A vote share of 35%, this far out, seems a fairly shaky platform on which to project an overall majority. What if it drops 2-3%?
The Ashcroft polls suggest that many seats are going to be won on low %ages of the vote. It may well turn out that only one party gets more than 30% nationally.
Danny565 The gap was quite small on welfare, most of the policies the Tories proposed are backed by the public it is the explanation and PR which needs to change
A majority of 62 would mean Labour winning 356 seats. Almost 100 gains. Do we really believe that?
Yes, the 2010 Lib Dem defectors and the 2010 Con to Kipper switchers makes Ed's job so much easier.
t UKIP doing well in the North/with the working class is all fart and no follow through.
It kinda don't
Ukip are massively on the up in the North... Anyone denying it is ignoring all evidence...
number crunchers blog showed that UKIP are eating into labours vote too, just because it isn't producing instant results, doesn't mean it isn't slowly but surely happening
18 months ago I offered 4/6 ukip under 10% to a few lucky punters on here... Ladbrokes were 1/6 at the time... They thought they were on a good thing, but the odds say different now
in terms of GE 2015, maybe not too many if any ukip gains from labour, but if you want to bet on the number in 2020 I'm happy to take you or anyone else on
they will seize support from all parties, especially Labour in the north.
If you had told me four years ago I'd be voting ukip I'd have laughed in your face
People on here would never have had it ... But it's all true
My girlfriend - 26 years old, WWC, policewoman - says her family have never voted before. But now they ARE voting. And they're all voting UKIP.
She got any single mates??!
Yeah, but they seem, mainly, to be gay men.
How important is gender to you, as compared to single status?
Gay men planning to vote kipper? I suppose Roger Helmer may appeal to the BDSM demographic.
Her gay friends aren't voting kipper, just her family.
Did I mention she was 26 and HOT?
Oh yes. I did. Sorry. I am the writerly equivalent of Brooks Newmark. Middle aged and sad, and also drunk, on a beautiful hotel terrace, in Vulcano, the Aeolians. Ah, dolce far niente.
I went to the Aeolians in 2012 with a 25 year old girl who was HOT!
A majority of 62 would mean Labour winning 356 seats. Almost 100 gains. Do we really believe that?
Yes, the 2010 Lib Dem defectors and the 2010 Con to Kipper switchers makes Ed's job so much easier.
But Ed makes Ed's job so much harder.
It is almost impossible to see him as PM. Yet it's almost impossible to see the Tories surviving in power, what with UKIP eating up their votes, and the electoral bias against them.
Next year, something almost impossible must happen.
Some people last week speculated that Labour's brand is strong enough to cope with Ed being crap.
As I said, the most interesting poll this weekend was the one showing Labour comfortably holding Rotherham, and their share of the vote up!
It kinda proves that UKIP doing well in the North/with the working class is all fart and no follow through.
TSE- that is a pretty gross metaphor. By the way, I want to put the LD switchers in context- they are Labour switch backers, and only gave their support to the LD's in the first place because Brown was hopeless and thought Cameron was non threatening. Now after a term of Tory govt, they are rock solid switch backers and a core Labour group. The danger to Labour will be leakage to UKIP and apathy from the 29% who voted Brown last time- very few will go to the Tories. After my disastrous predictions for the Scottish election, based solely on subjective bias, I predict that it is almost impossible for Labour to poll over 33% in a GE with numpty bumpy as leader, and therefore impossible for them to secure a majority.
I think fewer and fewer people identify with any party. I expect many of the LD switchers are left-leaning in general but not particularly pro-Labour. They will vote red to get rid of the Tories though.
I thought the LD switchers were showing as even more pro Ed M than 2010 Lab voters, which would suggest that if they were not particularly pro-Lab before when they thought they were voting Red Liberal, they are now, surely?
They're more pro-Ed than most, that's true. I'm not sure they are more pro-Labour than the party's core vote though. For a Ed Miliband's weaknesses, this is his one strength. He does appeal to LD>Lab switchers, a group generally uninterested in artifice and PR, who don't care whether someone knows how to eat a bacon sandwich - as NXMP has pointed out.
Some signs in Cameron's Sunday Times interview (not paywalled) that he will produce a useful speech. Hopefully the Tories can show Mr and Mrs Bloggs that the party is "on their side" and that they will actually prosper after the austerity, maybe even get a "reward" for suffering it stoically.
When he speaks on Wednesday, Cameron will not repeat his no-notes performance of 2007, but will echo his 2006 speech urging Conservatives to “let sunshine win the day” ...
“The next stage is about demonstrating what this means for every family in the country ..."
He added: “What it should feel like in 2020 is not that there is light at the end of the tunnel but that we’re through the tunnel and we’re part of a country that we’re really proud of.”
I realise you're a Tory activist and supporter but this is appallingly desperate stuff. The truth, as Ashcroft shows, is that BOTH Coalition parties are widely held in contempt by an electorate which believes it has put up with a lot for little or no tangible personal reward.
I realise for some on here if Cameron read extracts from the Birmingham phone book it would be lauded as a "visionary" speech but this is the kind of mawkish nonsense he served up to the Scots and it took (dare one say it) Gordon Brown of all people to rescue the Union.
This "look at me, I'm a nice chap and I'm on your side" routine is risible - he has nearly five years of a Government record to defend and all he can offer is "jam tomorrow" platitudes.
If that's all he has, I'd welcome Ed Miliband as a breath of fresh air.
When discussion turned to Europe, few spontaneously mentioned the referendum pledge, and many were unaware of it even when prompted. Few were enthused by the idea and only a small minority said it would be central to their voting decision.
More noticed in relation to Europe were David Cameron’s “rows” with other EU leaders. Few could remember the details, let alone the name of Mr Juncker, but there was strong approval for the PM being willing to “stand up to” Europe even if he did not win.
A vote share of 35%, this far out, seems a fairly shaky platform on which to project an overall majority. What if it drops 2-3%?
Largest party then. The Tories seem pretty unlikely to increase their share to the extent they can prevent that, given even winning the popular vote does not achieve that without a sizable lead.
(I am really going to look foolish in 2015 if Ed M is not at the least head of a minority government).
Alanbrooke The hard right on the march across the EU. But federalists can have some cheer, the US anthem, the Star Spangled Banner. at the Ryder Cup is followed by Beethovan's 9th, the EU anthem
A majority of 62 would mean Labour winning 356 seats. Almost 100 gains. Do we really believe that?
Yes, the 2010 Lib Dem defectors and the 2010 Con to Kipper switchers makes Ed's job so much easier.
t UKIP doing well in the North/with the working class is all fart and no follow through.
It kinda don't
Ukip are massively on the up in the North... Anyone denying it is ignoring all evidence...
number crunchers blog showed that UKIP are eating into labours vote too, just because it isn't producing instant results, doesn't mean it isn't slowly but surely happening
18 months ago I offered 4/6 ukip under 10% to a few lucky punters on here... Ladbrokes were 1/6 at the time... They thought they were on a good thing, but the odds say different now
in terms of GE 2015, maybe not too many if any ukip gains from labour, but if you want to bet on the number in 2020 I'm happy to take you or anyone else on
they will seize support from all parties, especially Labour in the north.
Look at the betting markets over the last 18 months... Ukip to do well in any way you wish to suggest has shortened in price
If 18 months ago you'd predicted
Won euros Scottish MEP Two Tory defectors Established as 3rd in polls Odds on favourites for three parliamentary seats 13/8 to win five or more
People on here would never have had it ... But it's all true
My girlfriend - 26 years old, WWC, policewoman - says her family have never voted before. But now they ARE voting. And they're all voting UKIP.
We heard a lot of similar tales from the Yes camp just a couple of weeks ago. Colour me sceptical.
Um, the YES camp got 45% of the Scottish vote on a record-breakingly high turnout. The tales the YES camp were telling proved to be true: lots of new, old, Laboury voters were coming out for YES.
The trouble was that NO achieved an even higher turnout of old/young, rural righties and they carried the day.
But the YES camp were quite correct in the anecdata.
Turnout was noticeably lower than the indyref average in places like Glasgow and Dundee.
Indeed the 45ers should direct their ire at their countrymen who could not be bothered.
A vote share of 35%, this far out, seems a fairly shaky platform on which to project an overall majority. What if it drops 2-3%?
35% is hardly a glass ceiling for Labour, when UKIP were dropping back a month or two ago it pushed Labour into the high thirties. There's also some 2010 Labour voters to win back from "don't know", as well as a small Green vote to try and squeeze.
One of the interesting things about the upcoming by-elections will be turnout. We will see if supporting labour in a poll is the same as voting for Ed Millband's labour party in an election.
I just wonder whether the Reckless defection will rebound on him. Call me old fashioned but I do find it pretty ugly behaviour when a man sets out to cause maximum damage and embarrassment to his erstwhile friends and colleagues. I know that a man must do what a man must do, but I for one would never treat my own friends and colleagues like that. If Reckless loses it will serve him right IMO.
A majority of 62 would mean Labour winning 356 seats. Almost 100 gains. Do we really believe that?
Yes, the 2010 Lib Dem defectors and the 2010 Con to Kipper switchers makes Ed's job so much easier.
t UKIP doing well in the North/with the working class is all fart and no follow through.
in terms of GE 2015, maybe not too many if any ukip gains from labour, but if you want to bet on the number in 2020 I'm happy to take you or anyone else on
they will seize support from all parties, especially Labour in the north.
If you had told me four years ago I'd be voting ukip I'd have laughed in your face
People on here would never have had it ... But it's all true
My girlfriend - 26 years old, WWC, policewoman - says her family have never voted before. But now they ARE voting. And they're all voting UKIP.
She got any single mates??!
Yeah, but they seem, mainly, to be gay men.
How important is gender to you, as compared to single status?
Gay men planning to vote kipper? I suppose Roger Helmer may appeal to the BDSM demographic.
in Vulcano, the Aeolians. Ah, dolce far niente.
I went to the Aeolians in 2012 with a 25 year old girl who was HOT!
Annoying though... Have you been to Lipari yet?
I avoided Lipari. I've done Stromboli, Panarea, Salina and now - my last island - Vulcano. The Aeolians are magnificent.
It helps that I am staying in a serious of ludicrously luxe hotels for free, courtesy of R Murdoch Esq.
My fave bit was Stromboli. They are having a once-in-a-decade eruption when the lava pours down the mountain right into the sea, like a river of furious gold. At night, under the Mediterranean stars, is is indescribably moving and beautiful, like the earth is bleeding giant orange diamonds.
What a wonderful world.
*sob*
Ah I wanted to do all that... In a less expensive way... But in a holiday dominated by rows I ended up only going to Vulcano... Lipari was pretty boring, good swerve
If it hadn't been for my "I Partridge"book I'd have been home after two days!
Interesting details in the Ashcroft poll. I think he has been a bit too definite in his conclusions as to the results in various seats - some of them are far too close to call on his figures. The following all have leads of 2% or less (in the 'constituency' voting intention), which means they should probably be regarded as a 'tie' rather than as he states:
Watford ("Lab Gain") [and that was before Dorothy Thornhill's selection] St Austell & Newquay ("Con Gain") [with Labour and UKIP just one point behind the LibDems] St Ives ("LibDem Hold") Bermondsey & Old Southwark ("LibDem Hold") Cambridge ("Lab Gain")
Some of those seats have quite long odds on one of the two (or in some cases more) leading parties, suggesting there may be very good value in betting on the second or third favourite.
Thinking about it, it would probably be better for UKIP to try and develop a term for 'leaving the EU', that was more accurate and less scary sounding. After all, we wouldn't be going anywhere, or left without an army, a currency, a diplomatic service, any government departments, or any of the essential organs of a state. Something like 'resigning' from the EU, or 'cancelling our membership', or 'terminating our membership' -like it's a monthly bill we can no longer afford (which essentially it is).
I just wonder whether the Reckless defection will rebound on him. Call me old fashioned but I do find it pretty ugly behaviour when a man sets out to cause maximum damage and embarrassment to his erstwhile friends and colleagues. I know that a man must do what a man must do, but I for one would never treat my own friends and colleagues like that. If Reckless loses it will serve him right IMO.
Especially when he lies about it so blatantly - and, to make it worse, in this case, he had the temerity to accuse others of dishonesty:
With a lead so small I don't think I'll be taking much notice of polls until February.
There are too many undecideds. In the New Year campaigning will begin in earnest and people will only decide once they see the candidates.
Not really. If you take the latest YG, just 15% are undecided, and only 9/10% of those who voted Con/Lab last time. This weekend again, canvassing a strong Lab ward and two strong Con wards, I found most people absolutely sure how they'd vote - which is wildly different from most past elections. I didn't find a huge swing to UKIP - they were on 5-8% in the Tory wards and 2% in the Labour one.
I just wonder whether the Reckless defection will rebound on him. Call me old fashioned but I do find it pretty ugly behaviour when a man sets out to cause maximum damage and embarrassment to his erstwhile friends and colleagues. I know that a man must do what a man must do, but I for one would never treat my own friends and colleagues like that. If Reckless loses it will serve him right IMO.
Especially when he lies about it so blatantly - to make it worse, in this case, he had the temerity to accuse others of dishonesty:
I am right. It was the newly registered supposed YES voters that failed to turnout on the day, relative to other voters. Overall the turnout was high, but the DNV still largely DNV.
I just wonder whether the Reckless defection will rebound on him. Call me old fashioned but I do find it pretty ugly behaviour when a man sets out to cause maximum damage and embarrassment to his erstwhile friends and colleagues. I know that a man must do what a man must do, but I for one would never treat my own friends and colleagues like that. If Reckless loses it will serve him right IMO.
Especially when he lies about it so blatantly - to make it worse, in this case, he had the temerity to accuse others of dishonesty:
Why don't the Tories on here just copy and paste their sobs and smears from when Carswell saw sense and left and change the names. Or have they??
I thought that was done at precisely the optimum time to cause aggro? But now it seems Reckless did that.
So if someone else defects just before Cameron's big speech... Does that trump this one???
Actually there was rather little criticism of Carswell, other than to point out that the defection was counter-productive and that it was discourteous not to tell Cameron in advance. Almost no-one accused him of a lack of integrity. But then, Mark Reckless is no Carswell.
Why don't the Tories on here just copy and paste their sobs and smears from when Carswell saw sense and left and change the names. Or have they??
I thought that was done at precisely the optimum time to cause aggro? But now it seems Reckless did that.
So if someone else defects just before Cameron's big speech... Does that trump this one???
Actually there was rather little criticism of Carswell, other than to point out that the defection was counter-productive and that it was discourteous not to tell Cameron in advance. Almost no-one accused him of a lack of integrity. But then, Mark Reckless is no Carswell.
They did what they thought best, I can't see the need to criticise either
Interesting Ashcroft passage on incumbency bonus: --------- Reviewing the results of my seat-by-seat surveys published since May, we find that while the Lib Dem vote climbs when voters in Lib Dem seats are asked to think about their local area, this is not always the case for the Conservative vote in Conservative seats. Indeed, in the last group of Conservative-held marginals I surveyed in July, the Tory vote fell on the “own constituency” question more often than it rose. So what is going on?
Much of the discussion about this subject effect seems to assume that the incumbency effect is something that just happens to a politician. But it is not – it is something he or she creates (or doesn’t). Incumbency is not so much an advantage in itself as an opportunity to build a profile, make a reputation, and achieve the things that will ultimately be rewarded on election day. I suspect new MPs, knowing they will have a battle to hold on to their often marginal seats, have in the past worked harder than most, thereby creating what has become known as the “first-time” effect. I further suspect that some have registered the existence of the phenomenon without having understood the reasons for it, and now think it will be bestowed upon them gratis by a benevolent electorate. -------- FWIW, I'm finding the anti-politics mood is, oddly, helping me slightly, because most constituents have met me personally over the years after 18 years of weekly door-knocking, so the "All the politicians on TV are rubbish but we know you" view isn't uncommon. Because the sitting MP is a busy Minister, she hasn't had time to build up the same "We had a nice chat in our front room" rapport.
I just wonder whether the Reckless defection will rebound on him. Call me old fashioned but I do find it pretty ugly behaviour when a man sets out to cause maximum damage and embarrassment to his erstwhile friends and colleagues. I know that a man must do what a man must do, but I for one would never treat my own friends and colleagues like that. If Reckless loses it will serve him right IMO.
Especially when he lies about it so blatantly - to make it worse, in this case, he had the temerity to accuse others of dishonesty:
If by lie you mean deny he was going to do it then yes. More to the point he didn't even have the decency to surrender his seat though it had been won on a party list. Still don't remember you complaining about that.
Why don't the Tories on here just copy and paste their sobs and smears from when Carswell saw sense and left and change the names. Or have they??
I thought that was done at precisely the optimum time to cause aggro? But now it seems Reckless did that.
So if someone else defects just before Cameron's big speech... Does that trump this one???
Actually there was rather little criticism of Carswell, other than to point out that the defection was counter-productive and that it was discourteous not to tell Cameron in advance. Almost no-one accused him of a lack of integrity. But then, Mark Reckless is no Carswell.
Have a read of fitalass' postings over the last week if that's what you believe.
RT Campbell Bannermann Had previously defected from the Tories to UKIP, I should know as I campaigned for him as the Tory candidate in Warwick and Leamington in 2001
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
Of course, but it's his picture and his name (or at least one of them) that's doing the following. He's an absolute idiot.
I am right. It was the newly registered supposed YES voters that failed to turnout on the day, relative to other voters. Overall the turnout was high, but the DNV still largely DNV.
Can't speak for Dundee, but the turnout for Glasgow was lowest in its most affluent constituency, Kelvin. I'd imagine it would also have had the lowest number of newly registered potential voters.
Why don't the Tories on here just copy and paste their sobs and smears from when Carswell saw sense and left and change the names. Or have they??
I thought that was done at precisely the optimum time to cause aggro? But now it seems Reckless did that.
So if someone else defects just before Cameron's big speech... Does that trump this one???
Actually there was rather little criticism of Carswell, other than to point out that the defection was counter-productive and that it was discourteous not to tell Cameron in advance. Almost no-one accused him of a lack of integrity. But then, Mark Reckless is no Carswell.
Have a read of fitalass' postings over the last week if that's what you believe.
The poor abandoned folk of clacton? So hurt by Carswells betrayal they're going to give him a landslide victory?
If by lie you mean deny he was going to do it then yes. More to the point he didn't even have the decency to surrender his seat though it had been won on a party list. Still don't remember you complaining about that.
On the first point, I don't remember (in fact to be honest I hardly even noticed his defection). If he lied as blatantly as Mark Reckless then I criticise him for that, because as you know I value integrity above all.
On the party list point, I believe I did criticise him for it.
Incidentally, I see UKIP's economic spokesman was being a bit economical with the truth, or perhaps he's not really the economic spokesman. Either way it turns out one can't believe him. Anyway the idiotic tax on bling lasted less than 48 hours.
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
Of course, but it's his picture and his name (or at least one of them) that's doing the following. He's an absolute idiot.
You clearly know nothing about twitter. It is totally standard way of building a following, you will find pretty much every company does it. If he had no followers, he wouldn't be doing his job properly to promote his party.
I bet if you go and look at Labour / Labour MPs they do the same, and lets not forget about what Mr Harperson got caught doing on twitter, and that certainly wasn't a "bot".
IMO Shapps was a touch OTT today. All this talk of lying and betrayal reflects badly on both sides. Hardly smacks of confidence or water off a duck's back. Tories look wounded.
[But the YES camp were quite correct in the anecdata.]
They were asking SCOTTISH people if they were Scottish - and got 45%.
Epic fails.
Far from a fail Briskin , given it had never ever been above 30% , lots of water to go under the bridge yet , the unionists will be like ferrets in a sack and if we do not see home rule as promised then it will be game on once again very quickly. So far it is far from a defeat. SNP have quadrupled membership, now at 70K versus labour lucky to be above 10K , and Tories an also ran , Greens now approaching 2nd highest number of members. A lot to play for yet, if powers are not in place before May and lots of them then it will be fun.
Since the mass defection of Labour MPs to the SDP in 1981 there have been 21 MP defections. Given 13 (62%) of them were Tories you'd have thought they got sufficiently used to them by now not to have a hissy fit about it when it happens
IMO Shapps was a touch OTT today. All this talk of lying and betrayal reflects badly on both sides. Hardly smacks of confidence or water off a duck's back. Tories look wounded.
I think it reflects genuine anger. It's probably a good thing from a motivational point of view - I think they will fight back vigorously in Rochester & Strood.
If by lie you mean deny he was going to do it then yes. More to the point he didn't even have the decency to surrender his seat though it had been won on a party list. Still don't remember you complaining about that.
On the first point, I don't remember (in fact to be honest I hardly even noticed his defection). If he lied as blatantly as Mark Reckless then I criticise him for that, because as you know I value integrity above all.
On the party list point, I believe I did criticise him for it.
Incidentally, I see UKIP's economic spokesman was being a bit economical with the truth, or perhaps he's not really the economic spokesman. Either way it turns out one can't believe him. Anyway the idiotic tax on bling lasted less than 48 hours.
It was a stupid idea from the start. No idea why he thought he could just throw stuff in like that without at least a vague idea whether or not the membership agreed with it (overwhelmingly they didn't).
Mind you I am reminded that many economic spokesmen have come undone with half baked or poorly presented ideas. Pasty tax anyone?. Funnily enough I agreed with that one and was pretty sickened to see Greggs trying to continue what I consider to be tax dodging.
Late on Friday evening, the Conservative official charged with arranging the main campaigning event of the party's conference received an answerphone message. It was from Mark Reckless. The Tory MP for Rochester would be “very, very happy” to accompany his colleagues and hundreds of party activists on Sunday’s trip to Birmingham Northfield, he said. He added that if they wanted, he’d also be prepared to give them all a morale-boosting pep talk on the coach.
Mark Reckless never made the coach. Less than 24 hours later he was standing on stage in Doncaster next to Nigel Farage, basking in the acclaim of the Ukip faithful. When Douglas Carswell defected to the People’s Army, he succeeded in framing his actions as those of an honourable man. It is going to be hard for his new colleague to do the same.
As recently as 29 August, Reckless said: “‘Douglas is a friend so I don't want to criticise him personally. If people want a vote for an independent Britain they need a Conservative government.” The timing of his announcement was specifically designed to cause maximum damage to the party that he had represented in parliament since 2010. And it came on the day that his country went to war. At least Douglas Carswell had the courage to stab his Prime Minister in the front. Mark Reckless has stabbed him squarely in the back.
Well we know now that the mother of all marginals is St. Austell & Newquay. Plus Simon Hughes is in real danger.
The current Lib Dem MP Stephen Gilbert had not been reselected as at 20th Sept 2014. He was diagnosed with “Bell’s Palsy” in Feb, is that the reason for the delay or is he considering standing down? Unusual as LDs usually reselect very early.
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
Of course, but it's his picture and his name (or at least one of them) that's doing the following. He's an absolute idiot.
You clearly know nothing about twitter. It is totally standard way of building a following, you will find pretty much every company does it. If he had no followers, he wouldn't be doing his job properly to promote his party.
I bet if you go and look at Labour / Labour MPs they do the same, and lets not forget about what Mr Harperson got caught doing on twitter, and that certainly wasn't a "bot".
Maybe I don't know much about Twitter, but I do know a bit about Politics - and it's generally not a good idea for a politician to act in a way that will invite mockery.
Why don't the Tories on here just copy and paste their sobs and smears from when Carswell saw sense and left and change the names. Or have they??
I thought that was done at precisely the optimum time to cause aggro? But now it seems Reckless did that.
So if someone else defects just before Cameron's big speech... Does that trump this one???
Actually there was rather little criticism of Carswell, other than to point out that the defection was counter-productive and that it was discourteous not to tell Cameron in advance. Almost no-one accused him of a lack of integrity. But then, Mark Reckless is no Carswell.
Even if people have some sympathy for UKIP, there is clearly a degree of distaste in Rochester (and elsewhere) regarding Mark Reckless and the perception he went about his defection dishonestly.
People feel that such deceitfulness is just not cricket.
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
Of course, but it's his picture and his name (or at least one of them) that's doing the following. He's an absolute idiot.
You clearly know nothing about twitter. It is totally standard way of building a following, you will find pretty much every company does it. If he had no followers, he wouldn't be doing his job properly to promote his party.
I bet if you go and look at Labour / Labour MPs they do the same, and lets not forget about what Mr Harperson got caught doing on twitter, and that certainly wasn't a "bot".
Maybe I don't know much about Twitter, but I do know a bit about Politics - and it's generally not a good idea for a politician to act in a way that will invite mockery.
The Labour Party Twitter feed follows 15k people, Tom Watson instance follows 11k people on twitter. You think they sat there clicking the follow button on all of those?
I bet if I take I look I can one or two interesting characters among over 25k twitter accounts.
As I say, it is absolutely standard practice if you are in online market place to use a bot to handle your follows / followers. You start it off with a list of closely connected individuals, but it will go off and try and follow people that your list follows.
I have been involved in this and grown accounts from nothing to 1000's of followers in a few weeks with no outside PR, and although picked up really good active audience, I know for a fact that our bot ended up following / accept a follow from several individuals who just tweeted pornographic material (which was a million miles away from the dry list we gave it).
UKIP should target St.Austell alright, just looked at the tables and its also the seat where Tory voters rule out UKIP the second least from all other seats.
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
Of course, but it's his picture and his name (or at least one of them) that's doing the following. He's an absolute idiot.
You clearly know nothing about twitter. It is totally standard way of building a following, you will find pretty much every company does it. If he had no followers, he wouldn't be doing his job properly to promote his party.
I bet if you go and look at Labour / Labour MPs they do the same, and lets not forget about what Mr Harperson got caught doing on twitter, and that certainly wasn't a "bot".
Maybe I don't know much about Twitter, but I do know a bit about Politics - and it's generally not a good idea for a politician to act in a way that will invite mockery.
The Labour Party Twitter feed follows 15k people, Tom Watson instance follows 11k people on twitter. You think they sat there clicking the follow button on all of those?
I bet if I take I look I can one or two interesting characters among over 25k twitter accounts.
I am right. It was the newly registered supposed YES voters that failed to turnout on the day, relative to other voters. Overall the turnout was high, but the DNV still largely DNV.
FFS. Glasgow got a turnout of 75%, Dundee got a turnout of 79%.
By comparison some parts of Glasgow recorded a sub-50% turnout in the GE of 2010.
So you're completely wrong in every respect. The YES canvassers were correct that people were registering to vote YES in huge and unprecedented numbers. It's just that NO voters did the same, and there are even more of them.
Shall we stop this now, Mr Pinhead MD? Good.
So 25% of Glaswegians and 21% of Dundonians stuck with DNV in a once in a generation election.
While the poll did go up in these DNV strongholds, DNVers are still a substantial minority.
It is not always a binary division. The DNV vote is higher in Council elections than National elections, and higher still in such plebiscites. Low in Euro elections too.
There will be some DNVers who vote UKIP, but also many who talk the talk, but do not walk the walk.
RT Campbell Bannermann Had previously defected from the Tories to UKIP, I should know as I campaigned for him as the Tory candidate in Warwick and Leamington in 2001
He had indeed defected but was not either an MP or MEP at that time. So not the same at all.
By the by, Roger Helmer should have stood down when he defected as well.
Late on Friday evening, the Conservative official charged with arranging the main campaigning event of the party's conference received an answerphone message. It was from Mark Reckless. The Tory MP for Rochester would be “very, very happy” to accompany his colleagues and hundreds of party activists on Sunday’s trip to Birmingham Northfield, he said. He added that if they wanted, he’d also be prepared to give them all a morale-boosting pep talk on the coach.
Mark Reckless never made the coach. Less than 24 hours later he was standing on stage in Doncaster next to Nigel Farage, basking in the acclaim of the Ukip faithful. When Douglas Carswell defected to the People’s Army, he succeeded in framing his actions as those of an honourable man. It is going to be hard for his new colleague to do the same.
As recently as 29 August, Reckless said: “‘Douglas is a friend so I don't want to criticise him personally. If people want a vote for an independent Britain they need a Conservative government.” The timing of his announcement was specifically designed to cause maximum damage to the party that he had represented in parliament since 2010. And it came on the day that his country went to war. At least Douglas Carswell had the courage to stab his Prime Minister in the front. Mark Reckless has stabbed him squarely in the back.
I suspect Nigel Farage knows down well that his best chance of support is tory voters, not labour ones.
He is selling tory waverers a vision of an election where labour will be shattered by UKIP as well as the tories, and thus it will be OK, in that case, to vote UKIP.
Heywood and Middleton might disabuse a few of that notion.
[But the YES camp were quite correct in the anecdata.]
They were asking SCOTTISH people if they were Scottish - and got 45%.
Epic fails.
Far from a fail Briskin , given it had never ever been above 30% , lots of water to go under the bridge yet , the unionists will be like ferrets in a sack and if we do not see home rule as promised then it will be game on once again very quickly. So far it is far from a defeat. SNP have quadrupled membership, now at 70K versus labour lucky to be above 10K , and Tories an also ran , Greens now approaching 2nd highest number of members. A lot to play for yet, if powers are not in place before May and lots of them then it will be fun.
Serious question: will Sturgeon put indyref in the manifesto for Holyrood 2016?
If she does I think it would be suicidal:
1. It will cause huge business uncertainty, tanking the Scottish economy (this time banks will move south before the event)
2. She will probably lose more votes than she gains (let's face it, NO won, by a margin), so damaging the SNP's chances
3. It will look deeply disrespectful to the Scottish electorate, and towards democracy, esp after Salmond said the issue was settled for a generation, either way.
4. It will look hugely premature, as the country will only have just received Home Rule (pr versions thereof)
and yet
4. She now has 70,000 members most of whom are indyref fundamentalists, so she will be under pressure to promise another vote, even tho she will know (for the reasons above) that it would be a grave political error
She has problems.
I cannot see it being in 2016 manifesto at all , unless the unionists renege and SNP make huge inroads in 2015 GE, and even then doubtful. Looking at events so far it appears unionists are determined to mess up their victory though. They have been back pedaling , fracking a perfect example. It will all depend on what powers they propose.
Late on Friday evening, the Conservative official charged with arranging the main campaigning event of the party's conference received an answerphone message. It was from Mark Reckless. The Tory MP for Rochester would be “very, very happy” to accompany his colleagues and hundreds of party activists on Sunday’s trip to Birmingham Northfield, he said. He added that if they wanted, he’d also be prepared to give them all a morale-boosting pep talk on the coach.
Mark Reckless never made the coach. Less than 24 hours later he was standing on stage in Doncaster next to Nigel Farage, basking in the acclaim of the Ukip faithful. When Douglas Carswell defected to the People’s Army, he succeeded in framing his actions as those of an honourable man. It is going to be hard for his new colleague to do the same.
As recently as 29 August, Reckless said: “‘Douglas is a friend so I don't want to criticise him personally. If people want a vote for an independent Britain they need a Conservative government.” The timing of his announcement was specifically designed to cause maximum damage to the party that he had represented in parliament since 2010. And it came on the day that his country went to war. At least Douglas Carswell had the courage to stab his Prime Minister in the front. Mark Reckless has stabbed him squarely in the back.
Hope it comes off, though it does look unlikely. Shame stuff like this doesn't get more coverage.
One of the guys I work with worked on the team to develop the (very basic) AI system on the lander. It will decide its own priorities for sampling and recording based on what conditions it finds when it gets there.
When he was elected, the Labour leader set himself three tasks. To move his party beyond New Labour. To break down the barriers that had been erected between his party and its working-class base, who felt they had no stake in Blairism. And to construct a new progressive consensus that would turn the tide of neo-conservatism.
He failed. And this week he realised he’d failed.
On Tuesday evening, I joined the small posse of shadow ministers, advisers and delegates on the dance floor of the Daily Mirror party. Things Can Only Get Better blared out of the speakers, helped by the voices of those on the floor. They were voices of defiance. By embracing – and demanding an encore of – the New Labour anthem, they were engaging in an act of sedition. They didn’t care. “What does it matter?”, one aide said to me: “We’re finished now.”
Ed Miliband has succeeded in burying New Labour. But he hasn’t moved on.
Late on Friday evening, the Conservative official charged with arranging the main campaigning event of the party's conference received an answerphone message. It was from Mark Reckless. The Tory MP for Rochester would be “very, very happy” to accompany his colleagues and hundreds of party activists on Sunday’s trip to Birmingham Northfield, he said. He added that if they wanted, he’d also be prepared to give them all a morale-boosting pep talk on the coach.
snip
As recently as 29 August, Reckless said: “‘Douglas is a friend so I don't want to criticise him personally. If people want a vote for an independent Britain they need a Conservative government.” The timing of his announcement was specifically designed to cause maximum damage to the party that he had represented in parliament since 2010. And it came on the day that his country went to war. At least Douglas Carswell had the courage to stab his Prime Minister in the front. Mark Reckless has stabbed him squarely in the back.
Mr. Tyndall, by conditions, would that involve how much/little energy it has?
I heard a week or two ago that one of the most difficult aspects is getting the angle right for the solar panels. Not enough sun, no energy; too much sun, and the panels get fried.
Edited extra bit: and kudos to your friend, by the way.
Oh, stop whining about Reckless. When you are considering defection, you don't give your colleagues 6 months notice...
No, but you don't tell bare-faced lies to your friends and colleagues less than 24 hours beforehand either and timing that announcement to do maximum damage to them.
It's seen as self-serving and vindictive: you run the risk of losing both trust and respect.
From what I can see Carswell and Reckless quit because they realised that Cameron is a thoroughgoing euro enthusiast who isn't at all interested in changing Britain's relationship with the EU.
They see him as the political equivalent of the KGB's master mole finally having bagged the top job at MI6
Oh, stop whining about Reckless. When you are considering defection, you don't give your colleagues 6 months notice...
No, but you don't tell bare-faced lies to your friends and colleagues less than 24 hours beforehand either and timing that announcement to do maximum damage to them.
It's seen as self-serving and vindictive: you run the risk of losing both trust and respect.
The Tory reaction does remind me of the Black Adder Goes Forth discussion on spies
Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.
General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies...
General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
Mr. Taffys, even if that's true, Cameron has a history of allowing votes he doesn't want (AV, Scottish independence). Why assume he won't have one on the EU, especially when his career would enjoy a similar trajectory to Crassus' post-Carrhae if he reneged?
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
Any idea what the seagull did to upset him? Defected to UKIP, perhaps?
He’s currently following over 27 thousand people on Twitter, a feat likely to have been accomplished with the help of a Twitter bot which rapidly follows unsuspecting Twitter users.
Of course, but it's his picture and his name (or at least one of them) that's doing the following. He's an absolute idiot.
You clearly know nothing about twitter. It is totally standard way of building a following, you will find pretty much every company does it. If he had no followers, he wouldn't be doing his job properly to promote his party.
I bet if you go and look at Labour / Labour MPs they do the same, and lets not forget about what Mr Harperson got caught doing on twitter, and that certainly wasn't a "bot".
Maybe I don't know much about Twitter, but I do know a bit about Politics - and it's generally not a good idea for a politician to act in a way that will invite mockery.
Yes. You know nothing about Twitter.
Nor do millions of older voters.
But what they would pick up from this story is 'Top Tory being sleazy'.
Grant Shapps is meant to promote the Conservative party to people who might vote for them, that may not be metropolitan 'sophisticates' as who follow Twitter.
PBTories already seems to have taken on a loser's persona - whining and bitching. What did you think Reckless would say when asked point blank ? He could indeed say now that when he said what he said, he meant every word.
Partly, it is probably true. Until Clacton, no one could be 100% sure what kind of reception they would get.
There will be more liars as I am sure many other suspects are being asked the same question. A queue is forming !
Mr Cameron talked about *duty* a lot in his STimes intv. I get that. Re allowing votes that may be uncomfortable - he thinks it's only cricket to allow them.
I've a very high opinion of those who do things that could harm them, but do it anyway. John Major's resignation as Party leader was another. That's serious cojones.
Mr. Taffys, even if that's true, Cameron has a history of allowing votes he doesn't want (AV, Scottish independence). Why assume he won't have one on the EU, especially when his career would enjoy a similar trajectory to Crassus' post-Carrhae if he reneged?
Comments
Annoying though... Have you been to Lipari yet?
I realise for some on here if Cameron read extracts from the Birmingham phone book it would be lauded as a "visionary" speech but this is the kind of mawkish nonsense he served up to the Scots and it took (dare one say it) Gordon Brown of all people to rescue the Union.
This "look at me, I'm a nice chap and I'm on your side" routine is risible - he has nearly five years of a Government record to defend and all he can offer is "jam tomorrow" platitudes.
If that's all he has, I'd welcome Ed Miliband as a breath of fresh air.
(I am really going to look foolish in 2015 if Ed M is not at the least head of a minority government).
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/apr/22/francois-hollande-france-election
Not sure if The photographer is a fan, or was there a hidden message?
Indeed the 45ers should direct their ire at their countrymen who could not be bothered.
If it hadn't been for my "I Partridge"book I'd have been home after two days!
Watford ("Lab Gain") [and that was before Dorothy Thornhill's selection]
St Austell & Newquay ("Con Gain") [with Labour and UKIP just one point behind the LibDems]
St Ives ("LibDem Hold")
Bermondsey & Old Southwark ("LibDem Hold")
Cambridge ("Lab Gain")
Some of those seats have quite long odds on one of the two (or in some cases more) leading parties, suggesting there may be very good value in betting on the second or third favourite.
Uh-oh. Now Grant Shapps (or his account) follows porn star, dominatrix + erotic writer on Twitter. http://www.buzzfeed.com/hannahjewell/grant-shapps-follows-at-least-one-porn-star-on-twitter#3ns9l70 …
I wonder if he is on speaking terms with the MP for Devizes, she might not be impressed.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/28/david-cameron-ukip-mark-reckless
I am right. It was the newly registered supposed YES voters that failed to turnout on the day, relative to other voters. Overall the turnout was high, but the DNV still largely DNV.
I thought that was done at precisely the optimum time to cause aggro? But now it seems Reckless did that.
So if someone else defects just before Cameron's big speech... Does that trump this one???
---------
Reviewing the results of my seat-by-seat surveys published since May, we find that while the Lib Dem vote climbs when voters in Lib Dem seats are asked to think about their local area, this is not always the case for the Conservative vote in Conservative seats. Indeed, in the last group of Conservative-held marginals I surveyed in July, the Tory vote fell on the “own constituency” question more often than it rose. So what is going on?
Much of the discussion about this subject effect seems to assume that the incumbency effect is something that just happens to a politician. But it is not – it is something he or she creates (or doesn’t). Incumbency is not so much an advantage in itself as an opportunity to build a profile, make a reputation, and achieve the things that will ultimately be rewarded on election day. I suspect new MPs, knowing they will have a battle to hold on to their often marginal seats, have in the past worked harder than most, thereby creating what has become known as the “first-time” effect. I further suspect that some have registered the existence of the phenomenon without having understood the reasons for it, and now think it will be bestowed upon them gratis by a benevolent electorate.
--------
FWIW, I'm finding the anti-politics mood is, oddly, helping me slightly, because most constituents have met me personally over the years after 18 years of weekly door-knocking, so the "All the politicians on TV are rubbish but we know you" view isn't uncommon. Because the sitting MP is a busy Minister, she hasn't had time to build up the same "We had a nice chat in our front room" rapport.
Plus Simon Hughes is in real danger.
On the party list point, I believe I did criticise him for it.
Incidentally, I see UKIP's economic spokesman was being a bit economical with the truth, or perhaps he's not really the economic spokesman. Either way it turns out one can't believe him. Anyway the idiotic tax on bling lasted less than 48 hours.
I bet if you go and look at Labour / Labour MPs they do the same, and lets not forget about what Mr Harperson got caught doing on twitter, and that certainly wasn't a "bot".
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2511016/Harriet-Harmans-MP-husband-Jack-Dromey-adds-gay-porn-Tweet-favourites.html
People were worried about you leaving forever on election night malcky - but I assured them you'd be back - thus yet again correctly calling it.
I will, I will, I will get some respect on here at some point.
Tipping Point.
I did have some Pinot yesterday though!!!!!!!
Mind you I am reminded that many economic spokesmen have come undone with half baked or poorly presented ideas. Pasty tax anyone?. Funnily enough I agreed with that one and was pretty sickened to see Greggs trying to continue what I consider to be tax dodging.
People feel that such deceitfulness is just not cricket.
I bet if I take I look I can one or two interesting characters among over 25k twitter accounts.
As I say, it is absolutely standard practice if you are in online market place to use a bot to handle your follows / followers. You start it off with a list of closely connected individuals, but it will go off and try and follow people that your list follows.
I have been involved in this and grown accounts from nothing to 1000's of followers in a few weeks with no outside PR, and although picked up really good active audience, I know for a fact that our bot ended up following / accept a follow from several individuals who just tweeted pornographic material (which was a million miles away from the dry list we gave it).
While the poll did go up in these DNV strongholds, DNVers are still a substantial minority.
It is not always a binary division. The DNV vote is higher in Council elections than National elections, and higher still in such plebiscites. Low in Euro elections too.
There will be some DNVers who vote UKIP, but also many who talk the talk, but do not walk the walk.
The fact its coming out now shows how the Tories have lost the narrative a little.
By the by, Roger Helmer should have stood down when he defected as well.
That is Dan Hodges, his opinions or articles are as unbiased as a football coach on his team.
He is selling tory waverers a vision of an election where labour will be shattered by UKIP as well as the tories, and thus it will be OK, in that case, to vote UKIP.
Heywood and Middleton might disabuse a few of that notion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29380448
Hope it comes off, though it does look unlikely. Shame stuff like this doesn't get more coverage.
He writes a lot of them though, so sometimes he stumbles across a decent point. Occasionally.
The seat would have just gone to the next Tory on the list...
I heard a week or two ago that one of the most difficult aspects is getting the angle right for the solar panels. Not enough sun, no energy; too much sun, and the panels get fried.
Edited extra bit: and kudos to your friend, by the way.
It's seen as self-serving and vindictive: you run the risk of losing both trust and respect.
They see him as the political equivalent of the KGB's master mole finally having bagged the top job at MI6
Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.
General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies...
General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
But what they would pick up from this story is 'Top Tory being sleazy'.
Grant Shapps is meant to promote the Conservative party to people who might vote for them, that may not be metropolitan 'sophisticates' as who follow Twitter.
Partly, it is probably true. Until Clacton, no one could be 100% sure what kind of reception they would get.
There will be more liars as I am sure many other suspects are being asked the same question. A queue is forming !
When is Cameron speaking ?
Yes, yes, I know that's as likely as my dog sprouting wings, but they should.
LOL
If Labour wins fewer than 42, the maths is even easier.
Bring on EV4EL.
True, and he also has a history of winning them...!!
I've a very high opinion of those who do things that could harm them, but do it anyway. John Major's resignation as Party leader was another. That's serious cojones.