How many MP's know the reality of foodbanks? IDS, and quite a few of his fellow cabinet members have not a clue.
Whereas Ed and the opposition cabinet do? I'm not as confident as you appear to be on the issue, as Ed has already demonstrated he does not even have a clue about his own household expenditure.
This broad brush slagging off people is easy, of very little value, but easy. Why do you do so much of it?
I stumbled across a news website this morning which informed me that the last television debate between the five candidates for the European Commission Presidency had taken place.
Was this put on television in the UK?
I saw a clip and was surprised I recognised four of the five candidates. Beyond the Greek Opposition leader Tsipras they all seem like European insiders - Schulz, Juncker and Verhofstadt. The only one I did not recognise was the Green candidate Ska Keller.
I think Milliband would be an awful PM, but, really, this is a very silly line of criticism. No married man knows what the average weekly shopping bill is.
I could understand that in olden days but with Ocado and home delivery its plausible a man may have a clue nowadays.
For us its roughly £80 a week but that moves between £40 and £110 so its hardly consistent....
On the rare occasions when I do have to do the shopping, I tend to switch off in the supermarket.
Mr. Fett, do you think the approach to the Syrian vote by Miliband was indicative of a man fit for high office? He played party politics with a matter of war and peace. Even worse, he buggered it up, and a Commons that mostly wanted an intervention didn't vote for it because they danced on the head of a pin.
It is not illegitimate or unfair to point out that this is a show of incompetence and immorality (not quite as bad as Blair's dossier and dubious words to Parliament over Iraq, but still). I hesitate to mention morality because I think there's an unhealthy strain of puritanism in certain aspects of public life, but there's no other word for his conduct over Syria.
He's also been incredibly hypocritical over energy costs, saying higher prices were necessary when Energy Secretary and now complaining they're too high in opposition.
I stumbled across a news website this morning which informed me that the last television debate between the five candidates for the European Commission Presidency had taken place.
Was this put on television in the UK?
I saw a clip and was surprised I recognised four of the five candidates. Beyond the Greek Opposition leader Tsipras they all seem like European insiders - Schulz, Juncker and Verhofstadt. The only one I did not recognise was the Green candidate Ska Keller.
We chatted about it here a bit - I think it was only accessible via the internet in Britain, and coverage was negligible, probably because there were no British candidates and nobody took their clothes off or threw their drinks over anyone. Continental coverage was extensive, with the Green candidate getting especially high praise, even among right-wing papers. Tsipras missed the first debate altogether but caught up with the next one. One comment was that nearly all the candidates chose to debate in English despite the availability of simultaneous interpretation, which is (a) fairly impressive and (b) shows the extent to which it's the lingua franca.
Of maybe more interest is that "Yes" for any EU referendum is extending its lead - currently 43-37 without renegotiation and 53-24 if Cameron waves a wand and says he's improved the terms.
Is that with YouGov?
I came across an Opinium referendum tracker the other day that shows a persistent 'No' lead. (No mention of a renegotiation).
There seems to be an effort to push a text change of omitting/rephrasing "ever closer union" as a big concession to eurosceptics; I would be very surprised if that fooled a significant number of people.
Yes, YouGov. The Opinium tracker shows a similar trend though as you say with their wording No still edged it last month. Note that even they show a lead for "membership is a good thing" - the reason No is still ahead there is that people who say "Don't know" to that tend to want to vote for withdrawal, which looks a shaky rock to base a No campaign on.
In any case I can't see that it'll be very relevant unless UKIP actually wins the Westmister election. If Labour wins, there won't be a referendum. If the Tories win, there will be a referendum without a treaty in 2017 (I assume nobody still thinks an actual treaty will be ready for a vote then), presumably on "Do you approve our splendid terms for renegotiation or do you want to withdraw anyway?" It's hard to see "Withdraw" winning that, and even harder to see Cameron offering ANOTHER referendum a few years later if he's got a deal - he'll argue that the Yes to the previous one has locked it up.
This is a fascinating piece, implying the Tories are going to hold their nerve after the Euros, no matter how bad it gets and they will keep their discipline up to the General Election.
If UKIP does well in the local elections, I think that will unsettle both Conservatives and Labour. The key ingredient will be the assessment of how many, and which, MPs seats are likely to be lost.
The Survation assessment of Westminster seats 'won' by UKIP in the 2013 local elections was largely 'safe seats'. So the MPs who discover they are likely to face a competitive 2015 due to UKIP will very likely be ones who are not used to it. They may not react well.
Must you persist with this vitriolic line about Ed? You have never met the guy, and it doesn't become you. You seem a sterling and polite chap generally so try leaving the nasty personal comments at home. You have a blind spot with Ed.
ed wants to take over the running of the country which MD inhabits; MD is therefore justified, as well as correct, in pointing out that ed is crap at such things as the running of countries.
Indeed. But my point was about his nasty personal comments about a man he has never met.
Personal abuse rather than political criticism is standard issue in the run-up to elections: look at what was said about Gordon Brown on here before 2010.
Mr. Smarmeron, a few differences there. For a start, they're in a coalition. It's also worth mentioning I'm not against politicians changing their minds if it makes sense. If Miliband no longer believed in man-made global warming it'd be legitimate to say "I did before and thus supported higher energy prices, now I don't I think energy prices should be lower". But he still supports climate change (as it were) and was directly responsible for the higher prices due to the green levy. He wants to eat cake and lose weight.
Must you persist with this vitriolic line about Ed? You have never met the guy, and it doesn't become you. You seem a sterling and polite chap generally so try leaving the nasty personal comments at home. You have a blind spot with Ed.
ed wants to take over the running of the country which MD inhabits; MD is therefore justified, as well as correct, in pointing out that ed is crap at such things as the running of countries.
Indeed. But my point was about his nasty personal comments about a man he has never met.
I would have more sympathy with your argument if it was not for your constant trolling on PB wrt ‘PBTories’ a unpleasant habit you are as yet to refrain from, going by your earlier comment to Financier.
PB Tory is NOT a personal comment. FFS
"Ed is crap" is NOT a personal comment. FFS
The Ed phrase has been common currency on PB for years and you must be one of the first to complain about it. It certainly isn't a personal insult but an overall judgement of the political capabilities of the LotO
PBers of all political colours have noted that Ed Miliband is personable, intelligent, decent and humorous. But then so are many. However when even his own supporters and voters have misgivings, some on a grand scale it is not unreasonable to append such a political judgement to Ed. Harsh, perhaps and pointed certainly but not personal.
Mr. Smarmeron, perhaps worth mentioning I've consistently been against coalitions (and still am) on the basis that it allows manifesto promises to be jettisoned with impunity.
Many thanks to Ladbrokes, Mike and Mark Hopkins for this.
This is a fascinating piece, implying the Tories are going to hold their nerve after the Euros, no matter how bad it gets and they will keep their discipline up to the General Election.
Tory Eurosceptics are planning to stand by David Cameron even if the party performs poorly in the European elections, as the right keeps its powder dry for a battle over Europe after the general election.
One senior figure said that the "wagons are beginning to circle" protectively around the prime minister as rightwing Eurosceptics acknowledge that the Conservatives need to unite in the runup to May 2015.
But the right is preparing for a battle over Europe before the prime minister's planned referendum on EU membership in 2017, amid warnings from insiders that it could lead to a Tory split as epic as the divisions over the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846.
Wishful thinking from Central Office -- after the Euros and in the run up to 2015 it will be squeaky bum time for every MP with less than a 10,000 majority, and a lot of them will call for Dave/Ed/Nick to change tack or resign.
Must you persist with this vitriolic line about Ed? You have never met the guy, and it doesn't become you. You seem a sterling and polite chap generally so try leaving the nasty personal comments at home. You have a blind spot with Ed.
ed wants to take over the running of the country which MD inhabits; MD is therefore justified, as well as correct, in pointing out that ed is crap at such things as the running of countries.
Indeed. But my point was about his nasty personal comments about a man he has never met.
Ed can take it. They all can. Personal abuse is not nice, but it goes with the territory. I guess that they all get so much it is like water off a duck's back.
Mr. Smarmeron, perhaps worth mentioning I've consistently been against coalitions (and still am) on the basis that it allows manifesto promises to be jettisoned with impunity.
A majority government is no guarantee of manifesto promises not being jettisoned.
Your opposition to coalitions would also have led to a weak minority Conservative administration and huge economic uncertainty.
Mr. W, unfortunately the numbers meant a coalition was necessary, but I remain against them generally and hope the next government will have an outright majority.
Mr. W, unfortunately the numbers meant a coalition was necessary, but I remain against them generally and hope the next government will have an outright majority.
Being against them "generally" is very woolly when faced with the reality of the voters decision.
Frankly it's typical of the wiffle stick tendency on PB who bandy about their bells, flowers and dangerous hand held offensive weapons in gay group abandon hoping we'll throw a few coins their way.
On topic, my best guess would be UKIP 27%, Lab 25%, Con 20%, Green and Lib Dems 9%, Others 10%. By comparison, I think NNEV share for the locals will be Lab 28%, Con 26%, UKIP 20%, Lib Dem 16%, Others 10%.
Sean glad to see a locals prediction.The really difficult one is UKIP. Can't believe that assuming UKIP polls high twenties in the Euros then there won't be some positive rub off for them in local voting.I would pitch their figure half way between poll figures for Euros and GE.ie around 20% as you have. My own estimates for NNEV share in locals is Lab 29,Con 24,UKIP 21,Lib Dem 13,others 13.
I thought that one of the differences between CPI and RPI was that the former did not include housing costs?
RPI includes mortgage interest payments and is down from 2.6% last month to 2.5%. There is a CPIH measure that includes Owner Occupier Costs and that stands at 1.6%.
I never said that being in coalition has made no difference. What was supposed to be different this time was that it would be done by mutual respect and consensus in the interest of the country, not by "horse trading". Now? Which one?, or was it both? that told a little fib?
Must you persist with this vitriolic line about Ed? You have never met the guy, and it doesn't become you. You seem a sterling and polite chap generally so try leaving the nasty personal comments at home. You have a blind spot with Ed.
ed wants to take over the running of the country which MD inhabits; MD is therefore justified, as well as correct, in pointing out that ed is crap at such things as the running of countries.
Indeed. But my point was about his nasty personal comments about a man he has never met.
No, sorry. Nasty personal comments would be saying that ed smells funny, or looks like grommit. Such comments are indeed reprehensible but if ed is putting himself forward as a future prime minister it is our right and indeed duty to point out how completely incompetent and out of his depth he is.
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network McARSE - My Caledonian Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
Kilgore: Smell that? You smell that?
Lance: What?
Kilgore: Wind, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that.
[kneels]
Kilgore: I love the smell of napalm complacency in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill canvassed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' BeTory voter. The smell, you know that wind of change smell, the whole hill. Smelled like...
[sniffing, pondering]
Kilgore: ... victory. Someday this campaign's gonna end...
Nice little gizmo to enter the numbers. Would be good to see how many PBers have entered on the "total picture" page. The guesses from the greenies look like they're from a very small number of entrants.
Ed is certainly crap. Labour generally is listless. The economy is improving. So why on earth aren't the Tories clear favourites to win the GE outright next year? They have everything in their favour, surely.
Can anyone explain this for me: Nigel Farage makes reference to Romanian criminal gangs, and this is a racist comment, a member of the public asks Gordon Brown "Where are they all flocking from?" and this is NOT bigoted. Hmmm?
Ed is certainly crap. Labour generally is listless. The economy is improving. So why on earth aren't the Tories clear favourites to win the GE outright next year? They have everything in their favour, surely.
It's already ended for YES but you can't quite accept it. YES is dead in the water and just awaiting the electorates signature on the death warrant dated 18th September 2014.
One vaguely amusing thing from that table of prediction averages by party is that everyone thinks their own party is going to do better than the average and everyone thinks their party is going to do better than the views of alll other supporters except Labour where the "others" think they will do better than Labour supporters themselves.
It is an excellent demonstration of the wish fulfilment aspect of predictions. Perhaps inevitably UKIP supporters are by far the furthest out on a limb. New love and all that. Doesn't mean they are wrong of course.
It has changed somewhat now, with more entries [though we don't know how many in each category].
Labour, Lib Dem and UKIP GE voters predict the highest shares for their party in the Euro elections, whereas the highest share for the Conservatives and Greens is predicted by supporters of the Greens and Labour respectively.
All groups of people have UKIP winning the popular vote, except for Lib Dem GE voters who give first place to Labour. Since Green voters have the Conservatives just 0.01% behind UKIP then I assume that both Neil and antifrank followed Mike in on the Conservatives in first place bet...
I never said that being in coalition has made no difference. What was supposed to be different this time was that it would be done by mutual respect and consensus in the interest of the country, not by "horse trading". Now? Which one?, or was it both? that told a little fib?
What this time? Can't think of any non wartime coalition. It was uncharted territory for all concerned.
Ed is certainly crap. Labour generally is listless. The economy is improving. So why on earth aren't the Tories clear favourites to win the GE outright next year? They have everything in their favour, surely.
Perhaps we need a Cameron is crap thread
Over the next week I have a Dave is crap thread, and a Nick is crap thread too, and sorry Kippers, but I've got a Nigel Farage (pbuh) is crap thread all set to publish.
The main surprise was how high most of you expect AIFE to be. My guess was 0.7% - I don't think people are that easily fooled. It'd be interesting if a pollster asked using the actual ballot paper, as thwy sometimes do.
I'm with you on that one, although I put in a slightly higher figure of 0.9%.
Ed is certainly crap. Labour generally is listless. The economy is improving. So why on earth aren't the Tories clear favourites to win the GE outright next year? They have everything in their favour, surely.
Perhaps we need a Cameron is crap thread
The usual excuse is that the electoral map does not favour the Tories. But this is not stopping them getting 40% of the vote. There is something else going on. Just about everything is in their favour, yet still a hung Parliament with them as the biggest party looks like the very best they can hope for.
When making predictions, just remember this thread
As we can see, when you’re a supporter of a party, you are forecasting them to do better in the polls than the supporters of the other parties. That’s something we should consider when we all make political predictions and perhaps the best course of action is to start listening to the predictions of those who aren’t aligned to any party for a realistic prediction.
Must you persist with this vitriolic line about Ed? You have never met the guy, and it doesn't become you. You seem a sterling and polite chap generally so try leaving the nasty personal comments at home. You have a blind spot with Ed.
ed wants to take over the running of the country which MD inhabits; MD is therefore justified, as well as correct, in pointing out that ed is crap at such things as the running of countries.
Indeed. But my point was about his nasty personal comments about a man he has never met.
I would have more sympathy with your argument if it was not for your constant trolling on PB wrt ‘PBTories’ a unpleasant habit you are as yet to refrain from, going by your earlier comment to Financier.
PB Tory is NOT a personal comment. FFS
It is. I think it took over from "herd" . It implies the person is unable to think for themselves. It certainly isnt just a way of categorising someone on this website who votes Tory
"Mark is right when he argues that the BNP is often successful in so-called "forgotten" white areas, where many traditional Labour supporters say they feel alienated from modern political discourse and that no one in the Labour party is listening to them. A well-used BNP tactic is to focus on people who traditionally have voted Labour but now feel neglected by this government. All too often there is a lack of what might be described as a "safe space" for ordinary working people to air their feelings – they often struggle to find the language to say what they want without being accused of being racist."
Mrs Duffy was just such an ordinary working person. I would not give Nigel Farage that much leeway.
How many MP's know the reality of foodbanks? IDS, and quite a few of his fellow cabinet members have not a clue.
If you knew the slightest thing about IDS, you'd know that he knows more about the reality of foodbanks, poverty and life on benefits than any other front-bencher and a lot more than almost all MPs - of any party. As is very well documented, he has devoted a very substantial part of his life to finding out about these subjects in depth.
The way Labour supporters' prejudice affects their judgement is a wonder to behold.
The lowest scores for each party are also amusing.
UKIP GE voters are most negative about the muesli-munchers giving the lowest predicted scores for the Lib Dems and the Greens. This antipathy is reciprocated by the Lib Dem GE voters, who predict the lowest share for UKIP. The lowest share for the Conservatives is predicted by Labour GE voters, while it is Green voters who least rate Labour's chances in the Euro elections. Green voters also have the most positive opinion of the ability of UKIP voters not to be confused by the An Independence From Europe splitters.
Conservative GE voters predict no extremes for any party, perhaps reflecting the Cameroonian moderation of their leadership...
Must you persist with this vitriolic line about Ed? You have never met the guy, and it doesn't become you. You seem a sterling and polite chap generally so try leaving the nasty personal comments at home. You have a blind spot with Ed.
ed wants to take over the running of the country which MD inhabits; MD is therefore justified, as well as correct, in pointing out that ed is crap at such things as the running of countries.
yay
Indeed. But my point was about his nasty personal comments about a man he has never met.
Personal abuse rather than political criticism is standard issue in the run-up to elections: look at what was said about Gordon Brown on here before 2010.
The main surprise was how high most of you expect AIFE to be. My guess was 0.7% - I don't think people are that easily fooled. It'd be interesting if a pollster asked using the actual ballot paper, as thwy sometimes do.
I'm with you on that one, although I put in a slightly higher figure of 0.9%.
Some anti-kippers will put in AIFE in order to wind them up...
The main surprise was how high most of you expect AIFE to be. My guess was 0.7% - I don't think people are that easily fooled. It'd be interesting if a pollster asked using the actual ballot paper, as thwy sometimes do.
I'm with you on that one, although I put in a slightly higher figure of 0.9%.
I predicted AIFE to receive more than 1%. I was guided by the results from 2009 when minor parties such as No2EU (1%), English Democrats (1.9%), Socialist Labour (1.1%), and the Christian People's Alliance (1.7%) all achieved 1% or more.
Even leaving aside the confusion issue, I think there's potential for AIFE to pick up support from people who want to give a direct anti-EU message, but for some reason have been put off by something Farage has said in the media, criticisms over expenses, etc [even if AIFE might be worse in that regard, without the media attention people won't know that].
So if the Indyref is going to be like Apocalypse Now, does that make Salmond, Colonel Kurtz?
No.
Scots seem to enjoy splitting their ticket and being joyously perverse in keeping their politicians on tenterhooks.
I expect the SNP to do rather well in the 2015 general election despite losing the referendum by a substantial margin. Effectively it's a way of getting the best for Scotland in a range of elections.
Ed is certainly crap. Labour generally is listless. The economy is improving. So why on earth aren't the Tories clear favourites to win the GE outright next year? They have everything in their favour, surely.
Perhaps we need a Cameron is crap thread
The usual excuse is that the electoral map does not favour the Tories. But this is not stopping them getting 40% of the vote. There is something else going on. Just about everything is in their favour, yet still a hung Parliament with them as the biggest party looks like the very best they can hope for.
A very effective, over many years, campaign to define Tories as people who will eat your babies and set fire to your grannies. This point is proven every time people are asked to rate policies without the party affiliation of that policy. Invariably approval drops when it is revealed to be a Tory policy. It's impressive how the losers managed to write the UK's political history, it's normally the winners who have that privilege.
Ed is certainly crap. Labour generally is listless. The economy is improving. So why on earth aren't the Tories clear favourites to win the GE outright next year? They have everything in their favour, surely.
Perhaps we need a Cameron is crap thread
Over the next week I have a Dave is crap thread, and a Nick is crap thread too, and sorry Kippers, but I've got a Nigel Farage (pbuh) is crap thread all set to publish.
Well we all know that rEd is crap anyway and we've had enough threads about him already. ;D
awaiting the electorates signature on the death warrant dated 18th September 2015.
2015 you say? Arses & elbows etc.
The edit function is your friend.
2015 might also be correct as I expect YES to whine about losing for a least a full calendar year.
Given how long we have been hearing about 1979, that is ludicrously optimistic.
In fairness the 79 referendum was gerrymandered by the turnout threshold and wholly wrong. In comparison, with YES having many factors in their favour, the decisive NO vote will be much more difficult to argue against.
"Mark is right when he argues that the BNP is often successful in so-called "forgotten" white areas, where many traditional Labour supporters say they feel alienated from modern political discourse and that no one in the Labour party is listening to them. A well-used BNP tactic is to focus on people who traditionally have voted Labour but now feel neglected by this government. All too often there is a lack of what might be described as a "safe space" for ordinary working people to air their feelings – they often struggle to find the language to say what they want without being accused of being racist."
Mrs Duffy was just such an ordinary working person. I would not give Nigel Farage that much leeway.
What was the horrific quote that Farage uttered?
"You know the difference"
How awful
Its a result of the media (and you see it perfectly from UKIP haters on here) expressing ridiculous faux outrage and that annoying "Im sorry I dont understand what you mean?" fake air of confusion, whenever someone says something that veers slightly from their dogmatic PC code.
@Easterross is "staggered" that Farage defended Helmer last night, well, all he said was it was worth considering that people in their 70s grew up in a time when homosexuality was illegal, and thought of as sinful in religious houses.. that is true, would anybody like to deny it?
So isnt it perfectly reasonable to expect people from that era to be less comfortable with gay marriage etc and cut them a bit of slack?
Helmer was a Tory when he made some unpleasant comments about homosexuality, and now he is a kipper he says he has relaxed his views so, although that is a pathetically weak, partisan argument from me, if you cant beat em, join em.
How many MP's know the reality of foodbanks? IDS, and quite a few of his fellow cabinet members have not a clue.
If you knew the slightest thing about IDS, you'd know that he knows more about the reality of foodbanks, poverty and life on benefits than any other front-bencher and a lot more than almost all MPs - of any party. As is very well documented, he has devoted a very substantial part of his life to finding out about these subjects in depth.
The way Labour supporters' prejudice affects their judgement is a wonder to behold.
Your comments clearly reveal your prejudices and affect your judgement Richard.
IDS knows that there is a lot of poverty in the UK, as do most politicians of all hues. That does not mean that he knows why it exists and what the best solutions are for alleviating it. His comments on food banks do not indicate he knows that much about the reality of them at all.
awaiting the electorates signature on the death warrant dated 18th September 2015.
2015 you say? Arses & elbows etc.
The edit function is your friend.
2015 might also be correct as I expect YES to whine about losing for a least a full calendar year.
Given how long we have been hearing about 1979, that is ludicrously optimistic.
In fairness the 79 referendum was gerrymandered by the turnout threshold and wholly wrong. In comparison, and with many factors in their favour, the decisive NO vote will be much more difficult to argue against.
The issue with '79 was also that the Scots were assured by Lord Douglas-Home etc. that they'd be dealt with appropriately if they accepted a No result [however defined]. That this was promptly broken is highly relevant to current political thinking.
Nice little gizmo to enter the numbers. Would be good to see how many PBers have entered on the "total picture" page. The guesses from the greenies look like they're from a very small number of entrants.
It is easy enough to add counts on the page. But it will have to wait until Mike asks for it.
It's already ended for YES but you can't quite accept it. YES is dead in the water and just awaiting the electorates signature on the death warrant dated 18th September 2014.
A premature ejaculation from Jack. A common problem among elderly men.
Us sprightlier types have more holding power, and we are going to pump, pump away until 22:00 on 18 September.
I seem to recall a few years ago hearing Salmond state it was a once in a lifetime referendum, or similar. Has he/the SNP/Yes confirmed that if No wins, they'll respect that and not seek to re-run the vote?
Comments
This broad brush slagging off people is easy, of very little value, but easy. Why do you do so much of it?
It is not illegitimate or unfair to point out that this is a show of incompetence and immorality (not quite as bad as Blair's dossier and dubious words to Parliament over Iraq, but still). I hesitate to mention morality because I think there's an unhealthy strain of puritanism in certain aspects of public life, but there's no other word for his conduct over Syria.
He's also been incredibly hypocritical over energy costs, saying higher prices were necessary when Energy Secretary and now complaining they're too high in opposition.
In any case I can't see that it'll be very relevant unless UKIP actually wins the Westmister election. If Labour wins, there won't be a referendum. If the Tories win, there will be a referendum without a treaty in 2017 (I assume nobody still thinks an actual treaty will be ready for a vote then), presumably on "Do you approve our splendid terms for renegotiation or do you want to withdraw anyway?" It's hard to see "Withdraw" winning that, and even harder to see Cameron offering ANOTHER referendum a few years later if he's got a deal - he'll argue that the Yes to the previous one has locked it up.
The Survation assessment of Westminster seats 'won' by UKIP in the 2013 local elections was largely 'safe seats'. So the MPs who discover they are likely to face a competitive 2015 due to UKIP will very likely be ones who are not used to it. They may not react well.
The obverse? Look at what Cameron/Clegg said when they were in opposition, compared to now?
By comparison, I think NNEV share for the locals will be Lab 28%, Con 26%, UKIP 20%, Lib Dem 16%, Others 10%.
vine.co/v/MH6wnaiqxqZ
The Ed phrase has been common currency on PB for years and you must be one of the first to complain about it. It certainly isn't a personal insult but an overall judgement of the political capabilities of the LotO
PBers of all political colours have noted that Ed Miliband is personable, intelligent, decent and humorous. But then so are many. However when even his own supporters and voters have misgivings, some on a grand scale it is not unreasonable to append such a political judgement to Ed. Harsh, perhaps and pointed certainly but not personal.
UKIP 27.62
Lab 25.09
Con 22.88
LD 9.34
Green 8.57
AIFE 2.53
Bang on ? "Nerdy Ed knows precisely how much the average shop is. How close is his to £104 though."
etc...
"Sir! Sir!.... It wasn;t me, it was him! (points finger) He MADE me do it"
Take your pick from the list.
One of my favorites being Olliver Letwin's claim that the "Big Society" was only dropped in deference to the LbDems
Tory 23.2
Labour 22.5
Green 8.2
LibDem 7.1
I have a thread dedicated to Ed this afternoon.
Cons lose Havering to noc, but gain Kingston from Lib Dems. Labour gain Harrow and Merton from noc, otherwise no change.
Your opposition to coalitions would also have led to a weak minority Conservative administration and huge economic uncertainty.
Niles (to Frasier): Did you say something? Your penis was talking so loudly, I couldn't hear.
Edit - Balls, I'm thinking of another episode.
Lowered both LD and greens.
Jim Pickard @PickardJE 13m
Tim Farron tells me Lib Dems ruling out minority government is like "lying on the floor with jam and butter on ourselves saying: eat me"
Labour %: 24.39
Lib Dem %: 6.16
UKIP %: 27.80
Green %: 6.97
An Independence
from Europe %: 1.69
is the entry.
BetVictor - Euros - Scotland - UKIP to win an MEP
No 4/11
Yes 2/1 (started at 5/4 last week)
Ladbrokes still have the best price if you want to back UKIP winning no MEP in Scotland: 1/2.
"Average house prices increased in all nine English regions over the year to March 2014.
The largest increase was again in London at 17.0% followed by the East (6.6%) and the South East (6.1%).
Excluding London and the South East, UK house prices increased by 4.7% over the year
to March 2014.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_362863.pdf
You clearly haven't read the thread. I was not talking about Ed is Crap.
I thought that one of the differences between CPI and RPI was that the former did not include housing costs?
You can now get 4/1 LAB to win Most Votes in Scotland at the Euros (BetVictor). From 7/4 last week.
SNP-backers get the best value over at William Hill: 1/4 SNP most votes at Euros.
Frankly it's typical of the wiffle stick tendency on PB who bandy about their bells, flowers and dangerous hand held offensive weapons in gay group abandon hoping we'll throw a few coins their way.
My own estimates for NNEV share in locals is Lab 29,Con 24,UKIP 21,Lib Dem 13,others 13.
RPI includes mortgage interest payments and is down from 2.6% last month to 2.5%. There is a CPIH measure that includes Owner Occupier Costs and that stands at 1.6%.
I never said that being in coalition has made no difference.
What was supposed to be different this time was that it would be done by mutual respect and consensus in the interest of the country, not by "horse trading".
Now? Which one?, or was it both? that told a little fib?
However I'm sure PB will be grateful to you on the next thread to embellish your above comment that "Ed is crap"
Oh and he is crap.
Lance: What?
Kilgore: Wind, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that.
[kneels]
Kilgore: I love the smell of napalm complacency in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill canvassed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' BeTory voter. The smell, you know that wind of change smell, the whole hill. Smelled like...
[sniffing, pondering]
Kilgore: ... victory. Someday this campaign's gonna end...
@susannareid100: Ed Miliband: My family probably spends £80 a week on groceries http://t.co/RHv8nq23DN
"Someday this campaign's gonna end..."
......................................................................
It's already ended for YES but you can't quite accept it. YES is dead in the water and just awaiting the electorates signature on the death warrant dated 18th September 2014.
Labour, Lib Dem and UKIP GE voters predict the highest shares for their party in the Euro elections, whereas the highest share for the Conservatives and Greens is predicted by supporters of the Greens and Labour respectively.
All groups of people have UKIP winning the popular vote, except for Lib Dem GE voters who give first place to Labour. Since Green voters have the Conservatives just 0.01% behind UKIP then I assume that both Neil and antifrank followed Mike in on the Conservatives in first place bet...
Btw, I've tallied all the votes from the 2010 local elections so we can make a comparison with this year's votes.
"The economy is improving"
Only for a given definition of "improving"
e.g. If inflation is at 1.8% and your wages are capped at a 1% rise?
I need to go, but I am sure you can find other examples.
Conservative %: 21.10
Labour %: 26.90
Lib Dem %: 8.40
UKIP %: 31.20
Green %: 3.30
An Independence
from Europe %: 1.10
As we can see, when you’re a supporter of a party, you are forecasting them to do better in the polls than the supporters of the other parties. That’s something we should consider when we all make political predictions and perhaps the best course of action is to start listening to the predictions of those who aren’t aligned to any party for a realistic prediction.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/02/19/yougov-asked-people-to-predict-what-the-national-voting-intention-figures-would-be-at-the-end-of-2014-here-are-the-results/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/apr/05/stoke-central-tristram-hunt-labour
"Mark is right when he argues that the BNP is often successful in so-called "forgotten" white areas, where many traditional Labour supporters say they feel alienated from modern political discourse and that no one in the Labour party is listening to them. A well-used BNP tactic is to focus on people who traditionally have voted Labour but now feel neglected by this government. All too often there is a lack of what might be described as a "safe space" for ordinary working people to air their feelings – they often struggle to find the language to say what they want without being accused of being racist."
Mrs Duffy was just such an ordinary working person. I would not give Nigel Farage that much leeway.
The way Labour supporters' prejudice affects their judgement is a wonder to behold.
UKIP GE voters are most negative about the muesli-munchers giving the lowest predicted scores for the Lib Dems and the Greens. This antipathy is reciprocated by the Lib Dem GE voters, who predict the lowest share for UKIP. The lowest share for the Conservatives is predicted by Labour GE voters, while it is Green voters who least rate Labour's chances in the Euro elections. Green voters also have the most positive opinion of the ability of UKIP voters not to be confused by the An Independence From Europe splitters.
Conservative GE voters predict no extremes for any party, perhaps reflecting the Cameroonian moderation of their leadership...
Can't recall the precise figures, but I think my UKIP/Lab/Con numbers were higher than most, and Lib Dems/Greens lower than most guesses here.
2015 might also be correct as I expect YES to whine about losing for a least a full calendar year.
Even leaving aside the confusion issue, I think there's potential for AIFE to pick up support from people who want to give a direct anti-EU message, but for some reason have been put off by something Farage has said in the media, criticisms over expenses, etc [even if AIFE might be worse in that regard, without the media attention people won't know that].
Scots seem to enjoy splitting their ticket and being joyously perverse in keeping their politicians on tenterhooks.
I expect the SNP to do rather well in the 2015 general election despite losing the referendum by a substantial margin. Effectively it's a way of getting the best for Scotland in a range of elections.
http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/05/20/tower-hamlets-mayoral-election-is-rahman-toast/
http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Ukip-leader-Nigel-Farage-hold-mini-carnival/story-21114448-detail/story.html
UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to hold a 'mini-carnival' in Croydon in an attempt to counter accusations his party is racist.
The event - which will feature a steel band - will be held outside the main entrance to the Whitgift Centre, North End, at 2.30pm today (Tuesday).
Jokes about clowns and laboured analogies about trapeze artists may abound.
"You know the difference"
How awful
Its a result of the media (and you see it perfectly from UKIP haters on here) expressing ridiculous faux outrage and that annoying "Im sorry I dont understand what you mean?" fake air of confusion, whenever someone says something that veers slightly from their dogmatic PC code.
@Easterross is "staggered" that Farage defended Helmer last night, well, all he said was it was worth considering that people in their 70s grew up in a time when homosexuality was illegal, and thought of as sinful in religious houses.. that is true, would anybody like to deny it?
So isnt it perfectly reasonable to expect people from that era to be less comfortable with gay marriage etc and cut them a bit of slack?
Helmer was a Tory when he made some unpleasant comments about homosexuality, and now he is a kipper he says he has relaxed his views so, although that is a pathetically weak, partisan argument from me, if you cant beat em, join em.
IDS knows that there is a lot of poverty in the UK, as do most politicians of all hues. That does not mean that he knows why it exists and what the best solutions are for alleviating it. His comments on food banks do not indicate he knows that much about the reality of them at all.
Us sprightlier types have more holding power, and we are going to pump, pump away until 22:00 on 18 September.
I seem to recall a few years ago hearing Salmond state it was a once in a lifetime referendum, or similar. Has he/the SNP/Yes confirmed that if No wins, they'll respect that and not seek to re-run the vote?