Another week where ICM just screams wrong. Labour -12 last week was bonkers, Kippers in 3rd this week the same. It's not that one pollster is right and the others wrong, I just thing they struggle because they are trying to transpose 3 party GE votes 4 years ago into a 4 party world now and things are very very different.
Indeed. I wonder if ICM have lost the plot along the way. Their indyref polling is also a little suspect, and they admit they have problems doing the modelling.
As you say, perhaps ICM in particular find it hard to deal with multi-party politics after decades of Lib, Lab, Con.
In Scotland at least all the polls are struggling to handle the changes from the old model
The tone has not changed at all. All that has changed is the way the media and the other parties are spinning what is being said. That is how effective smear campaigns work and this one is a doozy.
In the past I've said I don't support Farage because I think he's a self-publicist and vain man with poor judgement who would make a terrible PM. I've not said that he's a racist, although he is comfortable leading a party that attracts a lot of racists.
His latest comments "you know the difference" gets very close to a very unpleasant line. Yes, I'm sure Sam, you are right, that he was stating the difference between a German family and a bunch of Romanian men, but most people won't pick that up. It was a very clear dog whistle.
The man may not be a racist himself, but he's comfortable with fronting a racist message.
(as an aside, the Romanian Orthodox Church uses our family church on Saturdays - about 5 years ago there was a marked change in the community with an influx of young men who caused a lot of difficulties for the local residents)
Another week where ICM just screams wrong. Labour -12 last week was bonkers, Kippers in 3rd this week the same. It's not that one pollster is right and the others wrong, I just thing they struggle because they are trying to transpose 3 party GE votes 4 years ago into a 4 party world now and things are very very different.
Indeed. I wonder if ICM have lost the plot along the way. Their indyref polling is also a little suspect, and they admit they have problems doing the modelling.
As you say, perhaps ICM in particular find it hard to deal with multi-party politics after decades of Lib, Lab, Con.
I'd say so. There's logical reasons (imo) why the Ukip score should be "base level + high peaks" so I wonder if they poll one area and it seems too high (even though it isn't) and the next area seems too low (even though it isn't) so the polling companies are stuck trying to guess what the accurate weighting is.
I'm wondering if these UKIP poll ratings that suggest them winning easily aren't more of a problem than a benefit. I mean the expectation is now ingrained that they will romp home, so if they only scrape to the top of the poll it won't look quite so impressive. If however ICM is broadly correct and they come in third then that's going to really be hard to recover from. I think that these poll numbers are really a double edged sword and perhaps the worst Farage mistake has been failing to keep a lid on expectations.
That's an overly simplistic analysis and one that breeds complacency.
A large proportion of the population feels disenfranchised and facing a bleak economic future. UKIP is not the answer, but that doesn't mean that the questions can be ignored.
I'm wondering if these UKIP poll ratings that suggest them winning easily aren't more of a problem than a benefit. I mean the expectation is now ingrained that they will romp home, so if they only scrape to the top of the poll it won't look quite so impressive. If however ICM is broadly correct and they come in third then that's going to really be hard to recover from. I think that these poll numbers are really a double edged sword and perhaps the worst Farage mistake has been failing to keep a lid on expectations.
If you want to bet on ICM being correct, you can probably get good odds.
The tone has not changed at all. All that has changed is the way the media and the other parties are spinning what is being said. That is how effective smear campaigns work and this one is a doozy.
In the past I've said I don't support Farage because I think he's a self-publicist and vain man with poor judgement who would make a terrible PM. I've not said that he's a racist, although he is comfortable leading a party that attracts a lot of racists.
His latest comments "you know the difference" gets very close to a very unpleasant line. Yes, I'm sure Sam, you are right, that he was stating the difference between a German family and a bunch of Romanian men, but most people won't pick that up. It was a very clear dog whistle.
The man may not be a racist himself, but he's comfortable with fronting a racist message.
(as an aside, the Romanian Orthodox Church uses our family church on Saturdays - about 5 years ago there was a marked change in the community with an influx of young men who caused a lot of difficulties for the local residents)
UKIP = BNP lite
Farage got himself in a pickle because he was clearly thinking about "Roma" not "Romanians" yet felt obliged to euphemise, for whatever reasons.
It was foolish talk, and even if he didn't mean it, the tone strayed perilously close to *sounding* racist.
He is lucky that right now he is close to untouchable as he is attracting all the protest votes, and he is personally quite likeable (or so it seems); plus the EU vote is not crucial for most people.
This kind of error would, however, be much more damaging in a general election. Again it underlines how UKIP are dangerously reliant on the bonhomie and charisma of one man, who must surely get very very knackered, and will therefore make mistakes.
They need lieutenants to step up. If they can't find them, UKIP will shrivel.
iSam mentioned Suzanne Evans the other day. She does seem to come over well on telly.
The euro polls tonight have a 10 out of 10 voting certainty of around 50%, similar with 2009 polls with a real turnout of 34%, that maybe ICMs weakness.
I'm wondering if these UKIP poll ratings that suggest them winning easily aren't more of a problem than a benefit. I mean the expectation is now ingrained that they will romp home, so if they only scrape to the top of the poll it won't look quite so impressive. If however ICM is broadly correct and they come in third then that's going to really be hard to recover from. I think that these poll numbers are really a double edged sword and perhaps the worst Farage mistake has been failing to keep a lid on expectations.
If you want to bet on ICM being correct, you can probably get good odds.
I'm just musing that the only party that has anything much to lose is UKIP and that's not a position you should want to be in.
Another thought on a UKIP win - and I do expect them to walk it. The "party of in" gets wiped out to one or two MEPs or hopefully "zilch" as Cleggasm put it. The party of "only we can give you a referendum" come third. For the coalition partners their Euro nightmare surely gets untenable over the summer.
The Tories have banged on and on about their cast iron guarantee of a referendum and likely will finish a long way behind the Kippers who the Tories insisted are irrelevant on Euro referendum issues. Shapps Green was on Question Time a couple of weeks ago and was received in silence every time he banged that drum. Their foaming dog fever rebels on the backbenches are likely to demand more than a referendum rejected by the electorate.
And the yellow pox? Clegg will be resigned, we either get Beaker or Farron and the coalition behaves in a way that makes the recent spat over schools policy look like comradely supportive behaviour.
The tone has not changed at all. All that has changed is the way the media and the other parties are spinning what is being said. That is how effective smear campaigns work and this one is a doozy.
In the past I've said I don't support Farage because I think he's a self-publicist and vain man with poor judgement who would make a terrible PM. I've not said that he's a racist, although he is comfortable leading a party that attracts a lot of racists.
His latest comments "you know the difference" gets very close to a very unpleasant line. Yes, I'm sure Sam, you are right, that he was stating the difference between a German family and a bunch of Romanian men, but most people won't pick that up. It was a very clear dog whistle.
The man may not be a racist himself, but he's comfortable with fronting a racist message.
(as an aside, the Romanian Orthodox Church uses our family church on Saturdays - about 5 years ago there was a marked change in the community with an influx of young men who caused a lot of difficulties for the local residents)
UKIP = BNP lite
Farage got himself in a pickle because he was clearly thinking about "Roma" not "Romanians" yet felt obliged to euphemise, for whatever reasons.
It was foolish talk, and even if he didn't mean it, the tone strayed perilously close to *sounding* racist.
He is lucky that right now he is close to untouchable as he is attracting all the protest votes, and he is personally quite likeable (or so it seems); plus the EU vote is not crucial for most people.
This kind of error would, however, be much more damaging in a general election. Again it underlines how UKIP are dangerously reliant on the bonhomie and charisma of one man, who must surely get very very knackered, and will therefore make mistakes.
They need lieutenants to step up. If they can't find them, UKIP will shrivel.
The YouGov polling seems to have the majority of the voters agreeing with him.
O/T .World Cup betting.I've decided to support Uruguay at 28-1.I fear unless England conquer Italy,the inevitable defeat against the mighty Suarez will mean England won't qualify.I also believe Uruguay has the best political leader in the world,a 78 year old known as "Pepe".He will provide the inspiration for victory.The UK could do with such a fine leader of his country.The closest UK comparison is Dennis Skinner,a great man in his own right.
10 Reasons to Love Uruguay’s President José Mujica,
Another thought on a UKIP win - and I do expect them to walk it. The "party of in" gets wiped out to one or two MEPs or hopefully "zilch" as Cleggasm put it. The party of "only we can give you a referendum" come third. For the coalition partners their Euro nightmare surely gets untenable over the summer.
The Tories have banged on and on about their cast iron guarantee of a referendum and likely will finish a long way behind the Kippers who the Tories insisted are irrelevant on Euro referendum issues. Shapps Green was on Question Time a couple of weeks ago and was received in silence every time he banged that drum. Their foaming dog fever rebels on the backbenches are likely to demand more than a referendum rejected by the electorate.
And the yellow pox? Clegg will be resigned, we either get Beaker or Farron and the coalition behaves in a way that makes the recent spat over schools policy look like comradely supportive behaviour.
Its going to be fun!
"The party of Out" winning, and "the party of in" getting zero MEPs would be perfect.
I'm wondering if these UKIP poll ratings that suggest them winning easily aren't more of a problem than a benefit. I mean the expectation is now ingrained that they will romp home, so if they only scrape to the top of the poll it won't look quite so impressive. If however ICM is broadly correct and they come in third then that's going to really be hard to recover from. I think that these poll numbers are really a double edged sword and perhaps the worst Farage mistake has been failing to keep a lid on expectations.
If you want to bet on ICM being correct, you can probably get good odds.
I'm just musing that the only party that has anything much to lose is UKIP and that's not a position you should want to be in.
Nah. I think if UKIP come a close second they can still present that as a modest triumph, and that will be fine. Remember they were a VERY distant second in 2009 (which was itself their best performance ever).
Their only problem is if they come third. That would look bad. But it is unlikely.
"Modest triumph" perhaps, but surely UKIP want a game-changing performance ahead of the GE where they have so far struggled.
Economic policy rating gap closed significantly in that Comres poll, so it's definitely not an unfriendly sample for Labour (as only devout Labour folk could possibly pretend they have any confidence in those two).
Mr Cameron's 'most important goal' is not repatriating powers from the EU to the UK, it's rephrasing a sentence in the Treaty.
I'm sure no-one will think that's a pantomime (™ SeanT) renegotiation. Serious statesman at work.
I don't understand your opposition. Surely you understand the value of guiding principles like "ever closer union" or "Big Society" or "One Nation Labour" in politics, which is what Cameron is engaged in.
Mr Cameron's 'most important goal' is not repatriating powers from the EU to the UK, it's rephrasing a sentence in the Treaty.
I'm sure no-one will think that's a pantomime (™ SeanT) renegotiation. Serious statesman at work.
I don't understand your opposition. Surely you understand the value of guiding principles like "ever closer union" or "Big Society" or "One Nation Labour" in politics, which is what Cameron is engaged in.
Mr Cameron intends to pass powers over Justice and Home Affairs from the UK to the EU after the EU Parliament election.
If he had any intention of arresting, or reversing the centralisation of power in Brussels he would not be doing that.
Shoreditch liberal-trendy sneering crap like this just makes me want to vote UKIP, and I don't actually support UKIP.
God knows what effect it has on the voters out there, beyond the M25.
Has there ever been a more counter-productive campaign than the smearfest against Farage & Co?
I think UKIP's opponents would be far better off concentrating on the many flaws in their arguments and asking them about a wider range of policies (which are of course interconnected with the issue of the EU).
The best take down of Nick Griffin, wasn't the QT show trial, it was Iain Dale. And I AM NOT IN ANYWAY COMPARING FARAGE TO GRIFFIN.
What you have to remember is Farage knows all people are going to ask him is EU, EU, anti-immigrant, etc, in the same way as Griffin knows that the only questions he is ever going to get is "are you a racist", and thus 99% of the time they have well drilled answers.
Dale mullered Griffin, because he did the opposite. He asked Griffin lots of questions which were if you got elected, how would you renationalise everything. How would you deal with x, y and z, with the race issue thrown into the mix. It completely stumped Griffin, and made him look very silly without calling him a racist.
Mr Cameron's 'most important goal' is not repatriating powers from the EU to the UK, it's rephrasing a sentence in the Treaty.
I'm sure no-one will think that's a pantomime (™ SeanT) renegotiation. Serious statesman at work.
I don't understand your opposition. Surely you understand the value of guiding principles like "ever closer union" or "Big Society" or "One Nation Labour" in politics, which is what Cameron is engaged in.
Mr Cameron intends to pass powers over Justice and Home Affairs from the UK to the EU after the EU Parliament election.
If he had any intention of arresting, or reversing the centralisation of power in Brussels he would not be doing that.
"In September 2012, the Prime Minister announced that the Government intended to exercise the right conferred exclusively on the UK by the Lisbon Treaty to opt out of EU police and criminal justice measures adopted before that Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009."
The UK government is now looking at at a partial opt-in, based on whether the power in most effectively kept here or transferred to Brussels. There's nothing particularly Europhilic about that line of reasoning. Certainly if Cameron rejected the European project in toto he would be acting inconsistently with that - but all he's said is that some powers currently exercised by Brussels would be better left to member states.
The tone has not changed at all. All that has changed is the way the media and the other parties are spinning what is being said. That is how effective smear campaigns work and this one is a doozy.
In the past I've said I don't support Farage because I think he's a self-publicist and vain man with poor judgement who would make a terrible PM. I've not said that he's a racist, although he is comfortable leading a party that attracts a lot of racists.
His latest comments "you know the difference" gets very close to a very unpleasant line. Yes, I'm sure Sam, you are right, that he was stating the difference between a German family and a bunch of Romanian men, but most people won't pick that up. It was a very clear dog whistle.
The man may not be a racist himself, but he's comfortable with fronting a racist message.
(as an aside, the Romanian Orthodox Church uses our family church on Saturdays - about 5 years ago there was a marked change in the community with an influx of young men who caused a lot of difficulties for the local residents)
Mr Cameron's 'most important goal' is not repatriating powers from the EU to the UK, it's rephrasing a sentence in the Treaty.
I'm sure no-one will think that's a pantomime (™ SeanT) renegotiation. Serious statesman at work.
I don't understand your opposition. Surely you understand the value of guiding principles like "ever closer union" or "Big Society" or "One Nation Labour" in politics, which is what Cameron is engaged in.
Mr Cameron intends to pass powers over Justice and Home Affairs from the UK to the EU after the EU Parliament election.
If he had any intention of arresting, or reversing the centralisation of power in Brussels he would not be doing that.
"In September 2012, the Prime Minister announced that the Government intended to exercise the right conferred exclusively on the UK by the Lisbon Treaty to opt out of EU police and criminal justice measures adopted before that Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009."
The UK government is now looking at at a partial opt-in, based on whether the power in most effectively kept here or transferred to Brussels. There's nothing particularly Europhilic about that line of reasoning. Certainly if Cameron rejected the European project in toto he would be acting inconsistently with that - but all he's said is that some powers currently exercised by Brussels would be better left to member states.
Shoreditch liberal-trendy sneering crap like this just makes me want to vote UKIP, and I don't actually support UKIP.
God knows what effect it has on the voters out there, beyond the M25.
Has there ever been a more counter-productive campaign than the smearfest against Farage & Co?
Sean
The video is mild compared with the war going on on twitter.
Lastest tack is the revival of Professor Alan Sked's allegation in 2005 that Nigel Farage used the 'n word' when addressing a UKIP group of MEPs in the EP. Reported at the time by Nick Cohen (who else?) in the Guardian who based his article on an original scoop in the Mail.
What effect will it have on voting in the EP elections next Thursday? It may well boost the Kipper vote, but that is much less important than ensuring that those who do vote for the party are fully aware of the statements made by its leadership, elected representatives, party officers, activists and supporters.
Vote UKIP by all means, but know for whom it is you are voting.
Mr Cameron's 'most important goal' is not repatriating powers from the EU to the UK, it's rephrasing a sentence in the Treaty.
In my negotiator days, I have flown thousands of miles for umpteen meetings to rephrase a sentence in an agreement.
Usually because there was a vast amount of cash turning on that wording.
This wording is meaningless. It's a trivial cosmetic change. There has been a transfer of real powers from the member states to the EU. A renegotiation should be aiming for repatriation of some of those powers. This is not.
I think Laddies have just suspended their TriCast market...
Ladbrokes have tonight taken down a number of their European Election markets - understandable I suppose in view of the disparity between the polls. Hopefully these will reappear tomorrow/Monday.
"In September 2012, the Prime Minister announced that the Government intended to exercise the right conferred exclusively on the UK by the Lisbon Treaty to opt out of EU police and criminal justice measures adopted before that Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009."
The UK government is now looking at at a partial opt-in, based on whether the power in most effectively kept here or transferred to Brussels. There's nothing particularly Europhilic about that line of reasoning. Certainly if Cameron rejected the European project in toto he would be acting inconsistently with that - but all he's said is that some powers currently exercised by Brussels would be better left to member states.
That's just spin: clearly it's in UKIP's interest to play down the importance of 100 opted out of and play up the importance of the 35 opted into.
According to the European Scrutiny Committee (which, as the rest of the report makes clear, was sceptical of the government throughout) suggests that of the measures the government does not intend to rejoin:
4 measures which are not in force or are defunct; 21 measures in which continuing UK participation is not required; 10 measures which are likely to be superseded by a subsequent (post-Lisbon) instrument; 2 measures which present a significant risk of infraction (in particular the reciprocal searching of each others' databases for DNA Profiles - hardly nothing) and ~60 Measures which the Government does not intend to rejoin as a matter of policy or principle.
Stephan Shakespeare @StephanShaxper May 16 Given some tweets, let me say: the esteemed Lynton Crosby has never been a director of YouGov. In fact he's a director of a rival company!
Evening all and I see the polls are all over the place. Just a thought, if Thursday does indeed to be very bloody for our LibDem chums, might Nick Clegg suggest to Cammo that on dissolution of the coalition he appoints Cleggie to the forthcoming Euro Commissioner post? The by-election in Sheffield just before the GE would be a cracker.
"In September 2012, the Prime Minister announced that the Government intended to exercise the right conferred exclusively on the UK by the Lisbon Treaty to opt out of EU police and criminal justice measures adopted before that Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009."
The UK government is now looking at at a partial opt-in, based on whether the power in most effectively kept here or transferred to Brussels. There's nothing particularly Europhilic about that line of reasoning. Certainly if Cameron rejected the European project in toto he would be acting inconsistently with that - but all he's said is that some powers currently exercised by Brussels would be better left to member states.
The video is mild compared with the war going on on twitter.
Lastest tack is the revival of Professor Alan Sked's allegation in 2005 that Nigel Farage used the 'n word' when addressing a UKIP group of MEPs in the EP. Reported at the time by Nick Cohen (who else?) in the Guardian who based his article on an original scoop in the Mail.
What effect will it have on voting in the EP elections next Thursday? It may well boost the Kipper vote, but that is much less important than ensuring that those who do vote for the party are fully aware of the statements made by its leadership, elected representatives, party officers, activists and supporters.
Vote UKIP by all means, but know for whom it is you are voting.
It's just pathetic drivel: such an obvious, desperate attempt to abort a growing party that threatens the cosy liberal Westminster consensus.
Feck off. I want no part of it. Given time, UKIP could grow into a sensible populist non-racist rightwing party that represents the 15-25% of patriotic, old fashioned, rightwing voters that right now feel entirely disenfranchised.
This would be GOOD for democracy (even if bad for your ridiculous party). It is WRONG that these people are, right now, entirely unrepresented; it is wrong that - as per my article - views held, on important issues, by 50% of the British public, are simply ignored by a metropolitan elite.
I don't support UKIP, but the democrat in me wishes them well next week. I hope they give all you wankers a total fright.
I don't think the question is whether UKIP is harming democracy by standing - they aren't - but rather whether characterising UKIP as racist or other "pathetic drivel" (and I agree, it does look desperate) is really undermining democracy or strengthening it.
There will be people who simply don't care that Farage says he'd feel uncomfortable living next door to Romanians, or that some of UKIP's members or candidates have said X, Y or Z. If UKIP do well on the basis of those votes, then I have little to complain about and I think that's what you would be content to see.
But I don't see that this means that other parties shouldn't highlight these facts. If you're UKIP, you can go out and do the same, or you can say that it doesn't matter or you can distance yourself - that is all a manifestation of democracy, not a subversion of it.
"In September 2012, the Prime Minister announced that the Government intended to exercise the right conferred exclusively on the UK by the Lisbon Treaty to opt out of EU police and criminal justice measures adopted before that Treaty entered into force on 1 December 2009."
The UK government is now looking at at a partial opt-in, based on whether the power in most effectively kept here or transferred to Brussels. There's nothing particularly Europhilic about that line of reasoning. Certainly if Cameron rejected the European project in toto he would be acting inconsistently with that - but all he's said is that some powers currently exercised by Brussels would be better left to member states.
That's just spin: clearly it's in UKIP's interest to play down the importance of 100 opted out of and play up the importance of the 35 opted into.
I saw Daniel Hannan at an MEP debate recently. He was appalled that the Conservatives intend to opt into the European Arrest Warrant.
Why shouldn't he? Whether or not the UK should opt into any particular measure is a debate worth having: indeed it is the debate that any Conservative should welcome, including Cameron; the idea of powers being handed to Brussels as carte blanche was what they characterise Labour as doing and what Cameron's "better Europe" looks like.
The idea that this government has achieved nothing by opt-ing out and in again - as you argue - is quite different.
Evening all and I see the polls are all over the place. Just a thought, if Thursday does indeed to be very bloody for our LibDem chums, might Nick Clegg suggest to Cammo that on dissolution of the coalition he appoints Cleggie to the forthcoming Euro Commissioner post? The by-election in Sheffield just before the GE would be a cracker.
But why would Cameron want to do Clegg any favours? - If any one factor prevents the Tories from winning the 2015 GE it will surely be the LibDems' obduracy as regards agreeing to support overdue boundary changes.
Do not confuse ICM online with ICM phone - which should be treated as two totally different pollsters. Tonight's poll is online
Oh my, Mike. ICM, the once golden boy of pollsters, is up the creek without a paddle: either that or it's got too many paddles, all paddling like mad in different directions.
I have felt all along that the imminence of the Euro poll is distorting all of the current polling but I'm surprised to see such big variations betweent diffenrent companies and between Telephone v On-line. Very difficult to know the pblic mood right now although I suspect UKIP will do well next week as the voters give a collective FU to the mainstream parties. It's a little odd that the hostility to Clegg and the LDs is so pronounced but I think this may worsen as we move to the real GE next year. They have no strategy for the transition from protest party to party of government and it shows badly. The failure of Labour to learn the lessons of why they lost and the inability of the Miliband leadership to move beyond thier north London luvvie comfort zone could be key in giving the Tories a shout next year ,especially if the ecnomic improvement continues.
Seems to be some daft polls around again tonight. Even the most blinkered Labourite doesn't believe the Tories are in the 20s.
To be honest, I give up. Probably best to wait until well after the Euros before we make any betting decisions - the polls are all over the shop.
Well said. Some pollsters are going to have egg on their faces next weekend and some PBers are going to have considerably lighter pockets for betting with their hearts and not with their heads. I expect the Euros to be either UKIP/Tory/Lab or Tory/UKIP/Lab but given that there is going to be a scramble for the last couple of seats in most regions, it could go any way.
The council elections will be far more interesting. We know how Labour is expected to do by the experts. If they don't achieve the expectations, there will be considerable rumblings by Labour MPs and candidates where they don't "win" next week.
Lots of bankers doing "porridge" are there ? Care to list a few of the better known ones? Seems to me, their greed and flaunting of basic laws of decency and even financial reason caused the crash, but everyone else, the immigrants, the poor, the sick, etc, get to carry the blame, and the rest of the poor sods get to bail the bankers sorry arses out. As a student of history, you will point out that this is always the case, And me as a mere commoner. will point out that it still isn't right.
that is all a manifestation of democracy, not a subversion of it.
There's something strange going on. Any critic of UKIP is now denounced as a stooge of the 'Liberal Establishment' and/or (if they're a non-Leftist) a traitor to the Right. This is unnervingly reminiscent of the Trotskyist's attitude towards Labour in the 1970s - that of the visionary warrior untainted by false consciousness. It would be interesting to hear from UKIP supporters if this is how they regard themselves.
That's just spin: clearly it's in UKIP's interest to play down the importance of 100 opted out of and play up the importance of the 35 opted into.
According to the European Scrutiny Committee (which, as the rest of the report makes clear, was sceptical of the government throughout) suggests that of the measures the government does not intend to rejoin:
4 measures which are not in force or are defunct; 21 measures in which continuing UK participation is not required; 10 measures which are likely to be superseded by a subsequent (post-Lisbon) instrument; 2 measures which present a significant risk of infraction (in particular the reciprocal searching of each others' databases for DNA Profiles - hardly nothing) and ~60 Measures which the Government does not intend to rejoin as a matter of policy or principle.
You omit the crucial point that in respect of every measure we opt back in to, we will be obliged to accept the jurisdiction of the CJEU and the liability to infraction proceedings by the Commission. That is a highly significant transfer of sovereignty to the Brussels and Luxembourg, which the government intends to effect without even passing an Act of Parliament. Yet Cameron claimed that every transfer of powers to the European Union would require a referendum...
Comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2009_(United_Kingdom)
http://www.icmresearch.com/pdfs/2009_may_suntele_euro_poll.pdf
A large proportion of the population feels disenfranchised and facing a bleak economic future. UKIP is not the answer, but that doesn't mean that the questions can be ignored.
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 30m
Is it just possible that there are a fair share of bigots amongst those who accuse UKIP of being a racist party?
Is it possible? You bet there is!
Is it corect that we have polls tonight which have UKIP, Labour and the Tories - ahead in one or the other !
The Tories have banged on and on about their cast iron guarantee of a referendum and likely will finish a long way behind the Kippers who the Tories insisted are irrelevant on Euro referendum issues. Shapps Green was on Question Time a couple of weeks ago and was received in silence every time he banged that drum. Their foaming dog fever rebels on the backbenches are likely to demand more than a referendum rejected by the electorate.
And the yellow pox? Clegg will be resigned, we either get Beaker or Farron and the coalition behaves in a way that makes the recent spat over schools policy look like comradely supportive behaviour.
Its going to be fun!
http://yougov.co.uk/publicopinion/archive/10159/
10 Reasons to Love Uruguay’s President José Mujica,
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/15/10-reasons-to-love-uruguays-president-jose-mujica/
I've just put £250 on Helmer to win Newark @ 4/1 I think he now has a good chance.
EDIT
False alarm. They're back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=78QPZmOzSus&app=desktop
The comments from Gunther Krichbaum, head of the German government's committee on EU affairs, will cast serious doubt on Cameron's ability to deliver on a pledge that he said a week ago was the "most important" change he wanted to see in the UK's relations with Europe.
I've just put £250 on Helmer to win Newark @ 4/1 I think he now has a good chance.
Nice tribute to Lib Dem campaigning, he'll be doing bar charts next.
Mr Cameron's 'most important goal' is not repatriating powers from the EU to the UK, it's rephrasing a sentence in the Treaty.
I'm sure no-one will think that's a pantomime (™ SeanT) renegotiation. Serious statesman at work.
The negative press UKIP is getting right now will not harm their voting intention.
However, it will firm up anti-UKIP tactical voting.
This is the real danger for UKIP in an FPTP world.
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE|A336872231&v=2.1&u=palo_alto&it=r&inPS=true&prodId=ITOF&userGroupName=palo_alto&p=ITOF&digest=a57a1063d73687c0cd03ad199af6b441&rssr=rss
If he had any intention of arresting, or reversing the centralisation of power in Brussels he would not be doing that.
The best take down of Nick Griffin, wasn't the QT show trial, it was Iain Dale. And I AM NOT IN ANYWAY COMPARING FARAGE TO GRIFFIN.
What you have to remember is Farage knows all people are going to ask him is EU, EU, anti-immigrant, etc, in the same way as Griffin knows that the only questions he is ever going to get is "are you a racist", and thus 99% of the time they have well drilled answers.
Dale mullered Griffin, because he did the opposite. He asked Griffin lots of questions which were if you got elected, how would you renationalise everything. How would you deal with x, y and z, with the race issue thrown into the mix. It completely stumped Griffin, and made him look very silly without calling him a racist.
The UK government is now looking at at a partial opt-in, based on whether the power in most effectively kept here or transferred to Brussels. There's nothing particularly Europhilic about that line of reasoning. Certainly if Cameron rejected the European project in toto he would be acting inconsistently with that - but all he's said is that some powers currently exercised by Brussels would be better left to member states.
Like Seant's blog, just then and now.
(See from 9m28s into the video below.)
http://youtu.be/c3JnIw50zL8?t=9m28s
The video is mild compared with the war going on on twitter.
Lastest tack is the revival of Professor Alan Sked's allegation in 2005 that Nigel Farage used the 'n word' when addressing a UKIP group of MEPs in the EP. Reported at the time by Nick Cohen (who else?) in the Guardian who based his article on an original scoop in the Mail.
2005 Cohen article here: http://bit.ly/1sEYVsQ
2014 Twitter revival here: http://bit.ly/1jUqlKV
What effect will it have on voting in the EP elections next Thursday? It may well boost the Kipper vote, but that is much less important than ensuring that those who do vote for the party are fully aware of the statements made by its leadership, elected representatives, party officers, activists and supporters.
Vote UKIP by all means, but know for whom it is you are voting.
According to the European Scrutiny Committee (which, as the rest of the report makes clear, was sceptical of the government throughout) suggests that of the measures the government does not intend to rejoin:
4 measures which are not in force or are defunct;
21 measures in which continuing UK participation is not required;
10 measures which are likely to be superseded by a subsequent (post-Lisbon) instrument;
2 measures which present a significant risk of infraction (in particular the reciprocal searching of each others' databases for DNA Profiles - hardly nothing) and
~60 Measures which the Government does not intend to rejoin as a matter of policy or principle.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmeuleg/683/68314.htm and following
To be honest, I give up. Probably best to wait until well after the Euros before we make any betting decisions - the polls are all over the shop.
You are a silly billy Avery.
You profess to think "He said it Miss, I heard him, I did, I really did." matters.
We want our Country back.
Given some tweets, let me say: the esteemed Lynton Crosby has never been a director of YouGov. In fact he's a director of a rival company!
2,538 comments
787 shares
502 Facebook
284 Twitter
1 LinkedIn (oddly enough)
"We want our Country back. "
You can have it back once they figure just who actually owns the damned thing.
There will be people who simply don't care that Farage says he'd feel uncomfortable living next door to Romanians, or that some of UKIP's members or candidates have said X, Y or Z. If UKIP do well on the basis of those votes, then I have little to complain about and I think that's what you would be content to see.
But I don't see that this means that other parties shouldn't highlight these facts. If you're UKIP, you can go out and do the same, or you can say that it doesn't matter or you can distance yourself - that is all a manifestation of democracy, not a subversion of it.
Play with it, bite it, break it and toss it out of the pram I suspect.
A vote is no different from any other decision you make in life: you need to take responsibility for its consequences.
The idea that this government has achieved nothing by opt-ing out and in again - as you argue - is quite different.
"A vote is no different from any other decision you make in life: you need to take responsibility for its consequences. "
Except of course when the decision is about a "financial instrument" or money laundering. in which case you find an "entity" to blame?
And what will you do with "our Country" if you do get it back?
BOO
Please pay attention.
The council elections will be far more interesting. We know how Labour is expected to do by the experts. If they don't achieve the expectations, there will be considerable rumblings by Labour MPs and candidates where they don't "win" next week.
Lots of bankers doing "porridge" are there ? Care to list a few of the better known ones?
Seems to me, their greed and flaunting of basic laws of decency and even financial reason caused the crash, but everyone else, the immigrants, the poor, the sick, etc, get to carry the blame, and the rest of the poor sods get to bail the bankers sorry arses out.
As a student of history, you will point out that this is always the case, And me as a mere commoner. will point out that it still isn't right.