led by the rich, for the rich. People with assets have just got incredibly wealthier. It has never been easier to make money if you have money- put it anywhere, it just goes up and up and up. Stocks, land, property, vintage things. Times of austerity- I mean please. How can they talk about the need for cuts without falling about laughing? The LD's are even more pointless than Labour. Enough said about them. And UKIP. They have borrowed the Goebbels copybook. Well why not? It works. Pick on some weak groups- immigrants, benefit claimants. People who can't fight back. Take a few abstract concepts- Euro bureaucrats (Goebbels had the Jewish financiers) and profess to talk to the common man. It's a tried and tested proven formula. Very effective- the problem is sometimes you can let the genie out of the bottle. My political senses tell me that UKIP is going to have a barn storming Euro election- maybe touching on 40% of the popular vote. The momentum will take it very, very close to Newark- but certainly will carry forward to next May (2015) in terms of national vote share- a 15% plus national share for UKIP is probable, but actually will have little bearing on the actual result since it will be fought entirely in the marginals by the local parties. I expect the Tories to poll in the range of 32-34% next year, and Labour 27-29% and both parties to win roughly the same number of seats.
My lack of posting over recent years reflects my complete dismay with UK politics, but with an impending return to the UK from Florence, I think I better get engaged again. So hello to all pbERS, I have followed many of your threads with some level of interest. First, my opinion of Miliband has not improved. Hollande appears to be a man of considerable charm, leadership and charisma by comparison. I don't quite see the point of the Labour party in its present guise. Do they realise that these meaningless slogans- squeezed middle just turn people off? Do they realise that people see through tactical, politicised policymaking as just that? One day gas bills, one day railways. I mean please... At least the Tories have maintained their integrity and value base- a party of the rich, led by the rich, for the rich. People with assets have just got incredibly wealthier. It has never been easier to make money if you have money- put it anywhere, it just goes up and up and up. Stocks, land, property, vintage things. Times of austerity- I mean please. How can they talk about the need for cuts without falling about laughing? The LD's are even more pointless than Labour. Enough said about them. And UKIP. They have borrowed the Goebbels copybook. Well why not? It works. Pick on some weak groups- immigrants, benefit claimants. People who can't fight back. Take a few abstract concepts- Euro bureaucrats (Goebbels had the Jewish financiers) and profess to talk to the common man. It's a tried and tested proven formula. Very effective- the problem is sometimes you can let the genie out of the bottle. My political senses tell me that UKIP is going to have a barn storming Euro election- maybe touching on 40% of the popular vote. The momentum will take it very, very close to Newark- but certainly will carry forward to next May (2015) in terms of national vote share- a 15% plus national share for UKIP is probable, but actually will have little bearing on the actual result since it will be fought entirely in the marginals by the local parties. I expect the Tories to poll in the range of 32-34% next year, and Labour 27-29% and both parties to win roughly the same number of seats.
Actually what Salmond said is probably a good reflection of the future if Scotland is independent.
Access to the Norwegian fishing grounds (where 'access' is used in its accepted term when referring to fishing as meaning 'the right to fish') is probably entirely dependent on Scotland remaining in the EU. If Scotland leaves then the treaty agreement that gives Norway access to Scottish fishing grounds will no longer apply. In that case Norway will be allowing access to its own fishing grounds in return for nothing.
At that point I suspect the Norwegians will pull out of the deal, citing the loss of access to Scottish waters as a justifiable grounds.
Didn't he say that the fishing fleets of 12 countries would be denied access to Norwegian waters as a consequence?
That is the natural consequence of what I just said. If the deal between the EU and Norway is dependent on Norwegian access (ie fishing rights) to Scottish waters then if Scotland leaves the EU then the deal would, I assume, fall.
Listening to the Astra Zeneca evidence - it's a bit thin 'take overs are disrupting' - true, but not a reason for blocking this takeover in particular......looks like highly paid execs trying to hang onto their jobs......
With reference to Balls out. If Ed of the Miliband is brave, he will go for Rachel Reeve. Untried in higher shadow office but personable and would put Osborne at risk of looking like an unpleasant bully, which he can get away with against a troglodyte like Balls. However, given that he will face a leadership challenge if he demotes Ed of the spheres, he won't do it.
The polling is fascinating, Sunday looked like the Tories were going into the first throes of meltdown, now it looks like Labour are. A 12% drop in any poll is catastrophic, whatever the ins and outs of weighting and representation. IF and it's a big if, the electorate have decided Labour are not ready to return to office, the trend will accelerate and amplify, however I think this is too early and unlikely. It is possible that Farages love bombing of Labour support is having a decisive effect, in which case We may find if UKIP drop after the Euros, both parties will benefit. This seems a more likely explanation, random sampling spread notwithstanding.
Mr. Anorak, worth mentioning the experts at the IPCC (different, but I don't know any Royal Society forecasts) got their predictions wrong.
That's why pb.com's so valuable. It's about people putting their money on things unlikely to happen, and winning.
I'm not going to get drawn into an argument on this. The similarities between discussions on this, and discussions between believers and athiests, convinces me that no-one's mind will be changed an iota.
My point was simply that I'm always going to believe the view of the vast majority of independent experts and institutions in a field over an amateur/enthusiast on a website. While the latter might be right, it's a 100-1 shot at best.
Actually what Salmond said is probably a good reflection of the future if Scotland is independent.
Access to the Norwegian fishing grounds (where 'access' is used in its accepted term when referring to fishing as meaning 'the right to fish') is probably entirely dependent on Scotland remaining in the EU. If Scotland leaves then the treaty agreement that gives Norway access to Scottish fishing grounds will no longer apply. In that case Norway will be allowing access to its own fishing grounds in return for nothing.
At that point I suspect the Norwegians will pull out of the deal, citing the loss of access to Scottish waters as a justifiable grounds.
Didn't he say that the fishing fleets of 12 countries would be denied access to Norwegian waters as a consequence?
then the deal would, I assume, fall.
So does Salmond. But its a matter between the EU and Norway, who are entitled to sort out something themselves - outwith the gift of Scotland or Salmond.....
Really, anyone who believes such rubbish as "The hockey stick was a work of fiction" has to take a long hard look at themselves and their credulity of charlatans.
Where is your scepticism?
Sorry Mr Me but the hockey stick was disproved back in 2005 when the first of a series of papers emerged showing that the statistical underpinning of the data for the paper was fatally flawed. Subsequent (and previous) papers also showed that the base assumption of the hockey stick which required the removal of the Medieval Warming Period was also flawed.
*snip* cut and paste of cherry-picked reports from some denier site *snip*
"Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, accompanied by sea-level rise, a strong decline in Arctic sea ice, and other climate-related changes." Feb 2014
Who to believe? Richard T or the Royal Society? Who has access to the best data? Who is more likely to be the expert in climatology? Tough call. I'll clearly have to think on it a while.
I am not asking you to believe me. All I am doing is providing peer review papers that show that the idea that the science is settled is clearly false.
And as ever the fact that certain organisations back the theory is meaningless in scientific terms. The Royal Society has backed the wrong horse on a whole range of issues in the past and I am sure will do again.
By the way since you raise the issue of expertise in climatology (so negating the claim of the logical fallacy of appeal to authority) I do at least work in the field so am not simply an interested observer.
A couple of extra Euro betting options at Ladbrokes.
UKIP vote share Over/Under 28% 5/6 5/6
Vote share match bet 1/2 LD 6/4 Green
Shadsy time has come when you should be thinking of making a market for council elections in Sutton. There are no Lib dem posters up,Labour are resurgent in 4 wards and the Tories fancy their chances of picking up quite a few seats.
Comments
@PickardJE: RT @jameschappers: Extending franchise to women and middle class in 19th century 'probably wrong', says Ukip candidate http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/05/13/strip-public-of-the-vote-says-ukip-candidate
http://www.icmresearch.com/media-centre/polls/guardian-poll-may-2014
@afneil: RT @scott_eff: @afneil Jim Murphy says the Mail story of Darling being replaced is a total fabrication.
@jimmurphymp: Alistair Darling very much alive and well and in charge of a campaign that had a 20% lead in latest poll. Daily Mail story is total fiction.
Maybe it will be different this time, but if it isn't...
I think you've got it the wrong way around. The hockey stick is produced from data, and AGW is a theory as to how it has come about.
Personally I treat the hockey stick data with a certain amount of contempt: you have to be very careful when analysing such data, especially when there are so few data points, and your assumptions need to be made clear. And the scientists' behaviour has hardly been exemplary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
You've arrived in time for the May 22nd excitement, and if you stay after that, the 50 weeks countdown to the 2015 GE. All that will cause fainting fits, hysterical collapses, sudden spurts of euforia and climbing the walls, so bring your smelling salts.
Mind you, a better map yet was in the Mail a few months ago, showing which countries we hadn't ever had a war with (there were only about 10, including Mongolia).
Sorry Mr Me but the hockey stick was disproved back in 2005 when the first of a series of papers emerged showing that the statistical underpinning of the data for the paper was fatally flawed. Subsequent (and previous) papers also showed that the base assumption of the hockey stick which required the removal of the Medieval Warming Period was also flawed.
Mann, basing his work on that of Keith Briffa, claimed that the MWP had only been a regional effect and had no bearing on overall temperatures. This position has been fundamentally debunked by a whole series of papers from around the world showing evidence for the MWP (and the early Roman and Minoan warming periods) on every continent.
Just taking a few papers off my shelf:
MWP in Japan
D.P. Adhikari · F. Kumon (2001) Climatic changes during the past 1300 years as deduced from the sediments of Lake Nakatsuna, central Japan
MWP in California and South America
S. Stine (1994) Extreme and persistent drought in California and Patagonia during mediaeval time
MWP in Northern Europe
B. Christiansen and F. C. Ljungqvist (2012) The extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere temperature in the last two millennia: reconstructions of low-frequency variability
MWP in central and southern Europe and China
F. C. Ljungqvist (2010) A regional approach to the medieval warm period and the little ice age
MWP in New Zealand
Lorrey, A., Williams, P., Salinger, J., Martin, T., Palmer, J., Fowler, A., Zhao, J.-X. and Neil, H. (2008). Speleothem stable isotope records interpreted within a multi-proxy framework and implications for New Zealand palaeoclimate reconstruction
MWP in the Pacific
Y.Rosenthal B.K. Linsley D.W. Oppo (2013)
Pacific Ocean Heat Content During the Past 10,000 Years
By the way I am still up for that meeting sometime if you fancy
Unless the blue leads are replicated over some time there's not much point getting too over-excited.
Don't worry I took it as a badge of honour - a rite of passage if you like ;-)
But boy the triumphalism is palpable here today. There are going to be some very red faces if it proves a short term blip.
Complacency, and panic...
One can then introduce a law to remove the right to vote from beings that defecate or urinate in public, which would encourage cat/dog owners to exercise more control over their pet's toilet habits and also neatly disenfranchise those people who drink so much of a weekend that they are unable to control their bladders.
Why don't you get your head out of Eck's vast sunless crevice ?
May I put my scientist hat on for the moment.
All we know is that the climate is changing/has changed/has become more extreme in recent years. However as MD says, such events are not unknown during our recorded history. But the root cause/causes of this change and previous changes is by no means fully understood.
Also there is a huge amount of money at present in the climate change industry/academia. Have first hand experience of this, as a consultancy, we do a lot of verification of applications for funding bodies on applications for funding for research on climate change and renewable energy. Many of these applications we find are built on incomplete/erroneous science and are recommended for rejection.
We do a lot of modelling, but all our modelling is based on the results of very large scale experiments - many square miles in size and very expensive. However, the major problem is scaling up the results of such experiments over a time-scale which is sufficient long. It is there that such modelling can fall down.
Admittedly, this is just from a sample of 25 [who say they will vote and name a party. There are 52 in the sample as a whole], but UKIP and the Greens both had at least one respondent for every region.
You're projecting again.
Meanwhile;
And while we’re talking about the Lib Dems – our relentless week long attack on them has seen them go up in the polls, whilst UKIP remain unchallenged.
http://labourlist.org/2014/05/theres-still-time-to-win-if-miliband-can-stop-the-rot/
FWIW, I doubt the Labour PPB had ANY influence on the polling - its just the first MOE excursion into crossover territory that's been a long time coming.....
~ 2.3 years/person is a financial saving not to be sniffed at tbh. Why should the early dieing Scots fund the long living English ?
Is there any INDEPENDENT literature to show if Scots were to be better or worse off assuming
a) They take their share of the debt according to population
b) The oil boundary is at the 'median line'
c) They continue to use Sterling but have no influence over monetary policy, and can not use the Bank of England in the same way the treasury does.
(good to see you back here, btw)
More good news on health for labour today from the people's republic of Wales.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9201871/did-most-women-want-the-vote/
I am so glad that we will have weekly phone polls from Ashcroft to keep us updated on this.
I've just got this vision of you out campaigning and meeting no voters and your response to them.
Pretty much the only person who would be worse than Ed Balls in the role of Shadow Chancellor would be Liam Byrne...
"More good news on health for labour today from the people's republic of Wales."
And from the Tory kingdom of London?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27385529
A mere peek downthread will see whom I refer to.
Agree about the PPB.
Actually Liam Byrne wouldn't be the worst choice, Gordon Brown would be,
If Ed Miliband wants to recover from poor poll ratings and win the next general election, he must be brave and ditch Ed Balls”
Less than a year before the election is far too late for Labour even to think about replacing its leader. Miliband will take the party into the next election and stand or fall by the result. But he can change his team, and the weakest link by far is Ed Balls. The shadow chancellor is unpersuasive in his commons and media performances by comparison with Osborne. He is fatally associated with the failures of Gordon Brown, and the early upturn in the economy – whether felt by most Labour voters or not – risks leaving his central message on living standards outdated.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/13/labour-right-ed-miliband-ed-balls-needs-to-go?CMP=twt_gu
Lib Dems would probably still have kingmaker power !
And from the Tory kingdom of London?
Maybe. Except health is number one issue for Labour and an absolute key attack line.
1997.....24 hours to save the NHS.
2015.....24 hours to make the NHS even worse, like it is in Wales.
twitter.com/UKIP/status/466145892920492032
A clear win over the LDs in the Eastleigh local elections would be encouraging.
Have you noticed since the Tories announced plans for HMRC to raid people's bank accounts without a court order, the Tories have taken the lead.
PS TSE , I am actually cute and cuddly and very nice in real life.
They havent, I dont get what you are saying?
"Well that Dave might be a bit crap, but Ed would be much much worse" wouldn't be the best line to win votes.
Edit: As an aside, my comment wasn't having a go at you. I really do admire your passion for Scotland.
After the reds gave us the worst recession in history they needed to rebuild some credibility. MIliband's just offered endless state intervention, copying Hollande, and attempted to employ quantum mechanics to bankers' bonuses.
http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/
Let's see how he reacts.
Access to the Norwegian fishing grounds (where 'access' is used in its accepted term when referring to fishing as meaning 'the right to fish') is probably entirely dependent on Scotland remaining in the EU. If Scotland leaves then the treaty agreement that gives Norway access to Scottish fishing grounds will no longer apply. In that case Norway will be allowing access to its own fishing grounds in return for nothing.
At that point I suspect the Norwegians will pull out of the deal, citing the loss of access to Scottish waters as a justifiable grounds.
"Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. It is now more certain than ever, based on many lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, accompanied by sea-level rise, a strong decline in Arctic sea ice, and other climate-related changes." Feb 2014
Who to believe? Richard T or the Royal Society? Who has access to the best data? Who is more likely to be the expert in climatology? Tough call. I'll clearly have to think on it a while.
In leafy Bucks, down the road from Jack W.
I'm outraged this has made it inside our borders...
I've NEVER had a Labour leaflet before.
I hope they haven't breached the Harpenden 'keep' defences?
It must be down to immigration.
Time to vote UKIP at this scandalous breach of security - only they can save us now.
I'm off to see on Zoopla how much my house value has just fallen!
First, my opinion of Miliband has not improved. Hollande appears to be a man of considerable charm, leadership and charisma by comparison. I don't quite see the point of the Labour party in its present guise. Do they realise that these meaningless slogans- squeezed middle just turn people off? Do they realise that people see through tactical, politicised policymaking as just that? One day gas bills, one day railways. I mean please...
At least the Tories have maintained their integrity and value base- a party of the rich, led by the rich, for the rich. People with assets have just got incredibly wealthier. It has never been easier to make money if you have money- put it anywhere, it just goes up and up and up. Stocks, land, property, vintage things. Times of austerity- I mean please. How can they talk about the need for cuts without falling about laughing?
The LD's are even more pointless than Labour. Enough said about them.
And UKIP. They have borrowed the Goebbels copybook. Well why not? It works. Pick on some weak groups- immigrants, benefit claimants. People who can't fight back. Take a few abstract concepts- Euro bureaucrats (Goebbels had the Jewish financiers) and profess to talk to the common man. It's a tried and tested proven formula. Very effective- the problem is sometimes you can let the genie out of the bottle.
My political senses tell me that UKIP is going to have a barn storming Euro election- maybe touching on 40% of the popular vote. The momentum will take it very, very close to Newark- but certainly will carry forward to next May (2015) in terms of national vote share- a 15% plus national share for UKIP is probable, but actually will have little bearing on the actual result since it will be fought entirely in the marginals by the local parties. I expect the Tories to poll in the range of 32-34% next year, and Labour 27-29% and both parties to win roughly the same number of seats.
That's why pb.com's so valuable. It's about people putting their money on things unlikely to happen, and winning.
On the front cover, a wistful Ed stares dreamily into the distance at Conference.
Seriously, is that really the best photo the party could find?
On a more serious note, welcome back to both Blighty and the site.
However, given that he will face a leadership challenge if he demotes Ed of the spheres, he won't do it.
The polling is fascinating, Sunday looked like the Tories were going into the first throes of meltdown, now it looks like Labour are. A 12% drop in any poll is catastrophic, whatever the ins and outs of weighting and representation. IF and it's a big if, the electorate have decided Labour are not ready to return to office, the trend will accelerate and amplify, however I think this is too early and unlikely. It is possible that Farages love bombing of Labour support is having a decisive effect, in which case We may find if UKIP drop after the Euros, both parties will benefit. This seems a more likely explanation, random sampling spread notwithstanding.
My point was simply that I'm always going to believe the view of the vast majority of independent experts and institutions in a field over an amateur/enthusiast on a website. While the latter might be right, it's a 100-1 shot at best.
And as ever the fact that certain organisations back the theory is meaningless in scientific terms. The Royal Society has backed the wrong horse on a whole range of issues in the past and I am sure will do again.
By the way since you raise the issue of expertise in climatology (so negating the claim of the logical fallacy of appeal to authority) I do at least work in the field so am not simply an interested observer.
There are no Lib dem posters up,Labour are resurgent in 4 wards and the Tories fancy their chances of picking up quite a few seats.