Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The limits of private polling

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited September 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The limits of private polling

For we followers and obsessives of opinion polls, there are two words that grab our attention like no others, those two words are “private polling”, there’s some belief that “private polling” is much more sophisticated and accurate, than the normal public polling, but is it?

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • "And an analysis of their findings by two leading academics in New York said the Yes campaign would win by 54 per cent to 46."

    I would not want to be the academic who had to tell him they got the numbers the wrong way around ...
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    I wonder how they can be so far out from bog-standard opinion polls.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    POASWAS.
  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    What about the private polling showing the Tories 67% ahead in the marginals that exists in Dan Hodges head?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300

    "And an analysis of their findings by two leading academics in New York said the Yes campaign would win by 54 per cent to 46."

    I would not want to be the academic who had to tell him they got the numbers the wrong way around ...

    Mein Fuhrer...Steiner...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Was this polling provided by a political consultant based in Southam by any chance?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030

    "And an analysis of their findings by two leading academics in New York said the Yes campaign would win by 54 per cent to 46."

    I would not want to be the academic who had to tell him they got the numbers the wrong way around ...

    A simple Excel formula typo! Happens to the best of us! *winks at TSE*
  • Hugh said:

    What about the private polling showing the Tories 67% ahead in the marginals that exists in Dan Hodges head?

    Hello stranger....

    just a reminder from FPT

    How can you tell it's been a seriously bad week for Ed M? Here's how:

    tom_watson‏@tom_watson·1 hr
    Personally speaking this has been the most enjoyable labour conference I've ever attended. #lab14
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    What would be the polling that makes it

    Labour 2/9
    Ukip 3/1

    In Heywood and Middleton?

    If there was any I mean

    40/30?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Even the organ grinder's hacked off with the monkey.

    'Len McCluskey, the leader of the Unite trade union which is one of Labour's biggest backers, said that the failure to mention the deficit was a "glaring omission".'

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11119350/Ed-Milibands-leadership-openly-questioned-by-his-own-MPs.html
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    What is it with Canadian pollsters....?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Even the organ grinder's hacked off with the monkey.

    'Len McCluskey, the leader of the Unite trade union which is one of Labour's biggest backers, said that the failure to mention the deficit was a "glaring omission".'

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11119350/Ed-Milibands-leadership-openly-questioned-by-his-own-MPs.html

    All those Quiet Bat People who got a name-check, and he forgot the key message.

    That's intellectual superiority for you...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @Hayley_Barlow: Ed Miliband forgets the deficit. Again! Watch the feisty interview with @JonSnowC4 on #c4news at 7pm. http://t.co/FR3UaBaKgP
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @Andrew_ComRes: New ComRes/ITV poll out tonight: Ed M's "forgotten" speech issues - immigration & deficit - are Labour's weakest with voters
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited September 2014
    FPT

    Today was the day when the Magic Sign was overtaken by the Mighty Machine in terms of market capitalisation:
    Ladbrokes ........... £1,172.56 million
    Betfair ................. £1,195.97 million

    How are the once mighty now fallen! I wonder what Cyril Stein would have made of it. Of course it wouldn't have happened in his day. Judging by the following extract from his entry in Wiki the old boy who died three years ago did all right for himself and for his shareholders:

    "Cyril ran his own small credit-betting office in the West End of London when (aged 28) he teamed up in 1956 with his bookmaker uncle Mark, who traded as Max Parker, to buy the venerable but failing bookmarking firm of Ladbrokes, founded in 1886, for a reported £100,000."

    Wow!
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    I find the labour party criticism of ed Miliband puzzling.

    Labour are normally pretty good at getting behind the leader.
  • Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Salmond meets Downfall.

    http://www.youtube.com
    /watch?v=2_nnYSD2gGo
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

  • isam said:

    What would be the polling that makes it

    Labour 2/9
    Ukip 3/1

    In Heywood and Middleton?

    If there was any I mean

    40/30?

    Are we talking proper pollsters, or Canadians?

  • glwglw Posts: 9,954
    Remember the many calls for readers and advertisers to boycott of the News of the World? Presumably the people behind those calls are preparing a similar campaign against the Mirror.

  • After Ed's interview yesterday, it would seem the 2 candidates for his job had good interviews today at conference -especially Yvette!!!!

    Get her in as Lab leader pre-election and asap.... I need my winnings with whoever bookie it's with.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited September 2014
    Scott_P said:

    @Hayley_Barlow: Ed Miliband forgets the deficit. Again! Watch the feisty interview with @JonSnowC4 on #c4news at 7pm. http://t.co/FR3UaBaKgP

    Is Ed sick or something, doing the interview from a hospital bed? Is it just me, or does that look a bit weird?

    I can only imagine the upheaval caused by politicians doing a PR stunt from places like hospitals or schools. It really annoys me, and yes they all do it.

    If they really want to know about how a public body functions etc, they can do it privately and quietly and away from the cameras, and they do. All the big set piece nonsense just causes distraction of the running of the place, for what getting on the news shaking the hand of some poor sod who is ill or doing an interview from a hospital bed.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    This was one of his best posts -

    'The clueless wonders around here are in for a shock.'
  • Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
  • Socrates said:

    I wonder how they can be so far out from bog-standard opinion polls.

    Why bother to do private polls anyway?

    Presumably it must be because one thinks they are better than public polls and so they represent valuable information that gives you an advantage. Why would that be?

    Perhaps because you had fed in the [private] data from your canvassing returns/other campaign data on voter contact? That's the only thing I can think of that might not be available in the public domain.

    Most likely is that there is an observational bias at play here. We are only hearing about private polling that was contrary to the public polling - because it's not interesting to hear that private polls gave the same answer as public polls.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    The magnitude of the difference is extraordinary:

    Private polling - win by 8%
    Actual result - lose by 11%

    An error in the lead of 19 points.

    Equivalent to having polls with Lab leading by 4% and the actual result being Lab winning by 23% or Lab losing by 15%.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704

    "And an analysis of their findings by two leading academics in New York said the Yes campaign would win by 54 per cent to 46."

    I would not want to be the academic who had to tell him they got the numbers the wrong way around ...

    Scanning back for a quick look at what's been said, I would not wish those academics to be marking my exam papers.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682
    edited September 2014
    Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    As I have said before, quoting the Euro-fanatic Bogdanor who said that unfairness towards the English was a price worth paying, is hardly a great recommendation for any cause.
  • On topic: Why on earth would you use a Canadian company to do your polling in Scotland?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @David_Cameron I have requested that Parliament be recalled to debate UK response to the Iraqi Govt's request for support against ISIL
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014

    Scott_P said:

    @Hayley_Barlow: Ed Miliband forgets the deficit. Again! Watch the feisty interview with @JonSnowC4 on #c4news at 7pm. http://t.co/FR3UaBaKgP

    Is Ed sick or something, doing the interview from a hospital bed? Is it just me, or does that look a bit weird?

    I can only imagine the upheaval caused by politicians doing a PR stunt from places like hospitals or schools. It really annoys me, and yes they all do it.

    If they really want to know about how a public body functions etc, they can do it privately and quietly and away from the cameras, and they do. All the big set piece nonsense just causes distraction of the running of the place, for what getting on the news shaking the hand of some poor sod who is ill or doing an interview from a hospital bed.
    Funny, I thought hospitals were overflowing with patients. That's certainly what the usual suspects would have us believe. Why's that expensive bed empty?

    What gives Milliband and Channel 4 the right to use a publicly owned asset as a film set? Of course, I'm sure Channel 4 and the Labour Party paid a hefty location fee.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    On topic: Why on earth would you use a Canadian company to do your polling in Scotland?

    Or anywhere!

  • On topic: Why on earth would you use a Canadian company to do your polling in Scotland?

    Well, parts of Canada look very much like Scotland. Nova Scotia, for example.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I can see the logic from the private pollsters - they weren't going to get repeat business as this was a "once in a lifetime" referendum - so they kept the client happy..
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
    How on Earth is it hostile to prevent the Scottish and Welsh ruling the English on stuff they get devolved?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    edited September 2014
    Interestingly when news of the Canadian findings first emerged there was a certain unease among those NO people who had heard of the story through the Herald or Record. Happily I was able to quote someone on here who had checked the Canadian's credentials and had debunked them as publicity seekers with absolutely no track record.

    (Take a bow PBer whose identity I've now forgotten.)
  • Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    This was one of his best posts -

    'The clueless wonders around here are in for a shock.'
    He also asserted boldly and without a jot of evidence in support that the higher the turnout the more likely a win for Yes.

    Anything above 80% and he thought the Nationalists were home and hosed.

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    No, just a coward.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    To be fair to the Canucks - both ICM and Yougov had YES ahead at one point.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    This was one of his best posts -

    'The clueless wonders around here are in for a shock.'
    He also asserted boldly and without a jot of evidence in support that the higher the turnout the more likely a win for Yes.

    Anything above 80% and he thought the Nationalists were home and hosed.

    Yes - although there was a lot of head scratching about that on the day of the poll. It boiled down to high turn out = good for YES, low turn out = bad for NO.

    Bunkum as it turned out.
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited September 2014
    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    What I chiefly remember about Stuart was his habit of telling the rest of us, in that marvellously patronising de haut en bas way that only lefties have really mastered, that we had "no idea what is actually happening on the ground in Scotland."

    This was usually in the form of a reproof directed at anyone who ventured to suggest that No was going to walk it and it wouldn't even be close.

    He used to deliver it with a sort of pitying head shaking contempt, as though pointing out that you really had no right to call yourself interested in politics given this glaring lacuna.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    This was one of his best posts -

    'The clueless wonders around here are in for a shock.'
    He also asserted boldly and without a jot of evidence in support that the higher the turnout the more likely a win for Yes.

    Anything above 80% and he thought the Nationalists were home and hosed.

    Tipping Point.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited September 2014

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    What I chiefly remember about Stuart was his habit of telling the rest of us, in that marvellously patronising de haut en bas way that only lefties have really mastered
    That you think Stuart is a lefty speaks volumes.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    What I chiefly remember about Stuart was his habit of telling the rest of us, in that marvellously patronising de haut en bas way that only lefties have really mastered
    That you think Stuart is a lefty speaks volumes.
    You seem to have recovered from your fellow traveller nationalists getting a sound drubbing Neil old bean - that's the spirit !
  • TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    This was one of his best posts -

    'The clueless wonders around here are in for a shock.'
    He also asserted boldly and without a jot of evidence in support that the higher the turnout the more likely a win for Yes.

    Anything above 80% and he thought the Nationalists were home and hosed.

    Yes - although there was a lot of head scratching about that on the day of the poll. It boiled down to high turn out = good for YES, low turn out = bad for NO.

    Bunkum as it turned out.
    Quite a few of us thought it was bunkum before it turned out.

    Anybody can be wrong, but he simply ignored requests to substantiate or argue his case.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    What I chiefly remember about Stuart was his habit of telling the rest of us, in that marvellously patronising de haut en bas way that only lefties have really mastered
    That you think Stuart is a lefty speaks volumes.
    You seem to have recovered from your fellow traveller nationalists getting a sound drubbing Neil old bean - that's the spirit !
    Yes, Harry, Pork and James Kelly, my fellow travellers...

  • Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
    Its gone quiet because the EVfEL answer is as inadequate as the Bogdanor and Miliband proposals.

    Now what I want to know is if Miliband is going to give England equality and devolve to regions and Cities does that mean he is proposing to break up the NHS? Logically to address the democratic deficit properly by devolving to city and regions that is what you would have to do. Otherwise how could say the Northwest choose to get free prescriptons and say the North East choose to get extra nurses.

    There is only one solution which actually gives England democratic equality and keeps the NHS whole and that is an English Parliament........
  • TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    This was one of his best posts -

    'The clueless wonders around here are in for a shock.'
    He also asserted boldly and without a jot of evidence in support that the higher the turnout the more likely a win for Yes.

    Anything above 80% and he thought the Nationalists were home and hosed.

    Yes - although there was a lot of head scratching about that on the day of the poll. It boiled down to high turn out = good for YES, low turn out = bad for NO.

    Bunkum as it turned out.
    Quite a few of us thought it was bunkum before it turned out.

    Anybody can be wrong, but he simply ignored requests to substantiate or argue his case.

    Essentially it was what one might call an argumentum ad Caledoniam: "I'm right because I'm Scotch*".

    * Yes, yes, I know about Scots and Scotch. I'll call them what I like, especially now we pwn them.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    The reasons for private poll bias seem to be:

    1. Distortion of questions - a private pollster has no reason to resist asking leading questions etc.
    2. Selection of best results. You might have four private polls done, and leak the one that suits you best.
    3. Pollster distortion - trying to please the customer by helpful rounding etc.

    Number 3 seems the least likely - it would just be annoying to have a pollster who makes stuff up. Those unscrupulous enough to lie to the public can make up their own lies based on non-existent pollsters. But either 1 or 2 looks possible.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    The reasons for private poll bias seem to be:

    1. Distortion of questions - a private pollster has no reason to resist asking leading questions etc.
    2. Selection of best results. You might have four private polls done, and leak the one that suits you best.
    3. Pollster distortion - trying to please the customer by helpful rounding etc.

    Number 3 seems the least likely - it would just be annoying to have a pollster who makes stuff up. Those unscrupulous enough to lie to the public can make up their own lies based on non-existent pollsters. But either 1 or 2 looks possible.

    2. wouldn't convinced the campaigns themselves however.
  • Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Probably not as I think Bogdanor is ignoring the new political reality. With greater devolution, the need to address the democratic deficit is increased. If Scotland is going to have even more areas of self-governance, then it has to accept that Scottish MPs have no right to participate in the determination of policy in those areas for the rest of the UK.

    Labour forgets many things. It forgets that in 1997, it was elected on a promise not to bring in tuition fees for university students. It clearly forgot that when the introduce legislation implementing their u-turn. It also forgets that there was a significant backbench rebellion when meant that the measure only went through because Scottish Labour MPs voted for it - even though their own constituents were only going to be marginally affected by the policy (if at all)

    With more devolution, such things are going to happen again and again. That is unacceptable in any democracy.

    Yes, there are issues when the party of National Government does not carry a majority of the seats in England. But if the past 4 or so years have shown us anything, it is that parties can come together to being forward policies that carry support beyond simple party lines.

    A supply and demand situation for English laws is sure a good thing if that is what is necessary for stable government for the UK as a whole.

    I do not believe in an English Parliament. I do not believe in devolution to cities (or even city states.) And I certainly do not believe that the current system can continue without reform.

    That reform has to mean that English MPs have the final say over measures that only affect English matters.

    The detail of how that is implemented is not beyond intelligent people to determine. It means co-operation, communication, collaboration - and accepting that, in a union of different nation states with different political systems, Westminster has to adapt.

    And for those who bring up the idea that London having a mayoral system means that we need to account for that, they are just attempting to divert attention from the real issues. The same goes for those who talk about the difference between those MPs from coastal or inland seats, or the urban/rural divide.

    England will not stand for having policy imposed by politicians who have no democratic right to do so. Just as the Scots have made it perfectly clear that they want control over many areas of policy.

    We all need to adjust our thinking and our systems to reflect that reality.

    Miliband stands in the way of this. And the people will see that.
  • Socrates said:

    Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
    How on Earth is it hostile to prevent the Scottish and Welsh ruling the English on stuff they get devolved?
    Whether it is or not, the question is whether it is perceived to be. One factor here would be its source. The SNP proposing ev4el is less likely to be seen as anti-Scots than an absolutely identical proposal from the Conservative Party because that party is already seen -- fairly or unfairly -- as being hostile to Scotland: the effing Tories, as the Prime Minister put it. And even if Scotland is written off, there are eight Welsh seats to defend.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    STOP DIGGING!

    @DPJHodges: If, as Ed Miliband is now claiming, his speech wasn't "prepared earlier" how did comments he never made appear in the released text?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited September 2014
    On the general subject of private polling, I don't claim to be an expert, but my understanding from conversations I've had is that it's not so much about headline voting intention, but more about trying to find out how your messages are being received, whether you need to change your approach, and whether there are weaknesses in your opponents' messaging which you can try to exploit.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
    How on Earth is it hostile to prevent the Scottish and Welsh ruling the English on stuff they get devolved?
    Whether it is or not, the question is whether it is perceived to be. One factor here would be its source. The SNP proposing ev4el is less likely to be seen as anti-Scots than an absolutely identical proposal from the Conservative Party because that party is already seen -- fairly or unfairly -- as being hostile to Scotland: the effing Tories, as the Prime Minister put it. And even if Scotland is written off, there are eight Welsh seats to defend.
    So the Conservatives aren't allowed to do the fair thing because the Scots have a chip on their shoulder? With respect, that's a ridiculous position.
  • It's not private polling that's rubbish. It's Canadian polling that's rubbish.

    Angus Reid and all that.
  • After Ed's interview yesterday, it would seem the 2 candidates for his job had good interviews today at conference -especially Yvette!!!!

    Get her in as Lab leader pre-election and asap.... I need my winnings with whoever bookie it's with.

    No, no, no - it must be Darling as I've had him for next leader for last two years :-)
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    That reform has to mean that English MPs have the final say over measures that only affect English matters.

    But EV4EL will only do that for legislative measures. For all the non-legislative changes made by the Education Secretary and the Health Secretary, the English get screwed.

  • Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    Yes he frequently said he didn't know who would win - but pointed out the disparity between the polling odds (close thing) and betting odds.

    Prize turnips for "getting it wrong" must go to "GOTV Pork" and "hopeless" malcolmg......

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    Yes he frequently said he didn't know who would win - but pointed out the disparity between the polling odds (close thing) and betting odds.

    Prize turnips for "getting it wrong" must go to "GOTV Pork" and "hopeless" malcolmg......

    No doubt the latter is plaguing OGH on his Spanish holiday, with whisky fuelled outbursts of 'Fanny' and 'Erchie' at random intervals from poolside.
  • Socrates said:

    That reform has to mean that English MPs have the final say over measures that only affect English matters.

    But EV4EL will only do that for legislative measures. For all the non-legislative changes made by the Education Secretary and the Health Secretary, the English get screwed.

    Do you know think that it is possible to devise some system to ensure that properly scrutiny of such matters happens?

    I believe it is.

    And it is unthinkable, going forward, that an Education Secretary will not represent an English constituency.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    Yes he frequently said he didn't know who would win - but pointed out the disparity between the polling odds (close thing) and betting odds.

    Prize turnips for "getting it wrong" must go to "GOTV Pork" and "hopeless" malcolmg......

    Poor hapless Pork. The indignity of seeing his sparing partner Seth vindicated when Lansley became leader followed by getting the Scottish referendum badly wrong because he understood less about what was going on than the out-of-touch-fop-twits.

  • Scott_P said:

    STOP DIGGING!

    @DPJHodges: If, as Ed Miliband is now claiming, his speech wasn't "prepared earlier" how did comments he never made appear in the released text?

    Eh? Miliband told ITV this morning that it was prepared earlier, and I quote:

    "What I try and do is I try and write a speech and then I use it as the basis for what I want to say to the country."

    Please, please, when are the grown-ups coming to sort all this out?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Request: please could someone with a relatively large Twitter following ask Lord Ashcroft whether he has any plans to commission a poll in Heywood and Middleton.

    I tweeted him a few days ago but he didn't reply, which isn't surprising since I only have about 200 followers.
  • Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
    How on Earth is it hostile to prevent the Scottish and Welsh ruling the English on stuff they get devolved?
    Whether it is or not, the question is whether it is perceived to be. One factor here would be its source. The SNP proposing ev4el is less likely to be seen as anti-Scots than an absolutely identical proposal from the Conservative Party because that party is already seen -- fairly or unfairly -- as being hostile to Scotland: the effing Tories, as the Prime Minister put it. And even if Scotland is written off, there are eight Welsh seats to defend.
    So the Conservatives aren't allowed to do the fair thing because the Scots have a chip on their shoulder? With respect, that's a ridiculous position.
    No, there are two aspects to it. One is what should be done; once you've moved beyond sloganising, it isn't obvious: hence Hague's committee. The other is getting elected, and that is where perceptions of voters matter. Both these factors suggest it will be kicked into the long grass.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited September 2014
    "Mitt Romney’s internal polling in 2012, showed him believing he was on course to win the Presidency"

    I think this misrepresents Mr Romney's position. The US pollsters results fell into two groups, the variation being on who they thought would be the electorate. The pro-dem pollsters were right, the pro-gop pollsters were wrong.

    You can see something similar in current UK polls. There is a high-UKIP group, and a low-UKIP group.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    Scott

    "forgotten" speech issues - "

    Ben said yesterday that party leaders doing a speech without notes should be cast into a bottomless pit. Very prescient of him as usual
  • Socrates said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    No, just a coward.
    Is flouncing off in a cloud of sanctimony more courageous?
  • Socrates said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    No, just a coward.
    Dickson's principle reason for posting on PB was to gloat ghoulishly. A vile defect that I fully share.
  • To be fair to Stuart, he's not a bad bloke. He was clearly very passionate about a YES win. Although I found some of his arguments extraordinary, and unbelievable, I genuinely enjoyed his presence here. He made a bit of a fool of himself with his "tipping point" episode, but who hasn't?

    If it meant that much to him, I expect he's still trying to come to terms with the loss in Scotland. I do hope he pulls himself together soon, and comes back on here.

    Inevitably, he will have to deal with the ribbing and the pillorying, but there are some insights of his I miss already.
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    Ed M on Look North promises a fairer deal for Yorkshire compared to the rest of England and is deeply sorry on behalf of the Labour Party for Rotherham and talks of having a proper enquiry... Accuses UKIP of exploiting the issue
  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014

    Socrates said:

    That reform has to mean that English MPs have the final say over measures that only affect English matters.

    But EV4EL will only do that for legislative measures. For all the non-legislative changes made by the Education Secretary and the Health Secretary, the English get screwed.

    Do you know think that it is possible to devise some system to ensure that properly scrutiny of such matters happens?

    I believe it is.

    And it is unthinkable, going forward, that an Education Secretary will not represent an English constituency.
    The budgets for specific devolved areas are currently developed as part of the overall annual Government budget by the Chancellor (formerly two Scots in succession) and the Chief Secretary of the Treasury (two Scots in succession). The budget is and has to be voted on by all members of the House giiven it is a Pan UK budget. How do you propose that the allocation of specific budgets for devolved areas is made an English only matter?

    How do you address areas like the Home office which will have devolved areas such as police and non-devolved areas such as Immigration. Are you going to break up one of the great offices of State or just ban non English MP's from a job that should be available for them.

    How do you identify which Peers (who will be able to block all legislation from the Commons) are non-English and which are not? They do not necessarily previously have constituencies. After all it would be a bit pointless having EVfEL if Mick Martin, David Steele and Neil Kinnock were then able to block it in the Lords.

    The idea that you can provide national integrity for English only matters within the UK Government/ Parliament is highly implausible. In fact to adapt a William Hague phrase its a bit like being 'In England but not run by England'

    There is a big difference between 'English Votes for English Laws' and 'English Rule for English Laws' and the latter is where we should be heading.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Roger said:

    Scott

    "forgotten" speech issues - "

    Ben said yesterday that party leaders doing a speech without notes should be cast into a bottomless pit. Very prescient of him as usual

    The reason EdM forgot to mention the deficit is that he has nothing to say about it.

    The voters will have to judge whether that makes him fit to be PM.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    AndyJS said:

    Request: please could someone with a relatively large Twitter following ask Lord Ashcroft whether he has any plans to commission a poll in Heywood and Middleton.

    I tweeted him a few days ago but he didn't reply, which isn't surprising since I only have about 200 followers.

    I asked him today, and didn't get a reply, but then I have less than 100 followers...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @SunNewsdesk: Andy Burnham is accused of forgetting the deaths of nearly 1,200 people in a hospital scandal: http://bit.ly/1yr3Iq0 twitter.com/SunNewsdesk/status/514832943865274368/photo/1
  • An interesting thread.

    I wasn’t aware of Alex Salmond’s winning certainty - Just goes to show, even with the most sophisticated methodology available, private polling can prove to be just an expensive dud.
  • I see parliament has been recalled to debate the Uk's part in air strikes on IS in Iraq. Poor buggers, getting their holiday cut short.
  • Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    Yes he frequently said he didn't know who would win - but pointed out the disparity between the polling odds (close thing) and betting odds.

    Prize turnips for "getting it wrong" must go to "GOTV Pork" and "hopeless" malcolmg......

    Poor hapless Pork. The indignity of seeing his sparing partner Seth vindicated when Lansley became leader followed by getting the Scottish referendum badly wrong because he understood less about what was going on than the out-of-touch-fop-twits.

    Was it Pork or tim who used to obsess about the horse Cameron rode and how he would have to resign by the weekend?

    We've had another "Cameron will resign any moment now" obsessive here recently.....
  • Incidentally from what I can see Ed Milband's shadow cabinet (the first chosen by a labour leader) seems to be 'England friendly' unlike the current Government (Danny Alexander being the biggest problem) as it only uses non English MPs in UK roles (Foreign,International Aid, Wales, Ireland, Scotland)

    Coincidence?
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Wasn't it this internal Nationalist polling that was behind Rupert Murdoch tweeting hints that the Scottish Sun might come out for Independence a couple of weeks before the Referendum after he had chatted on the phone with Alex Salmond? IIRC, @Seant commented that there was a rumour that Murdoch then got cold feet and pulled back from endorsing the Yes campaign after his flying visit to Scotland where he mingled and chatted to Scots voters and held a meeting with the editorial team of the Scottish Sun?
  • An interesting thread.

    I wasn’t aware of Alex Salmond’s winning certainty - Just goes to show, even with the most sophisticated methodology available, private polling can prove to be just an expensive dud.

    Salmond has never been possessed of self doubt.....it was the people who won by 10 points who had that, in the face of the Nats adamantine certainty.....
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336

    Socrates said:

    That reform has to mean that English MPs have the final say over measures that only affect English matters.

    But EV4EL will only do that for legislative measures. For all the non-legislative changes made by the Education Secretary and the Health Secretary, the English get screwed.

    Do you know think that it is possible to devise some system to ensure that properly scrutiny of such matters happens?

    I believe it is.

    And it is unthinkable, going forward, that an Education Secretary will not represent an English constituency.
    The budgets for specific devolved areas are currently developed as part of the overall annual Government budget by the Chancellor (formerly two Scots in succession) and the Chief Secretary of the Treasury (two Scots in succession). The budget is and has to be voted on by all members of the House giiven it is a Pan UK budget. How do you propose that the allocation of specific budgets for devolved areas is made an English only matter?

    How do you address areas like the Home office which will have devolved areas such as police and non-devolved areas such as Immigration. Are you going to break up one of the great offices of State or just ban non English MP's from a job that should be available for them.

    How do you identify which Peers (who will be able to block all legislation from the Commons) are non-English and which are not? They do not necessarily previously have constituencies. After all it would be a bit pointless having EVfEL if Mick Martin, David Steele and Neil Kinnock were then able to block it in the Lords.

    The idea that you can provide national integrity for English only matters within the UK Government/ Parliament is highly implausible. In fact to adapt a William Hague phrase its a bit like being 'In England but not run by England'

    There is a big difference between 'English Votes for English Laws' and 'English Rule for English Laws' and the latter is where we should be heading.
    Thanks for this - and to others on the same theme. Very interesting to get an update on the situation.

  • Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Carnyx said:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/english-votes-english-laws-absurdity-separatist

    Might be worth a look as it is by Vernon Bogdanor on EV4EL and so on - was he not Mr Cameron's tutor at Oxford?

    Any pb reader will have noted that ev4el posts have died away on recent threads, presumably as the party has realised it ain't that straightforward, which is presumably why Hague's committee has been established, and perhaps for fear of a causing a backlash -- maybe CCHQ's private polling (you see what I did there?) showed that in general English voters don't really care and Scottish and Welsh ones fear a hostile Conservative Party.
    How on Earth is it hostile to prevent the Scottish and Welsh ruling the English on stuff they get devolved?
    Whether it is or not, the question is whether it is perceived to be. One factor here would be its source. The SNP proposing ev4el is less likely to be seen as anti-Scots than an absolutely identical proposal from the Conservative Party because that party is already seen -- fairly or unfairly -- as being hostile to Scotland: the effing Tories, as the Prime Minister put it. And even if Scotland is written off, there are eight Welsh seats to defend.
    So the Conservatives aren't allowed to do the fair thing because the Scots have a chip on their shoulder? With respect, that's a ridiculous position.
    No, there are two aspects to it. One is what should be done; once you've moved beyond sloganising, it isn't obvious: hence Hague's committee. The other is getting elected, and that is where perceptions of voters matter. Both these factors suggest it will be kicked into the long grass.
    Having Billy Vague run it increases the chances of fudge, muddle and no action.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Scott_P said:

    This makes Pete Wishart's tweet this morning even funnier.

    They want to replace all Main Stream Media reporting with people on Facebook telling each other they are going to win...

    Still no sign of Stuart Dickson? Was he a MI5 mole?

    I suspect Stuart Dickson has gone the way of Stuart Truth and now inhabits a parallel Universe where reality is exactly what you want it to be.

    I dont remember Stuart ever saying he thought 'yes' would win - he mostly said it would be close and 'yes' was value.

    Yes he frequently said he didn't know who would win - but pointed out the disparity between the polling odds (close thing) and betting odds.

    Prize turnips for "getting it wrong" must go to "GOTV Pork" and "hopeless" malcolmg......

    Poor hapless Pork. The indignity of seeing his sparing partner Seth vindicated when Lansley became leader followed by getting the Scottish referendum badly wrong because he understood less about what was going on than the out-of-touch-fop-twits.

    Was it Pork or tim who used to obsess about the horse Cameron rode and how he would have to resign by the weekend?

    We've had another "Cameron will resign any moment now" obsessive here recently.....
    It was the cowardly bully Tim.
  • taffys said:

    I find the labour party criticism of ed Miliband puzzling.

    Labour are normally pretty good at getting behind the leader.

    Gordon brown is gone, it's no longer a Nokia to the back of the head from twenty paces when Labour MPs get out of line. - Ed, now commands respect from within the party by intellectual confidence alone...
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Incidentally from what I can see Ed Milband's shadow cabinet (the first chosen by a labour leader) seems to be 'England friendly' unlike the current Government (Danny Alexander being the biggest problem) as it only uses non English MPs in UK roles (Foreign,International Aid, Wales, Ireland, Scotland)

    Coincidence?

    As long as we're getting Education and Health Secretaries on the back of a majority via Scots/Welsh votes, it doesn't matter what nationality they are.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    That reform has to mean that English MPs have the final say over measures that only affect English matters.

    But EV4EL will only do that for legislative measures. For all the non-legislative changes made by the Education Secretary and the Health Secretary, the English get screwed.

    Do you know think that it is possible to devise some system to ensure that properly scrutiny of such matters happens?

    I believe it is.

    And it is unthinkable, going forward, that an Education Secretary will not represent an English constituency.
    What about an MP from a Scots constituency becoming PM, when most of the issues they deal with are English-only?
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    Yes, there's nothing more important than the start of the UKIP conference.
  • MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    Louise Mensch ✔ @LouiseMensch
    .@chrisg0000 @HouseOfTwitsCon Cam should have waited for the #UKIP conference so they can send back all their MPs. #ohwait
  • MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    You're not helping damp down the perception of Kippers as fruitcakes with comments like that!
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014
    MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    Obama timed US military action specifically to steal Farage's thunder.

    "Hello, White House. Bomb Iraq to get up the Kippers noses? Yup, anything for you Dave"
  • Socrates said:

    Incidentally from what I can see Ed Milband's shadow cabinet (the first chosen by a labour leader) seems to be 'England friendly' unlike the current Government (Danny Alexander being the biggest problem) as it only uses non English MPs in UK roles (Foreign,International Aid, Wales, Ireland, Scotland)

    Coincidence?

    As long as we're getting Education and Health Secretaries on the back of a majority via Scots/Welsh votes, it doesn't matter what nationality they are.
    I certainly agree with you. I was wondering whether Miliband was attempting to provide cover for the inadequacy of whatever proposals he comes up with (because they are bound to be inadequate).
  • MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    Louise Mensch ✔ @LouiseMensch
    .@chrisg0000 @HouseOfTwitsCon Cam should have waited for the #UKIP conference so they can send back all their MPs. #ohwait
    Well if the Tories' answer to Sally Bercow has decided to comment on it then its got to be dodgy!
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited September 2014

    MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    Louise Mensch ✔ @LouiseMensch
    .@chrisg0000 @HouseOfTwitsCon Cam should have waited for the #UKIP conference so they can send back all their MPs. #ohwait
    Douglas Carswel's little toe makes more of an MP than Louise "revolving door" Mensch ever did...
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    Louise Mensch ✔ @LouiseMensch
    .@chrisg0000 @HouseOfTwitsCon Cam should have waited for the #UKIP conference so they can send back all their MPs. #ohwait
    Well if the Tories' answer to Sally Bercow has decided to comment on it then its got to be dodgy!
    Remind me is mensch an mp, or just a gobby member of the public?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    MikeK said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29339787

    Parliament recalled over air strikes on Islamic State in Iraq

    Cammo trying to drown out the start of the UKIP Conference in Doncaster?
    It won't help him or any of the Lab/Lib/Con team.

    You're not helping damp down the perception of Kippers as fruitcakes with comments like that!
    It does seem a little odd to have the parliamentary vote on whether to join the air strikes after the air strikes have begun...
This discussion has been closed.