Twitter Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 35m As we prepare for the UK press coverage of Junker's pull out, thank God the Germans don't have a word for schadenfreude
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 40m Jean-Claude Juncker ducks out of EC fight. That Garbo-like "leave me alone" moment summed up existential problem of Euro policy elite
Jean-Claude Juncker to withdraw bid to lead European Commission, sources say
The former prime minister of Luxembourg could pull out of the race to succeed José Manuel Barroso within weeks, after a coalition of European leaders attempted to block his candidacy
So it looks like that's the stalking horse out of the running. I wonder who is the preferred choice (dripping in Europhilia of course). I'd have favoured Lagarde if Sarkozy was still in power but I do not think Hollande would accept her?
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Yeah!!!! That didn't take long you tory bastard journos (I'm afterwatershed) - that's why we pay you-
£6m Policing Bill For Assange? That’s Your Problem
The Ecuadorean ambassador to London says that a £6 million policing bill after two years of stalemate over Julian Assange is “not our problem”.
Juan Falconi Puig, 67, said that Mr Assange was “suffering” but could remain indefinitely in the back room of the ground-floor flat in Knightsbridge, central London, where he went into hiding in June 2012.
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
Where do you think the Lib Dem votes went to?
UKIP take from all parties, at differing levels depending on the seat.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
Where do you think the Lib Dem votes went to?
UKIP take from all parties, at differing levels depending on the seat.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
Where do you think the Lib Dem votes went to?
UKIP take from all parties, at differing levels depending on the seat.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Dream on.
You have taken me on re UKIP in bets, how are they looking?
Newarks result was no dofferent to South Shields or Wythenshawe,... Was that due to Tories voting Labour to stop UKIP then?
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
I can see an argument that we lack sufficient evidence to say there's been anti-UKIP tactical voting.
But I don't think you can definitively say it's nonsense to suggest it.
Well there is zero evidence.
Its desperate to suggest it. The tory vote share went down despite tactical votes from Labour nd the Lib Dems?
Jackanory
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence, and it's a logical enough suggestion.
I suppose the idea is votes going UKIP <<< Tory<<< LD/Lab
I wouldn't be surprised if it's happened, but it's currently a possible thing rather than at all verified.
(Or to restate that slightly, there is almost certainly some anti-tactical UKIP voting occurring, but we lack evidence to say for certain whether it's happening on any significant level).
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
Where do you think the Lib Dem votes went to?
UKIP take from all parties, at differing levels depending on the seat.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Dream on.
You have taken me on re UKIP in bets, how are they looking?
Newarks result was no dofferent to South Shields or Wythenshawe,... Was that due to Tories voting Labour to stop UKIP then?
Sam
The thing is whether there was tactical voting or not on Thursday is irrelevant. It was a free hit. Labour /Libdem voters lost nothing (and won nothing) by voting Tory on Thursday. it was a Tory seat.
However come 2015 its no longer a zero sum game. Every seat the Tories lose will take Labour one seat closer to Downing Street and the Tories one seat further away. That thought should insure that tactical voting to stop UKIP taking Tories seats will be minimal (and indeed the same applies for Tory voters in Labour seats in reverse ).
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
I can see an argument that we lack sufficient evidence to say there's been anti-UKIP tactical voting.
But I don't think you can definitively say it's nonsense to suggest it.
Well there is zero evidence.
Its desperate to suggest it. The tory vote share went down despite tactical votes from Labour nd the Lib Dems?
Jackanory
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence, and it's a logical enough suggestion.
I suppose the idea is votes going UKIP <<< Tory<<< LD/Lab
I wouldn't be surprised if it's happened, but it's currently a possible thing rather than at all verified.</p>
If you think that is true then why wouldnt you think Tories and Lib Dems were voting Labour in South Shields and Wythenshawe? Same results just a different massive majority for the massive favourite
Im afraid this smells like typical left wing behaviour. Think of a theory that suits and make it fit
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
Where do you think the Lib Dem votes went to?
UKIP take from all parties, at differing levels depending on the seat.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Dream on.
You have taken me on re UKIP in bets, how are they looking?
Newarks result was no dofferent to South Shields or Wythenshawe,... Was that due to Tories voting Labour to stop UKIP then?
Sam
The thing is whether there was tactical voting or not on Thursday is irrelevant. It was a free hit. Labour /Libdem voters lost nothing (and won nothing) by voting Tory on Thursday. it was a Tory seat.
However come 2015 its no longer a zero sum game. Every seat the Tories lose will take Labour one seat closer to Downing Street and the Tories one seat further away. That thought should insure that tactical voting to stop UKIP taking Tories seats will be minimal (and indeed the same applies for Tory voters in Labour seats in reverse ).
The seats UKIP win, if they win any, will be 2010 two way marginals. There wont be Labour supporters voting Tory or vice versa there to stop UKIP
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
I can see an argument that we lack sufficient evidence to say there's been anti-UKIP tactical voting.
But I don't think you can definitively say it's nonsense to suggest it.
Well there is zero evidence.
Its desperate to suggest it. The tory vote share went down despite tactical votes from Labour nd the Lib Dems?
Jackanory
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence, and it's a logical enough suggestion.
I suppose the idea is votes going UKIP <<< Tory<<< LD/Lab
I wouldn't be surprised if it's happened, but it's currently a possible thing rather than at all verified.</p>
If you think that is true then why wouldnt you think Tories and Lib Dems were voting Labour in South Shields and Wythenshawe? Same results just a different massive majority for the massive favourite
Im afraid this smells like typical left wing behaviour. Think of a theory that suits and make it fit
Isam, UKIP preaches LibLabCon all the same etc. Tactical voting would fit right in with UKIP narrative.
Tactical voting is a very common feature of elections/by-elections, it usually happens.
The Conservatives were openly campaigning for it during the by-elections and people were tweeting about doing it.
Who's to say they weren't voting tactically in Wythenshawe etc? In that case there were certainly votes going from Con/LD to Labour, but hard to differentiate between tactical voting to just normal voter shift.
Owen Jones, chief writer of lefty nonsense, says there was an anti UKIP vote in Newark
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
Unless you believe that UKIP got twice as many votes from Lib Dems as Conservatives, there was anti-UKIP tactical voting.
UKIP got over 8,000 more votes than last time, you are talking absolute nonsense
Where do you think the Lib Dem votes went to?
UKIP take from all parties, at differing levels depending on the seat.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Dream on.
You have taken me on re UKIP in bets, how are they looking?
Newarks result was no dofferent to South Shields or Wythenshawe,... Was that due to Tories voting Labour to stop UKIP then?
Sam
The thing is whether there was tactical voting or not on Thursday is irrelevant. It was a free hit. Labour /Libdem voters lost nothing (and won nothing) by voting Tory on Thursday. it was a Tory seat.
However come 2015 its no longer a zero sum game. Every seat the Tories lose will take Labour one seat closer to Downing Street and the Tories one seat further away. That thought should insure that tactical voting to stop UKIP taking Tories seats will be minimal (and indeed the same applies for Tory voters in Labour seats in reverse ).
The seats UKIP win, if they win any, will be 2010 two way marginals. There wont be Labour supporters voting Tory or vice versa there to stop UKIP
Not that there was in Newark
Almost all 2-way marginals feature tactical voting anyway.
Somewhere like Grimsby might well see Conservatives voting tactically to get UKIP in over Labour. (although it's harder to mobilise when you're not already in the top 2 positions).
My final word (for tonight) on tactical voting. It's very probably happening on some level. Whether that level is significant enough for us to extrapolate on, I don't think we have sufficient good evidence for.
But likewise I don't think you can dismiss it as definitely not happening.
Comments
This is really stretching credibility to its maximum. UKIP saw almost as big a jump in their vote as ever before, and achieved their 2nd best by election result.
Desperate clutching. You are unlikely to see a better example of writing what you want to believe rather than what is happening
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/06/analysis-newark-ukip-is-feeling-the-effect-of-protest-votes
On that precedent - I shall go - beyond the paywll and report back.
£6m Policing Bill For Assange? That’s Your Problem
The Ecuadorean ambassador to London says that a £6 million policing bill after two years of stalemate over Julian Assange is “not our problem”.
Juan Falconi Puig, 67, said that Mr Assange was “suffering” but could remain indefinitely in the back room of the ground-floor flat in Knightsbridge, central London, where he went into hiding in June 2012.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4111588.ece
But I don't think you can definitively say it's nonsense to suggest it.
You hate UKIP and it would suit you if there was anti UKIP voting, but it is pure conjecture based on nothing, and is laughable given the fact this was UKIPs 2nd best ever vote share.
Unless you think anti UKIP votes cost them Eastleigh and were in force in South Shields and Wythenshawe?
Its desperate to suggest it. The tory vote share went down despite tactical votes from Labour nd the Lib Dems?
Jackanory
Newarks result was no dofferent to South Shields or Wythenshawe,... Was that due to Tories voting Labour to stop UKIP then?
I suppose the idea is votes going UKIP <<< Tory<<< LD/Lab
I wouldn't be surprised if it's happened, but it's currently a possible thing rather than at all verified.
(Or to restate that slightly, there is almost certainly some anti-tactical UKIP voting occurring, but we lack evidence to say for certain whether it's happening on any significant level).
The thing is whether there was tactical voting or not on Thursday is irrelevant. It was a free hit. Labour /Libdem voters lost nothing (and won nothing) by voting Tory on Thursday. it was a Tory seat.
However come 2015 its no longer a zero sum game. Every seat the Tories lose will take Labour one seat closer to Downing Street and the Tories one seat further away. That thought should insure that tactical voting to stop UKIP taking Tories seats will be minimal (and indeed the same applies for Tory voters in Labour seats in reverse ).
Im afraid this smells like typical left wing behaviour. Think of a theory that suits and make it fit
Not that there was in Newark
Tactical voting is a very common feature of elections/by-elections, it usually happens.
The Conservatives were openly campaigning for it during the by-elections and people were tweeting about doing it.
Who's to say they weren't voting tactically in Wythenshawe etc? In that case there were certainly votes going from Con/LD to Labour, but hard to differentiate between tactical voting to just normal voter shift.
Somewhere like Grimsby might well see Conservatives voting tactically to get UKIP in over Labour. (although it's harder to mobilise when you're not already in the top 2 positions).
My final word (for tonight) on tactical voting. It's very probably happening on some level. Whether that level is significant enough for us to extrapolate on, I don't think we have sufficient good evidence for.
But likewise I don't think you can dismiss it as definitely not happening.