politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Today’s Populus poll should at least calm some nerves in the red camp
Whenever a new poll comes up showing two or three points changes someone always comes on to say it is all within the margin of error. And so it is from a mathematical point of view.
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
Not a Robinson fan as political editor but when he was stand-in Newsnight presenter I thought he did a much better job of chairing a discussion than the regulars, and was less full of himself and more measured than them.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
Not a Robinson fan as political editor but when he was stand-in Newsnight presenter I thought he did a much better job of chairing a discussion than the regulars, and was less full of himself and more measured than them.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
Did I miss why Andrew Neil isnt' going to get the Newsnight gig? Doesn't he want it?
oh and fpt for James O'Brien, should have been:
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
As a political sage once wrote for the DT,
"“Here come de heap big warmy. Bigtime warmy warmy. Is big big hot. Plenty big warm burny hot. Hot! Hot hot! But now not hot. Not hot now. De hot come go, come go. Now Is Coldy Coldy. Is ice. Hot den cold. Frreeeezy ice til hot again. "
and I think that sums the current state of public political opinion up quite well.
@SophyRidgeSky: David Cameron has told Sky News he understands the Iraq Inquiry will be able to publish its (much delayed) report by the end of the year
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
As a political sage once wrote for the DT,
"“Here come de heap big warmy. Bigtime warmy warmy. Is big big hot. Plenty big warm burny hot. Hot! Hot hot! But now not hot. Not hot now. De hot come go, come go. Now Is Coldy Coldy. Is ice. Hot den cold. Frreeeezy ice til hot again. "
and I think that sums the current state of public political opinion up quite well.
Just read the Hodges piece on Farage. I've concluded he's being more trollish than usual and is primarily winding up his frothing UKIP fan club.
This one has a moustache for sure. Golf club president, maybe:
I tell you what Mr Hodges. If UKIP win next week, then I expect you to resign from writing this drivel in the DT. If they lose, I will take my 3 degress (inc. PhD) and my business, and find another country to live and work (outside the EU).
You can fashion your own lovely EU communist dream as you see fit, and I won't be there to harass you. That sounds fair to me. You really make me sick to the stomach.
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
Not a Robinson fan as political editor but when he was stand-in Newsnight presenter I thought he did a much better job of chairing a discussion than the regulars, and was less full of himself and more measured than them.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
Mr Dancer I think the Euro elections are causing a bit more oddness in polling. There has also been a marked decline in Labour position for a bit which can always include them dropping behind. Almost all the pills this week have shown a position that given the error margin could be described as "nothing between them". Let's wait until after the elections because the results are likely to drive a narrative.
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
To be fair, If those were the questions fired at Farage, he should have been able to answer them.
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
Not a Robinson fan as political editor but when he was stand-in Newsnight presenter I thought he did a much better job of chairing a discussion than the regulars, and was less full of himself and more measured than them.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
Did I miss why Andrew Neil isnt' going to get the Newsnight gig? Doesn't he want it?
oh and fpt for James O'Brien, should have been:
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
I would say firstly I didnt even know the National Front were still going.
Secondly, any party that talks about controlling immigration gets the same thing thrown at them (Michael Howrds Conservatives "Are you thinking what we are thinking", Gordon Brown "British Jobs For British Workers".
It is difficult for anyone to talk about controlling imigration without gettin the BNP thrown at them by pro immigrationist. It is the cowardly debating technique of attacking a strawman rather than the actual point.
The leaflets wouldnt appeal to racists because they never mention race (or religion come to that)
There are clear lines between UKIP & BNP
BNP want to end all immigration UKIP want controlled immigration The other 3 want open door immigration
UKIP are the middle ground
BNP want to repatriate immigrants UKIP dont
BNP make a distinction between people on the basis of skin colour UKIP dont
Andrew NEill must have ruled himself out of the NEwsnight job surely? He wouldnt be 33/1 if he was a runner, should be fav
10.30 am: Cabin Cruiser catches fire about 1m offshore. 10.45 am: Man rescued from boat by lifeboat. 11.15 am: Rockets on board start exploding into the sky. Also danger of gas canisters exploding. Police close off road adjacent to beach. 1.30 pm Boat sinks. 2.10 pm Police belatedly open the road. 2.15 pm: Council men (6) arrive with 3 vans and 1 lorry to close off the road.
What had they been doing all day - watching the soaps and daytime tv?
2.25:pm: Council men remove road closed signs and return to depot to sign off for the week.
Just read the Hodges piece on Farage. I've concluded he's being more trollish than usual and is primarily winding up his frothing UKIP fan club.
This one has a moustache for sure. Golf club president, maybe:
I tell you what Mr Hodges. If UKIP win next week, then I expect you to resign from writing this drivel in the DT. If they lose, I will take my 3 degress (inc. PhD) and my business, and find another country to live and work (outside the EU).
You can fashion your own lovely EU communist dream as you see fit, and I won't be there to harass you. That sounds fair to me. You really make me sick to the stomach.
Marvellous.
I love his "three degress" as well. In its sheer economy it's a haiku of inanition.
And anyway, who cares what he does with his collection of Philadelphia soul music?
@SophyRidgeSky: David Cameron has told Sky News he understands the Iraq Inquiry will be able to publish its (much delayed) report by the end of the year
Gordon Brown set up the Chilcot inquiry back in 2009, presumably in order to bury it before the following general election. It will be quite amusing if Sir John’s findings are published immediately prior to the next, a belated present for Miliband you could say..!
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
To be fair, If those were the questions fired at Farage, he should have been able to answer them.
@SophyRidgeSky: David Cameron has told Sky News he understands the Iraq Inquiry will be able to publish its (much delayed) report by the end of the year
Just in time to remind the RedLiberals about the Iraq War before the election...?
F. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them.
His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
I think you could say much the same about most UK political journalists. They seem to regard their job to be hunt-the-gaffe, rather than explain the problems policies are aimed at, and their pros/cons.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
As a political sage once wrote for the DT,
"“Here come de heap big warmy. Bigtime warmy warmy. Is big big hot. Plenty big warm burny hot. Hot! Hot hot! But now not hot. Not hot now. De hot come go, come go. Now Is Coldy Coldy. Is ice. Hot den cold. Frreeeezy ice til hot again. "
and I think that sums the current state of public political opinion up quite well.
"Ed says that they've got an inbuilt advantage that means that even if they lose the popular vote, they can still take power. Ed asked if I understood and I said, "Yeah – I'm from Chicago." Like Michelle says, "We're so freakin' popular out there, even the dead vote for us.""
This is such a lazy caricature, generally made by people who have never set foot in a golf club.
All golf clubs bars I've been to are pretty quiet places, generally because the members tend to be out playing.....err.....golf.
I've been in a few, but I've never heard politics talked in any of them.
Most caricatures are lazy, but they're still a useful and efficient shorthand. I'll grant you that one's a couple of decades out of date - but still, you knew exactly what I meant. Would 'retired colonel' have been better? You know, the sort of chap who'd give the fuzzy-wuzzies what for.
FPT - Lansley's a possibility, true. Yeo would fit the grunatic criteria, but he's not a future Cabinet Minister (and wasn't in 2010). I didn't have Hague down as a greenie - but perhaps I am wrong?
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
Not a Robinson fan as political editor but when he was stand-in Newsnight presenter I thought he did a much better job of chairing a discussion than the regulars, and was less full of himself and more measured than them.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
Did I miss why Andrew Neil isnt' going to get the Newsnight gig? Doesn't he want it?
oh and fpt for James O'Brien, should have been:
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
I would say firstly I didnt even know the National Front were still going.
Secondly, any party that talks about controlling immigration gets the same thing thrown at them (Michael Howrds Conservatives "Are you thinking what we are thinking", Gordon Brown "British Jobs For British Workers".
It is difficult for anyone to talk about controlling imigration without gettin the BNP thrown at them by pro immigrationist. It is the cowardly debating technique of attacking a strawman rather than the actual point.
The leaflets wouldnt appeal to racists because they never mention race (or religion come to that)
There are clear lines between UKIP & BNP
BNP want to end all immigration UKIP want controlled immigration The other 3 want open door immigration
UKIP are the middle ground
BNP want to repatriate immigrants UKIP dont
BNP make a distinction between people on the basis of skin colour UKIP dont
Andrew NEill must have ruled himself out of the NEwsnight job surely? He wouldnt be 33/1 if he was a runner, should be fav
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
FPT - Lansley's a possibility, true. Yeo would fit the grunatic criteria, but he's not a future Cabinet Minister (and wasn't in 2010). I didn't have Hague down as a greenie - but perhaps I am wrong?
It was reported, I forget where, that the FCO saw global warming as their number 1 priority. I assume Mr Hague had/has internalised that mindset.
F. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them.
His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
I think you could say much the same about most UK political journalists. They seem to regard their job to be hunt-the-gaffe, rather than explain the problems policies are aimed at, and their pros/cons.
Sad to say I agree with you – The ‘Fourth Estate’ is a pitiful sight today, little more than sex, celebs and drivel.
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
They do. It's a requirement of EU membership, and all three parties are in favour of EU membership.
FPT - Lansley's a possibility, true. Yeo would fit the grunatic criteria, but he's not a future Cabinet Minister (and wasn't in 2010). I didn't have Hague down as a greenie - but perhaps I am wrong?
It was reported, I forget where, that the FCO saw global warming as their number 1 priority. I assume Mr Hague had/has internalised that mindset.
May be - although don't forget this interview took place before the 2010 election, so he wouldn't have had the chance at that point.
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
They do. It's a requirement of EU membership, and all three parties are in favour of EU membership.
It's also typically a requirement of a trade treaty with the EU, which UKIP are in favour of, so make that all 4 of the major parties.
FPT - Lansley's a possibility, true. Yeo would fit the grunatic criteria, but he's not a future Cabinet Minister (and wasn't in 2010). I didn't have Hague down as a greenie - but perhaps I am wrong?
It was reported, I forget where, that the FCO saw global warming as their number 1 priority. I assume Mr Hague had/has internalised that mindset.
May be - although don't forget this interview took place before the 2010 election, so he wouldn't have had the chance at that point.
He would have been shadowing the department, and hobnobbing with the Civil Servants/diplomats.
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section). .
oh and fpt for James O'Brien, should have been:
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
I would say firstly I didnt even know the National Front were still going.
Secondly, any party that talks about controlling immigration gets the same thing thrown at them (Michael Howrds Conservatives "Are you thinking what we are thinking", Gordon Brown "British Jobs For British Workers".
It is difficult for anyone to talk about controlling imigration without gettin the BNP thrown at them by pro immigrationist. It is the cowardly debating technique of attacking a strawman rather than the actual point.
The leaflets wouldnt appeal to racists because they never mention race (or religion come to that)
There are clear lines between UKIP & BNP
BNP want to end all immigration UKIP want controlled immigration The other 3 want open door immigration
UKIP are the middle ground
BNP want to repatriate immigrants UKIP dont
BNP make a distinction between people on the basis of skin colour UKIP dont
Andrew NEill must have ruled himself out of the NEwsnight job surely? He wouldnt be 33/1 if he was a runner, should be fav
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
From the EU
Do you know Camerons immigration policy in a Tory majority then? Can you tell?
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
They do. It's a requirement of EU membership, and all three parties are in favour of EU membership.
Well I was under the impression that this government had made a number of changes relating to migration. Also the conservatives are looking to reform the free movement rules as part of the EU renegotiation to ensure better management of the issue.
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
They do. It's a requirement of EU membership, and all three parties are in favour of EU membership.
It's also typically a requirement of a trade treaty with the EU, which UKIP are in favour of, so make that all 4 of the major parties.
The treatment of UKIP by the whole of the British media has given me food for thought. I used to think the whole 'political class/westminster bubble/North london mafia/Liblabcon conspiracy' was paranoid b*llocks.
FPT: Good afternoon, everyone. vel-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
? Doesn't he want it?
I would say firstly I didnt even know the National Front were still going.
Secondly, any party that talks about controlling immigration gets the same thing thrown at them (Michael Howrds Conservatives "Are you thinking what we are thinking", Gordon Brown "British Jobs For British Workers".
It is difficult for anyone to talk about controlling imigration without gettin the BNP thrown at them by pro immigrationist. It is the cowardly debating technique of attacking a strawman rather than the actual point.
The leaflets wouldnt appeal to racists because they never mention race (or religion come to that)
There are clear lines between UKIP & BNP
BNP want to end all immigration UKIP want controlled immigration The other 3 want open door immigration
UKIP are the middle ground
BNP want to repatriate immigrants UKIP dont
BNP make a distinction between people on the basis of skin colour UKIP dont
Andrew NEill must have ruled himself out of the NEwsnight job surely? He wouldnt be 33/1 if he was a runner, should be fav
A sensible entry point to a debate on immigration is no doubt challenging. Where UKIP IMO suffers is that they are not (yet) saying we want to do this on health, that on defence, something else on transport and the following on immigration.
They are saying IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION...
And hence the similarity between UKIP those other two parties. Who knew or knows what the BNP policy on corporation tax is? The problem UKIP faces is that they seem obsessed. Everything Farage said in that interview was fine IMO - he answered the questions but he didn't address (and O'Brien didn't press) the central theme - UKIP has become a natural home for those who see immigration as their overriding concern. Their only concern perhaps. That is the danger.
And, for the nth time, having been in principle a supporter of UKIP's right to have the immigration (and EU) debate, looking at their current campaign leaflets really shocked me. It put them big style on the wrong side of the line between debate and dog whistle ugly politics.
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
The treatment of UKIP by the whole of the British media has given me food for thought. I used to think the whole 'political class/westminster bubble/North london mafia/Liblabcon conspiracy' was paranoid b*llocks.
The LibLabcon have left us in the lurch By failing to bring back the birch. All villains should get a damn good thrashin' Except expenses-fiddling UKIP MEPs, among whom dishonesty is in fashion.
FPT: Good afternoon, everyone. vel-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
? Doesn't he want it?
I would say firstly I didnt even know the National Front were still going.
Secondly, any party that talks about controlling immigration gets the same thing thrown at them (Michael Howrds Conservatives "Are you thinking what we are thinking", Gordon Brown "British Jobs For British Workers".
It is difficult for anyone to talk about controlling imigration without gettin the BNP thrown at them by pro immigrationist. It is the cowardly debating technique of attacking a strawman rather than the actual point.
The leaflets wouldnt appeal to racists because they never mention race (or religion come to that)
There are clear lines between UKIP & BNP
-snip -
Andrew NEill must have ruled himself out of the NEwsnight job surely? He wouldnt be 33/1 if he was a runner, should be fav
A sensible entry point to a debate on immigration is no doubt challenging. Where UKIP IMO suffers is that they are not (yet) saying we want to do this on health, that on defence, something else on transport and the following on immigration.
They are saying IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION...
And hence the similarity between UKIP those other two parties. Who knew or knows what the BNP policy on corporation tax is? The problem UKIP faces is that they seem obsessed. Everything Farage said in that interview was fine IMO - he answered the questions but he didn't address (and O'Brien didn't press) the central theme - UKIP has become a natural home for those who see immigration as their overriding concern. Their only concern perhaps. That is the danger.
And, for the nth time, having been in principle a supporter of UKIP's right to have the immigration (and EU) debate, looking at their current campaign leaflets really shocked me. It put them big style on the wrong side of the line between debate and dog whistle ugly politics.
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
The BNP have never had a 68% chance of winning the European elections. And they are a mile to the left of UKIP, Nationalist socialists I would say.
Interesting piece on Climate Change, it probably broadly reflects my opinion on the issue to be honest I avoid thinking about it as the shouty-screamy match gives me brain ache
The treatment of UKIP by the whole of the British media has given me food for thought. I used to think the whole 'political class/westminster bubble/North london mafia/Liblabcon conspiracy' was paranoid b*llocks.
Now I'm not so sure.
I don't think it is a conspiracy as such. Just that there is a lot of political correctness in certain circles, where you show you are better than someone else by following the latest "correct" way of thinking.
E.g. use "rape" in the wrong context - hang him!
UKIP is like a swarm of political in-correctness, which must be like scratching fingernails down a black chalk board to these people. And they respond accordingly.
You know, the sort of chap who'd give the fuzzy-wuzzies what for.
Now that is out of date, he'd have to be going on 150 years old. Castrated a few Mau Mau suspects or terminated some Armalite-toting bog trotters would be more the thing.
Miliband’s rhetoric on immigration is temperate; but, at base, his message is not far from Nigel Farage’s. To put it crudely: an unskilled yokel is on his way to pinch your job, and clog up your hospitals and schools. The message is risible (as Miliband himself concedes when he says, as he always does, that immigration has been “good” for the country as a whole, which makes you wonder why he bothers to talk about it). But at least Farage is coherently risible: immigration cannot be controlled (in an exact sense of the term), unless one takes complete control of one’s borders.
I'm not sure why you think an essay by an individual who speaks neither for the EU or UKIP contradicts what I said, but it is an excellent essay in that it lays out the challenges clearly. In particular, on the specific point of negotiating 'No free movement of people', it says the difficulty is 'Medium'. So the author doesn't think it is a shoo-in.
My view is that on that particular point he is wrong: I'd put the difficulty as 'High, verging on impossible'.
Others might disagree, but no-one can really know - except for one thing: the Kippers are living in an Alex-Salmond-style cloud cuckoo land, convincing themselves that they can get everything they want and the people they are negotiating with will have zero say in the matter.
It is the total failure to address reality on points such as this which is my principal gripe with UKIP. Where is the grown-up discussion of Brexit? The article you cited is a good starting point, but if UKIP want to convince people like me - and I am quite persuadable, as I've said before I think the balance is shifting towards Out - I need answers grounded in reality, not la-la land.
FPT: Good afternoon, everyone. vel-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
? Doesn't he want it?
A sensible entry point to a debate on immigration is no doubt challenging. Where UKIP IMO suffers is that they are not (yet) saying we want to do this on health, that on defence, something else on transport and the following on immigration.
They are saying IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION...
And hence the similarity between UKIP those other two parties. Who knew or knows what the BNP policy on corporation tax is? The problem UKIP faces is that they seem obsessed. Everything Farage said in that interview was fine IMO - he answered the questions but he didn't address (and O'Brien didn't press) the central theme - UKIP has become a natural home for those who see immigration as their overriding concern. Their only concern perhaps. That is the danger.
And, for the nth time, having been in principle a supporter of UKIP's right to have the immigration (and EU) debate, looking at their current campaign leaflets really shocked me. It put them big style on the wrong side of the line between debate and dog whistle ugly politics.
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
I think UKIP are majoring on immigration because these are the EU elections. There isnt much more to it than that.
The EU doesnt control whether we have Grammar schools, it doesnt set our tax rates etc, so why mention those topics? They are irrelevant for this election
What are the other parties talking about in terms of the EU?
The major vote winner regarding the EU is a stop to mass immigration through uncontrolled borders. I would expect UKIP's campaign this time next year to cover a a broader range of policies, but thats not for now
They are odds on favs to win most votes, I think its harsh to call it a turn off because its turned you off
You know, the sort of chap who'd give the fuzzy-wuzzies what for.
Now that is out of date, he'd have to be going on 150 years old. Castrated a few Mau Mau suspects or terminated some Armalite-toting bog trotters would be more the thing.
I hadn't realised I'd used such a time-specific racial slur.
I've come up with a couple of haiku poems about UKIP if anyone's interested:
Them Romanians Coming over here, taking Our jobs. Send ‘em back.
Oi LibLabCon scum! Repaint our trains in proper Colours you BASTARDS
I have also come up with a clerihew:
Nigel Farage We should not disparage. Although James O’Brien socked it to him right up the shitter He kept his temper and isn’t bitter.
Do any other PBers enjoy, as I do, composing eccentric verse forms about protest parties?
Mr.Bond, you still have not grasped the Haiku form even though You only live twice was published at least 50 years ago...
you need a seasonal word/theme. melting snow, cherry blossoms, autumn leaves.
otherwise, you have only part of a Tanka.
(You only live twice. Once when you are born, and once when you lookdeath in the face:
I suppose your meter has improved since this one. Although you could argue that stretching the point this has some kind of seasonal quality, birth death. but tenuous)
The predictions of those pro-warming (as it were) have been consistently wrong (cf the IPCC witnessing a plateau after predicting a rise then increasing their own self-confidence from 90% to 95%), and have other problems with credibility (the East Anglian e-mails and hockey stick spring to mind. Also, using ice cores does prove a correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature, but if an actual scientist thinks correlation means causation then they need to be beaten around the head with a dictionary and sent back to scientist school).
There are big areas of overlap between what we should do if warmists are right and if they are wrong (which I think they are), such as promoting energy efficiency and the like.
But the idea of truce is nonsense, as is scepticism somehow being bad. Science is all about competing theories, using evidence and new discoveries to support or disprove previous beliefs and then amend theories to take them into account.
Oh dear, probably best not to be deliberately misleading. I suggest you revisit the thought that all 3 of the major parties want what you refer to as "open door immigration". When your ready you might want to come back and correct your assertion.
They do. It's a requirement of EU membership, and all three parties are in favour of EU membership.
It's also typically a requirement of a trade treaty with the EU, which UKIP are in favour of, so make that all 4 of the major parties.
The third sentence of that article proclaims it to be just a joke: "In Europe, a priority must be to secure open trade relations, ideally by membership of the European Free Trade Area, though remaining outside the European Economic Area." EFTA is four countries, or rather three countries plus Liechtenstein, or arguably two countries plus Liechtenstein and Iceland. That is really going to compensate for refusing to join the EEA, is it not? And the EFTA countries have all signed up to EEA except Switzerland which has a bilateral treaty with the EU which effectively obliges them to accept unlimited EU immigration.
This stuff really is thinner than Salmond's currency policy.
The treatment of UKIP by the whole of the British media has given me food for thought. I used to think the whole 'political class/westminster bubble/North london mafia/Liblabcon conspiracy' was paranoid b*llocks.
Now I'm not so sure.
"Conspiracy" is paranoid b*llocks.
You could make a good argument for "groupthink" though.
Just on EEA/EFTA etc: if we left the EU it wouldn't just be the same EU minus a big island and a few smaller ones. It's be the EU without one of the largest contributors, an EU shrinking rather than increasing in size, an EU whose whole political centre of mass would tilt leftwards massively without us.
Just as the environment shapes us, so do we shape the environment. If we left the EU that wouldn't only create an interesting situation for us, but one for the EU as well.
The leakage of votes for this Tory Is only a part of the story. Because despite it, we've still had crossover, Making us favourites in marginals like Dover, But a majority? That's sheer jackanory!
Alex Wickham @WikiGuido 7m So far two UKIPers have been on @LondonLive and had private conversations leaked to Lebedev papers. How not to run a TV channel.
I've come up with a couple of haiku poems about UKIP if anyone's interested:
Them Romanians Coming over here, taking Our jobs. Send ‘em back.
Oi LibLabCon scum! Repaint our trains in proper Colours you BASTARDS
I have also come up with a clerihew:
Nigel Farage We should not disparage. Although James O’Brien socked it to him right up the shitter He kept his temper and isn’t bitter.
Do any other PBers enjoy, as I do, composing eccentric verse forms about protest parties?
Mr.Bond, you still have not grasped the Haiku form even though You only live twice was published at least 50 years ago...
you need a seasonal word/theme. melting snow, cherry blossoms, autumn leaves.
otherwise, you have only part of a Tanka.
(You only live twice. Once when you are born, and once when you lookdeath in the face:
I suppose your meter has improved since this one. Although you could argue that stretching the point this has some kind of seasonal quality, birth death. but tenuous)
Fair comment. How about this one?
Them gays, getting married, Causing floods like a spring tide of Romanians.
For those, such as Fett, on the left, The polls find them trapped in a cleft. For in spite of their lead, Inspiration they need, Of which they are clearly bereft.
FPT: Good afternoon, everyone. vel-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
? Doesn't he want it?
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
I think UKIP are majoring on immigration because these are the EU elections. There isnt much more to it than that.
The EU doesnt control whether we have Grammar schools, it doesnt set our tax rates etc, so why mention those topics? They are irrelevant for this election
What are the other parties talking about in terms of the EU?
The major vote winner regarding the EU is a stop to mass immigration through uncontrolled borders. I would expect UKIP's campaign this time next year to cover a a broader range of policies, but thats not for now
They are odds on favs to win most votes, I think its harsh to call it a turn off because its turned you off
There is a lot more to the EU than immigration. I'm not 100% convinced that people view the EU only in terms of potential uncontrolled immigration.
UKIP are also getting NOTA votes although some of those are leaking to the Greens.
UKIP turned me off because I can remember the BNP and the NF and this most recent campaign pushed the same and only theme which you can dress up or justify as you like: keep foreigners out.
The predictions of those pro-warming (as it were) have been consistently wrong (cf the IPCC witnessing a plateau after predicting a rise then increasing their own self-confidence from 90% to 95%), and have other problems with credibility (the East Anglian e-mails and hockey stick spring to mind. Also, using ice cores does prove a correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature, but if an actual scientist thinks correlation means causation then they need to be beaten around the head with a dictionary and sent back to scientist school).
There are big areas of overlap between what we should do if warmists are right and if they are wrong (which I think they are), such as promoting energy efficiency and the like.
But the idea of truce is nonsense, as is scepticism somehow being bad. Science is all about competing theories, using evidence and new discoveries to support or disprove previous beliefs and then amend theories to take them into account.
Well I'm not a scientist but am a keen follower of science so I can see explanations of for instance the cosmological standard model which have had elements disproved and yet underlying confidence in the broad structure increased. So there could be any number of reasons why the failure of a specific prediction would not be inconsistent with increasing confidence in the underlying approach.
Genuine scientific scepticism though is usually the spur to research to remove the area of scepticism or find more data. Climate scepticism though is more akin to a form of nihilism. It doesn't follow the pattern of x doesn't make sense we need to know more about x pattern of science but rather, x doesn't make sense therefore anyone saying x is WRONG and also BAD PEOPLE.
I like scientific scepticism because it leads to better understanding, the other sort is about switching our torch off and leaving the room. Truce is a clumsy description, but I think there needs to be more dialogue and debate between genuine scientific sceptics and proponents and an end to the megaphone trench warfare of people talking past each other.
That's about as big a screaming Sell Labour! signal as you could hope to find.
Still, I enjoyed the bits about the Tories' 'personal attacks' on Miliband (!), and especially the bit about the false consciousness of the proletariat: "Ed Miliband may envy David Cameron's ratings, but his policies will be popular with voters. They just don't know it yet"
I spoke to a respectable Green Who said '8% is the highest we've seen' But I said 'i'll eat some cold porridge, If you Ecos can romp home in Norwich Or anywhere from Brighton, between'
That's about as big a screaming Sell Labour! signal as you could hope to find.
Still, I enjoyed the bit about the false consciousness of the proletariat: "Ed Miliband may envy David Cameron's ratings, but his policies will be popular with voters. They just don't know it yet"
Strange choice of phrase given that it is associated in politics with Reagan's description of Latinos as Republicans who didn't know it yet. Reagan (and, moreso, subsequent Republicans) failed to grasp how much effort it would take to convince anyone to vote for you even if on paper they ought to support your policies. That seems to be exactly what Polly is doing.
"According to the AFP news agency, Downing Street has said that Mr Modi has accepted an invitation from UK Prime Minister David Cameron to visit Britain" (BBC)
You loveable rogue, Mr Dancer Your praise makes you a bit of a chancer Who's words lift me up Like that beer mug shaped cup You're asking me to fill with some Hansa.
Matthew Holehouse their political correspondent proves it.
"Nigel Farage was accused of being a divisive racist " did James O Brien actually accuse Mr Farage at any point in the interview of being a 'divisive racist' ?
WHO has accused Mr Farage ?
Why does the article not name an actual person who has accused Mr Farage of being racist. I think it far more likely this is classic 'third party' technique, and the Telegraph itself is calling Mr Farage a 'divisive racist'.
FPT: Good afternoon, everyone. vel-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
? Doesn't he want it?
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
I think UKIP are majoring on immigration because these are the EU elections. There isnt much more to it than that.
The EU doesnt control whether we have Grammar schools, it doesnt set our tax rates etc, so why mention those topics? They are irrelevant for this election
What are the other parties talking about in terms of the EU?
The major vote winner regarding the EU is a stop to mass immigration through uncontrolled borders. I would expect UKIP's campaign this time next year to cover a a broader range of policies, but thats not for now
They are odds on favs to win most votes, I think its harsh to call it a turn off because its turned you off
There is a lot more to the EU than immigration. I'm not 100% convinced that people view the EU only in terms of potential uncontrolled immigration.
UKIP are also getting NOTA votes although some of those are leaking to the Greens.
UKIP turned me off because I can remember the BNP and the NF and this most recent campaign pushed the same and only theme which you can dress up or justify as you like: keep foreigners out.
That's not true. They just want the UK to apply the same immigration controls to EU states that they already apply to the rest of the world.
Matthew Holehouse their political correspondent proves it.
"Nigel Farage was accused of being a divisive racist " did James O Brien actually accuse Mr Farage at any point in the interview of being a 'divisive racist' ?
WHO has accused Mr Farage ?
Why does the article not name an actual person who has accused Mr Farage of being racist. I think it far more likely this is classic 'third party' technique, and the Telegraph itself is calling Mr Farage a 'divisive racist'.
Like that great joke:
Employee: Would you sack me if I told you what I think of you? Boss: I might, yes. Employee: But you couldn't sack me if I was only thinking something about you, could you? Boss: of course not. Employee: OK then I think you're a ****.
FPT: Good afternoon, everyone. vel-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
? Doesn't he want it?
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
I think UKIP are majoring on immigration because these are the EU elections. There isnt much more to it than that.
The EU doesnt control whether we have Grammar schools, it doesnt set our tax rates etc, so why mention those topics? They are irrelevant for this election
What are the other parties talking about in terms of the EU?
The major vote winner regarding the EU is a stop to mass immigration through uncontrolled borders. I would expect UKIP's campaign this time next year to cover a a broader range of policies, but thats not for now
They are odds on favs to win most votes, I think its harsh to call it a turn off because its turned you off
There is a lot more to the EU than immigration. I'm not 100% convinced that people view the EU only in terms of potential uncontrolled immigration.
UKIP are also getting NOTA votes although some of those are leaking to the Greens.
UKIP turned me off because I can remember the BNP and the NF and this most recent campaign pushed the same and only theme which you can dress up or justify as you like: keep foreigners out.
My bad phrasing., apologies.
I meant "there isnt much more to UKIP majoring on immigration at this election than it being the EU election", not "there isnt more to the EU than immigration"
Comments
Colin Furze makes real life Wolverine Claws
Mr. Isam, without commenting on the interview (not interested enough to listen to it) I hope they don't go for Paxman Mark 2. Paxman was full of himself, more interested in catching people out and scalp-hunting than actually interviewing them. His 'interview' with the Jesus and Mo cartoonist was a new low, where he attacked the cartoonist for being 'offensive' and never once raised any point in favour of freedom of speech (not just in the interview but the piece beforehand, there was just one mention of that during the whole Jesus and Mo section).
Not a Robinson fan as political editor but when he was stand-in Newsnight presenter I thought he did a much better job of chairing a discussion than the regulars, and was less full of himself and more measured than them.
On-topic: it appears that the brief blue lead was transient (although probably real, given multiple pollsters pointing towards level-pegging or blue leads). I'm baffled as to why it occurred in the first place, but there we are.
oh and fpt for James O'Brien, should have been:
"Mr Farage - on immigration, how do you explain the similarity in language and tone of your recent leaflet campaign with that of the National Front and the BNP? For a party that seeks to dissociate itself from those racist parties why does UKIP mimic their approach? Although UKIP may not be racist, why wouldn't your leaflets appeal to racists?"
"“Here come de heap big warmy. Bigtime warmy warmy. Is big big hot. Plenty big warm burny hot. Hot! Hot hot! But now not hot. Not hot now. De hot come go, come go. Now Is Coldy Coldy. Is ice. Hot den cold. Frreeeezy ice til hot again. "
and I think that sums the current state of public political opinion up quite well.
This one has a moustache for sure. Golf club president, maybe:
I tell you what Mr Hodges. If UKIP win next week, then I expect you to resign from writing this drivel in the DT. If they lose, I will take my 3 degress (inc. PhD) and my business, and find another country to live and work (outside the EU).
You can fashion your own lovely EU communist dream as you see fit, and I won't be there to harass you. That sounds fair to me. You really make me sick to the stomach.
Marvellous.
Simon Richards @simplysimontfa
The relentless hate campaign against Ukip exceeds even the vile abuse to which Margaret Thatcher was subjected: the politics of the gutter
To be fair, If those were the questions fired at Farage, he should have been able to answer them.
Secondly, any party that talks about controlling immigration gets the same thing thrown at them (Michael Howrds Conservatives "Are you thinking what we are thinking", Gordon Brown "British Jobs For British Workers".
It is difficult for anyone to talk about controlling imigration without gettin the BNP thrown at them by pro immigrationist. It is the cowardly debating technique of attacking a strawman rather than the actual point.
The leaflets wouldnt appeal to racists because they never mention race (or religion come to that)
There are clear lines between UKIP & BNP
BNP want to end all immigration
UKIP want controlled immigration
The other 3 want open door immigration
UKIP are the middle ground
BNP want to repatriate immigrants
UKIP dont
BNP make a distinction between people on the basis of skin colour
UKIP dont
Andrew NEill must have ruled himself out of the NEwsnight job surely? He wouldnt be 33/1 if he was a runner, should be fav
Local Council Efficiency
10.30 am: Cabin Cruiser catches fire about 1m offshore.
10.45 am: Man rescued from boat by lifeboat.
11.15 am: Rockets on board start exploding into the sky. Also danger of gas canisters exploding.
Police close off road adjacent to beach.
1.30 pm Boat sinks.
2.10 pm Police belatedly open the road.
2.15 pm: Council men (6) arrive with 3 vans and 1 lorry to close off the road.
What had they been doing all day - watching the soaps and daytime tv?
2.25:pm: Council men remove road closed signs and return to depot to sign off for the week.
And anyway, who cares what he does with his collection of Philadelphia soul music?
twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/467292253082640385/photo/1
This is such a lazy caricature, generally made by people who have never set foot in a golf club.
All golf clubs bars I've been to are pretty quiet places, generally because the members tend to be out playing.....err.....golf.
I've been in a few, but I've never heard politics talked in any of them.
"Ed says that they've got an inbuilt advantage that means that even if they lose the popular vote, they can still take power. Ed asked if I understood and I said, "Yeah – I'm from Chicago." Like Michelle says, "We're so freakin' popular out there, even the dead vote for us.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2014_(United_Kingdom)#London_polls
FPT - Lansley's a possibility, true. Yeo would fit the grunatic criteria, but he's not a future Cabinet Minister (and wasn't in 2010). I didn't have Hague down as a greenie - but perhaps I am wrong?
David Alexrod @DavidAlexrod
Great to see UK Labor leader @DMiliband is following me. Looking forward to working for you. pic.twitter.com/qJGh3Ufklo
Retweeted by Guido Fawkes
Them Romanians
Coming over here, taking
Our jobs. Send ‘em back.
Oi LibLabCon scum!
Repaint our trains in proper
Colours you BASTARDS
I have also come up with a clerihew:
Nigel Farage
We should not disparage.
Although James O’Brien socked it to him right up the shitter
He kept his temper and isn’t bitter.
Do any other PBers enjoy, as I do, composing eccentric verse forms about protest parties?
Do you know Camerons immigration policy in a Tory majority then? Can you tell?
Haikus, coming over here -
we've got LIMERICKS
When you were a nipper
When you misbehaved
Were you hit with a slipper?
http://www.iea.org.uk/publications/research/the-iea-brexit-prize-a-blueprint-for-britain-openness-not-isolation
Now I'm not so sure.
They are saying IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION...
And hence the similarity between UKIP those other two parties. Who knew or knows what the BNP policy on corporation tax is? The problem UKIP faces is that they seem obsessed. Everything Farage said in that interview was fine IMO - he answered the questions but he didn't address (and O'Brien didn't press) the central theme - UKIP has become a natural home for those who see immigration as their overriding concern. Their only concern perhaps. That is the danger.
And, for the nth time, having been in principle a supporter of UKIP's right to have the immigration (and EU) debate, looking at their current campaign leaflets really shocked me. It put them big style on the wrong side of the line between debate and dog whistle ugly politics.
And for the (n+1)th time it is why I am keen that they move on and broaden their approach to other pressing political matters.
Because if they don't then the suspicion will remain that they quite like that association. You cannot produce an election leaflet and conduct a campaign which only mentions immigration and then wonder why everyone screams racist. Today you just can't.
I understand the distinctions you make between BNP/UKIP but really Sam, do you think the bulk of the electorate get the nuances?
He's one of them shape shifting
lizard BASTARDS, duuuuh!
By failing to bring back the birch.
All villains should get a damn good thrashin'
Except expenses-fiddling UKIP MEPs, among whom dishonesty is in fashion.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100271837/climate-change-its-time-to-declare-a-truce-in-the-war-between-warmists-and-deniers/
There once was a Kipper called Sam
Who'd never touch New Zealand lamb
Nothing foreign for him
Which kept him quite slim
As he only ate Somerset ham
E.g. use "rape" in the wrong context - hang him!
UKIP is like a swarm of political in-correctness, which must be like scratching fingernails down a black chalk board to these people. And they respond accordingly.
But never can cause any damage
As much they bait
He just sits and waits
Til they look like a fuckwitted cabbage
Tim Montgomerie ✔ @TimMontgomerie
No party in modern history has come under such sustained attack and misrepresentation as Ukip - writes @OborneTweets http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10830882/British-politics-is-broken-and-only-Nigel-Farage-is-profiting.html …
Castrated a few Mau Mau suspects or terminated some Armalite-toting bog trotters would be more the thing.
I'm walking around with a permanent....
...smile on my face!
My view is that on that particular point he is wrong: I'd put the difficulty as 'High, verging on impossible'.
Others might disagree, but no-one can really know - except for one thing: the Kippers are living in an Alex-Salmond-style cloud cuckoo land, convincing themselves that they can get everything they want and the people they are negotiating with will have zero say in the matter.
It is the total failure to address reality on points such as this which is my principal gripe with UKIP. Where is the grown-up discussion of Brexit? The article you cited is a good starting point, but if UKIP want to convince people like me - and I am quite persuadable, as I've said before I think the balance is shifting towards Out - I need answers grounded in reality, not la-la land.
The EU doesnt control whether we have Grammar schools, it doesnt set our tax rates etc, so why mention those topics? They are irrelevant for this election
What are the other parties talking about in terms of the EU?
The major vote winner regarding the EU is a stop to mass immigration through uncontrolled borders. I would expect UKIP's campaign this time next year to cover a a broader range of policies, but thats not for now
They are odds on favs to win most votes, I think its harsh to call it a turn off because its turned you off
Interesting, given Boris isn;t one to generally shy away from the media.
you need a seasonal word/theme. melting snow, cherry blossoms, autumn leaves.
otherwise, you have only part of a Tanka.
(You only live twice.
Once when you are born,
and once when you lookdeath in the face:
I suppose your meter has improved since this one. Although you could argue that stretching the point this has some kind of seasonal quality, birth death. but tenuous)
The predictions of those pro-warming (as it were) have been consistently wrong (cf the IPCC witnessing a plateau after predicting a rise then increasing their own self-confidence from 90% to 95%), and have other problems with credibility (the East Anglian e-mails and hockey stick spring to mind. Also, using ice cores does prove a correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature, but if an actual scientist thinks correlation means causation then they need to be beaten around the head with a dictionary and sent back to scientist school).
There are big areas of overlap between what we should do if warmists are right and if they are wrong (which I think they are), such as promoting energy efficiency and the like.
But the idea of truce is nonsense, as is scepticism somehow being bad. Science is all about competing theories, using evidence and new discoveries to support or disprove previous beliefs and then amend theories to take them into account.
This stuff really is thinner than Salmond's currency policy.
You could make a good argument for "groupthink" though.
Oh dear, dont think that of me!
I am not one of these "British is best" types, far from it
& I dont eat mammals!
Just as the environment shapes us, so do we shape the environment. If we left the EU that wouldn't only create an interesting situation for us, but one for the EU as well.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ukips-nigel-farage-pulled-out-of-interview-with-london-live-because-tv-studio-would-not-provide-professional-makeup-artist-9382613.html
Mr taffy,just to prove your point ;-)
Is only a part of the story.
Because despite it, we've still had crossover,
Making us favourites in marginals like Dover,
But a majority? That's sheer jackanory!
So far two UKIPers have been on @LondonLive and had private conversations leaked to Lebedev papers. How not to run a TV channel.
That's a very interesting contribution Patrick. All of the end-rhymes are in fact assonances. Bravo!
Fair comment. How about this one?
Them gays, getting married,
Causing floods like a spring tide
of Romanians.
The polls find them trapped in a cleft.
For in spite of their lead,
Inspiration they need,
Of which they are clearly bereft.
Check these guys out - globalbritain.co.uk/
UKIP are also getting NOTA votes although some of those are leaking to the Greens.
UKIP turned me off because I can remember the BNP and the NF and this most recent campaign pushed the same and only theme which you can dress up or justify as you like: keep foreigners out.
Is that so bad?
Wait til the nukes land
On Islamabad
Genuine scientific scepticism though is usually the spur to research to remove the area of scepticism or find more data. Climate scepticism though is more akin to a form of nihilism. It doesn't follow the pattern of x doesn't make sense we need to know more about x pattern of science but rather, x doesn't make sense therefore anyone saying x is WRONG and also BAD PEOPLE.
I like scientific scepticism because it leads to better understanding, the other sort is about switching our torch off and leaving the room. Truce is a clumsy description, but I think there needs to be more dialogue and debate between genuine scientific sceptics and proponents and an end to the megaphone trench warfare of people talking past each other.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/16/poll-jitters-axelrod-labour-miliband
That's about as big a screaming Sell Labour! signal as you could hope to find.
Still, I enjoyed the bits about the Tories' 'personal attacks' on Miliband (!), and especially the bit about the false consciousness of the proletariat: "Ed Miliband may envy David Cameron's ratings, but his policies will be popular with voters. They just don't know it yet"
Who said '8% is the highest we've seen'
But I said 'i'll eat some cold porridge,
If you Ecos can romp home in Norwich
Or anywhere from Brighton, between'
Your praise makes you a bit of a chancer
Who's words lift me up
Like that beer mug shaped cup
You're asking me to fill with some Hansa.
So I went to have a look at it, but it turned out to be from "An Independence From Europe".
Initially she didn't believe me when I pointed it out as it "appeared" to be from UKIP.
This confusion is going to cost UKIP. But how much?
Peter Oborne makes a point about UKIP's treatment in the media, front page of DT online:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10836159/Nigel-Farage-in-car-crash-interview-as-he-faces-Ukip-racism-claims.html
Matthew Holehouse their political correspondent proves it.
"Nigel Farage was accused of being a divisive racist " did James O Brien actually accuse Mr Farage at any point in the interview of being a 'divisive racist' ?
WHO has accused Mr Farage ?
Why does the article not name an actual person who has accused Mr Farage of being racist. I think it far more likely this is classic 'third party' technique, and the Telegraph itself is calling Mr Farage a 'divisive racist'.
Employee: Would you sack me if I told you what I think of you?
Boss: I might, yes.
Employee: But you couldn't sack me if I was only thinking something about you, could you?
Boss: of course not.
Employee: OK then I think you're a ****.
I meant "there isnt much more to UKIP majoring on immigration at this election than it being the EU election", not "there isnt more to the EU than immigration"