Off topic, looking forward to Ed's conference speech.
Have a sneaky feeling PB Tories might be frothing almost as much as they were last year with the energy price freeze.
Ed has led a successful team and can show that he has been able to keep the team united.United we bargain,Divided we beg.Leading an opposition Labour party which remains united is no mean achievement for Ed,the team leader.He has prevented the internal carnage that would have been predictable.Thats what I call leadership.What the PB Tories hate is his superiority over Cameron in the intellectual self-confidence stakes.It's so obvious it irks them.
Mmm, was very irked by the way he self-confidently ran away and hid from a non-hostile crowd consisting mainly of his own supporters and the press in Edinburgh last Thursday. I do like a bold politician. Funny how out of the hundreds of MPs campaigning in Scotland last week, not a single one had the cerebral chutzpah to follow ed's lead, they all just cravenly got on with the job.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
[Ed Balls is] in a difficult situation, on the one hand, he has to respond to the fact that according to the poll, people are concerned about the economic credibility of the Labour party but on the other hand he’s got to make certain that we present a vision of what Labour stand for and how they will change Britain.’
He's quite right, of course. There is no way of both being economically credible, and presenting a vision of what Labour stand for and how they will change Britain. The two are diametrically opposed. That's why Labour will say as little as possible.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I have soured a little on Nuttall since I found out he wants to double down on drug criminalisation. I also disagree with his views on gay marriage and climate change, although I know you won't on the latter.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
Farage was re elected leader last week I think so it seems you're stuck with him for a while!
You don't get tactical voting, in a General Election. But what we are finding, is more and more people are finding fault with their former parties. I, with Labour, who have just stated they will have to increase the retirement age AGAIN? Have found their policies since Blair, have harmonised with Tory policies, there appears to be a common goal, to destroy the country. Labour letting paedophiles off in Rotherham and Tories allowing Sharia Law in areas of the country, a move that I feel, is designed to instigate racial tension. Neither of them, in their effort to con the public into believing they have the answer to unemployment, have even touched on the main problem, immigration. Because they know EU wont allow them, while we have a constant stream of cheap labour on our doorstep, wages or living standards wont rise. Only answer is to leave the EU and the dreadful TTIP, that is proposed at the workers expense. For this we need a party that has conviction, which is why I will vote UKIP. I have seen what the last 45 years of EU have been like, I don't want any more!
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I'm afraid you'll both have to wait for a new party leader:
NIGEL FARAGE RE-ELECTED UNOPPOSED AS UKIP LEADER Yesterday, nominations closed for the position of UKIP Party Leader as Nigel Farage MEP's four-year term is due to end on November 5th.
The Returning Officer, the UKIP General Secretary Roger Bird, confirmed that only one nomination had been received and therefore Nigel Farage has been re-elected unopposed as UKIP Leader with his new term beginning on November 5th.
Nigel Farage MEP said: "I am very pleased to be returned as UKIP Leader unopposed".
Nigel has said that if: 1. He fails to get 1 UKIP into parliament at the GE, he will quit as leader, or 2. He fails to get elected to parliament himself, he will consider his position.
I actually think he has grown as party leader in the past year, grown with the party in fact.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
Farage was re elected leader last week I think so it seems you're stuck with him for a while!
I've no strong feelings about the leadership issue. I don't, however, see Mr. Farage as being a Prime Minister in waiting.
Well, as a Red Liberal I wish Ed WOULD produce some coherent policies. Otherwise I’ll have to go Green. Or maybe even back to Yellow if Clegg gets his marching orders.
Ed surely will have a couple of things to tell us tomorrow - Mansion tax ? NHS tax for those on 100k + ? Scrap HS2 to pay for the NHS ?
You don't get tactical voting, in a General Election. But what we are finding, is more and more people are finding fault with their former parties. I, with Labour, who have just stated they will have to increase the retirement age AGAIN? Have found their policies since Blair, have harmonised with Tory policies, there appears to be a common goal, to destroy the country. Labour letting paedophiles off in Rotherham and Tories allowing Sharia Law in areas of the country, a move that I feel, is designed to instigate racial tension. Neither of them, in their effort to con the public into believing they have the answer to unemployment, have even touched on the main problem, immigration. Because they know EU wont allow them, while we have a constant stream of cheap labour on our doorstep, wages or living standards wont rise. Only answer is to leave the EU and the dreadful TTIP, that is proposed at the workers expense. For this we need a party that has conviction, which is why I will vote UKIP. I have seen what the last 45 years of EU have been like, I don't want any more!
For all you want, come to UKIP, we will be please to welcome you to the family.
The prelude to legalised paedophilia! Look around, all the vices of the past, that brought about downfalls of government, are slowly being legalised. The Rotherham furore and other cities, that have gone unchecked. Just as Savile and Cyril Smith were allowed free reign. Jack Straw in 2009, brought in a gagging order;; "Children in Care had their rights to complain of abuse, withdrawn"? https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jack_straw_placed_gagging_order
Nothing on the fitness of the Greens, perhaps they are not seen as a group likely to get near power.
The Greens seem to be steadily polling 5% or so.
I expect that to go up after the GE when radical voters will find if Lab win due to the need for continued austerity that the new boss apart from a little tinkering at the edges will be the same as the old boss.
Listened to Rachel Reeves being interviewed by Brillo. Either hilarious of terrifying, depending on if you expect Labour to form the next government or not.
I thought she was supposed to be one of Labour's rising stars! She sounded like she was bluffing even on the end bit when her position seemed defensible!
It's good to see labour's new generation are really not any better at this money stuff....
Andrew Neil@afneil·9 mins Thought Labour policy was to run CURRENT spending surplus. Rachel Reeves tells me its to run surplus in OVERALL spending. Anybody clarify?
Robert Peston@Peston·17 mins On Daily Politics, @RachelReevesMP seemed to think @edballsmp wants surplus on total budget, not just current spending. Whoops.
The prelude to legalised paedophilia! Look around, all the vices of the past, that brought about downfalls of government, are slowly being legalised. The Rotherham furore and other cities, that have gone unchecked. Just as Savile and Cyril Smith were allowed free reign. Jack Straw in 2009, brought in a gagging order;; "Children in Care had their rights to complain of abuse, withdrawn"? https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jack_straw_placed_gagging_order
Back in the Sixties and Seventies, there certainly were campaigners who thought that gay rights and paedophile rights were one and the same cause, but since then, society has generally become more hostile towards paedophilia, while more accepting of homosexuality.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I'm afraid you'll both have to wait for a new party leader:
NIGEL FARAGE RE-ELECTED UNOPPOSED AS UKIP LEADER Yesterday, nominations closed for the position of UKIP Party Leader as Nigel Farage MEP's four-year term is due to end on November 5th.
The Returning Officer, the UKIP General Secretary Roger Bird, confirmed that only one nomination had been received and therefore Nigel Farage has been re-elected unopposed as UKIP Leader with his new term beginning on November 5th.
Nigel Farage MEP said: "I am very pleased to be returned as UKIP Leader unopposed".
Nigel has said that if: 1. He fails to get 1 UKIP into parliament at the GE, he will quit as leader, or 2. He fails to get elected to parliament himself, he will consider his position.
I actually think he has grown as party leader in the past year, grown with the party in fact.
As I said in my previous post, now would not be the time to change leader. I do think it is unfortunate that the leadership contest was scheduled for now as it effectively guaranteed Farage would not be opposed.
Nothing on the fitness of the Greens, perhaps they are not seen as a group likely to get near power.
The Greens seem to be steadily polling 5% or so.
I expect that to go up after the GE when radical voters will find if Lab win due to the need for continued austerity that the new boss apart from a little tinkering at the edges will be the same as the old boss.
One of the interesting quirks you will find in the detail of some of the opinion polls is that the Greens are picking up more Conservative 2010 voters than Labour 2010 voters. It would seem that there were a few people who voted blue to get green and are now disappointed.
You don't get tactical voting, in a General Election. But what we are finding, is more and more people are finding fault with their former parties. I, with Labour, who have just stated they will have to increase the retirement age AGAIN? Have found their policies since Blair, have harmonised with Tory policies, there appears to be a common goal, to destroy the country. Labour letting paedophiles off in Rotherham and Tories allowing Sharia Law in areas of the country, a move that I feel, is designed to instigate racial tension. Neither of them, in their effort to con the public into believing they have the answer to unemployment, have even touched on the main problem, immigration. Because they know EU wont allow them, while we have a constant stream of cheap labour on our doorstep, wages or living standards wont rise. Only answer is to leave the EU and the dreadful TTIP, that is proposed at the workers expense. For this we need a party that has conviction, which is why I will vote UKIP. I have seen what the last 45 years of EU have been like, I don't want any more!
For all you want, come to UKIP, we will be please to welcome you to the family.
Nothing on the fitness of the Greens, perhaps they are not seen as a group likely to get near power.
The Greens seem to be steadily polling 5% or so.
I expect that to go up after the GE when radical voters will find if Lab win due to the need for continued austerity that the new boss apart from a little tinkering at the edges will be the same as the old boss.
One of the interesting quirks you will find in the detail of some of the opinion polls is that the Greens are picking up more Conservative 2010 voters than Labour 2010 voters. It would seem that there were a few people who voted blue to get green and are now disappointed.
V. interesting. Let's hope they don't meet too many of the Watermelons.
On topic - the obvious reason why the Euro results were irrelevant is because they don't select a government. You don't need to worry about a party's fitness to govern when the ballot isn't actually about that.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I have soured a little on Nuttall since I found out he wants to double down on drug criminalisation. I also disagree with his views on gay marriage and climate change, although I know you won't on the latter.
On that last did you see the link I posted to the article by Obama's previous Science Advisor on the lack of settled science. The AGW position is becoming less and less tenable by the week.
Left Foot Forward not impressed with Ed's 'Long Grass' strategy:
On English votes for English laws, Labour has been caught like a rabbit in the headlights.
The simple reality is that, for all the talk of Cameron playing politics with the issue, which he undoubtedly has, the argument that things are being rushed is simply not credible.
For the last four years commentators like me, political strategists, former Labour ministers, some current shadow cabinet ministers, and even the odd brave Labour MP have been calling for Labour to address its lack of credibility on the economy. Ed Balls himself has tried to entice, nudge and cajole his party into a position where it can start to at least compete with the Tories on the issue.
It’s an exercise in futility. Just think about that figure for a moment: £75 billion. The Labour Party, if it were to win the next election, would have to close a gap the gap between what the nation earns and what it spends by £75 billion. “We will balance the books”, Ed Balls claimed. Well, to do that, he will have to bring into balance books that are £75 billion in the red.
He can’t do it. Ed Miliband can’t do it. No Labour Party politician can do it.
Left Foot Forward not impressed with Ed's 'Long Grass' strategy:
On English votes for English laws, Labour has been caught like a rabbit in the headlights.
The simple reality is that, for all the talk of Cameron playing politics with the issue, which he undoubtedly has, the argument that things are being rushed is simply not credible.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I have soured a little on Nuttall since I found out he wants to double down on drug criminalisation. I also disagree with his views on gay marriage and climate change, although I know you won't on the latter.
On that last did you see the link I posted to the article by Obama's previous Science Advisor on the lack of settled science. The AGW position is becoming less and less tenable by the week.
I haven't but I will try to at some point. As you know, I have always felt that the certainty is overstated, but that it is still more likely happening than not. Even if you accept the more intelligent of the sceptics argument that there are lots of strong negative feedback effects to prevent temperature rises, it seems to me that there is a strong possibility they could be highly detrimental too (e.g. ocean acidification).
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I'm afraid you'll both have to wait for a new party leader:
NIGEL FARAGE RE-ELECTED UNOPPOSED AS UKIP LEADER Yesterday, nominations closed for the position of UKIP Party Leader as Nigel Farage MEP's four-year term is due to end on November 5th.
The Returning Officer, the UKIP General Secretary Roger Bird, confirmed that only one nomination had been received and therefore Nigel Farage has been re-elected unopposed as UKIP Leader with his new term beginning on November 5th.
Nigel Farage MEP said: "I am very pleased to be returned as UKIP Leader unopposed".
Nigel has said that if: 1. He fails to get 1 UKIP into parliament at the GE, he will quit as leader, or 2. He fails to get elected to parliament himself, he will consider his position.
I actually think he has grown as party leader in the past year, grown with the party in fact.
As I said in my previous post, now would not be the time to change leader. I do think it is unfortunate that the leadership contest was scheduled for now as it effectively guaranteed Farage would not be opposed.
Presumably the leadership contest was scheduled to be in the aftermath of the Euro elections, which up to recently were the most important elections for the party.
Raheem Kassam (@RaheemJKassam) 22/09/2014 17:37 Churchill was a Racist White Supremacist Claims Labour Candidate #lab14 bit.ly/1x1jaHS via @BreitbartNews
John Bickley (@JohnBickleyUKIP) 22/09/2014 17:07 Labour Can't Play the 'UKIP Are Racist' Card In the Heywood By-Election. Here's Why... bit.ly/1x0Jnq1 via @BreitbartNews
Divvie - any info on whether there will be a challenger to Sturgeon - i.e. will there be a contest and hence a betting market ?
Herald had a piece this am, which BTW confirms that Fiona Hyslop has fallen in with the general consensus (as you asked earlier, wich is why I noticed). This must be it online?
Divvie - any info on whether there will be a challenger to Sturgeon - i.e. will there be a contest and hence a betting market ?
Herald had a piece this am, which BTW confirms that Fiona Hyslop has fallen in with the general consensus (as you asked earlier, wich is why I noticed). This must be it online?
On topic - the obvious reason why the Euro results were irrelevant is because they don't select a government. You don't need to worry about a party's fitness to govern when the ballot isn't actually about that.
While the Euro results are technically as irrelevant as last time, when the vote did not hold up in the slightest from Euro to GE, there are good reasons to believe it will at least hold up much much better than last time.
What Hodges is missing is the effect of economic growth. From the depths of '92 recession to the early part of Blair-Brown years the deficit went from -£50 billion to +£16b i.e. making up £66b gap. Something similar could easily happen over next 5 years.
"One glaring discrepancy shows that Balls is talking utter Balls. He talks about a Compulsory Jobs Guarantee where unemployed 18-24 year olds out of work would be offered a taxpayer funded job. But under EU rules, British workers cannot be prioritised.
Is he planning on extending that scheme to the five million young people unemployed across the EU?"
Dan has a point, Balls is well aware of the score but the rest of his party are dreaming. Whoah at some of the seriously alarmist comments that follow his article - some are like SeanT on speed. I'll stick with the "Red Tories" thanks.
UKIP are undoubtedly here to stay, which means future Tory success depends on an alliance/merger under FPTP or a coalition under PR. Regrettably for conservatives, the Tory leadership is too thick to think more than about three months ahead, as has been shown on a number of occasions.
This reminds me in a way of the reasoning I used to encounter when I was a consultant. Every now and then there'd be a bit of downturn in utilisation, i.e. chargeability. When that happened - if, say, we were running at 50% utilisation instead of 70% - the usual solution was to sack 30% of the heads, chosen from among those who weren't currently utilised.
You now had 50 heads out of every 70 who were chargeable. So you were back at 70% utilisation again. Happy days! Unfortunately the 30 you had sacked were the ones doing future business development, which stops. So in a very short time indeed, new work stops coming in, your utilisation was down to 35 out of 70 again, and so you have to sack another 30%....etc.
In the same way, postulating an alliance between two parties while assuming that everything thereafter can be relied on to stay exactly the same is a bit facile. Look at what's happened to LD ratings since going into alliance with the Tories, for example. You can't just add poll shares together and you certainly can't assume no reaction.
An alliance with UKIP would send a large fraction of the kippers berserk and would also peel away all those who prefer Cameron's brand of Conservatism to Farage's brand of, well, whatever it is Farage stands for. Meanwhile, what happens if Labour enters a coalition with the LDs in response?
This delusion that many UKIPpers have - that they represent some kind of insuperable problem for Cameron, and that he'll have to accept this analysis, from a party that's not managed to elect one single MP in 20 years - strikes me as, well, desperately jejune.
What is pretty clear is that Miliband is now well positioned to win in 2015 just by rejecting EVEL and insisting on more immigration, more spending and no referendum.
The right-wingers enraged by this are likely to be actual or potential UKIP voters who were previously inclined towards the Tories. Spouting unreconstructed Brownite bile lures voters away from the Tories to UKIP and thus makes it likeier actually to happen.
If I'm right, the next opinion poll will show a bounce for Labour via a loss from Tory to UKIP.
What Hodges is missing is the effect of economic growth. From the depths of '92 recession to the early part of Blair-Brown years the deficit went from -£50 billion to +£16b i.e. making up £66b gap. Something similar could easily happen over next 5 years.
Could do. The effects of economic growth will certainly in any case allow them to slow the pace of any cuts still further, as people will not be so angry at such a large deficit when in general things are feeling better. Hell, people can barely stomach cuts in reality even when times are really tough, not in practice, if things are going ok they will care even less.
"One glaring discrepancy shows that Balls is talking utter Balls. He talks about a Compulsory Jobs Guarantee where unemployed 18-24 year olds out of work would be offered a taxpayer funded job. But under EU rules, British workers cannot be prioritised.
Is he planning on extending that scheme to the five million young people unemployed across the EU?"
Left Foot Forward not impressed with Ed's 'Long Grass' strategy:
On English votes for English laws, Labour has been caught like a rabbit in the headlights.
The simple reality is that, for all the talk of Cameron playing politics with the issue, which he undoubtedly has, the argument that things are being rushed is simply not credible.
They are certainly right that it appears no one near Ed had game played the consequences of a 'No'. What were they thinking?
To be fair, you need to add the qualifier of a narrow no.
But what you say may suggest that, like Mr Cameron et al, and possibly WITH Mr C etc., Labour had convinced themselves that indyref'd be a walkover for the Union. Opinion polling for Yes at 25%-ish back in 2012. Problem? What problem?
Never mind, the Tories will always have Gideon's English votes master strategy to drone on and on and on and on about.
A FTT is a no brainer.Raises the 20 bill needed for the NHS with some spare change for other things too.Robin Hood can come to our rescue.The Tory donors hate it so it must be good.
On topic - the obvious reason why the Euro results were irrelevant is because they don't select a government. You don't need to worry about a party's fitness to govern when the ballot isn't actually about that.
While the Euro results are technically as irrelevant as last time, when the vote did not hold up in the slightest from Euro to GE, there are good reasons to believe it will at least hold up much much better than last time.
What reasons are those, exactly? The only reason I can think of is that as oppositions almost always go backwards, and incumbent governments mark time, or go backwards, the votes have to go somewhere. It's not likely to be the LDs so that kinda leaves UKIP.
"One glaring discrepancy shows that Balls is talking utter Balls. He talks about a Compulsory Jobs Guarantee where unemployed 18-24 year olds out of work would be offered a taxpayer funded job. But under EU rules, British workers cannot be prioritised.
Is he planning on extending that scheme to the five million young people unemployed across the EU?"
Not content with Stamp Duty and Council Tax, Labour rush around trying to find a new way of grabbing headlines. In tomorrow's news, The Two Eds show how it is possible to piss into the wind.
And how I believe we must deal with it (since you all asked), is by replacing Nigel as 'leader'. A tacit acknowledgement that things went wrong (they didn't) and that the matter has been addressed. A Farage who isn't carrying the weight of the party on his ability to diffuse the latest media smear with a funny quip, or survive a hostile interview, is a better and more useful Farage. We need to undergo a visible evolution.
I am with you Lucky. Farage was not my choice for leader at the last election, much as I think he is a fine speaker and a great figurehead. He has done more than anyone to drag UKIP into the mainstream but I believe there are limits to how much further he can take the party and I would prefer to see another leader.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
I must admit I don't know a lot about Paul Nuttal. My vote goes to Suzanne Evans. I especially think it will wrong foot the other leaders to have Suzanne Evans to face in the debates -they are already sharpening their knives, and it will be difficult to attack a woman in the same way, and counter-productive even if it succeeds.
Farage deserved to be re-elected unnoposed, but he has already acknowledged it's time to bring other people to the fore.
To be fair, you need to add the qualifier of a narrow no.
But it wasn't narrow.
Oh yes it was - till the Vow. Else why panic, run round in circles, and emit that Vow?
The vote was on Thursday 18th - and it wasn't narrow.
The vow was before then - and that is the time frame I am talking about. A fair proportion of No voters were influenced by it - I have seen figures f something like a quarter but not the original source. The margin would have been considerably narrower if that were so.
'Increase in NHS spending funded by a mansion tax.'
How's that going to work in Wales where Labour has slashed the NHS budget by 8% and there are no mansions to tax?
Labour Shibboleth - check
Politics of envy - check
Economically innumerate - check
It will get cheered to the rafters...
Says a lot about the current Labour Party though. They've not learnt a thing, they are a party of liars, and they plan on a YES like campaign of bluffing their way to power.
I can not fathom why a single person in the UK supports these muppets.
Pitiful amount that a mansion tax raised to solve the massive NHS crisis? Who on earth do they think that is going to convince?
Starting to think this conference could be looked back on as the point Labour lost the election. Suddenly, it's starting to look possible Labour could even fall on their 2010 vote, leaking votes to the Greens and UKIP. Most Labour voters already only do so through gritted teeth, and there's literally no reason to do it if there's just going to be Tory policies anyway.
Avoid mansion tax by renting out rooms. Convert one to a "home office". In fact, if both partners work, convert two. Knock two "spare rooms" into one big one.
That took me 30 seconds, and I'm neither an accountant nor a lawyer. And people have the audacity to criticize Cameron for not thinking through policy decisions.
To be fair, you need to add the qualifier of a narrow no.
But it wasn't narrow.
Oh yes it was - till the Vow. Else why panic, run round in circles, and emit that Vow?
The vote was on Thursday 18th - and it wasn't narrow.
The vow was before then - and that is the time frame I am talking about. A fair proportion of No voters were influenced by it - I have seen figures f something like a quarter but not the original source. The margin would have been considerably narrower if that were so.
Why didn't Eck come up with a vow - a vow to have a Plan B - then he might have done better.
Scotsman this morning summed it up - some aspects of the Yes campaign were totally inept.
"The Yes campaign only needed to neutralise the economic arguments and it could then go on to win – instead it lived in an unreal world and fought a ridiculous battle like the Black Knight from Monty Python’s Holy Grail."
The reason for these strategic flaws in the Yes campaign is not hard to identify: it was the hubris of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon – the belief that they could not be wrong or at least not be seen to be wrong.
" He remains in denial, for Salmond resignation is nothing other than a manoeuvre designed to preserve the career of his chief accomplice, Sturgeon."
No-one likes a sore loser and in saying at the weekend that No voters had been tricked, Salmond showed arrogant disrespect for the judgement of more than two million Scots. "
@steve_hawkes: Huff Post's Mehdi Hasan tells Ed Balls a Survation poll found people think George Osborne is better looking.. It's like a Xmas Panto here
On topic - the obvious reason why the Euro results were irrelevant is because they don't select a government. You don't need to worry about a party's fitness to govern when the ballot isn't actually about that.
While the Euro results are technically as irrelevant as last time, when the vote did not hold up in the slightest from Euro to GE, there are good reasons to believe it will at least hold up much much better than last time.
What reasons are those, exactly? The only reason I can think of is that as oppositions almost always go backwards, and incumbent governments mark time, or go backwards, the votes have to go somewhere. It's not likely to be the LDs so that kinda leaves UKIP.
The reasons I meant were the indicators they will do well, and include their much improved results in by-elections and far more sustained polling performance since the Euros than before, and the likely presence of a UKIP MP in 2015 (which unlike the Greens can be capitalised on elsewhere as 'not a wasted vote' proof, because they have support in many places to a higher degree than the greens, a lot of which is down to the reason you mention
I'm not expecting a lot of MPs - prior to Carswell I was expecting possibly one but probably none, but I was anticipating between 5-10%. Of course, now they are aiming for more.
Comments
Spaces after punctuation marks, please.
LOL.
Who that would be I don't know at this moment. My favourite would probably be Paul Nuttal. I am not convinced that Carswell has what is needed to lead a party much as I agree with almost every single one of his policy positions and his vision.
Of course until after the next GE I suspect the question is moot but it is nice to know there are others who agree with me in the party.
@PHammondMP
[Ed Balls is] in a difficult situation, on the one hand, he has to respond to the fact that according to the poll, people are concerned about the economic credibility of the Labour party but on the other hand he’s got to make certain that we present a vision of what Labour stand for and how they will change Britain.’
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/09/len-mccluskey-ed-ballss-long-speech-was-good-in-parts/
He's quite right, of course. There is no way of both being economically credible, and presenting a vision of what Labour stand for and how they will change Britain. The two are diametrically opposed. That's why Labour will say as little as possible.
Neither of them, in their effort to con the public into believing they have the answer to unemployment, have even touched on the main problem, immigration. Because they know EU wont allow them, while we have a constant stream of cheap labour on our doorstep, wages or living standards wont rise.
Only answer is to leave the EU and the dreadful TTIP, that is proposed at the workers expense. For this we need a party that has conviction, which is why I will vote UKIP. I have seen what the last 45 years of EU have been like, I don't want any more!
NIGEL FARAGE RE-ELECTED UNOPPOSED AS UKIP LEADER
Yesterday, nominations closed for the position of UKIP Party Leader as Nigel Farage MEP's four-year term is due to end on November 5th.
The Returning Officer, the UKIP General Secretary Roger Bird, confirmed that only one nomination had been received and therefore Nigel Farage has been re-elected unopposed as UKIP Leader with his new term beginning on November 5th.
Nigel Farage MEP said: "I am very pleased to be returned as UKIP Leader unopposed".
Nigel has said that if:
1. He fails to get 1 UKIP into parliament at the GE, he will quit as leader, or
2. He fails to get elected to parliament himself, he will consider his position.
I actually think he has grown as party leader in the past year, grown with the party in fact.
Yes? What about it?
The prelude to legalised paedophilia!
Look around, all the vices of the past, that brought about downfalls of government, are slowly being legalised. The Rotherham furore and other cities, that have gone unchecked. Just as Savile and Cyril Smith were allowed free reign.
Jack Straw in 2009, brought in a gagging order;; "Children in Care had their rights to complain of abuse, withdrawn"?
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/jack_straw_placed_gagging_order
UKIP Mid Dorset @UKIPMidDorset 6h
Don't forget... UKIP Conference is live on Friday 26/09/2014 from 9.30am - BBC Parliament Channel - Freeview 131 - Freesat 201
All are invited to watch. You may learn something about UKIP democracy to your advantage.
Robert Peston@Peston·12 mins
& problem for @edballsmp is what @RachelReevesMP said on how to get debt down could have been said by @George_Osborne. As I said, whoops
Andrew Neil@afneil·9 mins
Thought Labour policy was to run CURRENT spending surplus. Rachel Reeves tells me its to run surplus in OVERALL spending. Anybody clarify?
Robert Peston@Peston·17 mins
On Daily Politics, @RachelReevesMP seemed to think @edballsmp wants surplus on total budget, not just current spending. Whoops.
http://order-order.com/2014/09/22/miliband-speaks-alongside-stalin-at-labour-conference/
On English votes for English laws, Labour has been caught like a rabbit in the headlights.
The simple reality is that, for all the talk of Cameron playing politics with the issue, which he undoubtedly has, the argument that things are being rushed is simply not credible.
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/09/conference-2014-labour-is-losing-credibility-on-devolution/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100287293/the-size-of-the-financial-black-hole-is-incomprehensible-so-labour-has-opted-not-to-comprehend-it/
22/09/2014 17:37
Churchill was a Racist White Supremacist Claims Labour Candidate #lab14 bit.ly/1x1jaHS via @BreitbartNews
22/09/2014 17:07
Labour Can't Play the 'UKIP Are Racist' Card In the Heywood By-Election. Here's Why... bit.ly/1x0Jnq1 via @BreitbartNews
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/no-ifs-or-buts-sturgeon-is-set-to-take-reins.25396217
@ComResPolls: New poll on devolution and Ed Miliband for @itvnews - 2/3 believe Scottish MPs shouldn't vote on English laws
http://t.co/G7FmR4ksf8
Sometimes a contest is healthy though ?
"One glaring discrepancy shows that Balls is talking utter Balls. He talks about a Compulsory Jobs Guarantee where unemployed 18-24 year olds out of work would be offered a taxpayer funded job. But under EU rules, British workers cannot be prioritised.
Is he planning on extending that scheme to the five million young people unemployed across the EU?"
http://www.ukip.org/don_t_let_labour_balls_up_the_economy
You now had 50 heads out of every 70 who were chargeable. So you were back at 70% utilisation again. Happy days! Unfortunately the 30 you had sacked were the ones doing future business development, which stops. So in a very short time indeed, new work stops coming in, your utilisation was down to 35 out of 70 again, and so you have to sack another 30%....etc.
In the same way, postulating an alliance between two parties while assuming that everything thereafter can be relied on to stay exactly the same is a bit facile. Look at what's happened to LD ratings since going into alliance with the Tories, for example. You can't just add poll shares together and you certainly can't assume no reaction.
An alliance with UKIP would send a large fraction of the kippers berserk and would also peel away all those who prefer Cameron's brand of Conservatism to Farage's brand of, well, whatever it is Farage stands for. Meanwhile, what happens if Labour enters a coalition with the LDs in response?
This delusion that many UKIPpers have - that they represent some kind of insuperable problem for Cameron, and that he'll have to accept this analysis, from a party that's not managed to elect one single MP in 20 years - strikes me as, well, desperately jejune.
What is pretty clear is that Miliband is now well positioned to win in 2015 just by rejecting EVEL and insisting on more immigration, more spending and no referendum.
The right-wingers enraged by this are likely to be actual or potential UKIP voters who were previously inclined towards the Tories. Spouting unreconstructed Brownite bile lures voters away from the Tories to UKIP and thus makes it likeier actually to happen.
If I'm right, the next opinion poll will show a bounce for Labour via a loss from Tory to UKIP.
Lol.
Never mind, the Tories will always have Gideon's English votes master strategy to drone on and on and on and on about.
Drive as many successful people you can out of the country... that worked so well in the 70s.
Or, if houses prices go down that will cause borrowing to rise.
Edited extra bit: just changed 'and' to 'or'.
But what you say may suggest that, like Mr Cameron et al, and possibly WITH Mr C etc., Labour had convinced themselves that indyref'd be a walkover for the Union. Opinion polling for Yes at 25%-ish back in 2012. Problem? What problem?
Bit like the CB freeze (£400mn) and the deficit (£75bn)
Lol.....
4 years wait for this - bravo Ed.
'Increase in NHS spending funded by a mansion tax.'
How's that going to work in Wales where Labour has slashed the NHS budget by 8% and there are no mansions to tax?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29318856
Not content with Stamp Duty and Council Tax, Labour rush around trying to find a new way of grabbing headlines. In tomorrow's news, The Two Eds show how it is possible to piss into the wind.
Politics of envy - check
Economically innumerate - check
It will get cheered to the rafters...
Farage deserved to be re-elected unnoposed, but he has already acknowledged it's time to bring other people to the fore.
"Who decides if your house is a mansion ?"
Count the number of spare rooms?
I can not fathom why a single person in the UK supports these muppets.
Starting to think this conference could be looked back on as the point Labour lost the election. Suddenly, it's starting to look possible Labour could even fall on their 2010 vote, leaking votes to the Greens and UKIP. Most Labour voters already only do so through gritted teeth, and there's literally no reason to do it if there's just going to be Tory policies anyway.
That took me 30 seconds, and I'm neither an accountant nor a lawyer. And people have the audacity to criticize Cameron for not thinking through policy decisions.
Scotsman this morning summed it up - some aspects of the Yes campaign were totally inept.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/brian-monteith-how-yes-failed-to-win-independence-1-3548226
"The Yes campaign only needed to neutralise the economic arguments and it could then go on to win – instead it lived in an unreal world and fought a ridiculous battle like the Black Knight from Monty Python’s Holy Grail."
The reason for these strategic flaws in the Yes campaign is not hard to identify: it was the hubris of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon – the belief that they could not be wrong or at least not be seen to be wrong.
" He remains in denial, for Salmond resignation is nothing other than a manoeuvre designed to preserve the career of his chief accomplice, Sturgeon."
No-one likes a sore loser and in saying at the weekend that No voters had been tricked, Salmond showed arrogant disrespect for the judgement of more than two million Scots. "
Futile gesture politics rules.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29318856
I'm not expecting a lot of MPs - prior to Carswell I was expecting possibly one but probably none, but I was anticipating between 5-10%. Of course, now they are aiming for more.
Great, no more briefing and infighting
@Flora_Alexander: The gloves are off! Douglas Alexander @ #labconf14: I don't think Damian McBride could find Scotland on a map.
That went well then...
Govt would lose out when sold too as stamp duty thresholds not met
I can never understand why poor PB Tories want the rich to get even richer whilst never utter a word of sympathy with those forced into food banks