Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
If you assume 25% of Labour and LDs will vote yes, then the balance of Indyref is far closer - about 45/55 if my mental arithmetic on the BBC data is correct - with some months to go. And remember that this does not allow for the impact of UKIP winning, and Labour only tying for 2nd equal with the Tories, and a majority of right-wing parties (not counting Labour) in the UK as a whole. The turnout is also about half of the likely Indyref turnout.
And remember it is not Indyref but an election - where the governing party held on to its vote in mid term. Certainly mixed news but not that much of a change except for LDs and UKIP. [edted to remove stray text] I'm not sure I would be too happy if I were Mr Miliband.
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
Salmond spent the last two weeks talking about nothing but UKIP and then last night complained that the BbC was responsible for their success by giving them too much coverage. Old fool.
And Nicola Sturgeon:
Nicola Sturgeon: 'Voting SNP is the only way to stop Ukip'
The remarks, which came at the SNP's European election manifesto launch in Edinburgh, suggest the party has moved from viewing Ukip as an irrelevance in Scotland to a genuine political contender.
Last year Alex Salmond dismissed Ukip's appeal north of the border by saying they "dislike everybody" and know "absolutely nothing about Scotland".
I see you are unwilling to discuss Tory thrashing in England, keep pointing north where UKIP got 10% and ignore the embarrassment of Tory thrashing down south.
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
If you assume 25% of Labour and LDs will vote yes, then the balance of Indyref is far closer - about 45/55 if my mental arithmetic on the BBC data is correct - with some months to go. And remember that this does not allow for the impact of UKIP winning, and Labour only tying for 2nd equal with the Tories, and a majority of right-wing parties (not counting Labour) in the UK as a whole. The turnout is also about half of the likely Indyref turnout.
And remember it is not Indyref but an election - where the governing party held on to its vote in mid term. Certainly mixed news but not that much of a change except for LDs and UKIP. [edted to remove stray text] I'm not sure I would be too happy if I were Mr Miliband.
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
Salmond spent the last two weeks talking about nothing but UKIP and then last night complained that the BbC was responsible for their success by giving them too much coverage. Old fool.
And Nicola Sturgeon:
Nicola Sturgeon: 'Voting SNP is the only way to stop Ukip'
The remarks, which came at the SNP's European election manifesto launch in Edinburgh, suggest the party has moved from viewing Ukip as an irrelevance in Scotland to a genuine political contender.
Last year Alex Salmond dismissed Ukip's appeal north of the border by saying they "dislike everybody" and know "absolutely nothing about Scotland".
I see you are unwilling to discuss Tory thrashing in England, keep pointing north where UKIP got 10% and ignore the embarrassment of Tory thrashing down south.
I've already said that I suspect they'll be fairly pleased with how they did - and Labour have pause for thought.
Now that the Weir's Euro Millions have been spent - how are the YESNP going to close the (year old) 10 point gap?
I thought turnout was marginally down on last time.
Though whether the same people stayed at home is open to analysis. We may have had a lot of churn between all the parties. I suspect the kippers got most of the BNP vote, but some will have gone elsewhere.
The other notable part of these elections was the car crash campaign stunts of Ed Miliband, which does note bode well for Labour next year.
My ready reckoner (not sure where I saw it, so please correct me if I'm wrong) is that UKIP's +11 came largely from increased turnout (+5) and previous BNP voters (+6)
If this is the case, and that is replicated at a GE, doesn't that mean they could have a relatively limited impact in terms of seats?
I guess what you are looking for is where UKIP is currently within (BNP vote share + 5) of winning a seat. I know this is a little simplistic, but perhaps an interesting thought.
Incidentally, for the purposes of the OfCom rules, there is no way that the LibDems will be a major party at the next European Parliamentary Elections, if the Green Party was not a major party in these elections.
A very good point, and not something to be taken lightly, particularly as the Lib Dems are already likely to have minor party status for Holyrood 2016, assuming a No vote.
I wonder if Boris might have chosen a happier metaphor than 'Peasant's revolt' to describe the success of UKIP and its disparate brethren across Europe:
He at least is truthful and shows his complete disdain for ordinary people
And yet, the 'ordinary people' of London elected him Mayor......now back to your year-old 10 point gap......which, curiously, you seem anxious to avoid.......along with 'The SNP stopping UKIP in Scotland'....
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
If you assume 25% of Labour and LDs will vote yes, then the balance of Indyref is far closer - about 45/55 if my mental arithmetic on the BBC data is correct - with some months to go. And remember that this does not allow for the impact of UKIP winning, and Labour only tying for 2nd equal with the Tories, and a majority of right-wing parties (not counting Labour) in the UK as a whole. The turnout is also about half of the likely Indyref turnout.
And remember it is not Indyref but an election - where the governing party held on to its vote in mid term. Certainly mixed news but not that much of a change except for LDs and UKIP. [edted to remove stray text] I'm not sure I would be too happy if I were Mr Miliband.
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
The detailed Scottish numbers will bare some close scrutiny but my first thoughts were that the Conservatives polled very decently, YES will be concerned and the Scottish LibDems polled better than some regions in England.
I don't see this having any bearing on the referendum , good to see Lib Dems wiped out but dire that UKIP get to 10%. SNP winning after so long in government shows how well they are doing even if it would have been better to get the 3rd seat.
Clearly there's no direct correlation as all parties have voters who do not follow their party line on the referendum however in broad terms I'd be somewhat happier looking at the detailed results from the NO camp than YES.
However let's not get too overheated on this angle as these are Euro elections that have little relevance and are the greatest protest vote available to the punters.
I wonder if Boris might have chosen a happier metaphor than 'Peasant's revolt' to describe the success of UKIP and its disparate brethren across Europe:
I thought turnout was marginally down on last time.
Though whether the same people stayed at home is open to analysis. We may have had a lot of churn between all the parties. I suspect the kippers got most of the BNP vote, but some will have gone elsewhere.
The other notable part of these elections was the car crash campaign stunts of Ed Miliband, which does note bode well for Labour next year.
My ready reckoner (not sure where I saw it, so please correct me if I'm wrong) is that UKIP's +11 came largely from increased turnout (+5) and previous BNP voters (+6)
If this is the case, and that is replicated at a GE, doesn't that mean they could have a relatively limited impact in terms of seats?
I guess what you are looking for is where UKIP is currently within (BNP vote share + 5) of winning a seat. I know this is a little simplistic, but perhaps an interesting thought.
I suspect a fair bit of UKIP came from Labour's 2010 vote strikers - who Miliband evidently did not reach.
Labour needs to spend less time hating on the Lib Dems, and a bit more on understanding why a vast proportion of its core vote are now flirting outrageously with a party with a hard right agenda.
At least UKIP has an agenda. If you voted UKIP in the Euros, you knew what you were getting.
If you voted Labour in the Euros, you were getting...er...repeal of the bedroom tax? There was not even a vague attempt to spell out what the Labour-in-Europe message was.
The same will happen in May 2015, except it will be the Tory agenda where people will know what they are getting. Labour, what will they give you on the economy? Some socialist sentimentality with the life squeezed out of it by the reality that they will have no money to spend. The days of pissing a trillion pounds up a wall are long gone.
Not too disappointed the Lib Dems got a seat. May help keep Clegg in place.
There's no danger of Clegg going.
As I indicated way back in June 2010 they yellow peril were in this to the bitter end and basically bet the farm on events running their way in May 2015. They may still prove to be correct albeit with a diminished number of 40ish MP's -
Before the lib Dems make a decision about Nick Clegg the Lib Dems would do wel lto look outwards and ask the voting public in a poll whether they would be more or less likely to vote Lib dem with differen t(named) leaders.
Do we know if UKIP voters are more likely to vote at Euro elections than the other parties? If so would the 4.4 mil voters be the ceiling for a general election ~ 14.7%? Which doesn't quite seem high enough to gain more than half a dozen seats - less than the Sinn Fein no shows for instance - hardly a position of holding the balance of power?
Feel free to correct my logic - just pondering the question...
Really don't know but interesting that in my patch where UKIP fielded candidates in all wards they got 1800 fewer votes in the locals than the euros. They doubled ish their vote total from the previous euros, what is interesting though that in the last cycle UKIP got shy of 5000 votes in the euro elections the following year they got less than 2000 when the voting area includes extra voters from elsewhere.
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
If you assume 25% of Labour and LDs will vote yes, then the balance of Indyref is far closer - about 45/55 if my mental arithmetic on the BBC data is correct - with some months to go. And remember that this does not allow for the impact of UKIP winning, and Labour only tying for 2nd equal with the Tories, and a majority of right-wing parties (not counting Labour) in the UK as a whole. The turnout is also about half of the likely Indyref turnout.
And remember it is not Indyref but an election - where the governing party held on to its vote in mid term. Certainly mixed news but not that much of a change except for LDs and UKIP. [edted to remove stray text] I'm not sure I would be too happy if I were Mr Miliband.
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
The detailed Scottish numbers will bare some close scrutiny but my first thoughts were that the Conservatives polled very decently, YES will be concerned and the Scottish LibDems polled better than some regions in England.
I don't see this having any bearing on the referendum , good to see Lib Dems wiped out but dire that UKIP get to 10%. SNP winning after so long in government shows how well they are doing even if it would have been better to get the 3rd seat.
However let's not get too overheated on this angle as these are Euro elections that have little relevance and are the greatest protest vote available to the punters.
Which appears to have been replicated across much of Europe - we are in for an interesting time in the EU Parliament!
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
The great thing about the word "reform" is that it means something different to everybody. I'm still not sure what Cameron actually wants, but I'm pretty sure he's not demanding more protectionism and less globalization.
Oh of course but there has to be an opportunity to utilise the increased hostility to advantage the negotiations. I don't necessarily think it increases chances of successful negotiations but it may and it may be a means of widening the front on which renegotiation is attempted.
Maybe if you give us some examples of the kind of things you think Cameron wants, the centrist majority won't automatically spike and Syriza and the Front National will be helpful with that'll make it clearer.
We're promised that Cameron's EU negotiation will achieve great things but nobody is to know what they are.
Reminds me of that conman in the South Sea Bubble who set up a company which promised "an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is"
Don't worry. Whilst its 100% nailed on that ex Labour voters going UKIP will stay there, and bring their friends, its also 200% guaranteed that most Kipper voters will come home to the Tories as for seen by Vernon Bogdanor last night.
Apparently a promise of an unknown shopping list of reforms followed by a referendum in which the Tories would campaighn to stay in has big appeal to voters who don't like Europe and think Cameron is an untrustworthy liar who already broke the last pledge.
To ensure that this narrative is maintained the pollsters may well continue as they have so far with a 3 party model and UKIP not prompted.
Well as a rampant Europhile and former council member of Britain In Europe, Bogdanor is not what you would describe as an unbiased observer when it comes to EU matters and UKIP.
Of course he will downplay the impact of UKIP - just as he underplayed the impact of the Euro crisis after having strove for so many years to get the UK to join it.
Coupled with the factor that nearly half will vote for another party next year, the kipper vote is most likely under 10% nationally next year. Their hope for seats must lie with careful targetting, but unlikely to hold the balance of power.
Do we know if UKIP voters are more likely to vote at Euro elections than the other parties? If so would the 4.4 mil voters be the ceiling for a general election ~ 14.7%? Which doesn't quite seem high enough to gain more than half a dozen seats - less than the Sinn Fein no shows for instance - hardly a position of holding the balance of power?
Feel free to correct my logic - just pondering the question...
You come across as a very reasonable and thoughtful person in most of your postings, yet in common with some others, you lose a sense of perspective when it comes to Ukip. I had an interesting conversation on Thursday night when a friend made similar comments. I mentioned that I'd voted Ukip for the first ever time. "Ah," he said. "But you just did it for devilment."
There may be some truth in that, but it 's not the full story. Ukip can reflect the annoyance that voters feel when being told what's good for them.
The important next step for Ukip is their manifesto in September. It will be cherry-picked and distorted - that is politics - but if if, as I suspect, it's a mixture of socially conservative and economically left policies, the established parties may need to worry. And to be honest, I quite like the odd, inarticulate spokesperson that they sometimes put up. I happily put up with the LD oddities - I quite liked Tim Farron's peculiar excuses last night, for instance.
Labour needs to spend less time hating on the Lib Dems, and a bit more on understanding why a vast proportion of its core vote are now flirting outrageously with a party with a hard right agenda.
I genuinely don't think most of our "flirting with UKIP" voters actually know what UKIP policies are. What we heard on the doorstep was Labour people saying they wpuild vote for us at the GE but UKIP in the Euros to send a message. Have any Tory posters heard the same from their door knocking?
Yes, my worry though is that there's a clever bait and switch going on here, and that the proportion of the kipper vote that comes from Con will return home for the GE in a differentially higher proportion than ex Lab. This could be disastrous for Lab and they need to address explicitly the issues that resonate in WWC areas, immigration, meaningful jobs and pay, dismantling of councils and services etc, to stop it happening.
UKIP got 27.5% of the vote in an election with a 36% turnout. It was an historic victory but does need to be seen in that context.
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
If you assume 25% of Labour and LDs will vote yes, then the balance of Indyref is far closer - about 45/55 if my mental arithmetic on the BBC data is correct - with some months to go. And remember that this does not allow for the impact of UKIP winning, and Labour only tying for 2nd equal with the Tories, and a majority of right-wing parties (not counting Labour) in the UK as a whole. The turnout is also about half of the likely Indyref turnout.
And remember it is not Indyref but an election - where the governing party held on to its vote in mid term. Certainly mixed news but not that much of a change except for LDs and UKIP. [edted to remove stray text] I'm not sure I would be too happy if I were Mr Miliband.
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
The detailed Scottish numbers will bare some close scrutiny but my first thoughts were that the Conservatives polled very decently, YES will be concerned and the Scottish LibDems polled better than some regions in England.
I don't see this having any bearing on the referendum , good to see Lib Dems wiped out but dire that UKIP get to 10%. SNP winning after so long in government shows how well they are doing even if it would have been better to get the 3rd seat.
However let's not get too overheated on this angle as these are Euro elections that have little relevance and are the greatest protest vote available to the punters.
Which appears to have been replicated across much of Europe - we are in for an interesting time in the EU Parliament!
Back to three party politics. LibDems have to get used to life in the "others" column. Who in their right mind (and even their wooly, muesli-addled mind) is going to fund the LibDems now? Their income from the MEP's is gone, much of their income from their councillors is gone. It is reduced to a party of jumble sales. Certainly whilst Nick Clegg remains in charge.
What special something does Nick Clegg's ego tell him he still brings to the leadership of his party? It's a mystery....
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
Salmond spent the last two weeks talking about nothing but UKIP and then last night complained that the BbC was responsible for their success by giving them too much coverage. Old fool.
And Nicola Sturgeon:
Nicola Sturgeon: 'Voting SNP is the only way to stop Ukip'
The remarks, which came at the SNP's European election manifesto launch in Edinburgh, suggest the party has moved from viewing Ukip as an irrelevance in Scotland to a genuine political contender.
Last year Alex Salmond dismissed Ukip's appeal north of the border by saying they "dislike everybody" and know "absolutely nothing about Scotland".
I see you are unwilling to discuss Tory thrashing in England, keep pointing north where UKIP got 10% and ignore the embarrassment of Tory thrashing down south.
I've already said that I suspect they'll be fairly pleased with how they did - and Labour have pause for thought.
Now that the Weir's Euro Millions have been spent - how are the YESNP going to close the (year old) 10 point gap?
Plenty of time for a 5% swing. The real campaign is about to start and the prospect of a perpetual right wing Tory government in London will certainly help. Pathetic attempts by London/Treasury to say we would need 180 new government departments and giving out monopoly numbers of how poor we will be will also help. Also if you had really understood Scotland you would know that a huge part of Weir's money is in the SNP bank account.
My ready reckoner (not sure where I saw it, so please correct me if I'm wrong) is that UKIP's +11 came largely from increased turnout (+5) and previous BNP voters (+6)
If this is the case, and that is replicated at a GE, doesn't that mean they could have a relatively limited impact in terms of seats?
I guess what you are looking for is where UKIP is currently within (BNP vote share + 5) of winning a seat. I know this is a little simplistic, but perhaps an interesting thought.
Indeed, that massively increased turnout in Tower Hamlets was a great source of extra support for UKIP.
On topic, a historic night, one which may easily be a turning point in British political history, depending on how things pan out.
One irony of it that despite PR being needed now more than ever, if the representation is to be anything close to meaningful, the Westminster establishment will close ranks against it (for precisely the same reason).
As I've argued before, a more audacious approach would be for the Tories to embrace such a change, negating the need to do any deals with UKIP before an election (which would tar both parties with potential supporters), and look instead to do a deal afterwards, either with the Lib Dems again or with UKIP, depending on how the figures work out. After the mauling they took in local and Euro elections, as well as their keenness on the issue, the Lib Dems might go along with that.
As an aside, it's becoming a received wisdom that making electoral pacts with a new insurgent party is always a bad idea, the case of Labour and the Liberals being usually cited. This isn't true; it depends on how it's handled. Labour was only really able to break out from under the Libs because the Libs (1) went into coalition with the Tories during WWI, (2) subsequently split into two hostile camps, and (3) then had one of those factions fight the election in coalition with the Tories. By contrast, the way in which the Conservatives allied with and then suffocated the Liberal Unionists between 1890 and 1918, and the National Liberals between 1931 and the 50s shows how it can be done. I'm not saying Con and UKIP should do a deal but the notion that if one was done then it'd be the Tories signing their death warrant and handing it to their executioner is at best a misreading of history.
But a substantial segment of the old centre-left base—the older, white, post-industrial blue collar voters who feel economically and culturally marginalised—went to the Eurosceptic right: to parties (different though they may be in tone and emphasis) like the True Finns, the Front National and UKIP.
These socio-economic forces explain why such parties are almost universally hostile to globalisation and immigration, why they lean towards protectionism and why they engage in the sort of cultural politics that until recently was more common in America than in Europe. It also explains why they rarely thrive in large cities. In provincial towns, villages and suburbs around the continent, people whose jobs and livelihoods have been disrupted by immigration, outsourcing and automation no longer fit into the same social democratic “big tent” as urban professionals, ethnic minority voters, students and public-sector workers. The decline of the trade unions has further added to this sense of alienation from the centre-left establishment.
Has AIFE got up to 1.5% nationally (I know they seem to have with the English regions but were not standing in Wales or Scotland)?
Looks like wily old Shadsy has lured a lot of naive punters who were only thinking about England. AIFE were not on the ballot paper in either Scotland or Wales.
Oh no just seem 1.49% against AIFE - Jesus! what with Real Madrid scoring in the last minute , QPR scoring in the last minute (after backing 0-0) I have had some bad luck over the weekend!!
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
If you assume 25% of Labour and LDs will vote yes, then the balance of Indyref is far closer - about 45/55 if my mental arithmetic on the BBC data is correct - with some months to go. And remember that this does not allow for the impact of UKIP winning, and Labour only tying for 2nd equal with the Tories, and a majority of right-wing parties (not counting Labour) in the UK as a whole. The turnout is also about half of the likely Indyref turnout.
And remember it is not Indyref but an election - where the governing party held on to its vote in mid term. Certainly mixed news but not that much of a change except for LDs and UKIP. [edted to remove stray text] I'm not sure I would be too happy if I were Mr Miliband.
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
The detailed Scottish numbers will bare some close scrutiny but my first thoughts were that the Conservatives polled very decently, YES will be concerned and the Scottish LibDems polled better than some regions in England.
I don't see this having any bearing on the referendum , good to see Lib Dems wiped out but dire that UKIP get to 10%. SNP winning after so long in government shows how well they are doing even if it would have been better to get the 3rd seat.
Clearly there's no direct correlation as all parties have voters who do not follow their party line on the referendum however in broad terms I'd be somewhat happier looking at the detailed results from the NO camp than YES.
However let's not get too overheated on this angle as these are Euro elections that have little relevance and are the greatest protest vote available to the punters.
I agree, though it is a bit worrying that they get even 10%, only thing they can be voting for is against immigration. For Scotland this is madness as we absolutely need immigration and get too little of it at present. My concern is that there are enough of these badly educated idiots to make a difference, unfortunately confirms my worst fears.
Labour had a bigger share than 2004 and won a million more votes than they did in 1999. In seats Labour are where they were in 2004.
So given that Europe doesn't motivate Labour voters at all as an issue, it could be worse for Ed. But to achieve a similar result to Blair in the Iraq war should give Ed pause.
Has AIFE got up to 1.5% nationally (I know they seem to have with the English regions but were not standing in Wales or Scotland)?
Looks like wily old Shadsy has lured a lot of naive punters who were only thinking about England. AIFE were not on the ballot paper in either Scotland or Wales.
Yes I knew that before punting on it but looking around thought enough dim people in England would get them over 1.5% .Maybe I should move from my spot of it!! Good market making though by shadsy!! Got the line bang on
Presumably the press scrutiny that UKIP got reinforced their vote. Isn't this what we were told would happen?
It might have helped them win in Doncaster.
The irony.
It might also have gained them an extra MEP in Yorkshire at the expense of the Conservatives.
The irony.
It might also have gained them an MEP in Scotland.
The irony.
It might have done. If it did, we should conclude that the opinion pollsters have been substantially over-estimating UKIP vote shares and we should factor this into GE projections.
Back to three party politics. LibDems have to get used to life in the "others" column. Who in their right mind (and even their wooly, muesli-addled mind) is going to fund the LibDems now? Their income from the MEP's is gone, much of their income from their councillors is gone. It is reduced to a party of jumble sales. Certainly whilst Nick Clegg remains in charge.
What special something does Nick Clegg's ego tell him he still brings to the leadership of his party? It's a mystery....
But you forget the yellow peril won the elections from top to bottom !!
Shetland and Gibraltar ....
However in all seriousness the LibDems remain important in this "Coalition period" with 56 MP's and still well over 2,000 councillors. If they had to lose over 90% of their seats in one go as they did last night then the LibDems would surely opt for the barely relevant Euro elections.
It is the May 2015 General Election feast that is the main event and not last night's thin horses doofers course.
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
Agreed. There are now irrefutable signs that the Scottish Tories are, at last, recovering. I would be astonished if they poll less than 20% of the Scottish vote at the next UK GE. That means that they would have at least 3 Scottish MPs (Mundell + West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine + Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk), and perhaps 1 or 2 more.
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
Salmond spent the last two weeks talking about nothing but UKIP and then last night complained that the BbC was responsible for their success by giving them too much coverage. Old fool.
And Nicola Sturgeon:
Nicola Sturgeon: 'Voting SNP is the only way to stop Ukip'
The remarks, which came at the SNP's European election manifesto launch in Edinburgh, suggest the party has moved from viewing Ukip as an irrelevance in Scotland to a genuine political contender.
Last year Alex Salmond dismissed Ukip's appeal north of the border by saying they "dislike everybody" and know "absolutely nothing about Scotland".
I see you are unwilling to discuss Tory thrashing in England, keep pointing north where UKIP got 10% and ignore the embarrassment of Tory thrashing down south.
I've already said that I suspect they'll be fairly pleased with how they did - and Labour have pause for thought.
Now that the Weir's Euro Millions have been spent - how are the YESNP going to close the (year old) 10 point gap?
huge part of Weir's money is in the SNP bank account.
Where it will sit, as spending limits start in 4 days.....which has clearly passed you by.....
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
Agreed. There are now irrefutable signs that the Scottish Tories are, at last, recovering. I would be astonished if they poll less than 20% of the Scottish vote at the next UK GE. That means that they would have at least 3 Scottish MPs (Mundell + West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine + Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk), and perhaps 1 or 2 more.
Do you think they have a chance in Argyll and Bute?
"here is a kind of peasants’ revolt going on, a jacquerie. From Dublin to Lublin, from Portugal to Pomerania, the pitchfork-wielding populists are converging on the Breydel building in Brussels – drunk on local hooch and chanting nationalist slogans and preparing to give the federalist machinery a good old kicking with their authentically folkloric clogs. There are Greek anti-capitalists and Hungarian neo-fascists and polite German professors who want to bring back the Deutschemark. They are making common cause with Left-wing Italian comedians and Right-wing Dutch firebrands and the general slogan is simple: down with technocracy, down with bureaucracy, and give power back to the people!"
I think the prospects of renegotiating the EU are better than ever, with both Sarkozy and Le Pen arguing for an end to Schengen and benefit tourism. When the French talk, Brussels (and Strasbourg) listen.
But a substantial segment of the old centre-left base—the older, white, post-industrial blue collar voters who feel economically and culturally marginalised—went to the Eurosceptic right: to parties (different though they may be in tone and emphasis) like the True Finns, the Front National and UKIP.
These socio-economic forces explain why such parties are almost universally hostile to globalisation and immigration, why they lean towards protectionism and why they engage in the sort of cultural politics that until recently was more common in America than in Europe. It also explains why they rarely thrive in large cities. In provincial towns, villages and suburbs around the continent, people whose jobs and livelihoods have been disrupted by immigration, outsourcing and automation no longer fit into the same social democratic “big tent” as urban professionals, ethnic minority voters, students and public-sector workers. The decline of the trade unions has further added to this sense of alienation from the centre-left establishment.
I wonder if Boris might have chosen a happier metaphor than 'Peasant's revolt' to describe the success of UKIP and its disparate brethren across Europe:
Nick Clegg would quit if he cared a jot for his party. He has been political poison ever since he promised to cut tuition fees and then did the reverse.
To beat that...
A Tory leader would have to join the Euro. A labour leader would do an NHS share issue UKIP and the SNP would advocate closer union.
Do we know if UKIP voters are more likely to vote at Euro elections than the other parties? If so would the 4.4 mil voters be the ceiling for a general election ~ 14.7%? Which doesn't quite seem high enough to gain more than half a dozen seats - less than the Sinn Fein no shows for instance - hardly a position of holding the balance of power?
Feel free to correct my logic - just pondering the question...
Hello and welcome.
I think your logic is broadly right and yes, UKIP voters are more motivated to vote in the Euros than supporters of other parties. However, looking forward, the answer depends on whether UKIP's voters are motivated primarily by Europe, in which case their score this week is indeed around their ceiling, or whether they can morph into the primary NOTA / only X can stop Y party at a general election too. If so, they'll be able to reach other voters who abstained in the Euros.
In London, I see UKIP topped the poll in Havering, and Bexley, and came second in Bromley, Sutton, Hillingdon, and Barking and Dagenham.
It's particularly encouraging to see Euroscepticism flourishing in Heath's old constituency. His reaction to the results would have been absolutely hilarious.
The old adage, "When in a (deep) hole - stop digging" appears not to have been taught at Westminster - Clegg's alma mater - nor at the College of Europe.
So whilst the other parties have: one glass near the measure, two half-full or half-empty, the LDs are just left with the lees (dead yeast).
It is almost inconceivable, when in a debate with Farage that Clegg, whilst advocating the benefits of being in the EU, did not add several large BUTs or caveats whilst explaining that due to the passage of time and its enlargement, that several important EU reforms were required. That would have given him the first step out of his hole.
To have lost their only seat in one of their strongholds - the SW - must put in doubt their incumbency effect there.
Also as the polls show that the LDs are mainly the party that is strongly in favour of the EU, immigration and ECHR (the electorate does not really separate the two institutions and views them as part of the EU); will this autumn's LD conference seek a change of tack (as well as leader) or will they just carry on regardless? For it is of little use changing a leader whilst sticking to an unpopular policy.
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
MD, two cheeks of the same arse.
Noted that if so, that arse won more votes than Labour and very nearly as many as the SNP.
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
I expect the walls of the sandcastle will simply be built higher.
As I mentioned to TSE the other day, I had a very interesting lunch with a political editor and a former diplomat recently. Consensus was that time is great in terms of potential for a renegotiation:
- Germany: has the whip hand because it writes the cheques. Very keen to avoid the UK laving as they will be outnumbered by the South going forward. Merkel very receptive to flattery: seriously impressed by the effort made on her state visit (addressing Parliament, meeting the Queen etc. Sad but true!). And she really really doesn't like Hollande. Germany can deliver a bunch of the minor states in the south.
- Extremely close relationship with the Swedes and the Dutch
- Denmark being bought off by Cameron proposing Helle for President of the European Commission
- Poland and the Baltics have moved sharply into the UK's camp following Ukraine: they fear that the EU ex Britain would be very pro Russia.
They were also quite detailed on the list of concessions they think that Cameron can get (and wants). But they don't think it will be enough to convince people - and Cameron has to take 2/3 of his party with him. He'd rather campaign for 'out' than split the Tories; and these guys didn't think that the list of winnable concessions was enough to bring the party with him.
They also felt that there are only two ways a referendum can be won by the OUT side: (1) The EU gives a demonstrably bad deal to the UK, offending the Brits sense of fair play, and the government campaigns against membership or (2) Miliband is forced into a referendum, as an unpopular PM, and campaigns for IN - but the voters decide to use the vote to kick him instead
I didn’t think matters could be worse for the Libdems until I watched someone called Martin Tod laying into a red-faced and punch-drunk Danny Alexander on BBC during the night. Tod seemed to want a disavowal of all the Libdems leadership had done in the last four years, while poor old Danny kept mumbling about the (rapidly shrinking) redoubts where they still had some credibility. I got a nasty feeling we were heading for three party politics – but the Libdems were not one of the three.
Nick Clegg would quit if he cared a jot for his party. He has been political poison ever since he promised to cut tuition fees and then did the reverse.
To beat that...
A Tory leader would have to join the Euro. A labour leader would do an NHS share issue UKIP and the SNP would advocate closer union.
His remaining presence is surreal.
Following on The Green leader could say 'actually who gives a toss about global warming , lets build coal power stations' Nick Griffen could attend the Notting Hill Carnival dancing with some performers (trendy policeman like) after spending the previous Friday in a mosque appreciating diversity in religion
In London, I see UKIP topped the poll in Havering, and Bexley, and came second in Bromley, Sutton, Hillingdon, and Barking and Dagenham.
It's particularly encouraging to see Euroscepticism flourishing in Heath's old constituency. His reaction to the results would have been absolutely hilarious.
The truly monumental event of the whole Euros? Rise of UKIP? Nah. Collapse of the LibDems? Forget it.
No, the most striking event of the whole election was how close the Tory prognosticators came to the final result in the Ladbrokes challenge - thereby nailing the lie "PBTories are always wrong".....
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
I expect the walls of the sandcastle will simply be built higher.
As I mentioned to TSE the other day, I had a very interesting lunch with a political editor and a former diplomat recently. Consensus was that time is great in terms of potential for a renegotiation:
- Germany: has the whip hand because it writes the cheques. Very keen to avoid the UK laving as they will be outnumbered by the South going forward. Merkel very receptive to flattery: seriously impressed by the effort made on her state visit (addressing Parliament, meeting the Queen etc. Sad but true!). And she really really doesn't like Hollande. Germany can deliver a bunch of the minor states in the south.
- Extremely close relationship with the Swedes and the Dutch
- Denmark being bought off by Cameron proposing Helle for President of the European Commission
- Poland and the Baltics have moved sharply into the UK's camp following Ukraine: they fear that the EU ex Britain would be very pro Russia.
They were also quite detailed on the list of concessions they think that Cameron can get (and wants). But they don't think it will be enough to convince people - and Cameron has to take 2/3 of his party with him. He'd rather campaign for 'out' than split the Tories; and these guys didn't think that the list of winnable concessions was enough to bring the party with him.
They also felt that there are only two ways a referendum can be won by the OUT side: (1) The EU gives a demonstrably bad deal to the UK, offending the Brits sense of fair play, and the government campaigns against membership or (2) Miliband is forced into a referendum, as an unpopular PM, and campaigns for IN - but the voters decide to use the vote to kick him instead
What were the details of the concessions? How does them not being enough to convince people chime with the OUT side finding it difficult to win?
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
The great thing about the word "reform" is that it means something different to everybody. I'm still not sure what Cameron actually wants, but I'm pretty sure he's not demanding more protectionism and less globalization.
What I'm told is the following*:
- Amendment on the 'ever closer union' clause in the form of a protocol. [No one cares] - Restrictions on the ability to claim benefits by EU migrants [Everyone agrees] - No further enlargement without very long (20-30 year) transitional arrangement [UK falling into line with other members policy; we were always out on a limb on this - After this it becomes much more difficult. Their view was this was not compelling.
* Important caveat: the government is keeping the cards very close to its chest. The only ones who know their objectives, plans & strategy are Cameron, Osborne, Hague and Llewellyn. If it doesn't come from one of them directly it is either speculation or bullsh1t. I'd put the above list in the category of well-informed speculation.
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
Agreed. There are now irrefutable signs that the Scottish Tories are, at last, recovering. I would be astonished if they poll less than 20% of the Scottish vote at the next UK GE. That means that they would have at least 3 Scottish MPs (Mundell + West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine + Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk), and perhaps 1 or 2 more.
Do you think they have a chance in Argyll and Bute?
Absolutely. Argyll & Bute is that rare species: a four-way marginal. In other words, any of the parties could win it, even the Tories.
Note: SLAB had a great by-election gain (from independent SNP) in Oban South and the Isles on Thursday. Their first Argyll&Bute councillor in many years. Their victory went totally unnoticed because of the fuss over the English Euros and locals, but together with their two Fife HOLDS on Thursday, will give them a morale boost.
In London, I see UKIP topped the poll in Havering, and Bexley, and came second in Bromley, Sutton, Hillingdon, and Barking and Dagenham.
It's particularly encouraging to see Euroscepticism flourishing in Heath's old constituency. His reaction to the results would have been absolutely hilarious.
A pity he's not still alive
Sean, does the word "petty-minded" mean anything to you?
FWIW, Bexley borough covers a much larger area than Heath's old seat did.
But a substantial segment of the old centre-left base—the older, white, post-industrial blue collar voters who feel economically and culturally marginalised—went to the Eurosceptic right: to parties (different though they may be in tone and emphasis) like the True Finns, the Front National and UKIP.
These socio-economic forces explain why such parties are almost universally hostile to globalisation and immigration, why they lean towards protectionism and why they engage in the sort of cultural politics that until recently was more common in America than in Europe. It also explains why they rarely thrive in large cities. In provincial towns, villages and suburbs around the continent, people whose jobs and livelihoods have been disrupted by immigration, outsourcing and automation no longer fit into the same social democratic “big tent” as urban professionals, ethnic minority voters, students and public-sector workers. The decline of the trade unions has further added to this sense of alienation from the centre-left establishment.
Economist speaking drivel again. UKIP are pro-globalisation and want to sign trade deals with Brazil and India, and have said so on a number of occasions.
Interesting insights there. Snags are obviously France, who would need to be part of a deal and are not in a mood to compromise, Sweden, which will switch Government (95% certainty) this autumn and Hungary (just naturally awkward and would need to be bought off big time).
Also, whatever it is, it won't be there by 2017 - the EU simply doesn't work that quickly - so Cameron's strategy will presumably be to have a referendum on his negotiating hand (which he'd win) and then say "close enough, we don't need another referendum" if and when a deal was done.
But the main problem as you say is that the available concessions won't be enough for the sceptics - they'll feel it's like the Wilson "renegotiation".
In London, I see UKIP topped the poll in Havering, and Bexley, and came second in Bromley, Sutton, Hillingdon, and Barking and Dagenham.
It's particularly encouraging to see Euroscepticism flourishing in Heath's old constituency. His reaction to the results would have been absolutely hilarious.
A pity he's not still alive
That wasn't what you said when he died. If I recall correctly, it was "he won't be missed".
In London, I see UKIP topped the poll in Havering, and Bexley, and came second in Bromley, Sutton, Hillingdon, and Barking and Dagenham.
It's particularly encouraging to see Euroscepticism flourishing in Heath's old constituency. His reaction to the results would have been absolutely hilarious.
A pity he's not still alive
Sean, does the word "petty-minded" mean anything to you?
Yes. It describes Heath perfectly - along with vindictive and dishonest.
Reminds me of that conman in the South Sea Bubble who set up a company which promised "an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is"
It paid for our country house.
That's a great advantage (at least to members of the National Trust)
They also felt that there are only two ways a referendum can be won by the OUT side: (1) The EU gives a demonstrably bad deal to the UK, offending the Brits sense of fair play, and the government campaigns against membership or (2) Miliband is forced into a referendum, as an unpopular PM, and campaigns for IN - but the voters decide to use the vote to kick him instead
Charles, thanks for sharing that with the class. Far and away the best summary of the matter I have seen anywhere.
Yes, we should celebrate the fact that our nutjobs aren't half as nutty as most of the nutjobs around the EU. Sitting here in Hungary, where a party that has had a paramilitary wing has tallied just under 20% of the vote, makes me appreciate that while UKIP are rancid and vile, they are merely highly reactionary and bigoted rather than outright threatening.
UKIP are actually one of the least rancid and vile parties in the UK. The party that allows people to say other ethnic groups "love playing divide and rule" and remain in good standing, and go on about businessmen being "predators" are obviously the really nasty ones. But of course, nastiness is ignored when it comes to Europhiles by the metropolitan elite.
Now of course not all SLAB will vote no (tho the vast majority of Con will).......but it's hardly got "Yes landslide" written all over it....
Carnyx, twisted Tory Scottish hating logic, apples and oranges points to pears.
PS. I have to say though that UKIP getting a seat in Scotland is very depressing, have to wonder what cretins voted that way.
Salmond spent the last two weeks talking about nothing but UKIP and then last night complained that the BbC was responsible for their success by giving them too much coverage. Old fool.
And Nicola Sturgeon:
Nicola Sturgeon: 'Voting SNP is the only way to stop Ukip'
The remarks, which came at the SNP's European election manifesto launch in Edinburgh, suggest the party has moved from viewing Ukip as an irrelevance in Scotland to a genuine political contender.
Last year Alex Salmond dismissed Ukip's appeal north of the border by saying they "dislike everybody" and know "absolutely nothing about Scotland".
I see you are unwilling to discuss Tory thrashing in England, keep pointing north where UKIP got 10% and ignore the embarrassment of Tory thrashing down south.
I've already said that I suspect they'll be fairly pleased with how they did - and Labour have pause for thought.
Now that the Weir's Euro Millions have been spent - how are the YESNP going to close the (year old) 10 point gap?
huge part of Weir's money is in the SNP bank account.
Where it will sit, as spending limits start in 4 days.....which has clearly passed you by.....
Yawn, you seem to just want to sneer rather than take the point of posts> Please do not ever post to me again , I will not bother discussing further with you.
Thanks Jack for your reassuring thoughts - I am just pretending this election hadn't happened.
If I had a vote in Scotland then perhaps I would be more likely to vote to leave a UKIP infected England.
LibDems just have to be realistic.
Governing parties take a hammering in most free hit elections and LibDems and in particular the leadership knew full well that each year up to the May 2015 GE was going to be an electoral trauma.
Basically it's May 2015 or bust. Fortunately for the LibDems there are enough morsels left on the table for them to get their teeth into and with plenty of decent economic courses on the horizon.
Has AIFE got up to 1.5% nationally (I know they seem to have with the English regions but were not standing in Wales or Scotland)?
Looks like wily old Shadsy has lured a lot of naive punters who were only thinking about England. AIFE were not on the ballot paper in either Scotland or Wales.
Yes I knew that before punting on it but looking around thought enough dim people in England would get them over 1.5% .Maybe I should move from my spot of it!! Good market making though by shadsy!! Got the line bang on
It is astonishing how astute he usually is in these assessments. Makes other political bookies (eg. BetVictor) look like total amateurs.
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
Agreed. There are now irrefutable signs that the Scottish Tories are, at last, recovering. I would be astonished if they poll less than 20% of the Scottish vote at the next UK GE. That means that they would have at least 3 Scottish MPs (Mundell + West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine + Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk), and perhaps 1 or 2 more.
Do you think they have a chance in Argyll and Bute?
Absolutely. Argyll & Bute is that rare species: a four-way marginal. In other words, any of the parties could win it, even the Tories.
Note: SLAB had a great by-election gain (from independent SNP) in Oban South and the Isles on Thursday. Their first Argyll&Bute councillor in many years. Their victory went totally unnoticed because of the fuss over the English Euros and locals, but together with their two Fife HOLDS on Thursday, will give them a morale boost.
Actually, talking of ScotTory performance, they outdid the English and Welsh party at a canter I'm going to see what the best odds I can get on a full blue borders result in 2015 after the D and G result and have a nibble. I've got a feeling that might be their only 3 unless it's no and the SNP fall back/tartan Tories wander home.
Interesting insights there. Snags are obviously France, who would need to be part of a deal and are not in a mood to compromise, Sweden, which will switch Government (95% certainty) this autumn and Hungary (just naturally awkward and would need to be bought off big time).
Also, whatever it is, it won't be there by 2017 - the EU simply doesn't work that quickly - so Cameron's strategy will presumably be to have a referendum on his negotiating hand (which he'd win) and then say "close enough, we don't need another referendum" if and when a deal was done.
But the main problem as you say is that the available concessions won't be enough for the sceptics - they'll feel it's like the Wilson "renegotiation".
That depends on how keen various governments are on doing the deal. Last night's results were disastrous for Hollande. He may very well be looking at a first round exit in 2017 (note the date!). A deal that would bring his own WWC back onside might be no bad thing for his electoral prospects. If France, Germany, the Nordic countries, Poland and the Dutch are on side, a deal could be done.
If Clegg had anything about him, he'd agree and put forward his own list of preferred reforms (far greater democracy?), acknowledging that there's something deeply rotten in the current set-up and allowing the ball to get rolling now. He won't, of course.
Mr. G, didn't UKIP very nearly beat Labour in Wales? Calling UKIP English is what some Scots really hate: describing something British as English.
MD, but they really are and their only policy is UK out of EU. Can only assume they picked up people who want out of EU and especially the anti immigration people. You have to wonder at the mentality of the no immigration mob, who do they think will fund their welfare benefits in the future.
Well, in rUK we can probably expect a flood of English-speaking immigrants following a YES vote.
Mr. G, they've won seats in England and Wales, and will pick up a seat in Scotland too.
I do wonder if this will affect how Scots and leftwing areas elsewhere view the Conservatives. Will they remain the evil baby-eaters, or will UKIP assume that mantle and the blues be seen as at least 'better than UKIP'.
Mr. W, the General Election's looking interesting.
MD, two cheeks of the same arse.
Noted that if so, that arse won more votes than Labour and very nearly as many as the SNP.
David, agreed and anyone beating Labour is a bonus. Not happy with UKIP mind you , that is purely down to media scaremongering on immigration, led by Westminster government. Shocking on both points.
In London, I see UKIP topped the poll in Havering, and Bexley, and came second in Bromley, Sutton, Hillingdon, and Barking and Dagenham.
It's particularly encouraging to see Euroscepticism flourishing in Heath's old constituency. His reaction to the results would have been absolutely hilarious.
A pity he's not still alive
That wasn't what you said when he died. If I recall correctly, it was "he won't be missed".
The truly monumental event of the whole Euros? Rise of UKIP? Nah. Collapse of the LibDems? Forget it.
No, the most striking event of the whole election was how close the Tory prognosticators came to the final result in the Ladbrokes challenge - thereby nailing the lie "PBTories are always wrong".....
Nick Clegg would quit if he cared a jot for his party. He has been political poison ever since he promised to cut tuition fees and then did the reverse.
To beat that...
A Tory leader would have to join the Euro. A labour leader would do an NHS share issue UKIP and the SNP would advocate closer union.
His remaining presence is surreal.
By the way, turning the NHS into a series of regional mutuals owned by the patients is not the worst idea in the world...
Wondering what it would actually take for the LDs to replace Nick Clegg. He exerts a bizarre hypnotism over the entire party. It has a death wish.
(1) Parties are reluctant to change leaders whom they like and agree with. It feels cynical, and even most political people dislike feeling that to themselves (though they will shrug off the accusation from others). (2) Does anyone WANT to take over the ship as it steams full tilt towards the iceberg? Better to be the knight in shining armour who arrives with lifeboats after the crash?
Yes, we should celebrate the fact that our nutjobs aren't half as nutty as most of the nutjobs around the EU. Sitting here in Hungary, where a party that has had a paramilitary wing has tallied just under 20% of the vote, makes me appreciate that while UKIP are rancid and vile, they are merely highly reactionary and bigoted rather than outright threatening.
That's a fair point. We are fairly lucky in our reactionary movement, compared with many countries - I'd vote UKIP over Front Nationale or Jobbik or Golden Dawn in a heartbeat.
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
The great thing about the word "reform" is that it means something different to everybody. I'm still not sure what Cameron actually wants, but I'm pretty sure he's not demanding more protectionism and less globalization.
What I'm told is the following*:
- Amendment on the 'ever closer union' clause in the form of a protocol. [No one cares] - Restrictions on the ability to claim benefits by EU migrants [Everyone agrees] - No further enlargement without very long (20-30 year) transitional arrangement [UK falling into line with other members policy; we were always out on a limb on this - After this it becomes much more difficult. Their view was this was not compelling.
* Important caveat: the government is keeping the cards very close to its chest. The only ones who know their objectives, plans & strategy are Cameron, Osborne, Hague and Llewellyn. If it doesn't come from one of them directly it is either speculation or bullsh1t. I'd put the above list in the category of well-informed speculation.
So in terms of practical powers returned, it's just benefits. Yes, that would be pathetic, and recognised as such. If we look at the polls here, we can see what the public want returned:
- Immigration and border controls - Human rights law - Farming subsidies - Fishing rights
I believe I've seen another poll where they also asked about trade rights and the public wanted that too. I don't see how you can have a repatriation seen as successful without two (or one and two partials) out of those five.
Interesting insights there. Snags are obviously France, who would need to be part of a deal and are not in a mood to compromise, Sweden, which will switch Government (95% certainty) this autumn and Hungary (just naturally awkward and would need to be bought off big time).
Also, whatever it is, it won't be there by 2017 - the EU simply doesn't work that quickly - so Cameron's strategy will presumably be to have a referendum on his negotiating hand (which he'd win) and then say "close enough, we don't need another referendum" if and when a deal was done.
But the main problem as you say is that the available concessions won't be enough for the sceptics - they'll feel it's like the Wilson "renegotiation".
That depends on how keen various governments are on doing the deal. Last night's results were disastrous for Hollande. He may very well be looking at a first round exit in 2017 (note the date!). A deal that would bring his own WWC back onside might be no bad thing for his electoral prospects. If France, Germany, the Nordic countries, Poland and the Dutch are on side, a deal could be done.
If Clegg had anything about him, he'd agree and put forward his own list of preferred reforms (far greater democracy?), acknowledging that there's something deeply rotten in the current set-up and allowing the ball to get rolling now. He won't, of course.
DH: Is NC scared of losing his pensions or of not gaining an EU post?
Interesting insights there. Snags are obviously France, who would need to be part of a deal and are not in a mood to compromise, Sweden, which will switch Government (95% certainty) this autumn and Hungary (just naturally awkward and would need to be bought off big time).
Also, whatever it is, it won't be there by 2017 - the EU simply doesn't work that quickly - so Cameron's strategy will presumably be to have a referendum on his negotiating hand (which he'd win) and then say "close enough, we don't need another referendum" if and when a deal was done.
But the main problem as you say is that the available concessions won't be enough for the sceptics - they'll feel it's like the Wilson "renegotiation".
That depends on how keen various governments are on doing the deal. Last night's results were disastrous for Hollande. He may very well be looking at a first round exit in 2017 (note the date!). A deal that would bring his own WWC back onside might be no bad thing for his electoral prospects. If France, Germany, the Nordic countries, Poland and the Dutch are on side, a deal could be done.
If Clegg had anything about him, he'd agree and put forward his own list of preferred reforms (far greater democracy?), acknowledging that there's something deeply rotten in the current set-up and allowing the ball to get rolling now. He won't, of course.
The leader of the fifth party of England and the sixth of Scotland and Wales? Does anyone care what he thinks anymore?
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
I expect the walls of the sandcastle will simply be built higher.
As I mentioned to TSE the other day, I had a very interesting lunch with a political editor and a former diplomat recently. Consensus was that time is great in terms of potential for a renegotiation:
- Germany: has the whip hand because it writes the cheques. Very keen to avoid the UK laving as they will be outnumbered by the South going forward. Merkel very receptive to flattery: seriously impressed by the effort made on her state visit (addressing Parliament, meeting the Queen etc. Sad but true!). And she really really doesn't like Hollande. Germany can deliver a bunch of the minor states in the south.
- Extremely close relationship with the Swedes and the Dutch
- Denmark being bought off by Cameron proposing Helle for President of the European Commission
- Poland and the Baltics have moved sharply into the UK's camp following Ukraine: they fear that the EU ex Britain would be very pro Russia.
They were also quite detailed on the list of concessions they think that Cameron can get (and wants). But they don't think it will be enough to convince people - and Cameron has to take 2/3 of his party with him. He'd rather campaign for 'out' than split the Tories; and these guys didn't think that the list of winnable concessions was enough to bring the party with him.
They also felt that there are only two ways a referendum can be won by the OUT side: (1) The EU gives a demonstrably bad deal to the UK, offending the Brits sense of fair play, and the government campaigns against membership or (2) Miliband is forced into a referendum, as an unpopular PM, and campaigns for IN - but the voters decide to use the vote to kick him instead
What were the details of the concessions? How does them not being enough to convince people chime with the OUT side finding it difficult to win?
This was a lunch discussion - headlines only.
Not enough to convince (see my second post) refers to the Tory party, not the voters. Actually looking at my notes, the phrase was "not very compelling" rather than "not enough to convince"
@NickPalmer - "Sweden, which will switch Government (95% certainty) "
95% is about right. The Moderate Party (of which I am a member) got absolutely spanked last night (13%). Cannot say that I am surprised. The names at the top of the Moderate MEP list are, to be very kind, very "tired". We desperately need new blood, preferably women, and preferably under the age of 40.
Patrician snobby Stockholmers and Young Conservative type wide-boys go down like dog poo with Swedish voters.
"I've got a feeling that might be their only 3 unless it's no and the SNP fall back/tartan Tories wander home. "
I was thinking the same, do we know how many ex tartan Tories now support the SNP and if so what %age are likely to revert to their former party under your scenario?
The Tory vote holding up relatively well is a crumb of comfort, and suggests that there is still all to play for next year. One thing I've been considering is that the rise in support for parties who are to a greater or lesser degree eurosceptic across Europe may paradoxically strengthen Cameron's hand. It may make European governments more receptive to a case for reform.
The great thing about the word "reform" is that it means something different to everybody. I'm still not sure what Cameron actually wants, but I'm pretty sure he's not demanding more protectionism and less globalization.
What I'm told is the following*:
- Amendment on the 'ever closer union' clause in the form of a protocol. [No one cares] - Restrictions on the ability to claim benefits by EU migrants [Everyone agrees] - No further enlargement without very long (20-30 year) transitional arrangement [UK falling into line with other members policy; we were always out on a limb on this - After this it becomes much more difficult. Their view was this was not compelling.
* Important caveat: the government is keeping the cards very close to its chest. The only ones who know their objectives, plans & strategy are Cameron, Osborne, Hague and Llewellyn. If it doesn't come from one of them directly it is either speculation or bullsh1t. I'd put the above list in the category of well-informed speculation.
So in terms of practical powers returned, it's just benefits. Yes, that would be pathetic, and recognised as such. If we look at the polls here, we can see what the public want returned:
- Immigration and border controls - Human rights law - Farming subsidies - Fishing rights
I believe I've seen another poll where they also asked about trade rights and the public wanted that too. I don't see how you can have a repatriation seen as successful without two (or one and two partials) out of those five.
And I would lay odds that - if the poll had asked - the public would have wanted bus fares repatriated, too. Can any of us imagine saying, of any decision about anything, that we want it taken further away than nearer to us?
Mr. G, didn't UKIP very nearly beat Labour in Wales? Calling UKIP English is what some Scots really hate: describing something British as English.
MD, but they really are and their only policy is UK out of EU. Can only assume they picked up people who want out of EU and especially the anti immigration people. You have to wonder at the mentality of the no immigration mob, who do they think will fund their welfare benefits in the future.
Well, in rUK we can probably expect a flood of English-speaking immigrants following a YES vote.
John, what makes you think that, is it just ignorance and prejudice or do you have some inside knowledge.
But JackW, the LibDems have spent four years acting as though their being in the Coalition is something unutterably horrible. They seem unable to run forward promoting the strong economic growth because they might have to say something nice about George Osborne in the process. And the Tories - they are just frightfully beastly.
Liberal Democrats, you did a WONDERFUL THING! You bed-blocked Labour, you saw off the woeful Gordon Brown, you have delivered tax-free incomes for the poorest in society, you have been party to the right of gay marriage being enacted, you have been part of an economic stability that has allowed employers firstly to retain staff during the recession - and then to take on staff so that unemployment is W-A-Y lower than almost any forecasters dare suggest (and fully half what some on the left screamed it would be).
Unlike Labour, you have a strong case to make on how to run an economy. You could be the Sensible Left of British politics - especially against the twin numpties of Ed Miliband and Ed Balls. Go and shout it from the rooftops - The LibDems have been GOOD FOR BRITAIN! They have been part of a government bringing WORK TO THE WORKERS! But don't be namby-pamby about it. Go for Labour's gonads! (Must be someone in your party with micro-surgery skills?)
Unfortunately, to move forward with this task, you are going to need a new leader....
Interesting insights there. Snags are obviously France, who would need to be part of a deal and are not in a mood to compromise, Sweden, which will switch Government (95% certainty) this autumn and Hungary (just naturally awkward and would need to be bought off big time).
Also, whatever it is, it won't be there by 2017 - the EU simply doesn't work that quickly - so Cameron's strategy will presumably be to have a referendum on his negotiating hand (which he'd win) and then say "close enough, we don't need another referendum" if and when a deal was done.
But the main problem as you say is that the available concessions won't be enough for the sceptics - they'll feel it's like the Wilson "renegotiation".
The biggest risk is France, as you say.
The veto was actually a cock-up. The Brits thought they had done a deal with Germany, but at the last moment, France called on the Franco-German axis and Germany bent. Sarkozy, for domestic reasons, wasn't prepared to leave Cameron any fig leaves - and after a couple of calls back to London (to people who know what the parliamentary party thinks) Cameron realised they had no choice to veto. The Brits thought it was a disaster - until they got back to London and everyone was excited...
Essentially it's presenting Germany with a choice: do you want to keep Britain in the room or do you want to be there on your own with France and a bunch of spendthrifts.
And if Britain does vote to leave what message does that send about Europe's attractiveness to global business?
But JackW, the LibDems have spent four years acting as though their being in the Coalition is something unutterably horrible. They seem unable to run forward promoting the strong economic growth because they might have to say something nice about George Osborne in the process. And the Tories - they are just frightfully beastly.
Liberal Democrats, you did a WONDERFUL THING! You bed-blocked Labour, you saw off the woeful Gordon Brown, you have delivered tax-free incomes for the poorest in society, you have been party to the right of gay marriage being enacted, you have been part of an economic stability that has allowed employers firstly to retain staff during the recession - and then to take on staff so that unemployment is W-A-Y lower than almost any forecasters dare suggest (and fully half what some on the left screamed it would be).
Unlike Labour, you have a strong case to make on how to run an economy. You could be the Sensible Left of British politics - especially against the twin numpties of Ed Miliband and Ed Balls. Go and shout it from the rooftops - The LibDems have been GOOD FOR BRITAIN! They have been part of a government bringing WORK TO THE WORKERS! But don't be namby-pamby about it. Go for Labour's gonads! (Must be someone in your party with micro-surgery skills?)
Unfortunately, to move forward with this task, you are going to need a new leader....
But if British politics had a Sensible Left, what would we need the Tory Party (let alone UKIP) for? I mean, it's not as if the serried ranks of Peebies don't offer us a clue, is it?
"I've got a feeling that might be their only 3 unless it's no and the SNP fall back/tartan Tories wander home. "
I was thinking the same, do we know how many ex tartan Tories now support the SNP and if so what %age are likely to revert to their former party under your scenario?
There will be next to none on a NO vote and if YES it would need a clear out of the current rubbish that is the regional London Tory party. They have a very very long way to go before they even get close to getting a handful of MP's. They are still hated with a vengeance.
Comments
Now that the Weir's Euro Millions have been spent - how are the YESNP going to close the (year old) 10 point gap?
Though whether the same people stayed at home is open to analysis. We may have had a lot of churn between all the parties. I suspect the kippers got most of the BNP vote, but some will have gone elsewhere.
The other notable part of these elections was the car crash campaign stunts of Ed Miliband, which does note bode well for Labour next year.
However let's not get too overheated on this angle as these are Euro elections that have little relevance and are the greatest protest vote available to the punters.
If you voted Labour in the Euros, you were getting...er...repeal of the bedroom tax? There was not even a vague attempt to spell out what the Labour-in-Europe message was.
The same will happen in May 2015, except it will be the Tory agenda where people will know what they are getting. Labour, what will they give you on the economy? Some socialist sentimentality with the life squeezed out of it by the reality that they will have no money to spend. The days of pissing a trillion pounds up a wall are long gone.
Of course he will downplay the impact of UKIP - just as he underplayed the impact of the Euro crisis after having strove for so many years to get the UK to join it.
"UKIP are rancid and vile."
You come across as a very reasonable and thoughtful person in most of your postings, yet in common with some others, you lose a sense of perspective when it comes to Ukip. I had an interesting conversation on Thursday night when a friend made similar comments. I mentioned that I'd voted Ukip for the first ever time. "Ah," he said. "But you just did it for devilment."
There may be some truth in that, but it 's not the full story. Ukip can reflect the annoyance that voters feel when being told what's good for them.
The important next step for Ukip is their manifesto in September. It will be cherry-picked and distorted - that is politics - but if if, as I suspect, it's a mixture of socially conservative and economically left policies, the established parties may need to worry. And to be honest, I quite like the odd, inarticulate spokesperson that they sometimes put up. I happily put up with the LD oddities - I quite liked Tim Farron's peculiar excuses last night, for instance.
Back to three party politics. LibDems have to get used to life in the "others" column. Who in their right mind (and even their wooly, muesli-addled mind) is going to fund the LibDems now? Their income from the MEP's is gone, much of their income from their councillors is gone. It is reduced to a party of jumble sales. Certainly whilst Nick Clegg remains in charge.
What special something does Nick Clegg's ego tell him he still brings to the leadership of his party? It's a mystery....
Also if you had really understood Scotland you would know that a huge part of Weir's money is in the SNP bank account.
Aren't you a PPE graduate Charles ?
One irony of it that despite PR being needed now more than ever, if the representation is to be anything close to meaningful, the Westminster establishment will close ranks against it (for precisely the same reason).
As I've argued before, a more audacious approach would be for the Tories to embrace such a change, negating the need to do any deals with UKIP before an election (which would tar both parties with potential supporters), and look instead to do a deal afterwards, either with the Lib Dems again or with UKIP, depending on how the figures work out. After the mauling they took in local and Euro elections, as well as their keenness on the issue, the Lib Dems might go along with that.
As an aside, it's becoming a received wisdom that making electoral pacts with a new insurgent party is always a bad idea, the case of Labour and the Liberals being usually cited. This isn't true; it depends on how it's handled. Labour was only really able to break out from under the Libs because the Libs (1) went into coalition with the Tories during WWI, (2) subsequently split into two hostile camps, and (3) then had one of those factions fight the election in coalition with the Tories. By contrast, the way in which the Conservatives allied with and then suffocated the Liberal Unionists between 1890 and 1918, and the National Liberals between 1931 and the 50s shows how it can be done. I'm not saying Con and UKIP should do a deal but the notion that if one was done then it'd be the Tories signing their death warrant and handing it to their executioner is at best a misreading of history.
But a substantial segment of the old centre-left base—the older, white, post-industrial blue collar voters who feel economically and culturally marginalised—went to the Eurosceptic right: to parties (different though they may be in tone and emphasis) like the True Finns, the Front National and UKIP.
These socio-economic forces explain why such parties are almost universally hostile to globalisation and immigration, why they lean towards protectionism and why they engage in the sort of cultural politics that until recently was more common in America than in Europe. It also explains why they rarely thrive in large cities. In provincial towns, villages and suburbs around the continent, people whose jobs and livelihoods have been disrupted by immigration, outsourcing and automation no longer fit into the same social democratic “big tent” as urban professionals, ethnic minority voters, students and public-sector workers. The decline of the trade unions has further added to this sense of alienation from the centre-left establishment.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2014/05/eu-election-britain
The irony.
It might also have gained them an extra MEP in Yorkshire at the expense of the Conservatives.
The irony.
It might also have gained them an MEP in Scotland.
The irony.
So given that Europe doesn't motivate Labour voters at all as an issue, it could be worse for Ed. But to achieve a similar result to Blair in the Iraq war should give Ed pause.
Yes I knew that before punting on it but looking around thought enough dim people in England would get them over 1.5% .Maybe I should move from my spot of it!! Good market making though by shadsy!! Got the line bang on
Shetland and Gibraltar ....
However in all seriousness the LibDems remain important in this "Coalition period" with 56 MP's and still well over 2,000 councillors. If they had to lose over 90% of their seats in one go as they did last night then the LibDems would surely opt for the barely relevant Euro elections.
It is the May 2015 General Election feast that is the main event and not last night's thin horses doofers course.
If I had a vote in Scotland then perhaps I would be more likely to vote to leave a UKIP infected England.
"here is a kind of peasants’ revolt going on, a jacquerie. From Dublin to Lublin, from Portugal to Pomerania, the pitchfork-wielding populists are converging on the Breydel building in Brussels – drunk on local hooch and chanting nationalist slogans and preparing to give the federalist machinery a good old kicking with their authentically folkloric clogs. There are Greek anti-capitalists and Hungarian neo-fascists and polite German professors who want to bring back the Deutschemark. They are making common cause with Left-wing Italian comedians and Right-wing Dutch firebrands and the general slogan is simple: down with technocracy, down with bureaucracy, and give power back to the people!"
I think the prospects of renegotiating the EU are better than ever, with both Sarkozy and Le Pen arguing for an end to Schengen and benefit tourism. When the French talk, Brussels (and Strasbourg) listen.
To beat that...
A Tory leader would have to join the Euro.
A labour leader would do an NHS share issue
UKIP and the SNP would advocate closer union.
His remaining presence is surreal.
I think your logic is broadly right and yes, UKIP voters are more motivated to vote in the Euros than supporters of other parties. However, looking forward, the answer depends on whether UKIP's voters are motivated primarily by Europe, in which case their score this week is indeed around their ceiling, or whether they can morph into the primary NOTA / only X can stop Y party at a general election too. If so, they'll be able to reach other voters who abstained in the Euros.
So whilst the other parties have: one glass near the measure, two half-full or half-empty, the LDs are just left with the lees (dead yeast).
It is almost inconceivable, when in a debate with Farage that Clegg, whilst advocating the benefits of being in the EU, did not add several large BUTs or caveats whilst explaining that due to the passage of time and its enlargement, that several important EU reforms were required. That would have given him the first step out of his hole.
To have lost their only seat in one of their strongholds - the SW - must put in doubt their incumbency effect there.
Also as the polls show that the LDs are mainly the party that is strongly in favour of the EU, immigration and ECHR (the electorate does not really separate the two institutions and views them as part of the EU); will this autumn's LD conference seek a change of tack (as well as leader) or will they just carry on regardless? For it is of little use changing a leader whilst sticking to an unpopular policy.
- Germany: has the whip hand because it writes the cheques. Very keen to avoid the UK laving as they will be outnumbered by the South going forward. Merkel very receptive to flattery: seriously impressed by the effort made on her state visit (addressing Parliament, meeting the Queen etc. Sad but true!). And she really really doesn't like Hollande. Germany can deliver a bunch of the minor states in the south.
- Extremely close relationship with the Swedes and the Dutch
- Denmark being bought off by Cameron proposing Helle for President of the European Commission
- Poland and the Baltics have moved sharply into the UK's camp following Ukraine: they fear that the EU ex Britain would be very pro Russia.
They were also quite detailed on the list of concessions they think that Cameron can get (and wants). But they don't think it will be enough to convince people - and Cameron has to take 2/3 of his party with him. He'd rather campaign for 'out' than split the Tories; and these guys didn't think that the list of winnable concessions was enough to bring the party with him.
They also felt that there are only two ways a referendum can be won by the OUT side: (1) The EU gives a demonstrably bad deal to the UK, offending the Brits sense of fair play, and the government campaigns against membership or (2) Miliband is forced into a referendum, as an unpopular PM, and campaigns for IN - but the voters decide to use the vote to kick him instead
Following on
The Green leader could say 'actually who gives a toss about global warming , lets build coal power stations'
Nick Griffen could attend the Notting Hill Carnival dancing with some performers (trendy policeman like) after spending the previous Friday in a mosque appreciating diversity in religion
Titters ....
No, the most striking event of the whole election was how close the Tory prognosticators came to the final result in the Ladbrokes challenge - thereby nailing the lie "PBTories are always wrong".....
https://user.nojam.com/pid/50/live/averagebygeparty.php
- Amendment on the 'ever closer union' clause in the form of a protocol. [No one cares]
- Restrictions on the ability to claim benefits by EU migrants [Everyone agrees]
- No further enlargement without very long (20-30 year) transitional arrangement [UK falling into line with other members policy; we were always out on a limb on this
- After this it becomes much more difficult. Their view was this was not compelling.
* Important caveat: the government is keeping the cards very close to its chest. The only ones who know their objectives, plans & strategy are Cameron, Osborne, Hague and Llewellyn. If it doesn't come from one of them directly it is either speculation or bullsh1t. I'd put the above list in the category of well-informed speculation.
Note: SLAB had a great by-election gain (from independent SNP) in Oban South and the Isles on Thursday. Their first Argyll&Bute councillor in many years. Their victory went totally unnoticed because of the fuss over the English Euros and locals, but together with their two Fife HOLDS on Thursday, will give them a morale boost.
FWIW, Bexley borough covers a much larger area than Heath's old seat did.
Also, whatever it is, it won't be there by 2017 - the EU simply doesn't work that quickly - so Cameron's strategy will presumably be to have a referendum on his negotiating hand (which he'd win) and then say "close enough, we don't need another referendum" if and when a deal was done.
But the main problem as you say is that the available concessions won't be enough for the sceptics - they'll feel it's like the Wilson "renegotiation".
That's a great advantage (at least to members of the National Trust)
Governing parties take a hammering in most free hit elections and LibDems and in particular the leadership knew full well that each year up to the May 2015 GE was going to be an electoral trauma.
Basically it's May 2015 or bust. Fortunately for the LibDems there are enough morsels left on the table for them to get their teeth into and with plenty of decent economic courses on the horizon.
The game is not yet run ....
I'm going to see what the best odds I can get on a full blue borders result in 2015 after the D and G result and have a nibble. I've got a feeling that might be their only 3 unless it's no and the SNP fall back/tartan Tories wander home.
If Clegg had anything about him, he'd agree and put forward his own list of preferred reforms (far greater democracy?), acknowledging that there's something deeply rotten in the current set-up and allowing the ball to get rolling now. He won't, of course.
Never mind, we;ve got the next best thing
Wonder how Ken Clark is feeling this morning??
Is there an individual winner yet?
Will they be nicknamed Arbroath smokies?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10_05/tab_ban1_WT_281011_Final.pdf
- Immigration and border controls
- Human rights law
- Farming subsidies
- Fishing rights
I believe I've seen another poll where they also asked about trade rights and the public wanted that too. I don't see how you can have a repatriation seen as successful without two (or one and two partials) out of those five.
Not enough to convince (see my second post) refers to the Tory party, not the voters. Actually looking at my notes, the phrase was "not very compelling" rather than "not enough to convince"
95% is about right. The Moderate Party (of which I am a member) got absolutely spanked last night (13%). Cannot say that I am surprised. The names at the top of the Moderate MEP list are, to be very kind, very "tired". We desperately need new blood, preferably women, and preferably under the age of 40.
Patrician snobby Stockholmers and Young Conservative type wide-boys go down like dog poo with Swedish voters.
"I've got a feeling that might be their only 3 unless it's no and the SNP fall back/tartan Tories wander home. "
I was thinking the same, do we know how many ex tartan Tories now support the SNP and if so what %age are likely to revert to their former party under your scenario?
Liberal Democrats, you did a WONDERFUL THING! You bed-blocked Labour, you saw off the woeful Gordon Brown, you have delivered tax-free incomes for the poorest in society, you have been party to the right of gay marriage being enacted, you have been part of an economic stability that has allowed employers firstly to retain staff during the recession - and then to take on staff so that unemployment is W-A-Y lower than almost any forecasters dare suggest (and fully half what some on the left screamed it would be).
Unlike Labour, you have a strong case to make on how to run an economy. You could be the Sensible Left of British politics - especially against the twin numpties of Ed Miliband and Ed Balls. Go and shout it from the rooftops - The LibDems have been GOOD FOR BRITAIN! They have been part of a government bringing WORK TO THE WORKERS! But don't be namby-pamby about it. Go for Labour's gonads! (Must be someone in your party with micro-surgery skills?)
Unfortunately, to move forward with this task, you are going to need a new leader....
The veto was actually a cock-up. The Brits thought they had done a deal with Germany, but at the last moment, France called on the Franco-German axis and Germany bent. Sarkozy, for domestic reasons, wasn't prepared to leave Cameron any fig leaves - and after a couple of calls back to London (to people who know what the parliamentary party thinks) Cameron realised they had no choice to veto. The Brits thought it was a disaster - until they got back to London and everyone was excited...
Essentially it's presenting Germany with a choice: do you want to keep Britain in the room or do you want to be there on your own with France and a bunch of spendthrifts.
And if Britain does vote to leave what message does that send about Europe's attractiveness to global business?