I'm sure they will. The problem is that committed Liberals are a small proportion of Laws vote:
2010 Westminster: Liberals 55%, Tories 33%, Labour 5%, UKIP 4%, Green N/A. 69% turnout
2014 Euros: UKIP 33%, Tories: 29%, Liberals 19%, Green 8% Labour 7%. 39% turnout.
The tory vote has fallen a little, labour have risen a little, Liberal vote has collapsed from 55% to 19% and UKIP vote has risen from 4% to 33%.
The hardline yoghurt knitters have voted Green, some labour tactical voters have gone home, however most of the UKIP vote has clearly switched straight from the Liberals, this suggests that Laws vote was very soft and resulted from him being the best available at the time not any ideological commitment. Laws will not be helped by events since 2010 denting his personal vote.
Yeovil has voted Liberal since the late 70s, through periods of sizable majorities of the big two and has developed a massive LD majority - I don't think Laws' vote can possibly be that soft and a result of him being the best available not any ideological commitment. He cannot avoid taking a hit, but after several decades of often major majorities, it would take an amazing collapse and probably dislike of the local MP as well to shift them from Yeovil, surely?
Any idea what the Yeovil Euro vote was in 2009? I would guess the LDs did comparitively poorly compared to the their 2005 Westminster vote, but still did better in 2015.
Mr. Eagles, well, quite. New Who buggered up Davros (as well as the Master). Probably going to write a blog about why Farscape is better than new Who at some point.
But new Who gave us Karen Gillan, so it's worth it.
Mr. Eagles, well, quite. New Who buggered up Davros (as well as the Master). Probably going to write a blog about why Farscape is better than new Who at some point.
Mr Dancer they certainly buggered up the Master, who they made Like some comedy trickster character rather than the sinister Delgado creation. To be honest I don't remember much of the new who Davros story mainly because of the schmaltzy RTD big gay over the top crap of the earth being towed. Never ever forgiven him for that rubbish. Hoping for something better with PCap.
I'm sure they will. The problem is that committed Liberals are a small proportion of Laws vote:
2010 Westminster: Liberals 55%, Tories 33%, Labour 5%, UKIP 4%, Green N/A. 69% turnout
2014 Euros: UKIP 33%, Tories: 29%, Liberals 19%, Green 8% Labour 7%. 39% turnout.
The tory vote has fallen a little, labour have risen a little, Liberal vote has collapsed from 55% to 19% and UKIP vote has risen from 4% to 33%.
The hardline yoghurt knitters have voted Green, some labour tactical voters have gone home, however most of the UKIP vote has clearly switched straight from the Liberals, this suggests that Laws vote was very soft and resulted from him being the best available at the time not any ideological commitment. Laws will not be helped by events since 2010 denting his personal vote.
The tories may well get some ex UKIP votes at the next election but this seat could well be a tory/UKIP marginal post 2015 with Laws coming third and all three parties within a couple of thousand votes of each other.
Liberals really are facing wipeout, mainly because people will vote UKIP instead of neglecting to vote. No wonder they are so crotchety about UKIP.
A poster on here, I forget who, described the LD west country support as an anti-London vote, rather than a pro-LD vote.
I can actually buy that to some extent. I'm in the SW and an area with not a glimmer of Labour support, it is a hint of LD or Ind in a sea of unending blue shires, and many people who don't vote Tory gravitate to LD as the natural opponents with seemingly little other consideration - I've not heard a good word about the LD leadership from any of the local LDs, although I suppose that may be true in other areas too, but it does feel sometimes that the LD vote is just how things are done round here, not ideological, just a way to show how this area is different. I will of course concede the point to any actual LDs from the West Country who may disagree, they would clearly have a better idea than I.
I think part of the problem there though (in so far as hoping that supporters like myself and Sean will abandon UKIP) is that there is a disconnect between the perception that you are trying to portray of UKIP and the reality.
I do not believe that the Tories were ever the baby eating toxic party that their opponents made them out to be. The held positions that the vocal left could use to try and project that image but in the end the reality was a long way from that. Those who remained loyal to the Tory party throughout that period (and even those who left because of the rise of UKIP) saw from the inside that the Tory party as not the way it was portrayed by some in the media and no matter how much the left tried to push that image in the end they could not persuade supporters that it was a true reflection of the party. Basically those who always hated the Tories had their views reinforced whilst those who were supporters or even ambivalent ignored the hype as normal politicking.
The same applies to UKIP. Whilst I do not generally like parties and make no exception for UKIP, I recognise that the attempts by their opponents to portray the as the 'nasty party' are a very long way from the truth. There are certainly elements of their public positioning that I don't like - opposition to gay marriage being the most obvious - but given that they will do nothing to reverse it and that I believe there is scope to change the basic position within the party, just as there was in the Tory party, then I am happy to continue to support UKIP for the positive reasons that I first joined them./
I see far more hope of the current UKIP leadership coming round to my position on social affairs than I do for the current Tory leadership coming round to my position on EU membership.
This is pure anecdote. Ive just been taken to Bath for a couple of days with a wholesaler playing golf. Over a drink he said "did you vote for the racists" at the election then. I have never spoken about him about politics before. I asked him who he was referring to. UKIP was his response, he said that he agreed with a lot of their policies but they were a load of nutters and as such he didn't vote for them..
I know you cannot base anything on such an anecdote, but dont be surprised if this view it is not commonly held regarding UKIP.
My typical conversation at work with a UKIP voter goes like, im voting UKIP as we should kick these "foreigners" out. (Insert various other terms for foreigners)
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Nope - different parts of our United Kingdom vote in different ways. Dumfries and Galloway, for example, seems to be very like Warwickshire, where I am based.
Except that for your own slightly ridiculous purposes you were comparing apples ( a city that has never possessed sovereignty, and despite the bloviating, never will) and oranges (a once sovereign country that will decide in slightly more than 100 days whether to retake that sovereignty).
In reductio ad absurdum world, England's Euro result was much, much closer to that of France than Scotland's. So what?
No, I was comparing voting patterns in different parts of one sovereign state. It's not a hard concept to master. And Scotland had a list for the European Parliament, as did London. Scotland moved slightly to the right, London slightly to the left. Overall, though, their political make-ups are pretty similar - though Scotland seems to be more nationalist and less attractive to immigrants.
Excellent post Southam. I agree with every word. I am also hopeful that the toxicity of UKIP will eventually repel several of the best posters on here such as Richard Tyndall and Sean F.
Hopefully exasperation with real world compromises will not be enough.
Morning David,
I think part of the problem there though (in so far as hoping that supporters like myself and Sean will abandon UKIP) is that there is a disconnect between the perception that you are trying to portray of UKIP and the reality.
I do not believe that the Tories were ever the baby eating toxic party that their opponents made them out to be. The held positions that the vocal left could use to try and project that image but in the end the reality was a long way from that. Those who remained loyal to the Tory party throughout that period (and even those who left because of the rise of UKIP) saw from the inside that the Tory party as not the way it was portrayed by some in the media and no matter how much the left tried to push that image in the end they could not persuade supporters that it was a true reflection of the party. Basically those who always hated the Tories had their views reinforced whilst those who were supporters or even ambivalent ignored the hype as normal politicking.
The same applies to UKIP. Whilst I do not generally like parties and make no exception for UKIP, I recognise that the attempts by their opponents to portray the as the 'nasty party' are a very long way from the truth. There are certainly elements of their public positioning that I don't like - opposition to gay marriage being the most obvious - but given that they will do nothing to reverse it and that I believe there is scope to change the basic position within the party, just as there was in the Tory party, then I am happy to continue to support UKIP for the positive reasons that I first joined them./
I see far more hope of the current UKIP leadership coming round to my position on social affairs than I do for the current Tory leadership coming round to my position on EU membership.
Unlike David, I was pretty comfortable with the Conservative Party of the 1980's, and so I'm pretty comfortable with UKIP.
Mr. Jim, RTD decided that ignoring probably Davros' single most defining feature would be a good idea. Instead of refusing to submit to a dalek overlord (which was basically the entirety of the dalek plots from Genesis onwards) he reached 'an arrangement' which involved living in a vault as a prisoner.
The Master crying and then 'dying' as revenge was a load of tosh, as was the Dobby the house-elf moment. *sighs*
I'm sure they will. The problem is that committed Liberals are a small proportion of Laws vote:
2010 Westminster: Liberals 55%, Tories 33%, Labour 5%, UKIP 4%, Green N/A. 69% turnout
2014 Euros: UKIP 33%, Tories: 29%, Liberals 19%, Green 8% Labour 7%. 39% turnout.
The tory vote has fallen a little, labour have risen a little, Liberal vote has collapsed from 55% to 19% and UKIP vote has risen from 4% to 33%.
The hardline yoghurt knitters have voted Green, some labour tactical voters have gone home, however most of the UKIP vote has clearly switched straight from the Liberals, this suggests that Laws vote was very soft and resulted from him being the best available at the time not any ideological commitment. Laws will not be helped by events since 2010 denting his personal vote.
The tories may well get some ex UKIP votes at the next election but this seat could well be a tory/UKIP marginal post 2015 with Laws coming third and all three parties within a couple of thousand votes of each other.
Liberals really are facing wipeout, mainly because people will vote UKIP instead of neglecting to vote. No wonder they are so crotchety about UKIP.
Yeovil looks like a Tory gain on those Euro numbers to me
Realistically the delusional PB Tories would claim Labour had made the wrong decision whatever they did, so it's all a bit pointless here really isn't it?
Trade deficits are fun, They are a measure of an economy "growing" by consumer spending, and one growing by manufacturing increases. The transition between the two states will be the measure of Ozzie's "genius" because any idiot can manage consumer spending growth.
Good heavens I thought Mr. AlanBrooke and I were the only people on this site who cared about trade figures. Good to have you with us, Comrade. However, I am not sure what being allied to two revanchist, capitalist running-dogs on a matter of economics will do for your communist credentials
I hope that you've suffered only a temporary loss of memory regarding my own mentions of the trade deficit.
I am also perhaps the only person concerned about the UK's permanent tourism deficit.
Both symptoms of a country which feels entitled to consume more wealth than it is able to create.
Mr. Richard, my dear chap, I do apologise. A lapse on my part and no disrespect intended, I assure you.
Interesting what you say about the tourism deficit. I had no idea we had one. Certainly from my excursions to central London I wouldn't have thought so, considering every third person in the area of Picadilly these days seems to be a young oriental and every fifth one a young European going round as part of a gaggle. The last time I went to the British museum the only place that the Brits (and people over thirty) seemed to be in the majority was the restaurant. I have obviously missed your earlier posts on this subject, could you, please, point me to some figures on the subject.
I'm sure they will. The problem is that committed Liberals are a small proportion of Laws vote:
2010 Westminster: Liberals 55%, Tories 33%, Labour 5%, UKIP 4%, Green N/A. 69% turnout
2014 Euros: UKIP 33%, Tories: 29%, Liberals 19%, Green 8% Labour 7%. 39% turnout.
The tory vote has fallen a little, labour have risen a little, Liberal vote has collapsed from 55% to 19% and UKIP vote has risen from 4% to 33%.
The hardline yoghurt knitters have voted Green, some labour tactical voters have gone home, however most of the UKIP vote has clearly switched straight from the Liberals, this suggests that Laws vote was very soft and resulted from him being the best available at the time not any ideological commitment. Laws will not be helped by events since 2010 denting his personal vote.
The tories may well get some ex UKIP votes at the next election but this seat could well be a tory/UKIP marginal post 2015 with Laws coming third and all three parties within a couple of thousand votes of each other.
Liberals really are facing wipeout, mainly because people will vote UKIP instead of neglecting to vote. No wonder they are so crotchety about UKIP.
A poster on here, I forget who, described the LD west country support as an anti-London vote, rather than a pro-LD vote.
I can actually buy that to some extent. I'm in the SW and an area with not a glimmer of Labour support, it is a hint of LD or Ind in a sea of unending blue shires, and many people who don't vote Tory gravitate to LD as the natural opponents with seemingly little other consideration - I've not heard a good word about the LD leadership from any of the local LDs, although I suppose that may be true in other areas too, but it does feel sometimes that the LD vote is just how things are done round here, not ideological, just a way to show how this area is different. I will of course concede the point to any actual LDs from the West Country who may disagree, they would clearly have a better idea than I.
It's fair to say it's an element of it.
(although I'm better versed in the 1920s reasons than the modern ones).
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Clearly you have not read what I have written often enough if you have missed the contempt I hold for all parties - including UKIP who I consider to be simply the best of a very bad lot.
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
Realistically the delusional PB Tories would claim Labour had made the wrong decision whatever they did, so it's all a bit pointless here really isn't it?
Maybe, but you can follow that logic out to almost anything any political party does, as the tribalists on the opposing side, well, oppose no matter what.
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Clearly you have not read what I have written often enough if you have missed the contempt I hold for all parties - including UKIP who I consider to be simply the best of a very bad lot.
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
That is not the theory of many. I don't believe he will gain anything meaningful regardless of whether he intends to or not, and I sill have no clue why that concerns supporters of Out from being happy if a referendum is offered by Cameron, as if he has gained nothing you can tell us and the people will vote for Out. You win. Why do you think him claiming he has secured something which he hasn't will convince people and cause them to vote In?
Realistically the delusional PB Tories would claim Labour had made the wrong decision whatever they did, so it's all a bit pointless here really isn't it?
Would it cheer you up if I said I was absolutely delighted Labour decided to hand the Tories an even bigger victory in Newark, and undermine Ed's shaky position even more?
Please tell Mike Smithson that I see some women in that throng.
I think you went to the UKIP conference in Lakeside last year. Would you recommend a UKIP conference as a day out?
@anotherDave You are quite wrong about me being at Lakeside, though I had intended to go. I was though, at the London Conference in September, you know, the one that Godfrey Bloom nearly scuppered. It was a very political first day; very heavy weighted on policy and membership. I met some very nice Kippers from Nottingham and Salisbury over lunch and had a great gab.
It does depend what you want for a day out, but if serious politics is what you want, then nothing beats a conference for exchanging views and getting known.
Mr. Jim, RTD decided that ignoring probably Davros' single most defining feature would be a good idea. Instead of refusing to submit to a dalek overlord (which was basically the entirety of the dalek plots from Genesis onwards) he reached 'an arrangement' which involved living in a vault as a prisoner.
The Master crying and then 'dying' as revenge was a load of tosh, as was the Dobby the house-elf moment. *sighs*
Mr Dancer, indeed RTD had a strange vision. The Moff tries to be far too clever. I think one of the problems is trying to set up a menace and have a logically consistent resolution in 45 mins. Classic stories like Genesis would evolve over several hours.
I use many, many forums covering games, technology, writing and so forth - and have done for years. Forming a view of a community based on posters is not particularly useful.
Posters usually comprise a small minority and its often negative emotions that prompt them to contribute, whether that's 'more love for Rogues', 'Apple kit is overpriced garbage' or 'LibLabCon are controlled by space lizards intent on committing genocide against UK indigenes.
Mr. Jim, I agree. Some of Moffat's stories (Blink, the Silence two-parter) work very well.
RTD seemed to consider plot consistency, coherence and even vague plausibility as not really necessary (cf the three-part rubbish with the Master). New Who's occasionally great, but too often a bit ADHD for me.
Been rewatching Farscape on Pick. It's much more inventive and the plots actually hold together far better than New Who.
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Clearly you have not read what I have written often enough if you have missed the contempt I hold for all parties - including UKIP who I consider to be simply the best of a very bad lot.
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
That is not the theory of many. I don't believe he will gain anything meaningful regardless of whether he intends to or not, and I sill have no clue why that concerns supporters of Out from being happy if a referendum is offered by Cameron, as if he has gained nothing you can tell us and the people will vote for Out. You win. Why do you think him claiming he has secured something which he hasn't will convince people and cause them to vote In?
With both Labour and the Tories claiming it is a 'good' deal supported by all the media bar perhaps one or two papers, there is no doubt that whatever Cameron claims as a victory will be accepted as such by the majority of the public. It will bear no relation to reality of course but as people have been saying all morning in politics unfortunately it is perceptions not facts that matter.
This is backed up by the polls that show clearly that if Cameron claimed he had secured a good deal people would believe him no matter what the reality.
I use many, many forums covering games, technology, writing and so forth - and have done for years. Forming a view of a community based on posters is not particularly useful.
Posters usually comprise a small minority and its often negative emotions that prompt them to contribute, whether that's 'more love for Rogues', 'Apple kit is overpriced garbage' or 'LibLabCon are controlled by space lizards intent on committing genocide against UK indigenes.
What forum was that last one from?! Admittedly, I've seen close to it. Personally, I think the space lizards are doing an ok job, we should given them a chance.
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Clearly you have not read what I have written often enough if you have missed the contempt I hold for all parties - including UKIP who I consider to be simply the best of a very bad lot.
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
That is not the theory of many. I don't believe he will gain anything meaningful regardless of whether he intends to or not, and I sill have no clue why that concerns supporters of Out from being happy if a referendum is offered by Cameron, as if he has gained nothing you can tell us and the people will vote for Out. You win. Why do you think him claiming he has secured something which he hasn't will convince people and cause them to vote In?
With both Labour and the Tories claiming it is a 'good' deal supported by all the media bar perhaps one or two papers, there is no doubt that whatever Cameron claims as a victory will be accepted as such by the majority of the public. It will bear no relation to reality of course but as people have been saying all morning in politics unfortunately it is perceptions not facts that matter.
This is backed up by the polls that show clearly that if Cameron claimed he had secured a good deal people would believe him no matter what the reality.
So what you're saying is that it is not that we have the wrong type of governing parties, which is obvious no doubt, but that we have the wrong type of people, because they will fall for lies?
Mr. Jim, I agree. Some of Moffat's stories (Blink, the Silence two-parter) work very well.
RTD seemed to consider plot consistency, coherence and even vague plausibility as not really necessary (cf the three-part rubbish with the Master). New Who's occasionally great, but too often a bit ADHD for me.
Been rewatching Farscape on Pick. It's much more inventive and the plots actually hold together far better than New Who.
Occasionally a bit too wacky for its own good, but very creative, extremely colourful and engaging characters, far better than the bland heroics of Star Trek.
though Scotland seems to be more nationalist and less attractive to immigrants.
Uhuh? Funny, the British nationalist parties seemed to do quite well in London. You'll be gratified that the one unalloyedly pro immigration party topped the Euros in Scotland.
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Mr. Jim, I agree. Some of Moffat's stories (Blink, the Silence two-parter) work very well.
RTD seemed to consider plot consistency, coherence and even vague plausibility as not really necessary (cf the three-part rubbish with the Master). New Who's occasionally great, but too often a bit ADHD for me.
Been rewatching Farscape on Pick. It's much more inventive and the plots actually hold together far better than New Who.
Occasionally a bit too wacky for its own good, but very creative, extremely colourful and engaging characters, far better than the bland heroics of Star Trek.
The next Tory leader, Sajid Javid, is a Star Trek fan
Sajid Javid, the new Culture Secretary, revealed Star Trek’s Captain Jean-Luc Picard to be an unlikely source of political inspiration as he gave his first keynote speech about the arts.
He called for the arts to become more accessible to the working class and ethnic minorities, and for the wealthiest members of society – including billionaire foreigners resident in Britain – to fund the cultural sector....
....But he was also unafraid to discuss his passion for less highbrow forms of culture and to out himself as a Trekkie with a seemingly encyclopaedic knowledge of Star Trek: The Next Generation.
“Maybe I should quote someone I’m familiar with from my younger days,” he told an audience in Bristol.
“What we do in this country is great because, far from being ruled by central diktats, our ‘culture is based on freedom and self-determination’.”
And the source of this weighty statement? “That’s Captain Jean-Luc Picard. The Next Generation, season three, episode 26.”
He added: “I had a pretty mainstream cultural education. The kind millions of Britons will recognise. I like Star Trek. I like U2.”
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Clearly you have not read what I have written often enough if you have missed the contempt I hold for all parties - including UKIP who I consider to be simply the best of a very bad lot.
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
That is not the theory of many. I don't believe he will gain anything meaningful regardless of whether he intends to or not, and I sill have no clue why that concerns supporters of Out from being happy if a referendum is offered by Cameron, as if he has gained nothing you can tell us and the people will vote for Out. You win. Why do you think him claiming he has secured something which he hasn't will convince people and cause them to vote In?
With both Labour and the Tories claiming it is a 'good' deal supported by all the media bar perhaps one or two papers, there is no doubt that whatever Cameron claims as a victory will be accepted as such by the majority of the public. It will bear no relation to reality of course but as people have been saying all morning in politics unfortunately it is perceptions not facts that matter.
This is backed up by the polls that show clearly that if Cameron claimed he had secured a good deal people would believe him no matter what the reality.
I'm not necessarily so pessimistic. There are plenty of known unknowns that could swing things our way:-
1. Will the government be unpopular in 2017? 2. Will Conservative backbenchers cut up rough? 3. Will right wing media cut up rough? 4. Will the EU economy be in recession? 5. Will our economy be in recession? 6. Will Marine Le Pen win the French Presidency?
Mr. Eagles, Picard is a good choice. If he'd chosen Troi I think that would've warranted the sack, followed by a swift entry into the space cannon and an even swifter exit from Earth's atmosphere.
Trade deficits are fun, They are a measure of an economy "growing" by consumer spending, and one growing by manufacturing increases. The transition between the two states will be the measure of Ozzie's "genius" because any idiot can manage consumer spending growth.
Good heavens I thought Mr. AlanBrooke and I were the only people on this site who cared about trade figures. Good to have you with us, Comrade. However, I am not sure what being allied to two revanchist, capitalist running-dogs on a matter of economics will do for your communist credentials
I hope that you've suffered only a temporary loss of memory regarding my own mentions of the trade deficit.
I am also perhaps the only person concerned about the UK's permanent tourism deficit.
Both symptoms of a country which feels entitled to consume more wealth than it is able to create.
Mr. Richard, my dear chap, I do apologise. A lapse on my part and no disrespect intended, I assure you.
Interesting what you say about the tourism deficit. I had no idea we had one. Certainly from my excursions to central London I wouldn't have thought so, considering every third person in the area of Picadilly these days seems to be a young oriental and every fifth one a young European going round as part of a gaggle. The last time I went to the British museum the only place that the Brits (and people over thirty) seemed to be in the majority was the restaurant. I have obviously missed your earlier posts on this subject, could you, please, point me to some figures on the subject.
The UK actually does pretty well in attracting tourists, the tourism deficit is caused, in the same way the trade deficit is caused, by our vast sense of self-entitlement and desire to consume wealth.
Note that while some countries have trade surpluses and tourism deficits eg China and Germany and other countries have trade deficits and tourism surpluses eg France and the USA, the UK manages to have both a permanent trade deficit and a permanent tourism deficit.
Mr. Eagles, Picard is a good choice. If he'd chosen Troi I think that would've warranted the sack, followed by a swift entry into the space cannon and an even swifter exit from Earth's atmosphere.
I dunno, being a mind reader would be a good advantage to possess generally, and especially in the world of politics.
Now, had he have chosen Wesley Crusher or Troi's mum.......
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
Has anyone done the obligatory mourning of Firefly yet?
Yeovil has voted Liberal since the late 70s, through periods of sizable majorities of the big two and has developed a massive LD majority - I don't think Laws' vote can possibly be that soft and a result of him being the best available not any ideological commitment. He cannot avoid taking a hit, but after several decades of often major majorities, it would take an amazing collapse and probably dislike of the local MP as well to shift them from Yeovil, surely?
Any idea what the Yeovil Euro vote was in 2009? I would guess the LDs did comparitively poorly compared to the their 2005 Westminster vote, but still did better in 2015
UKIP: 16786: (33%), Conservative: 14,526 (29%), Liberals: 9,736 (19%), Green 4156 (8%), Labour 3,321 (7%), An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%), English Dems: 460 (1%), BNP: 294 (0.5%)
Turnout comparison
Total votes 50830 in 2009, 50020 in 2014
Therefore turnout pretty well identical.
So basically
Conservative are down from 34 to 29%, quite respectable given they were opposition in 2009 and mid term now. Vote has basically held solid
BNP have been wiped out
Labour have got a few tactical voters back from Liberals and gone from 3 to 7 %
Green vote has been virtually constant.
UKIP up from 21% to 33%
Liberal vote has collapsed, losing over a third of their votes down from 30% to 19%
------------------
Laws is in big big trouble. I would say if he is in trouble, then Liberals in English (and a few Scottish) rural seats are in big trouble because all their soft votes (ie the anti london votes as Another Dave put it) have gone to UKIP.
I would say that Yeovil will go Conservative and Laws will be fighting with UKIP over who is in second place, conceivably it could go UKIP. Many other Liberal rural seats will be won by the tories.
I hate to say it but this points to a libdem massacre in 2015.
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
The last is, I confess, a synthesis of a range of commenters in the Telegraph & Guardian. As you say, it's not much of a stretch.
Turning to the EU and any prospective referendum (and noting the science fiction theme here this morning), I'm reminded of Asimov's 'Foundation and Empire'. The protagonists spend a lot of time thrashing around trying to save the day, only to discover that the day is actually saved by historical imperatives that have developed over centuries.
As @Sean_F points out, the UK isn't the only country with agency, nor the only one with an interest in a different kind of European Union.
The future will likely be determined by long term demographic shifts, shifts in global competitiveness, resource depletion and the impact of disruptive technologies (e.g. robotics and/or genetics), rather than our current crop of political leaders.
though Scotland seems to be more nationalist and less attractive to immigrants.
Uhuh? Funny, the British nationalist parties seemed to do quite well in London. You'll be gratified that the one unalloyedly pro immigration party topped the Euros in Scotland.
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
Has anyone done the obligatory mourning of Firefly yet?
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
[....But he was also unafraid to discuss his passion for less highbrow forms of culture and to out himself as a Trekkie with a seemingly encyclopaedic knowledge of Star Trek: The Next Generation.]
Yeah!!!! Confirmed TNG is only ST!!!
[I'm reminded of Asimov's 'Foundation and Empire'. The protagonists spend a lot of time thrashing around trying to save the day, only to discover that the day is actually saved by historical imperatives that have developed over centuries.]
Yeovil has voted Liberal since the late 70s, through periods of sizable majorities of the big two and has developed a massive LD majority - I don't think Laws' vote can possibly be that soft and a result of him being the best available not any ideological commitment. He cannot avoid taking a hit, but after several decades of often major majorities, it would take an amazing collapse and probably dislike of the local MP as well to shift them from Yeovil, surely?
Any idea what the Yeovil Euro vote was in 2009? I would guess the LDs did comparitively poorly compared to the their 2005 Westminster vote, but still did better in 2015
UKIP: 16786: (33%), Conservative: 14,526 (29%), Liberals: 9,736 (19%), Green 4156 (8%), Labour 3,321 (7%), An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%), English Dems: 460 (1%), BNP: 294 (0.5%)
Turnout comparison
Total votes 50830 in 2009, 50020 in 2014
Therefore turnout pretty well identical.
So basically
Conservative are down from 34 to 29%, quite respectable given they were opposition in 2009 and mid term now. Vote has basically held solid
BNP have been wiped out
Labour have got a few tactical voters back from Liberals and gone from 3 to 7 %
Green vote has been virtually constant.
------------------
Laws is in big big trouble. I would say if he is in trouble, then Liberals in English (and a few Scottish) rural seats are in big trouble because all their soft votes (ie the anti london votes as Another Dave put it) have gone to UKIP.
I would say that Yeovil will go Conservative and Laws will be fighting with UKIP over who is in second place, conceivably it could go UKIP. Many other Liberal rural seats will be won by the tories.
I hate to say it but this points to a libdem massacre in 2015.
I think you are wrong because of 2 reasons. Firstly. lib dem voters are more cerebral than most other voters and do vote differently on different issues so the European vote isn't really a surprise especially as Clegg nailed his colours to the mast on that and gave euro sceptic LibDems nowhere to turn. Secondly in their heartlands the LibDems are just pumped up residents associations.. They are not LibDems..in fact if the libdem brand really does start to fracture then I can see many lib dem councils going RA just to detoxify themselves from the Libdem tag
though Scotland seems to be more nationalist and less attractive to immigrants.
Uhuh? Funny, the British nationalist parties seemed to do quite well in London. You'll be gratified that the one unalloyedly pro immigration party topped the Euros in Scotland.
I can't remember whether you're currently supporting UKIP, the party you said were racists and Fascists, or you've gone back to bumming up the Tories. Either way, both British nationalists.
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
Quite why I felt compelled to do this I have no idea, but your reference to dog's dangly bits made me attempt to google the history of the phrase 'the dog's bollocks' and to my astonishment the example of its use the ever dependable wikipedia has is:
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
Quite why I felt compelled to do this I have no idea, but your reference to dog's dangly bits made me attempt to google the history of the phrase 'the dog's bollocks' and to my astonishment the example of its use the ever dependable wikipedia has is:
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
Read this before you go
British Slang As Guessed By An American
The BuzzFeed UK team sent me (a clueless American) the following British slang terms from across the ocean and I was tasked with guessing their meanings. This is my terrible attempt to decipher British culture:
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
Quite why I felt compelled to do this I have no idea, but your reference to dog's dangly bits made me attempt to google the history of the phrase 'the dog's bollocks' and to my astonishment the example of its use the ever dependable wikipedia has is:
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
Read this before you go
British Slang As Guessed By An American
The BuzzFeed UK team sent me (a clueless American) the following British slang terms from across the ocean and I was tasked with guessing their meanings. This is my terrible attempt to decipher British culture:
Blair won Newark in 1997. Even after boundary changes, the seat is still based on the town and for Labour to come third is a big drag on momentum a year before the general election, with no more national elections at either local or European level next year, and the only imminent possible by-election on the cards in Cambridgeshire and the Tory shires, Labour has no further opportunity to boost its momentum after the faltering EU Parliament results and with Cameron having held off UKIP it is now he who has momentum
The more interesting notion for me is that the opinion polls may be returning to their 80s/90s position of over-estimating Labour support and under-estimating Tory support.
Probably two things at play.
Labour are in opposition for the first time since the "80s/90s", it is generally easier for people to say you oppose X,Y or Z than support A, B or C. Vocal supporters of Labour in govt, were expressing something quite different and more likely to translate into a vote.
Labour have always struggled to get it's nominal vote out. If everyone who said they were Labour had voted Labour British politics would have been very different. It will turn out more for the GE than Euros, but the party is still missing that rallying cry.
Labour has to be more than the We Are Not The Tories Party. There is a strong case to be made for a redistributionist 21st century social democratic party that believes in internationalism, sees the state as an enabler of social mobility and a guarantor of high standards of education and healthcare, decent and affordable housing, and all the rest of it, but Labour is not making it or coming anywhere close to doing so. What are the positive reasons for voting Labour? I can't think of many right now. It's a real shame. Labour should and could be so much better than it is now.
Google Blue Labour.
Why Miliband didnt carry on with this is insane. If he had I dont think Lab would have lost so many voters to UKIP in the North
Three years ago Labour was looking like they might really care about the English working class again.. looks like The Guardian put paid to it
Yeovil has voted Liberal since the late 70s, through periods of sizable majorities of the big two and has developed a massive LD majority - I don't think Laws' vote can possibly be that soft and a result of him being the best available not any ideological commitment. He cannot avoid taking a hit, but after several decades of often major majorities, it would take an amazing collapse and probably dislike of the local MP as well to shift them from Yeovil, surely?
Any idea what the Yeovil Euro vote was in 2009? I would guess the LDs did comparitively poorly compared to the their 2005 Westminster vote, but still did better in 2015
UKIP: 16786: (33%), Conservative: 14,526 (29%), Liberals: 9,736 (19%), Green 4156 (8%), Labour 3,321 (7%), An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%), English Dems: 460 (1%), BNP: 294 (0.5%)
Turnout comparison
Total votes 50830 in 2009, 50020 in 2014
Therefore turnout pretty well identical.
So basically
Conservative are down from 34 to 29%, quite respectable given they were opposition in 2009 and mid term now. Vote has basically held solid
BNP have been wiped out
Labour have got a few tactical voters back from Liberals and gone from 3 to 7 %
Green vote has been virtually constant.
UKIP up from 21% to 33%
Liberal vote has collapsed, losing over a third of their votes down from 30% to 19%
------------------
Laws is in big big trouble. I would say if he is in trouble, then Liberals in English (and a few Scottish) rural seats are in big trouble because all their soft votes (ie the anti london votes as Another Dave put it) have gone to UKIP.
I would say that Yeovil will go Conservative and Laws will be fighting with UKIP over who is in second place, conceivably it could go UKIP. Many other Liberal rural seats will be won by the tories.
I hate to say it but this points to a libdem massacre in 2015.
The Conservative Yeovil candidate has a good CV too.
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
Clearly you have not read what I have written often enough if you have missed the contempt I hold for all parties - including UKIP who I consider to be simply the best of a very bad lot.
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
That is not the theory of many. I don't believe he will gain anything meaningful regardless of whether he intends to or not, and I sill have no clue why that concerns supporters of Out from being happy if a referendum is offered by Cameron, as if he has gained nothing you can tell us and the people will vote for Out. You win. Why do you think him claiming he has secured something which he hasn't will convince people and cause them to vote In?
With both Labour and the Tories claiming it is a 'good' deal supported by all the media bar perhaps one or two papers, there is no doubt that whatever Cameron claims as a victory will be accepted as such by the majority of the public. It will bear no relation to reality of course but as people have been saying all morning in politics unfortunately it is perceptions not facts that matter.
This is backed up by the polls that show clearly that if Cameron claimed he had secured a good deal people would believe him no matter what the reality.
Mr Tyndall,
Your thoughts and comments on here are thoughtful, enlightening and very often right. Your assessment of UKIP's chances in Newark were bang on.
But reading your pronouncements on an EU referendum, they do remind me tremendously of my Liberal Democrat friend who also believes it would be a terrible idea to ask the British people as they will come up with the wrong answer ! (Hostile press, demonisation of Clegg as the IN man etc...)
Personally I lament the lack of any independent analysis on exit or remaining in the EU, the problem is that everyone has skin in the game.
Yes the cunning tactical voting by everyone against UKIP meant big drops in votes (share and cast) for everyone except UKIP whose share rose by 600% and votes by 8,000
You are deluded in applying EU results as any forecast as to what will happen in a GE .
The 2013 CC results for Yeovil parliamentary constituency had the Lib Dems in a clear first place over 2,000 votes ahead of the Conservatives with UKIP a close 3rd . Labour managed 7% Your 19% for Labour is sheer fantasy .
Mark: resorting to insults straightaway! I think you are running scared ;-)
If you had *read my post* my argument was you use the Euro results to create a "dodgy bar-chart" for marketing purposes. It's not applying the Euro results to the victory, but how the Tories might use the Euro results to persuade Lib Dems to vote tactically for them and against UKIP.
[And as I also caveated, I have no knowledge of Yeovil: I used it as an example of how an argument could be built because someone else mentioned it].
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a western-with-aliens)
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
@Pulpstar There is never any such thing as a completely independent analysis. I think the best you can do is try to work out what are the more lunatic positions of each side. The truth on the EU is probably messy, it has merits and pitfalls, neither perfectly good nor perfectly bad. We could survive outside but there are also sound reasons for staying in. This is one where it comes down to the persuasiveness of those arguing each case. I'm broadly ambivalent, neither fanatically pro nor blindly anti. I want to see what reforms and reneg we get before making a decision.
In Tory/Lib seats the message will undoubtably be that a vote for the Libs will let weirdo Miliband in the back door who will tax you to the hilt and ruin the country in a way that makes what Brown did look like a vicarage tea party.
Ditto tory/lab marginals where UKIP are conveinently eating into the white van man labour vote.
Lord Ashcroft's Newark poll had the 2010 LDs breaking Con 13%, UKIP 28%.
Yes, but my point is targeting the remaining LDs in some of their good seats like Yeovil.
Trying to encourage tactical (anti-UKIP) voting from people who haven't switched to either the Tories of UKIP prior to the election campaign
Below are illustrative numbers - I actually used Yeovil as a general example rather than specifically looking at the numbers, so there may be better cases.
2010: LD 56%, Con 33%, Lab 5%, UKIP 4%, other 2%
Ok, let's deduct 1/2 [28 pp] of the LD10 vote (for sake of argument) and assume that 50% goes to Labour, 10% to the greens Greens, 25% to UKIP and 15% to the Tories. Let's also assume that 5% of the Tory share has switched directly to UK
UKIP are contenders in a very small number of seats. They won't be a sellable bogeyman until they have won in those seats.
The anti-UKIP/Green rhetoric we see on here seems to be largely partisans who are miffed that UKIP/Greens are taking their former supporters.
Why werent people saying that there was an anti UKIP vote in Wythenshawe or South Shields?
Similar seats in terms of majority for the incumbent, and UKIP had no record of doing well there either. They did a lot better in Newark than Wythenshawe.
So were Tories voting for Labour in W&SE?
Th epolling suggested UKIP were taking votes quite equally off all parties in Newark I believe?
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
You just want the beer, curry and female adulation
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
You just want the beer, curry and female adulation
The partying in the gay clubs until 6am is what I'm after.
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
Sure! - You're going to be dreadfully disappointed if the Times story turns out to be bunkum.!
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
Quite why I felt compelled to do this I have no idea, but your reference to dog's dangly bits made me attempt to google the history of the phrase 'the dog's bollocks' and to my astonishment the example of its use the ever dependable wikipedia has is:
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
Read this before you go
British Slang As Guessed By An American
The BuzzFeed UK team sent me (a clueless American) the following British slang terms from across the ocean and I was tasked with guessing their meanings. This is my terrible attempt to decipher British culture:
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
You just want the beer, curry and female adulation
The partying in the gay clubs until 6am is what I'm after.
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
I fear you can expect a visit from Avery's apostrophe police.
Down town and delighted to see Scottish Labour out campaigning for together we can. Seems much more distinctively Labour than Better Together and even has a token pop at the Tories (as usual Labour ignore their real opponent in the SNP ) . Still I can cope with that if Labour finally start to get their act together .
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
Sure! - You're going to be dreadfully disappointed if the Times story turns out to be bunkum.!
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
This must happen indeed.
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
Quite why I felt compelled to do this I have no idea, but your reference to dog's dangly bits made me attempt to google the history of the phrase 'the dog's bollocks' and to my astonishment the example of its use the ever dependable wikipedia has is:
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
Read this before you go
British Slang As Guessed By An American
The BuzzFeed UK team sent me (a clueless American) the following British slang terms from across the ocean and I was tasked with guessing their meanings. This is my terrible attempt to decipher British culture:
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
Sure! - You're going to be dreadfully disappointed if the Times story turns out to be bunkum.!
It certainly has the ring of authenticity.
The Times article - or TSE's recently discovered enthusiasm for early morning starts? ; )
Mr. Eagles, she wasn't a mind-reader, she was an empath.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
In the summer e4 will be airing The 100, which in terms of scifi, is the dog's dangly bits.
Quite why I felt compelled to do this I have no idea, but your reference to dog's dangly bits made me attempt to google the history of the phrase 'the dog's bollocks' and to my astonishment the example of its use the ever dependable wikipedia has is:
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
Read this before you go
British Slang As Guessed By An American
The BuzzFeed UK team sent me (a clueless American) the following British slang terms from across the ocean and I was tasked with guessing their meanings. This is my terrible attempt to decipher British culture:
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
This must happen indeed.
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
I've just received an email from Dave, talking about Newark, and asking me to join team 2015.
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
I fear you can expect a visit from Avery's apostrophe police.
@Pulpstar There is never any such thing as a completely independent analysis. I think the best you can do is try to work out what are the more lunatic positions of each side. The truth on the EU is probably messy, it has merits and pitfalls, neither perfectly good nor perfectly bad. We could survive outside but there are also sound reasons for staying in. This is one where it comes down to the persuasiveness of those arguing each case. I'm broadly ambivalent, neither fanatically pro nor blindly anti. I want to see what reforms and reneg we get before making a decision.
Serious reform or scrapping of the CAP, firms only being subject to EU legislation should they sell into the EU, primacy of EU law only relating to trade matters, powers over intra-EU immigration/emigration being returned to national Governments.
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
This must happen indeed.
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
Xena starred in Battlestar Galactica too
The bad lady-admiral (Kane?) from Battlestar Galactica has turned up in Orphan Black.
Thanks for those tourism links. £16bn a year, and probably growing, tourist deficit, is pretty chunky and, as you say, evidence that the UK populace haven't got used to the idea of living in a much poorer country. Too much unearned bounce-back from 2008 and too little rebalancing of the economy, perhaps. The politicans' and the media's fixation with headline GDP figures and growf really isn't doing us any good.
Down town and delighted to see Scottish Labour out campaigning for together we can. Seems much more distinctively Labour than Better Together and even has a token pop at the Tories (as usual Labour ignore their real opponent in the SNP ) . Still I can cope with that if Labour finally start to get their act together .
Are Scottish Labour not really working well with Better Together then? Still, the Union needs their support no matter how they give it I suppose.
The more interesting notion for me is that the opinion polls may be returning to their 80s/90s position of over-estimating Labour support and under-estimating Tory support. Almost every proper election that takes place tells us that this is the case, but we seem to be paying little attention. When voters vote (outside London) they never provide any indication of even a 5% national poll lead. DavidL's theory is that Labour's vote may be becoming less efficient. Mine is that most of the time most of the pollsters are not reflecting the real mood in the country.
Stevenage doesn't seem like fertile ground for the EDL or am I missing something.
Must say I was surprised to see that they were marching there too. Although anywhere else in Herts would be even less fertile with possible exception of Borehamwood.
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
An amusing thought, that people(edit: significant numbers of people that is) in Britain had any idea who sits in the ECR with the Tories.
Comments
Please tell Mike Smithson that I see some women in that throng.
I think you went to the UKIP conference in Lakeside last year. Would you recommend a UKIP conference as a day out?
Any idea what the Yeovil Euro vote was in 2009? I would guess the LDs did comparitively poorly compared to the their 2005 Westminster vote, but still did better in 2015.
Morning David,
I think part of the problem there though (in so far as hoping that supporters like myself and Sean will abandon UKIP) is that there is a disconnect between the perception that you are trying to portray of UKIP and the reality.
I do not believe that the Tories were ever the baby eating toxic party that their opponents made them out to be. The held positions that the vocal left could use to try and project that image but in the end the reality was a long way from that. Those who remained loyal to the Tory party throughout that period (and even those who left because of the rise of UKIP) saw from the inside that the Tory party as not the way it was portrayed by some in the media and no matter how much the left tried to push that image in the end they could not persuade supporters that it was a true reflection of the party. Basically those who always hated the Tories had their views reinforced whilst those who were supporters or even ambivalent ignored the hype as normal politicking.
The same applies to UKIP. Whilst I do not generally like parties and make no exception for UKIP, I recognise that the attempts by their opponents to portray the as the 'nasty party' are a very long way from the truth. There are certainly elements of their public positioning that I don't like - opposition to gay marriage being the most obvious - but given that they will do nothing to reverse it and that I believe there is scope to change the basic position within the party, just as there was in the Tory party, then I am happy to continue to support UKIP for the positive reasons that I first joined them./
I see far more hope of the current UKIP leadership coming round to my position on social affairs than I do for the current Tory leadership coming round to my position on EU membership.
This is pure anecdote. Ive just been taken to Bath for a couple of days with a wholesaler playing golf. Over a drink he said "did you vote for the racists" at the election then. I have never spoken about him about politics before. I asked him who he was referring to. UKIP was his response, he said that he agreed with a lot of their policies but they were a load of nutters and as such he didn't vote for them..
I know you cannot base anything on such an anecdote, but dont be surprised if this view it is not commonly held regarding UKIP.
My typical conversation at work with a UKIP voter goes like, im voting UKIP as we should kick these "foreigners" out. (Insert various other terms for foreigners)
Reading your blogs on here you are the staunchest defender of UKIP, even coming up with some bizarre theories as to why the referendum promised by Cameron will not be fair, but I think you somewhat blinded to how UKIP are widely viewed.
The Master crying and then 'dying' as revenge was a load of tosh, as was the Dobby the house-elf moment. *sighs*
Interesting what you say about the tourism deficit. I had no idea we had one. Certainly from my excursions to central London I wouldn't have thought so, considering every third person in the area of Picadilly these days seems to be a young oriental and every fifth one a young European going round as part of a gaggle. The last time I went to the British museum the only place that the Brits (and people over thirty) seemed to be in the majority was the restaurant. I have obviously missed your earlier posts on this subject, could you, please, point me to some figures on the subject.
@Susie_Wolff: “@sniffpetrol: Today on http://t.co/sZV0IjdHQa Susie Wolff accent referendum: http://t.co/AAPbSVS76P"
(although I'm better versed in the 1920s reasons than the modern ones).
Moreover there is nothing bizarre about the idea that Cameron will do all in his power to ensure that the result of an EU referendum will be continued membership. He has said he will never countenance us leaving and has clearly set out a timeline which can produce no real promise of change to the EU prior to us having to vote.
The 'bizarre' theory is the one that claims that Cameron has any intention of any meaningful renegotiation with the EU either before or after a referendum.
@anotherDave
You are quite wrong about me being at Lakeside, though I had intended to go. I was though, at the London Conference in September, you know, the one that Godfrey Bloom nearly scuppered. It was a very political first day; very heavy weighted on policy and membership. I met some very nice Kippers from Nottingham and Salisbury over lunch and had a great gab.
It does depend what you want for a day out, but if serious politics is what you want, then nothing beats a conference for exchanging views and getting known.
Posters usually comprise a small minority and its often negative emotions that prompt them to contribute, whether that's 'more love for Rogues', 'Apple kit is overpriced garbage' or 'LibLabCon are controlled by space lizards intent on committing genocide against UK indigenes.
RTD seemed to consider plot consistency, coherence and even vague plausibility as not really necessary (cf the three-part rubbish with the Master). New Who's occasionally great, but too often a bit ADHD for me.
Been rewatching Farscape on Pick. It's much more inventive and the plots actually hold together far better than New Who.
This is backed up by the polls that show clearly that if Cameron claimed he had secured a good deal people would believe him no matter what the reality.
Your first sentence is tremendous understatement.
Elizabeth Winds @elizabethwinds_ 47m
Plastic banknotes will be introduced in 2016. This follows the introduction of plastic politicians 1997.
You'll be gratified that the one unalloyedly pro immigration party topped the Euros in Scotland.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sajid Javid, the new Culture Secretary, revealed Star Trek’s Captain Jean-Luc Picard to be an unlikely source of political inspiration as he gave his first keynote speech about the arts.
He called for the arts to become more accessible to the working class and ethnic minorities, and for the wealthiest members of society – including billionaire foreigners resident in Britain – to fund the cultural sector....
....But he was also unafraid to discuss his passion for less highbrow forms of culture and to out himself as a Trekkie with a seemingly encyclopaedic knowledge of Star Trek: The Next Generation.
“Maybe I should quote someone I’m familiar with from my younger days,” he told an audience in Bristol.
“What we do in this country is great because, far from being ruled by central diktats, our ‘culture is based on freedom and self-determination’.”
And the source of this weighty statement? “That’s Captain Jean-Luc Picard. The Next Generation, season three, episode 26.”
He added: “I had a pretty mainstream cultural education. The kind millions of Britons will recognise. I like Star Trek. I like U2.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10881748/Sajid-Javids-first-keynote-speech-as-Culture-Secretary-I-like-Star-Trek.-I-like-U2.html
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/06/culture-secretary-sajid-javid-interview
1. Will the government be unpopular in 2017?
2. Will Conservative backbenchers cut up rough?
3. Will right wing media cut up rough?
4. Will the EU economy be in recession?
5. Will our economy be in recession?
6. Will Marine Le Pen win the French Presidency?
Then there are the unknown unknown.
A recent ONS tourism publication:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_355902.pdf
Historical data back to 1986 for the UK's tourism earnings and expenditure abroad:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=GMAZ&dataset=ott&table-id=1
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=GMBB&dataset=ott&table-id=1
Lists of countries by tourism income and expenditure at the bottom of this wikipedia page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tourist_visits
Note that while some countries have trade surpluses and tourism deficits eg China and Germany and other countries have trade deficits and tourism surpluses eg France and the USA, the UK manages to have both a permanent trade deficit and a permanent tourism deficit.
Now, had he have chosen Wesley Crusher or Troi's mum.......
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
South Somerset 2014 votes in Euro election here: http://www.southsomerset.gov.uk/media/660844/south_somerset_declaration.pdf
South Somerset Euros 2009:
Conservative: 17,332 (34%) , Liberal: 15093 (30%) , UKIP: 10,844 (21%), Green:3653(7%) , BNP: 2189 (4%) , Lab: 1728 (3%)
South somerset Euros 2014
UKIP: 16786: (33%), Conservative: 14,526 (29%), Liberals: 9,736 (19%), Green 4156 (8%), Labour 3,321 (7%), An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%), English Dems: 460 (1%), BNP: 294 (0.5%)
Turnout comparison
Total votes 50830 in 2009, 50020 in 2014
Therefore turnout pretty well identical.
So basically
Conservative are down from 34 to 29%, quite respectable given they were opposition in 2009 and mid term now. Vote has basically held solid
BNP have been wiped out
Labour have got a few tactical voters back from Liberals and gone from 3 to 7 %
Green vote has been virtually constant.
UKIP up from 21% to 33%
Liberal vote has collapsed, losing over a third of their votes down from 30% to 19%
------------------
Laws is in big big trouble. I would say if he is in trouble, then Liberals in English (and a few Scottish) rural seats are in big trouble because all their soft votes (ie the anti london votes as Another Dave put it) have gone to UKIP.
I would say that Yeovil will go Conservative and Laws will be fighting with UKIP over who is in second place, conceivably it could go UKIP. Many other Liberal rural seats will be won by the tories.
I hate to say it but this points to a libdem massacre in 2015.
"PICARD! I WILL FEAST UPON YOUR HEART! YOUR WOMEN SHALL BE YOUR CONCUBINES, YOUR MEN MY SLAVES!"
Troi: "Captain, I'm sensing... hostility."
Mr. kle4, indeed. Watching Battlestar Galactica for the first time (also on Pick, actually), so that's 'new' to me, but I'm slightly surprised there doesn't seem to be a top notch sci-fi series that's genuinely new. Mind you, maybe there is and I just don't have access to it.
Not heard much more about the new film of Farscape recently. Some reckon if it does well a new series could be in the offing. Not clear which characters will return or could be in a series, though.
If Ben Browder and Claudia Black are back, after the last two series of SG-1, that'll be very weird to watch.
The last is, I confess, a synthesis of a range of commenters in the Telegraph & Guardian. As you say, it's not much of a stretch.
Turning to the EU and any prospective referendum (and noting the science fiction theme here this morning), I'm reminded of Asimov's 'Foundation and Empire'. The protagonists spend a lot of time thrashing around trying to save the day, only to discover that the day is actually saved by historical imperatives that have developed over centuries.
As @Sean_F points out, the UK isn't the only country with agency, nor the only one with an interest in a different kind of European Union.
The future will likely be determined by long term demographic shifts, shifts in global competitiveness, resource depletion and the impact of disruptive technologies (e.g. robotics and/or genetics), rather than our current crop of political leaders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_nationalist_parties_in_Europe
Not one of which did well in London.
http://tinyurl.com/CoitusInterruptus
Yeah!!!! Confirmed TNG is only ST!!!
[I'm reminded of Asimov's 'Foundation and Empire'. The protagonists spend a lot of time thrashing around trying to save the day, only to discover that the day is actually saved by historical imperatives that have developed over centuries.]
Yeah!!!! Who are these anti-Asimov Sci-fi fans???
Mr. Eagles, just read the premise. Sounds rather good, even though I'm not into post-apocalypse worlds as a rule.
Firstly. lib dem voters are more cerebral than most other voters and do vote differently on different issues so the European vote isn't really a surprise especially as Clegg nailed his colours to the mast on that and gave euro sceptic LibDems nowhere to turn.
Secondly in their heartlands the LibDems are just pumped up residents associations.. They are not LibDems..in fact if the libdem brand really does start to fracture then I can see many lib dem councils going RA just to detoxify themselves from the Libdem tag
An example of this usage is: "Before Tony Blair's speech, a chap near me growled: ‘He thinks he's the dog's bollocks’. Well, he's entitled to. It was a commanding speech: a real dog's bollocks of an oration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks#.22Dog.27s_bollocks.22
And so with that, ramblings on sci-fi and Rugby and a bit of politics, I think I should probably withdraw to do something useful - I am clearly dangerously bored.
British Slang As Guessed By An American
The BuzzFeed UK team sent me (a clueless American) the following British slang terms from across the ocean and I was tasked with guessing their meanings. This is my terrible attempt to decipher British culture:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mattbellassai/british-slang-as-guessed-by-american
Why Miliband didnt carry on with this is insane. If he had I dont think Lab would have lost so many voters to UKIP in the North
Three years ago Labour was looking like they might really care about the English working class again.. looks like The Guardian put paid to it
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/19/blue-labour-immigration
http://www.marcusfysh.org.uk/about-marcus
Your thoughts and comments on here are thoughtful, enlightening and very often right. Your assessment of UKIP's chances in Newark were bang on.
But reading your pronouncements on an EU referendum, they do remind me tremendously of my Liberal Democrat friend who also believes it would be a terrible idea to ask the British people as they will come up with the wrong answer ! (Hostile press, demonisation of Clegg as the IN man etc...)
Personally I lament the lack of any independent analysis on exit or remaining in the EU, the problem is that everyone has skin in the game.
Its all over!
If you had *read my post* my argument was you use the Euro results to create a "dodgy bar-chart" for marketing purposes. It's not applying the Euro results to the victory, but how the Tories might use the Euro results to persuade Lib Dems to vote tactically for them and against UKIP.
[And as I also caveated, I have no knowledge of Yeovil: I used it as an example of how an argument could be built because someone else mentioned it].
http://www.tv.com/shows/defiance/
Earth-bound Orphan Black is OK too.
http://www.tv.com/shows/orphan-black/
After what I've heard about this team and their exploits, I'm definitely joining team 2015, because I wan't to be up at 4:45 am on election day, in get out the vote operations.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
There is never any such thing as a completely independent analysis. I think the best you can do is try to work out what are the more lunatic positions of each side. The truth on the EU is probably messy, it has merits and pitfalls, neither perfectly good nor perfectly bad. We could survive outside but there are also sound reasons for staying in. This is one where it comes down to the persuasiveness of those arguing each case. I'm broadly ambivalent, neither fanatically pro nor blindly anti. I want to see what reforms and reneg we get before making a decision.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
*face palm*
http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2014-06-07/hertfordshire-town-prepares-for-edl-march/
I'm under the impression that "bare" is now just a bit passé and going the way of "random", but "fitty" is still doing ok.
What we need is for Lord Ashcroft to do another one of his phone-back polls, to see what the voters actually did.
My guess is he'll come back claiming to have stopped things that haven't actually happened, like the FTT...
Thanks for those tourism links. £16bn a year, and probably growing, tourist deficit, is pretty chunky and, as you say, evidence that the UK populace haven't got used to the idea of living in a much poorer country. Too much unearned bounce-back from 2008 and too little rebalancing of the economy, perhaps. The politicans' and the media's fixation with headline GDP figures and growf really isn't doing us any good.
Please, it was Admiral Cain. Are Scottish Labour not really working well with Better Together then? Still, the Union needs their support no matter how they give it I suppose.
Although anywhere else in Herts would be even less fertile with possible exception of Borehamwood.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/culturehousedaily/2014/06/the-bible-can-teach-us-and-our-politicians-how-to-use-words-properly/