politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From the latest Ashcroft Marginals polling that should have

SystemSystem Posts: 11,691
edited June 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » From the latest Ashcroft Marginals polling that should have attracted the attention it deserves

As we wait for this afternoon’s Newark poll from Lord Ashcroft I thought it worth going back to his massive marginals polling published the weekend before last. Because of the timing, on the Saturday after the local results but before the Euros, it got nothing like the attention it deserved.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    First
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Interesting stuff, Mr. Smithson, but UKIP remains the joker in the pack. Very hard to call the election.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    And specifically, how many people want "UKIP-only", and how may "UKIP-Conservative coalition"?

    (Or indeed, "Labour-UKIP coalition"...)
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,422
    Lots of don't knows which could be important.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    You know you're in trouble when even Nick Clegg has a go

    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 2m

    Nick Clegg calls for 2022 World Cup bid to be re-run if S.Times claims proven
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,350
    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,948
    edited June 2014
    You wouldnt go far wrong backing UKIP in any of those constituencies IMO.. and when the election is nearer, hopefully "to finish 2nd" will be offered...
  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    Ashcroft and Populus are very decent polls for Labour.

    But I want another week before betting - the polls have been very erratic around the Euros and we would be unwise to read too much into them.
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,422
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    You know you're in trouble when even Nick Clegg has a go

    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 2m

    Nick Clegg calls for 2022 World Cup bid to be re-run if S.Times claims proven

    Is Clegg in a position to call for elections to be re-run given the suspicions over his leadership win ;)
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    On the seventh day the good lord rested .... and decided he couldn't be arsed about Ukip on a Monday ??

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Given the difficulties in marginals polling, I would not bet the house on this data being accurate. But the picture it paints is noteworthy.
  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    ToryJim said:

    Lots of don't knows which could be important.

    Yet again, we have this every time. AIUI DKs tend to break with the pledges.

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    FPT:
    @JackW said:

    Treachery from a kipper following the EU monarchies and not the true British nature of monarchy.

    Burn the Ukip traitor !!!!!!!!!!!

    Nothing personal you understand.
    ------------------------------------------
    Oh, I quite understand my Lord of the Hillocks. Mind you I didn't call for a Republic - I'm giving ageing Charlie a chance, so you must temper your outrage.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351

    Here's an interesting conclusion you could draw from those figures .... without Ukip, Labour would do very well.

    Yes, I know it's silly, but it's the sort of conclusion that politicians like to indulge in.
  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    Populus 37/32
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    On topic, when Lord Ashcroft publishes a major poll,

    1) Mike is on holiday

    2) Something major happens/is happening.

    I remember last year, he published a major poll on immigration, but it was the day after Cameron lost the Syria vote, and that got buried under everything else.

    Though Double Carpet, David Herdon, Morus and I all maintain 2 is caused by 1
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



    There's a huge Primark in the centre of Manchester, I refuse to become a Primani Prince.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,651
    Amazing that 22% would like to see the Lib Dems in government. That must be encouraging news for Mr Clegg et al.
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,422
    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    Roger Helmer is using a caravan, this alone makes it essential people do not vote for him.

    Christ, I wanna go all Sharia law on caravan owners.

    Roger Helmer ‏@RogerHelmerMEP 26m

    With Denise from Northampton in Newark Market Square.

    pic.twitter.com/K0ZgwEpst3
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,948
    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    He did, the results are on page 4

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    ToryJim said:

    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    He did, the results are on page 4

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
    tyvm: amused that I'm probably in the only constituency in the UK where the LibDems outpoll UKIP 4:1
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,350
    BobaFett said:

    Populus 37/32

    Virtuous united Labour on the rise. :-)
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,948
    Of all the marginals, Thurrock is the one where least Tory voters, and second least Labour voters rule out voting for UKIP

    Sherwood is the place where most Labour voters say they wouldnt rule out UKIP.. isnt that next to Newark? Is that relevant for tactics on Thursday?

    It's on page 7

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    edited June 2014
    YouGov Sunday Times

    If you HAD to choose, would you rather the LiberalmDemocrats worked with (after 2015) the Conservative party or the Labour party?

    Cons:36 (Cons and UKIP voters in favour)
    Labour: 41(LAB & LD voters in favour)
    DK: 25
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    Can anyone explain why, after 13 years of sleaze culminating in wrecking the UK and several other economies, 35% want Labour back in?

    Do these people care about nothing except their own benefits and public sector salaries?
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited June 2014
    SandyRentool said:

    Amazing that 22% would like to see the Lib Dems in government. That must be encouraging news for Mr Clegg et al.

    Or 22% don't want unfettered power to any one party as they are not trusted. Not automatically a positive endorsement of LibDems.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    BobaFett said:

    ToryJim said:

    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?
    As you say, all pretty pathetic. But it sometimes works, and your lot invented it (Major-shirt-underpants).

  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    NickPalmer said:

    BobaFett said:

    Populus 37/32

    Virtuous united Labour on the rise. :-)
    :)

    Remarkably the poll was neither reported, nor commented on Nick.

    Who a thunk it??
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Can anyone explain why, after 13 years of sleaze culminating in wrecking the UK and several other economies, 35% want Labour back in?

    Do these people care about nothing except their own benefits and public sector salaries?

    Repression works wonders.

    Hell even one their ex MPs forgot about the laws they passed.
  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    Ishmael_X said:

    BobaFett said:

    ToryJim said:

    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?
    As you say, all pretty pathetic. But it sometimes works, and your lot invented it (Major-shirt-underpants).

    Sigh.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,935
    isam said:

    Of all the marginals, Thurrock is the one where least Tory voters, and second least Labour voters rule out voting for UKIP

    Sherwood is the place where most Labour voters say they wouldnt rule out UKIP.. isnt that next to Newark? Is that relevant for tactics on Thursday?

    It's on page 7

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf

    Hmm On the Cons at 5-1 in Sherwood.

    Those numbers look good for Labour to me, clear preference for a Milipede Gov't in the marginals...
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    BobaFett said:

    Populus 37/32

    Virtuous united Labour on the rise. :-)
    :)

    Remarkably the poll was neither reported, nor commented on Nick.

    Who a thunk it??
    Wrong.
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    BobaFett said:

    Populus 37/32

    Virtuous united Labour on the rise. :-)
    :)

    Remarkably the poll was neither reported, nor commented on Nick.

    Who a thunk it??
    It certainly was recorded on the previous thread. And you and Nick Palmer have both commented on it. What's your problem?
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,422
    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    BobaFett said:

    Populus 37/32

    Virtuous united Labour on the rise. :-)
    :)

    Remarkably the poll was neither reported, nor commented on Nick.

    Who a thunk it??
    Yes, it's clearly a vast right-wing conspiracy (TM Hillary Clinton)
  • Options
    Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    BobaFett said:

    ToryJim said:

    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. A The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?
    A shame tim isn't here to inform you that Cameron's propensity to blush renders him unfit for office.
  • Options
    megalomaniacs4umegalomaniacs4u Posts: 324
    FPT
    Gaius said:



    Workers would be even more appalled if employers NI also appeared on payslips.

    My payslips include employer NI as well the usual NI line.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,935
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    He did, the results are on page 4

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
    tyvm: amused that I'm probably in the only constituency in the UK where the LibDems outpoll UKIP 4:1
    Do you live near Kew Gardens ?

    Twickenham, Richmond ?

    Certainly SW London I'm guessing.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    BobaFett said:


    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?

    Remember? How could we forget? It kept tim going for months.
  • Options
    peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,875
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    Pathetic TSE, you didn't even include the obligatory exclamation mark.

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    peter_from_putney said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    Pathetic TSE, you didn't even include the obligatory exclamation mark.

    Sorry!

  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    BobaFett said:

    Ishmael_X said:

    BobaFett said:

    ToryJim said:

    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?
    As you say, all pretty pathetic. But it sometimes works, and your lot invented it (Major-shirt-underpants).

    Sigh.
    Fail.

  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351

    I thought it was quite a clever move by Labour to get Sadiq Khan to love-bomb the Ukip voters.

    Probably on the basis that he can apologise for not listening to them about immigration without being torn to pieces and accused of being a racist by his own party.

    Frank Field however ...

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    He did, the results are on page 4

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
    tyvm: amused that I'm probably in the only constituency in the UK where the LibDems outpoll UKIP 4:1
    Do you live near Kew Gardens ?

    Twickenham, Richmond ?

    Certainly SW London I'm guessing.
    Nah: Hampstead & Kilburn
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    He did, the results are on page 4

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
    tyvm: amused that I'm probably in the only constituency in the UK where the LibDems outpoll UKIP 4:1
    Do you live near Kew Gardens ?

    Twickenham, Richmond ?

    Certainly SW London I'm guessing.
    Although I did grow up in Strawberry Hill (halfway between Richmond and Twickenham)
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,808
    FPT
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Carnyx said:


    Seriously: nobody on this site has yet been able to answer my question: does the West Lothian Question meaningfully exist? Any vote on the English budget for item X is legitimate for Scots MPs, because it also affects the Scottish budget under the Barnett formula.

    That is a most ridiculous argument, so obviously bogus that it is remarkable that anyone makes it with a straight face. Sure, on the overall budget there is a tiny second-order effect on Scotland from the Barnett formula, but, inasmuch as that is so, it would give a reason for Scottish MPs to vote only on the budget, not at all on (for example) the details of NHS England reorganisation, free schools or other non-Scottish education policies.

    The simple fact is that Labour want their unfair advantage of having not only smaller constituencies in Labour voting areas, but also their block vote of Scottish Labour MPs interfering in English and Welsh affairs which don't affect their constituents at all. So it is hardly surprising that Labour don't want to correct this outrageous anomaly. The Barnett formula argument is just an excuse, and an exceptionally feeble one at that.
    I beg to differ. A budgetary change is a change even if it does not affect the total sum by a lot - many's a mickle maks a muckle or, Anglice, it all adds up.

    But I have no disagreement at all about the impropriety of voting on non-budgetary issues (usually - there may be some genuine cases where there are problems affecting Scotland).
    What I am actually trying to find out is whether such voting IS a problem, and whether a reasonably impartial analysis has been published.


  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,828
    Good Populus for poll for Labour - Ed Milliband has been keeping his head down since the Euro elections, of course...

    We await word from His Lordship.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



    There's a huge Primark in the centre of Manchester, I refuse to become a Primani Prince.
    Quite frightening that there's a phrase to describe Primark shoppers - and which you knew?
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Why has the good lord not asked about UKIP?

    He did, the results are on page 4

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Marginals-report-May-2014.pdf
    tyvm: amused that I'm probably in the only constituency in the UK where the LibDems outpoll UKIP 4:1
    Do you live near Kew Gardens ?

    Twickenham, Richmond ?

    Certainly SW London I'm guessing.
    Nah: Hampstead & Kilburn
    I'm guessing the former, rather than the latter.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    MikeK said:

    FPT:
    @JackW said:

    Treachery from a kipper following the EU monarchies and not the true British nature of monarchy.

    Burn the Ukip traitor !!!!!!!!!!!

    Nothing personal you understand.
    ------------------------------------------
    Oh, I quite understand my Lord of the Hillocks. Mind you I didn't call for a Republic - I'm giving ageing Charlie a chance, so you must temper your outrage.

    I'm a UKIP supporter that will happily call for a republic. I'm much more of a Whig than a Tory.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    Socrates said:

    I'm guessing the former, rather than the latter.

    Yes. My wife discovered it in 2008 and told me that it was the place we were going to live, and I'd just have to work harder to make sure we could afford it.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,948
    MaxPB said:

    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.

    The scrapping of NI from the last manifesto seems to be a favourite on here this morning.. it was that part of UKIPs old tax policy that lefties ignored when they bang on about the flat tax hurting the lowest paid. It was a flat tax of 31% with no NI and the first £11,500 tax free
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    SimonStClare said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



    There's a huge Primark in the centre of Manchester, I refuse to become a Primani Prince.
    Quite frightening that there's a phrase to describe Primark shoppers - and which you knew?
    A few of my female friends describe themselves as Primani Princesses.

    Is a variation of Armani.

    Me, I'm at the cutting edge of all things modern and fashion related.

  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,422
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



    There's a huge Primark in the centre of Manchester, I refuse to become a Primani Prince.
    Quite frightening that there's a phrase to describe Primark shoppers - and which you knew?
    A few of my female friends describe themselves as Primani Princesses.

    Is a variation of Armani.

    Me, I'm at the cutting edge of all things modern and fashion related.

    Seriously I find that hard to believe. Your music taste certainly suggests the reverse.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Boo hiss to republicanism!

    Mr. Eagles, I fear your delusions are becoming ever worse.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,808
    Carnyx said:

    FPT

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Carnyx said:


    Seriously: nobody on this site has yet been able to answer my question: does the West Lothian Question meaningfully exist? Any vote on the English budget for item X is legitimate for Scots MPs, because it also affects the Scottish budget under the Barnett formula.

    That is a most ridiculous argument, so obviously bogus that it is remarkable that anyone makes it with a straight face. Sure, on the overall budget there is a tiny second-order effect on Scotland from the Barnett formula, but, inasmuch as that is so, it would give a reason for Scottish MPs to vote only on the budget, not at all on (for example) the details of NHS England reorganisation, free schools or other non-Scottish education policies.

    The simple fact is that Labour want their unfair advantage of having not only smaller constituencies in Labour voting areas, but also their block vote of Scottish Labour MPs interfering in English and Welsh affairs which don't affect their constituents at all. So it is hardly surprising that Labour don't want to correct this outrageous anomaly. The Barnett formula argument is just an excuse, and an exceptionally feeble one at that.
    I beg to differ. A budgetary change is a change even if it does not affect the total sum by a lot - many's a mickle maks a muckle or, Anglice, it all adds up.

    But I have no disagreement at all about the impropriety of voting on non-budgetary issues (usually - there may be some genuine cases where there are problems affecting Scotland).
    What I am actually trying to find out is whether such voting IS a problem, and whether a reasonably impartial analysis has been published.


    Further to this - have found these to be of interest for those few who are interested. I had forgotten about the Foundations Trust vote; but the HoC Library Paper has some interesting comments on the budgetary issue which rather tend to go against Mr Nabavi's comments on that particular 'excuse'.

    http://www.consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/The-West-Lothian-Question-.pdf
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/alex-massie/2013/08/than-answer-to-the-west-lothian-question-is-to-stop-asking-it/
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/jan/17/what-is-west-lothian-question

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,020
    isam said:

    MaxPB said:

    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.

    The scrapping of NI from the last manifesto seems to be a favourite on here this morning.. it was that part of UKIPs old tax policy that lefties ignored when they bang on about the flat tax hurting the lowest paid. It was a flat tax of 31% with no NI and the first £11,500 tax free
    Which, by the way, I think is an excellent policy. Of course, in light of inflation, etc., you would probably want to move the tax free allowance up to £15k. I would also suspect you'd need to be at 33% on all above that level.

    In this way you massively reduce the cost of tax collection, you also reduce the scope for tax evasion, and attract some tax exiles.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    ToryJim said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



    There's a huge Primark in the centre of Manchester, I refuse to become a Primani Prince.
    Quite frightening that there's a phrase to describe Primark shoppers - and which you knew?
    A few of my female friends describe themselves as Primani Princesses.

    Is a variation of Armani.

    Me, I'm at the cutting edge of all things modern and fashion related.

    Seriously I find that hard to believe. Your music taste certainly suggests the reverse.
    You need bad music to help you appreciate good music even more.

    Head Like A Hole by Nine Inch Nails sounds even better when it is preceded by World of Our Own by Westlife.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Carnyx said:

    I beg to differ. A budgetary change is a change even if it does not affect the total sum by a lot - many's a mickle maks a muckle or, Anglice, it all adds up.

    But I have no disagreement at all about the impropriety of voting on non-budgetary issues (usually - there may be some genuine cases where there are problems affecting Scotland).
    What I am actually trying to find out is whether such voting IS a problem, and whether a reasonably impartial analysis has been published.


    But the budget is set in the Budget, so even in the narrowest faked-up Barnett argument sense, a Westminster bill relating to education or the NHS in England does not affect Scotland. How NHS England wants to organise itself or spend the budget allocated by the Chancellor is completely irrelevant to Scottish voters.
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,709
    Neil said:

    BobaFett said:


    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?

    Remember? How could we forget? It kept tim going for months.
    Or Camerons frothy Guinness, or Osborne tears at funeral
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    MaxPB said:

    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.

    The scrapping of NI from the last manifesto seems to be a favourite on here this morning.. it was that part of UKIPs old tax policy that lefties ignored when they bang on about the flat tax hurting the lowest paid. It was a flat tax of 31% with no NI and the first £11,500 tax free
    Which, by the way, I think is an excellent policy. Of course, in light of inflation, etc., you would probably want to move the tax free allowance up to £15k. I would also suspect you'd need to be at 33% on all above that level.

    In this way you massively reduce the cost of tax collection, you also reduce the scope for tax evasion, and attract some tax exiles.
    I suspect pensioners would be less keen on the idea of their income tax rate increasing by half, though, especially since they were conned by successive government into thinking that National Insurance was national insurance.

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,187
    Rexel56 said:

    BobaFett said:

    ToryJim said:

    BobaFett said:

    NickPalmer said:

    Interesting stuff. A The variations between constituencies look like random variation at first glance, and there's a fairly consistent pattern. It shows the limits of the "OMG, vote Labour and you'll get Miliband!!!" strategy - by a margin of 10 or so, the marginals are saying "Yeah, fine". Either the Tories need to be scarier than the "Look, he can't eat a bacon sandwich tidily" line, or they need some other reason to vote for them.

    Nick - I am currently eating a bacon sandwich.

    I have every confidence that I would look untidy doing so, if a snapper chose one of 100 stills.

    Whilst this is true, there are probably shocking pics of all senior politicians. That some appear is indicative. If Miliband was generally better perceived or had a better operation the bacon sandwich pictures would never have seen the light of day.
    Groan. Remember Dave's beachwear moment? It's all pretty pathetic stuff. Who cares?
    A shame tim isn't here to inform you that Cameron's propensity to blush renders him unfit for office.

    Typical Tory, trying to repackage Flashman-like choler as demure blushing.

    'I was kissing that baby, not eating it.'
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    rcs1000 said:

    Of course, in light of inflation, etc., you would probably want to move the tax free allowance up to £15k. I would also suspect you'd need to be at 33% on all above that level.

    UKIP policy was also to phase out Employer NI. I suspect the rate would have to be far in excess of 33% to make the sums work (though on phasing out Employer NI they did suggest other alternatives to lumping it on income tax).
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Isam,

    The local Labour party spent quite a lt of money on advertising n the last month or two. They ignored everyone else and went for Ukip with a vengeance. I've now learned that the fascist, racist party intend to privatise the NHS and leave old people to die in bus shelters. The swine!

    It seems to have worked. All the local council seats stayed red even though Ukip came second in virtually all of them.

    Merseyside? Don't cha just love it.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited June 2014
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    JackW said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    First

    You should abdicate .... cheating is so vulgar.

    This was a genuine first.
    So you concede all the other "first" posts were illegitimate.

    You are guilty as charged and will henceforth purchase all your footwear in "Primark".



    There's a huge Primark in the centre of Manchester, I refuse to become a Primani Prince.
    Quite frightening that there's a phrase to describe Primark shoppers - and which you knew?
    [snip]

    Me, I'm at the cutting edge of all things modern and fashion related.

    I was once a Dedicated Follower of Fashion, and if as said, fashion repeats every 30 years, I still am. ;-)
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    O/T

    Does anyone know the answer to this?

    With the changes in pensions coming in, can I buy my wife an annuity with one of my pension pots so that our combined tax liability goes down?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,948
    Cons now 1.25-1.27 on Betfair for Newark

    Ashcroft leakage??
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited June 2014
    Blue_rog said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know the answer to this?

    With the changes in pensions coming in, can I buy my wife an annuity with one of my pension pots so that our combined tax liability goes down?

    I don't think so! You could take the 25% tax-free allowance and buy her an annuity with that, of course (or give it to her and she could invest it to get an income). Or, with the latest changes, you could take out more than 25% as a lump sum but you'll be taxed on the excess over 25%, so that's not a whizzo wheeze.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    "Head Like A Hole by Nine Inch Nails sounds even better when it is preceded by World of Our Own by Westlife."

    I have no idea what that means, but it sounds dreadful so I am rather glad of my ignorance.
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,422
    O/t but the travails of Good Morning Britain are hilarious

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645877/Good-Morning-Britain-heading-chop-ratings-slump-not-host-Susanna-Reid-pull-viewers.html
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,851
    The most marginal seats will tend to be more Labour-inclined than the country as a whole.

    Overall, Yougov recently found a 4% lead for Conservative majority/Con-Lib Dem coalition over Labour majority/Lab-Lib Dem coalition.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,935
    isam said:

    Cons now 1.25-1.27 on Betfair for Newark

    Ashcroft leakage??

    THey headed down to 1.2 at one point previously.

    Could be a lay 1.27...
  • Options
    Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    Blair isn't seeking the EU Presidency.

    Is he just waiting to be persuaded?
    With a hat tip to the writers of Yes Minister

    While he does not seek the office, he has pledged himself to the service of his continent, and that should his colleagues persuade him that that is the best way he can serve, he might reluctantly have to accept the responsibility, whatever his personal wishes might be.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/02/uk-create-manifesto-change-europe-commission-tony-blair
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,047
    Just caught up with the previous thread. All about Ed and his problems on television. It does beg the question, if Ed is so useless, weird and unappealing on TV, why is Cameron trying to hide away from tv debates? What sort of election campaign are we going to get? Does he just want to hide behind the Tories' financial advantage and just have a mass advertising campaign? The TV companies need to be bold and threaten to empty chair him.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,948
    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    Cons now 1.25-1.27 on Betfair for Newark

    Ashcroft leakage??

    THey headed down to 1.2 at one point previously.

    Could be a lay 1.27...
    I laid it!
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Sean_F said:

    The most marginal seats will tend to be more Labour-inclined than the country as a whole.

    Overall, Yougov recently found a 4% lead for Conservative majority/Con-Lib Dem coalition over Labour majority/Lab-Lib Dem coalition.

    Correct. As Anthony Wells pointed out, the marginals polling was pretty much in line with the underlying polling at the time. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the majority of these most-marginal seats "fell" to Labour, and respondents in them favoured a Labour-led government.

    The betting (and various models) are all anticipating swingback over the next year.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Blair isn't seeking the EU Presidency.

    Is he just waiting to be persuaded?

    I think it's more a case of Blair realising that (1) he is even less likely to be asked than last time and (2) he quite likes those fat fees from dodgy governments and the like that he would have to give up if he was President of the Council.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    MaxPB said:

    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.

    The scrapping of NI from the last manifesto seems to be a favourite on here this morning.. it was that part of UKIPs old tax policy that lefties ignored when they bang on about the flat tax hurting the lowest paid. It was a flat tax of 31% with no NI and the first £11,500 tax free
    Which, by the way, I think is an excellent policy. Of course, in light of inflation, etc., you would probably want to move the tax free allowance up to £15k. I would also suspect you'd need to be at 33% on all above that level.

    In this way you massively reduce the cost of tax collection, you also reduce the scope for tax evasion, and attract some tax exiles.
    I suspect pensioners would be less keen on the idea of their income tax rate increasing by half, though, especially since they were conned by successive government into thinking that National Insurance was national insurance.

    Given that most pensioners have pensions not much above £11,500, it's highly unlikely their income tax rate would increase by half.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,808
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Carnyx said:

    I beg to differ. A budgetary change is a change even if it does not affect the total sum by a lot - many's a mickle maks a muckle or, Anglice, it all adds up.

    But I have no disagreement at all about the impropriety of voting on non-budgetary issues (usually - there may be some genuine cases where there are problems affecting Scotland).
    What I am actually trying to find out is whether such voting IS a problem, and whether a reasonably impartial analysis has been published.


    But the budget is set in the Budget, so even in the narrowest faked-up Barnett argument sense, a Westminster bill relating to education or the NHS in England does not affect Scotland. How NHS England wants to organise itself or spend the budget allocated by the Chancellor is completely irrelevant to Scottish voters.
    First point taken, thanks. And second too (excepting areas where there is a real Scottish impact, of course, such as, say, UK wide standards/specialist services, but I assume we'd agree on that anyway.)

    We still don't seem to have any clear indication of how often Scots and Welsh MPs (inevitably mainly Labour, and a few LD) actually vote on truly English-only matters. The four major votes - and I have now been reminded of the NHS foundation trusts vote - under Blair in 2003-4 seem to be the main recent 'scandals', but these were cases where the absolute majority depended on non-English MPs. This is not the same thing as using Scots and Welsh MPs to help boost one's vote routinely, which it would have made life easier for Labour even for English-only votes. But what really surprised me in the refs I put out earlier was the :consensus that it was less of a problem than the potential cures: English parliament, disfranchising the Scots and Welsh by reducing MPs disproportionately (which raises issues of their voting in foreign policy and war), defining English-only votes, and reorganising the financial setup. I can see why so many PBers think it a mess!







  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    MaxPB said:

    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.

    The scrapping of NI from the last manifesto seems to be a favourite on here this morning.. it was that part of UKIPs old tax policy that lefties ignored when they bang on about the flat tax hurting the lowest paid. It was a flat tax of 31% with no NI and the first £11,500 tax free
    Which, by the way, I think is an excellent policy. Of course, in light of inflation, etc., you would probably want to move the tax free allowance up to £15k. I would also suspect you'd need to be at 33% on all above that level.

    In this way you massively reduce the cost of tax collection, you also reduce the scope for tax evasion, and attract some tax exiles.
    It would hit the middle class pretty hard. Given there is a diminishing marginal return in the utility of money, I think a progressive income tax of at least two bands is better for the country as a whole.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    I'm guessing the former, rather than the latter.

    Yes. My wife discovered it in 2008 and told me that it was the place we were going to live, and I'd just have to work harder to make sure we could afford it.
    That anecdote doesn't paint your wife in a good light.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited June 2014
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    MaxPB said:

    Hmm, so UKIP are parking their tanks on Labour's lawn.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27654958

    I expect railway renationalisation to be on the UKIP agenda as well.

    The scrapping of NI from the last manifesto seems to be a favourite on here this morning.. it was that part of UKIPs old tax policy that lefties ignored when they bang on about the flat tax hurting the lowest paid. It was a flat tax of 31% with no NI and the first £11,500 tax free
    Which, by the way, I think is an excellent policy. Of course, in light of inflation, etc., you would probably want to move the tax free allowance up to £15k. I would also suspect you'd need to be at 33% on all above that level.

    In this way you massively reduce the cost of tax collection, you also reduce the scope for tax evasion, and attract some tax exiles.
    I suspect pensioners would be less keen on the idea of their income tax rate increasing by half, though, especially since they were conned by successive government into thinking that National Insurance was national insurance.

    Whilst I like the idea of flat income tax with a high starting point and no allowances, I think to lump national insurance into income tax is to go the wrong way.

    My preferred option would be to split NI into two hypothecated taxes, and National Health Charge and a Welfare Charge the taxes would be set annually to cover the cost of the NHS and the welfare bill. By all means have them banded with a low start point (so as many as possible are paying in) and progressively higher rates depending on income. All other taxes and duties currently used to part fund the NHS and Welfare should be reduced or eliminated accordingly.
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    ToryJim said:

    O/t but the travails of Good Morning Britain are hilarious

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645877/Good-Morning-Britain-heading-chop-ratings-slump-not-host-Susanna-Reid-pull-viewers.html

    I find Susanna rather foxy although I'd never watch a TV programme on that basis.

    Probably I have watched three TV programmes in total in the last 15 years and I really don;t miss it.

  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited June 2014
    @Carnyx - Yes, it is certainly a complete mess, on that we agree completely.

    Thanks Blair.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    HurstLlama said:

    "Head Like A Hole by Nine Inch Nails sounds even better when it is preceded by World of Our Own by Westlife."

    I have no idea what that means, but it sounds dreadful so I am rather glad of my ignorance.

    Head Like A Hole is one of the finest tracks of all time, from one of the finest albums of all time.

    Here's the video.

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=ao-Sahfy7Hg

    Westlife's World of Our Own is the antonym of Head Like A Hole

    Judge for yourself

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jal-vzO8bVE
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Blair isn't seeking the EU Presidency.

    Is he just waiting to be persuaded?
    With a hat tip to the writers of Yes Minister

    While he does not seek the office, he has pledged himself to the service of his continent, and that should his colleagues persuade him that that is the best way he can serve, he might reluctantly have to accept the responsibility, whatever his personal wishes might be.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/02/uk-create-manifesto-change-europe-commission-tony-blair

    "Britain has a great opportunity to lead a debate and build alliances among heads of government on the European council to create a long term "manifesto for change" that can end the cynicism and rejection of the European Union."

    Says the gullible chap who handed over £billions for zero change at all - 'Manifesto' my foot.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,506
    If we're talking about Blair as EU President, we should remember's Hague's very funny speech on Gordon's European Nightmare from a few years ago

    It even had the Labour benches rolling in the aisles

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6Cj1b-rp1E
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,030
    FPT
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Carnyx, pish, tosh, balderdash and piffle!

    Englishmen are charged to go to Scottish universities, whereas Frenchmen and Germans are not. This occurs because of Scottish votes cast on a matter which did not affect Scotland (and the vile SNP want to maintain this anti-English approach even if independence is achieved).

    MD, absolute and utter anti - Scottish bollocks , Scottish students are charged to go to English universities, there are none so blind as those who will not see. Vile UK nationalists penalise Scottish students and demand we give them a free education out of the miserly budget we get allocated out of our revenue, get a grip on reality.
  • Options
    Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    Neil said:

    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    Blair isn't seeking the EU Presidency.

    Is he just waiting to be persuaded?

    I think it's more a case of Blair realising that (1) he is even less likely to be asked than last time and (2) he quite likes those fat fees from dodgy governments and the like that he would have to give up if he was President of the Council.
    Maybe. I just couldn't resist the urge to get one of my favourite Yes Minister quotes in.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Mr. Eagles, seen it before, but that speech is rather super.

    Mr. G, Scots going to English universities are treated the same as English students. Scottish, French, German students going to a Scottish university do not have to pay, English students do. The two situations are utterly incomparable, except to draw a stark contrast between two completely different scenarios.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,330
    Talking of polling it is now more than 2 weeks since the last Scottish Indy poll. Is that not bizarre? I realise that most Scottish media are on their uppers but surely someone is interested?

    It is strange that the start of the official campaign was allowed to come and go without a poll. I would be interested if anyone has heard any rumours of one coming up.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    FrankBooth said:

    Just caught up with the previous thread. All about Ed and his problems on television. It does beg the question, if Ed is so useless, weird and unappealing on TV, why is Cameron trying to hide away from tv debates? What sort of election campaign are we going to get? Does he just want to hide behind the Tories' financial advantage and just have a mass advertising campaign? The TV companies need to be bold and threaten to empty chair him.

    Cameron's not scared of Miliband. He's scared of Farage.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,030
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Eagles, seen it before, but that speech is rather super.

    Mr. G, Scots going to English universities are treated the same as English students. Scottish, French, German students going to a Scottish university do not have to pay, English students do. The two situations are utterly incomparable, except to draw a stark contrast between two completely different scenarios.

    MD, rubbish , they are treated as English students which is exactly what they are and exactly what Scottish students get treated as in England.
This discussion has been closed.