What's going to happen during a four week general election campaign, because you can't hide Ed for four weeks.
That's what's interesting. Labour are going to have to find something for Ed Milliband to do for 4 weeks in an election campaign. Presumably drive around in a bus with tv crews and point at things and give interviews. The thing is, he won't have to make a major gaffe to put voters off Labour, he can do that by just being himself. The Tories will be wanting to make this a presidential election, Labour not.
Someone a few days ago raised the possibility that Labour might seek to draft Peter Mandelson, yet again. I wonder if that could happen.
I think Mandy has made his views on the current leadership quite clear on Paxo's final newsnight. Along the lines of:
Mr. Richard, I share Mr. Jessop's view on this. The crude view of woman as victim and man as perpetrator is not reflective of reality, where a large minority (circa 40%) of domestic violence victims are men.
I agree.
But this government also has a policy of 'Ending violence against women and girls in the UK'. Identical to the policy JJ is so angry about when it comes from Labour.
The LibDems lost a big chunk of their Left-leaning supporters very early in the life of this Parliament. That they seem to be the most willing to overlook the failings of Miliband to punish Clegg is an interesting piece of anti-gravity that may yet correct. Are they really going to be the cohort that most strongly holds its nose to vote for Odd Ed? I suspect that come polling day a sizeable chunk, after a punishing election campaign that highlights Ed's and Labour's failings, will tip into the arms of the Can't Be Arsed Party.
So OGH's faith in this number of newly-zealous Labour converts remaining static is perhaps ill-judged? It really only holds if they were never really LibDems in the first place, but votes lent from Labourites. Either way round, not good for the long term prospects of the LibDems.
And what of the LibDem's Right-leaning supporters? They have been able to sit this out for five years in Coalition and reserve judgment. But they are now faced with a stark choice. Do they hope for 5 more years of coalition government? But the LibDems very own Left-Right coalition that could get them to that point is long broken. So they could stay loyal to a broken party - and let in a Labour Party that the feel will undo 5 years of good work, led by a very poor --> potentially disastrous PM. Or they could go Tory in 2015.
I wonder if the further decline of the LibDems to 6% is as a result of these "Orange Bookers" giving up on the LibDems and - looking at the economic progress under Osborne and a party that has the balls to upset a chunk of its core vote by pressing on with gay marriage - are throwing their lot in with the Tories? If so, the two wings of the LibDems may largely balance themselves out for Labour and Conservative fortunes in 2015.
An interesting idea. Something must be behind the further decline despite nothing much changing in the last 6 months and perhaps, dispirited that there is no sign of a ld recovery, they have decided it is time to consider least worst options.
See my post at 07:13 where I actually look at the data that makes this an observable fact rather than an interesting idea...
As it happens the only group that seems to have been moved by the conferences is the 2010 Lib Dem voter block (at least according to the last 3 Friday YouGov polls).
In the YouGov after Labour's conference a large chunk of these voters moved from the blue and yellow columns to the red column, and now after the Tory conference a lot of them have moved over to the blues (to the point where there is almost an even split between the big three).
God knows what this means for the general election campaign when there will be four parties getting airtime, but aside from a small chunk of defectors to Ukip that could return to the Tories, most of the people who voted Lib Dem seem to be up for grabs.
This might become clearer after the LibDem conference - their last chance this year to set out some policy and reasons why they should continue to exist.
When is the LD conference?
Generally the LD conference is the first one of conference season followed by LAB then CON. This year's had to be put back because of the IndyRef on September 18.
So their coalition partners have already announced their plans and the LD conference will be a time to respond.
For me, the most worrying thing about this poll for Labour is the reaction to it. I remember a mere few months ago, when a poll showed crossover for the first time, it felt like a massive bombshell .... yet now, a Tory lead (even with a pollster who hadn't previously shown one) really doesn't feel that shocking.
I think Labour have blown it. The day they decided to play the Tories at their own austerity game was the day they lost. "Tory policies with half the competence" was NEVER going to win votes.
Quite. Labour is an idea whose time has gone - class politics are being replaced by identity politics (UKIP, SNP) - parties that promise to reduce human suffering have been seen through and will wither completely in the next generation. Labour's core values are shared by - what - one voter in six? one in seven?
Just to repeat my prediction for next May:- Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to win more votes in Scotland that Lib Dems in all GB. Seat predictions almost impossibly difficult, but I'd be astonished if these numbers only gave the Tories a majority of 30 (as EC suggests): 70-100 far more likely. (See Sean Fear [6.32am] below,)
Do Tory Peebies think that Cameron, with a clear majority, should keep or repeal the Five Year Act? Should it be the subject of a manifesto promise?
On the core voter idea, Martin Kettle in Guardian has some interesting points and figures on this:
Core vote figures roughly in May 2014: "Labour 31%, Conservatives 27%, Liberal Democrats 9% and the others, doubtless boosted by Ukip this time, 15%."
Blimey, substantially lower figures for all. I think Kettle's poll question revolved around "which party best represents your personal values" or words to that effect - so slightly different. The main point remains though - we have a volatile electorate.
What will be interesting is whether the Kippers start talking about PR after May 2015, when they poll say 12% or more and get one or two seats. How rich that would be...
So has anyone noticed 'wave after wave' of arrests ?
" Police forces across Britain are poised to arrest hundreds of suspected child abusers as part of a massive crackdown on the grooming of vulnerable young girls.
‘Wave after wave’ of arrests will be made between now until Christmas in response to the ‘epidemic’ of child sexual exploitation that has haunted the nation for two decades. Police are confident that the raids will lead to scores of court cases across the country, with suspects facing charges of child abduction, rape, multiple rape and sexual assault.
In Greater Manchester alone, more than 180 suspects are set to be rounded up in an operation described by sources as a ‘day of reckoning’ for men who have tormented girls as young as ten. Raids are also scheduled to take place in the south of England within the next few weeks, with many others set to follow before the end of the year. "
I wonder if Mike Penning, Minister of State for Policing, Criminal Justice and Victims has any thoughts on police strategy on this issue.
He doesn't seem to have had any thing to say about the Rotherham report yet.
Of course he has thoughts. And he keeps them to himself. Do you really want politicians intervening in operational policing, just like they do in Iran, North Korea and elsewhere?
If the police aren't doing their job then I would expect the Minister for Policing to take some action.
Now how many people here think the police have been doing their job properly on this issue ?
On your definition of "doing their job" and your timetable? Perhaps you'd like to have a thousand votes as well, instead of just the one.
Isn't it Josias Jessop who is so angered that Labour are planning a minister to deal with violence against women and girls and ignoring that against men and boys ?
If so, perhaps he might take a look at what's top of the policies list at the government website for the Minister of State for Policing, Criminal Justice and Victims:
And at the top of that policies list is 'Ending violence against women and girls in the UK'
Yep, I'd like to see more concentration on male victims as well (and particularly on raising awareness that it happens to boys and men as well. This blindness infects all parties and governments.
But that's a very different thing from having a *minister* looking at women and girls alone. That's a terrible message to send as the prominence is so much greater.
This must be declining as none of our company cars pay any. They are either very low emission petrol or are part electric - with a corresponding reduction in fuel consumption. No doubt HMRC will be moving the goal posts in future.
Yes I agree,3 cars in our household,all on zero VED,just purchased a hybrid with £5K grant from Gov,they also fitted a £1k charger to my house for free. The fitter who did the work was working 7 days a week and fitting 4 chargers a day,the money available for the free chargers is running out,and they are no longer free. BIK of 5% for company users,and no congestion charge,so yes I think the goalposts will move.
So... Here is a question - will a 65k ton aircraft carrier float in a gallon of water, if the ship is in a very close fitting dock?
Not unless a gallon weighs 65K ton,have a word with Archimedes.
Yes. If the entire surface of the hull below the waterline is spread even one molecule thick then it will 'float'. So the question is can a gallon of water one molecule thick cover the area of a large ship below its waterline? No idea if that is yes - I suspect it is (molecules are awfully small).
For me, the most worrying thing about this poll for Labour is the reaction to it. I remember a mere few months ago, when a poll showed crossover for the first time, it felt like a massive bombshell .... yet now, a Tory lead (even with a pollster who hadn't previously shown one) really doesn't feel that shocking.
I think Labour have blown it. The day they decided to play the Tories at their own austerity game was the day they lost. "Tory policies with half the competence" was NEVER going to win votes.
Quite. Labour is an idea whose time has gone - class politics are being replaced by identity politics (UKIP, SNP) - parties that promise to reduce human suffering have been seen through and will wither completely in the next generation. Labour's core values are shared by - what - one voter in six? one in seven?
Just to repeat my prediction for next May:- Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to win more votes in Scotland that Lib Dems in all GB. Seat predictions almost impossibly difficult, but I'd be astonished if these numbers only gave the Tories a majority of 30 (as EC suggests): 70-100 far more likely. (See Sean Fear [6.32am] below,)
Do Tory Peebies think that Cameron, with a clear majority, should keep or repeal the Five Year Act? Should it be the subject of a manifesto promise?
For a combined Con / UKIP total of 58% there needs to be a massive swing of wwc voters from Labour to UKIP.
If this is happening then UKIP should win the Heywood & Middleton byelection.
I could see the 35,25,23 result happening next year but in a November election - after an EdM government collapsed within a few months.
One thing is for sure: If Dave does squeek a majority in May then we're going to get EVFEL, boundary changes, a smaller state and a cultural shift on entitlements / welfare. Which will leave Labour in a very very much weaker position on education, health, policing - all the devolved stuff - and macro-economic policy. In fact Labour would be left struggling to explain their raison d'etre. We could be in for a major shift in UK politics.
Yes. This will be the last election in which Labour even comes second.
The Conservatives need to get UKIP back to 10% or so.
A result of Con 38%, Lab 35%, UKIP 10%, Lib Dem 6%, would give Con 310, Lab 303, Lib Dem 10, according to Baxter.
In reality, the Lib Dems would hold onto a few more seats (but not many more) Labour would lose some to the SNP, UKIP would win Clacton, and probably a couple more, and first time incumbency would reduce Conservative losses to Labour.
I'd suggest something like Con 310, Lab 289, Lib Dem 20, UKIP 3, Others 34, on those numbers.
Con + LD + UKIP coalition...
rats, sack...
Three votes extra (or six difference)wouldn't be worth the trouble of having to deal with UKIP
For me, the most worrying thing about this poll for Labour is the reaction to it. I remember a mere few months ago, when a poll showed crossover for the first time, it felt like a massive bombshell .... yet now, a Tory lead (even with a pollster who hadn't previously shown one) really doesn't feel that shocking.
I think Labour have blown it. The day they decided to play the Tories at their own austerity game was the day they lost. "Tory policies with half the competence" was NEVER going to win votes.
Quite. Labour is an idea whose time has gone - class politics are being replaced by identity politics (UKIP, SNP) - parties that promise to reduce human suffering have been seen through and will wither completely in the next generation. Labour's core values are shared by - what - one voter in six? one in seven?
Just to repeat my prediction for next May:- Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to win more votes in Scotland that Lib Dems in all GB. Seat predictions almost impossibly difficult, but I'd be astonished if these numbers only gave the Tories a majority of 30 (as EC suggests): 70-100 far more likely. (See Sean Fear [6.32am] below,)
Do Tory Peebies think that Cameron, with a clear majority, should keep or repeal the Five Year Act? Should it be the subject of a manifesto promise?
For a combined Con / UKIP total of 58% there needs to be a massive swing of wwc voters from Labour to UKIP.
If this is happening then UKIP should win the Heywood & Middleton byelection.
I could see the 35,25,23 result happening next year but in a November election - after an EdM government collapsed within a few months.
I expect almost all of the change from current polling to take place during the campaign. A week is a long time in politics, and five of Ed, Miliband and Garage will feel like an eternity.
So... Here is a question - will a 65k ton aircraft carrier float in a gallon of water, if the ship is in a very close fitting dock?
Not unless a gallon weighs 65K ton,have a word with Archimedes.
Yes. If the entire surface of the hull below the waterline is spread even one molecule thick then it will 'float'. So the question is can a gallon of water one molecule thick cover the area of a large ship below its waterline? No idea if that is yes - I suspect it is (molecules are awfully small).
Oh dear.
The ship will simply push the tiny quantity of water underneath it out of the way and rest on the bottom of the dock, because there is not enough water displaced to push it back up.
This is very simple physics which you can verify for yourself at home in the kitchen sink.
Another_richard - Why don't you stand as the South Yorkshire Police & Crime Commissioner.
I assume you won't be voting UKIP in that election, as they've chosen as candidate a former South Yorkshire copper who occasionally worked in Rotherham?
Mr. Richard, I share Mr. Jessop's view on this. The crude view of woman as victim and man as perpetrator is not reflective of reality, where a large minority (circa 40%) of domestic violence victims are men.
I agree.
But this government also has a policy of 'Ending violence against women and girls in the UK'. Identical to the policy JJ is so angry about when it comes from Labour.
A loss in Heywood & Middleton would be devastating for Labour. Judging by this poll, labour should be fairly confident, but not complacent.
A loss could trigger talk of a coup against Ed. I've said in the past that this won't happen and its far too late etc, but really the atmosphere is beginning to darken.
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Mike is right to the extent that all of the polling has shown this group of ex Lib dems to be the most loyal and enthusiastic Labour voters there are. It is the assumption that Brown got Labour down to an irreducible core that is wrong.
And Labour's vote is soft. Just over half of Labour voters think Ed is the best PM? That is a lot more encouraging for the Tories than a 1% lead.
Despite all the moronic "Red Ed" chants, it seems pretty obvious to me that Labour's current economic policies are significantly to the right of any of the New Labour manifestoes.
I don't recall price controls in any New Labour manifestos?
So... Here is a question - will a 65k ton aircraft carrier float in a gallon of water, if the ship is in a very close fitting dock?
Not unless a gallon weighs 65K ton,have a word with Archimedes.
Yes. If the entire surface of the hull below the waterline is spread even one molecule thick then it will 'float'. So the question is can a gallon of water one molecule thick cover the area of a large ship below its waterline? No idea if that is yes - I suspect it is (molecules are awfully small).
I think it would need to be 2 molecules think to get any meaningful displacement (ie so the hull penetrates the surface of the water). Otherwise it's not really floating...
So... Here is a question - will a 65k ton aircraft carrier float in a gallon of water, if the ship is in a very close fitting dock?
Not unless a gallon weighs 65K ton,have a word with Archimedes.
Yes. If the entire surface of the hull below the waterline is spread even one molecule thick then it will 'float'. So the question is can a gallon of water one molecule thick cover the area of a large ship below its waterline? No idea if that is yes - I suspect it is (molecules are awfully small).
I think it would need to be 2 molecules think to get any meaningful displacement (ie so the hull penetrates the surface of the water). Otherwise it's not really floating...
Stop this before you enrage SeanT. He has this crazy hypothesis that rich people are rich because they're cleverer than poor people, but you are doing a very good job of disproving this hypothesis.
I'm pretty sure you both have fairly high IQs, but you are embarrassing yourselves now.
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Labour support is higher than Tory support in the private sector.
I take it that we are still sticking to the established rationale that intra-conference polls are gibberish? We had bigger Labour polls after our conference, we've had a bigger Tory poll after their conference. And next week the yellow pox might reach the dizzy heights of 9% after their conference. Do any of these mean any more than party X is in the news a little more than the others for a few days?
Or does this one poll PROVE that the Tories will WIN?
Thank goodness Ed M still has that firewall of 2010 LDs keeping him on 34%, the total Kinnock got in 1992. If he did not he would be doing as badly as Brown and Foot!
I take it that we are still sticking to the established rationale that intra-conference polls are gibberish? We had bigger Labour polls after our conference, we've had a bigger Tory poll after their conference. And next week the yellow pox might reach the dizzy heights of 9% after their conference. Do any of these mean any more than party X is in the news a little more than the others for a few days?
Or does this one poll PROVE that the Tories will WIN?
I expect Mike to be right and Labour to keep the big chunk of 2010 Liberal support, however they will lose votes in Scotland and possibly more damaging a chunk of wwc support to UKIP.
Losing this support to UKIP is likely to cost them gains here in the East Midlands, Nick's seat certainly could be one of them and there are others.
I expect Labour to end up polling above the 29% in 2010 but below the 35% they need, that might be enough to gain most seats but I can't see Miliband having enough appeal to gain an overall majority.
It is likely to be a very close election with both main parties very close on seats and between them having a vote share less than 2010. In that event surely it would be the time for the main parties to find some common ground and work together for the good of the nation.
I agree with the broad thrust of what David has been telling us recently, clearing the deficit and keeping the conditions for future economic growth from 2015 to 2018 has to be done, hitting that to the long grass is not an option, those comments hitting at Balls for addressing the deficit are wrong, whoever is in charge this has to be dealt with and dealt with effectively.
Opposition for opposition sake is turgid and this opposition has been as opportunistic as any, it will be time in 2015 for some new thinking.
Given the general consensus not to get too excited by conference season polls, some of the posts are getting a bit carried away. Based on previous years and the belief that opinion is now unusually settled, my prediction was that we'd see Lab 6ish points clear last week (tick), 0ish this week (tick, unless we think 1 is very different from 0ish) and back to 3 when things have settled (late October). That still looks plausible to me, unless the "Tory surge" press reports have a bandwagon effect (and the existence of electoral bandwagons is disputed - do people change their votes so as to join in?). Those who believe that speeches have a gradual impact that filters through will disagree - we'll see!
I do agree with Sean F that we need to hold Heywood & Middleton. That's one by-election where we're working hard.
Today's Sun/YouGov has the Tories ahead for the first time since March 2012 Con 35, Lab 34, LD 6, UKIP 14
Less than a week ago: 'For those who were optimistic that the Tories would remain in power post May 2015, today probably extinguished those hopes.' (TSE)
This is a reminder that what gets political anoraks excited is of very little interest to ordinary people. Cameron's speech was on target, and he was massively boosted by the next day's press reporting. It's also possible that Reckless's defection has achieved an unexpected aim: he united the Conservatives with real fire in their eyes and anger in their bellies.
It's also a reminder that a week is a long time in politics and we have 32 of them left. What goes up can come down, and vice versa.
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Labour support is higher than Tory support in the private sector.
This suggests that next May's tory victory may be like the referendum result - success delivered on the back of pensioners. I predict that they will therefore be quite unable to take effective action against the deficit (as opposed to showboating on benefits) and there is at least 2:1 chance of UKIP winning the time after next!
So... Here is a question - will a 65k ton aircraft carrier float in a gallon of water, if the ship is in a very close fitting dock?
Not unless a gallon weighs 65K ton,have a word with Archimedes.
Yes. If the entire surface of the hull below the waterline is spread even one molecule thick then it will 'float'. So the question is can a gallon of water one molecule thick cover the area of a large ship below its waterline? No idea if that is yes - I suspect it is (molecules are awfully small).
I think it would need to be 2 molecules think to get any meaningful displacement (ie so the hull penetrates the surface of the water). Otherwise it's not really floating...
Stop this before you enrage SeanT. He has this crazy hypothesis that rich people are rich because they're cleverer than poor people, but you are doing a very good job of disproving this hypothesis.
I'm pretty sure you both have fairly high IQs, but you are embarrassing yourselves now.
This is an entirely theoretical - almost philosophical conundrum. Clearly in a real world setting the answer is "no". But it's fun to discuss.
I remember spending a skiing holiday arguing with a friend who believed that you could take a snooker ball sized object and cut it in such a way that you ended up with two objects the same size, mass and weight as the original. It didn't (and doesn't) sound plausible to me. But as he's now a tenured professor in pure maths at Yale I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt...
EdM supported by 58% of LAB VI, 7% off LD and 5% of UKIP
DC supported by 96% of Cons; 7% of LAB, 20% of LD and 37% of UKIP
DK would be interesting too - in a 2 horse race it looks like ~25% of Labour voters are refusing to answer for fear of either contradicting themselves, or saying something ridiculous like Ed would be a reasonable PM.
Given the general consensus not to get too excited by conference season polls, some of the posts are getting a bit carried away. Based on previous years and the belief that opinion is now unusually settled, my prediction was that we'd see Lab 6ish points clear last week (tick), 0ish this week (tick, unless we think 1 is very different from 0ish) and back to 3 when things have settled (late October). That still looks plausible to me, unless the "Tory surge" press reports have a bandwagon effect (and the existence of electoral bandwagons is disputed - do people change their votes so as to join in?). Those who believe that speeches have a gradual impact that filters through will disagree - we'll see!
I do agree with Sean F that we need to hold Heywood & Middleton. That's one by-election where we're working hard.
Nick - are you planning to put Ed Miliband's picture on your election leaflets ?
My condolences. Many Tories felt the same about IDS - only fortunately for us we dumped this terrible leadership mistake for Michael Howard, just in time. We still lost, but it wasn't as embarrassing.
I was voting Tony by then out of despair. It's a bit much when you have to vote for the nearest thing you can get to a sensible looking Tory, by voting Labour... The crowning of EdM has been an even bigger mistake, and they've had 4yrs to fix it. Desperate stuff for the faithful.
For me, the most worrying thing about this poll for Labour is the reaction to it. I remember a mere few months ago, when a poll showed crossover for the first time, it felt like a massive bombshell .... yet now, a Tory lead (even with a pollster who hadn't previously shown one) really doesn't feel that shocking.
I think Labour have blown it. The day they decided to play the Tories at their own austerity game was the day they lost. "Tory policies with half the competence" was NEVER going to win votes.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), he did mention that. I believe he omitted potential variance due to Labour lethargy and '45' enthusiasm/anger, which I think could make a significant difference.
antifrank didn't mention the potential of "anyone but the SNP" tactical voting next time.
It's going to be a factor - question is how big.
I mentioned it three times!
"That said, there is a worm in the apple. Because Scottish politics is currently all about independence and devolution after a very polarising debate, the SNP must now be vulnerable to some measure of tactical voting against it. This may make targets a bit harder to take than they would otherwise be."
"Labour might seek tactical votes from Conservative and Lib Dem supporters against the SNP. I'm doubtful whether many true blues would vote for Labour, but Labour may scoop up more of the few remaining Lib Dem voters. So I don't see much prospect for much relief on that front."
"A further proviso: in seats where the Lib Dems' main challenger is the SNP, the Lib Dems may well be able to get more tactical votes from both Labour and the Conservatives. That could conceivably help the Lib Dems get home. But for this to make much difference in any seat, the Lib Dem poll ratings are going to need to revive. There's absolutely no sign of that yet."
I like the stability of 5yr Parlies. Sure, it takes a lot of the fun out of *ooh when will they call a snap election* for many of us - but even for me that's not really a good reason to revert to the old way!
Sure, we see the same election bribes and economic cycle ploys at work - now we can just predict more accurately when the rabbits will pop out of the top hat. They're the same rabbits.
For me, the most worrying thing about this poll for Labour is the reaction to it. I remember a mere few months ago, when a poll showed crossover for the first time, it felt like a massive bombshell .... yet now, a Tory lead (even with a pollster who hadn't previously shown one) really doesn't feel that shocking.
I think Labour have blown it. The day they decided to play the Tories at their own austerity game was the day they lost. "Tory policies with half the competence" was NEVER going to win votes.
Do Tory Peebies think that Cameron, with a clear majority, should keep or repeal the Five Year Act? Should it be the subject of a manifesto promise?
So... Here is a question - will a 65k ton aircraft carrier float in a gallon of water, if the ship is in a very close fitting dock?
Not unless a gallon weighs 65K ton,have a word with Archimedes.
Yes. If the entire surface of the hull below the waterline is spread even one molecule thick then it will 'float'. So the question is can a gallon of water one molecule thick cover the area of a large ship below its waterline? No idea if that is yes - I suspect it is (molecules are awfully small).
I think it would need to be 2 molecules think to get any meaningful displacement (ie so the hull penetrates the surface of the water). Otherwise it's not really floating...
Stop this before you enrage SeanT. He has this crazy hypothesis that rich people are rich because they're cleverer than poor people, but you are doing a very good job of disproving this hypothesis.
I'm pretty sure you both have fairly high IQs, but you are embarrassing yourselves now.
This is an entirely theoretical - almost philosophical conundrum. Clearly in a real world setting the answer is "no". But it's fun to discuss.
I remember spending a skiing holiday arguing with a friend who believed that you could take a snooker ball sized object and cut it in such a way that you ended up with two objects the same size, mass and weight as the original. It didn't (and doesn't) sound plausible to me. But as he's now a tenured professor in pure maths at Yale I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt...
Are there holes where the more you dig them, the less deep they become?
This must be declining as none of our company cars pay any. They are either very low emission petrol or are part electric - with a corresponding reduction in fuel consumption. No doubt HMRC will be moving the goal posts in future.
Yes I agree,3 cars in our household,all on zero VED,just purchased a hybrid with £5K grant from Gov,they also fitted a £1k charger to my house for free. The fitter who did the work was working 7 days a week and fitting 4 chargers a day,the money available for the free chargers is running out,and they are no longer free. BIK of 5% for company users,and no congestion charge,so yes I think the goalposts will move.
Nothing to beat the sound of 6 cylinders or bigger, who wants a poxy silent electric motor.
I have some experiments to conduct to confirm this for myself - then I will come back to you.
Come on admit you were wrong - I do it all the time. Being wrong is good!
Even in open water the hull is only touching / supported by a layer one molecule thick. That layer only touches / is supported by the next molecule-thick layer out. Ad infintium. Replace the second layer with a 'very tight fitting dock' (ie only one molecule away from the the hull) and - ta da - it floats. This is a well known conundrum.
Thank you - it was clear listening to Salmond at FMQs yesterday that the SNP are going to keep going on and on and on and on about "Labour and their best mates the Tories"... .....
I remember spending a skiing holiday arguing with a friend who believed that you could take a snooker ball sized object and cut it in such a way that you ended up with two objects the same size, mass and weight as the original. It didn't (and doesn't) sound plausible to me. But as he's now a tenured professor in pure maths at Yale I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt...
I have some experiments to conduct to confirm this for myself - then I will come back to you.
Come on admit you were wrong - I do it all the time. Being wrong is good!
Even in open water the hull is only touching / supported by a layer one molecule thick. That layer only touches / is supported by the next molecule-thick layer out. Ad infintium. Replace the second layer with a 'very tight fitting dock' (ie only one molecule away from the the hull) and - ta da - it floats. This is a well known conundrum.
I'm looking forward to admitting that I was wrong - but I want to do the experiments first.
I'm merely surmising here based on his memoirs - but Mandy had a lot of residual affection for Gordon - a bit like a battered wife. Even though they hated each other, there was a loyalty to protect what they'd done together with Tony.
I can't see that bleeding over into anything for EdM - he's like a distant cousin to New Labour, and he's done nothing but attempt to trash it from Day One. Why would Mandy want to put himself out for him? He doesn't even have a clunking fist as a USP.
What's going to happen during a four week general election campaign, because you can't hide Ed for four weeks.
That's what's interesting. Labour are going to have to find something for Ed Milliband to do for 4 weeks in an election campaign. Presumably drive around in a bus with tv crews and point at things and give interviews. The thing is, he won't have to make a major gaffe to put voters off Labour, he can do that by just being himself. The Tories will be wanting to make this a presidential election, Labour not.
Someone a few days ago raised the possibility that Labour might seek to draft Peter Mandelson, yet again. I wonder if that could happen.
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Labour support is higher than Tory support in the private sector.
This suggests that next May's tory victory may be like the referendum result - success delivered on the back of pensioners. I predict that they will therefore be quite unable to take effective action against the deficit (as opposed to showboating on benefits) and there is at least 2:1 chance of UKIP winning the time after next!
And you think UKIP are going to get power on the back of promising to be be tough on pensioners?
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Labour support is higher than Tory support in the private sector.
The big unknown here is the one you point to in this sentence: "It remains to be seen whether this is a sympathy surge that will subside with time or a lasting level of support for the SNP ". I'd actually put it slightly more strongly than that: are the SNP going to be able to build on that surge and take even larger chunks out of the Labour Westminster vote?
I don't think we can discount the possibility that they might - which means, I think, that some of the longish-shot bets on the SNP remain good value.
Quite a lift for Labour over the past 7 days in Stephen Fisher's latest GE Seats prediction, based on UKPR's average of the polls, which does not include last night's Sun/YouGov poll showing the Tories 1% ahead. Nevertheless his numbers showing the changes compared with last week are:
Good piece, most of which I agree with (that's not why it's good!). My gut guess is SNP 15-ish seats, Con 2.
Point of requisite pedantry, 5 of the 6 SNP's Westminster seats are partially or wholly outwith the Highlands & Islands (in fact they're all outwith the Highland council area), so not really rural highland.
By all accounts, the Conservatives were in better mood - and voice - than their Labour counterparts, because of, or despite, their polling position or the defections. Given yesterday's polling, Cameron speech still being felt, and the British Bill of Rights proposals today, I cannot think that gap has narrowed. When it comes to campaigning, then, the Tories will be more confident still.
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Labour support is higher than Tory support in the private sector.
This suggests that next May's tory victory may be like the referendum result - success delivered on the back of pensioners. I predict that they will therefore be quite unable to take effective action against the deficit (as opposed to showboating on benefits) and there is at least 2:1 chance of UKIP winning the time after next!
If you believe that claim I have some magic beans for sale.
I remember spending a skiing holiday arguing with a friend who believed that you could take a snooker ball sized object and cut it in such a way that you ended up with two objects the same size, mass and weight as the original. It didn't (and doesn't) sound plausible to me. But as he's now a tenured professor in pure maths at Yale I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt...
antifrank didn't mention the potential of "anyone but the SNP" tactical voting next time.
It's going to be a factor - question is how big.
I mentioned it three times!
"That said, there is a worm in the apple. Because Scottish politics is currently all about independence and devolution after a very polarising debate, the SNP must now be vulnerable to some measure of tactical voting against it. This may make targets a bit harder to take than they would otherwise be."
"Labour might seek tactical votes from Conservative and Lib Dem supporters against the SNP. I'm doubtful whether many true blues would vote for Labour, but Labour may scoop up more of the few remaining Lib Dem voters. So I don't see much prospect for much relief on that front."
"A further proviso: in seats where the Lib Dems' main challenger is the SNP, the Lib Dems may well be able to get more tactical votes from both Labour and the Conservatives. That could conceivably help the Lib Dems get home. But for this to make much difference in any seat, the Lib Dem poll ratings are going to need to revive. There's absolutely no sign of that yet."
Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.
Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.
If the extra 20% who voted in the IndyRef (or even half of them) get the taste for voting, then those extra voters could play havoc with projections for Westminster seats in Scotland.
I have some experiments to conduct to confirm this for myself - then I will come back to you.
Come on admit you were wrong - I do it all the time. Being wrong is good!
Even in open water the hull is only touching / supported by a layer one molecule thick. That layer only touches / is supported by the next molecule-thick layer out. Ad infintium. Replace the second layer with a 'very tight fitting dock' (ie only one molecule away from the the hull) and - ta da - it floats. This is a well known conundrum.
I'm looking forward to admitting that I was wrong - but I want to do the experiments first.
may be you could borrow an aircraft carrier from the French? I don't think we have any to spare right now...
Thank you - it was clear listening to Salmond at FMQs yesterday that the SNP are going to keep going on and on and on and on about "Labour and their best mates the Tories"... .....
And why not? The memory of SLABers & SCONs high-fiving each other and air-punching as the referendum results were announced will live long in many memories (and will be revived if anyone gets a bit forgetful).
Thank you - it was clear listening to Salmond at FMQs yesterday that the SNP are going to keep going on and on and on and on about "Labour and their best mates the Tories"... .....
And why not? The memory of SLABers & SCONs high-fiving each other and air-punching as the referendum results were announced will live long in many memories (and will be revived if anyone gets a bit forgetful).
As will the memories of the Yessirs questioning the patriotism of No voters, the divisive campaigning and the calls for another referendum.
Despite the Tories' poll lead being splashed across all tomorrow's papers, guess which famous national broadcaster makes no mention of it whatsoever.
World class paranoia!
World class political bias!
The BBC is too busy describing Cameron's visit to Afghanistan ("UK Prime Minister David Cameron tells new Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani that Britain will always be a "strong partner and good friend""), Grayling's proposals on the British Bill of Rights ("Justice Secretary Chris Grayling says Tory plans to stop British laws being overruled by human rights rulings from Strasbourg are "viable and legal".") and today's papers. Hardly unsyumpathetic to the government.
A fair number of Labour's 29% were public sector workers or benefit recipients scared into voting. They either work in the private sector or have had their fears assuaged.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
Labour support is higher than Tory support in the private sector.
Thank you - it was clear listening to Salmond at FMQs yesterday that the SNP are going to keep going on and on and on and on about "Labour and their best mates the Tories"... .....
The memory of SLABers & SCONs high-fiving each other and air-punching as the referendum results were announced will live long in many memories
I have some experiments to conduct to confirm this for myself - then I will come back to you.
Come on admit you were wrong - I do it all the time. Being wrong is good!
Even in open water the hull is only touching / supported by a layer one molecule thick. That layer only touches / is supported by the next molecule-thick layer out. Ad infintium. Replace the second layer with a 'very tight fitting dock' (ie only one molecule away from the the hull) and - ta da - it floats. This is a well known conundrum.
I'm looking forward to admitting that I was wrong - but I want to do the experiments first.
may be you could borrow an aircraft carrier from the French? I don't think we have any to spare right now...
I should be able to demonstrate it with various plastic containers in the kitchen sink.
Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.
Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.
If the polls are too be believed, that's not even a question. I'm sure you're getting a different vibe from FollowFollow though.
Good point - surely some of those who were either too apathetic before or too scared to register before have now bitten the bullet and may turn out again. That seems likelier than not.
And the Yessers who feel thwarted may also want to kick Labour for being in the No camp. Be interesting to see what the SLabers who voted Yes feel about their party now.
If the extra 20% who voted in the IndyRef (or even half of them) get the taste for voting, then those extra voters could play havoc with projections for Westminster seats in Scotland.
Back the Tories at 11/8 with SkyBet (with 48.14% of total stake) to win the Rochester and Strood by-election and back UKIP at 6/5 with Hills (51.86% of stake) likewise and make a 14% profit. But hurry, this can't last! As ever, DYOR.
That Free Money offer, care of SkyBet and Hills is still there. Not sure how much one can stake. DYOR
Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.
Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.
If the polls are too be believed, that's not even a question. I'm sure you're getting a different vibe from FollowFollow though.
If the extra 20% who voted in the IndyRef (or even half of them) get the taste for voting, then those extra voters could play havoc with projections for Westminster seats in Scotland.
Nail on the head there, Sir. Will they slink away, bitter that their recent (only?) foray into democracy had an unhappy end? Or are they just angered - and now want to change things. But in a Westminster election? Hmmm... If the next elections had been for Holyrood, then maybe more likely to keep them enthused. But if they are now going to have to pay their arrears of Poll Tax for having stuck their head above the democratic parapets, then they might want their full (Bank of England backed) Pounds worth of flesh.....
The impact of Lib Dem to Labour switchers will depend on their geographical distribution, which probably isn't random. Coalition policies aren't likely to be equally unpopular with all Lib Dem voters everywhere, since they're not all identical.
In Lib-Con marginals, we can expect considerable tactical voting unwind - people who only voted Lib Dem to keep the Tories out returning to Labour. This could actually benefit the Conservatives, but doesn't affect the number of Labour MPs.
"Thank you - it was clear listening to Salmond at FMQs yesterday that the SNP are going to keep going on and on and on and on about "Labour and their best mates the Tories"... ....."
Lest we get on to Salmond and his best mate Trump.....
I have some experiments to conduct to confirm this for myself - then I will come back to you.
Come on admit you were wrong - I do it all the time. Being wrong is good!
Even in open water the hull is only touching / supported by a layer one molecule thick. That layer only touches / is supported by the next molecule-thick layer out. Ad infintium. Replace the second layer with a 'very tight fitting dock' (ie only one molecule away from the the hull) and - ta da - it floats. This is a well known conundrum.
I'm looking forward to admitting that I was wrong - but I want to do the experiments first.
may be you could borrow an aircraft carrier from the French? I don't think we have any to spare right now...
I should be able to demonstrate it with various plastic containers in the kitchen sink.
Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.
Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.
If the polls are too be believed, that's not even a question. I'm sure you're getting a different vibe from FollowFollow though.
What polls ?
The polls that show the SNP sustaining a substantial lead in Holyrood after being 7 years in power, and vying with Labour for biggest Westminster vote share. If you've got any other evidence for 'SNP backlash' (apart from you devoutly wishing it), I'd be fascinated to see it.
Comments
"Is Ed M the right leader for Labour?"
"Well, he's the one we have"
The debates are going to be interesting...
But this government also has a policy of 'Ending violence against women and girls in the UK'. Identical to the policy JJ is so angry about when it comes from Labour.
So their coalition partners have already announced their plans and the LD conference will be a time to respond.
What will be interesting is whether the Kippers start talking about PR after May 2015, when they poll say 12% or more and get one or two seats. How rich that would be...
But that's a very different thing from having a *minister* looking at women and girls alone. That's a terrible message to send as the prominence is so much greater.
The Home Office's webpage on domestic violence is fairly gender-blind:
https://www.gov.uk/domestic-violence-and-abuse
BIK of 5% for company users,and no congestion charge,so yes I think the goalposts will move.
If this is happening then UKIP should win the Heywood & Middleton byelection.
I could see the 35,25,23 result happening next year but in a November election - after an EdM government collapsed within a few months.
The ship will simply push the tiny quantity of water underneath it out of the way and rest on the bottom of the dock, because there is not enough water displaced to push it back up.
This is very simple physics which you can verify for yourself at home in the kitchen sink.
I assume you won't be voting UKIP in that election, as they've chosen as candidate a former South Yorkshire copper who occasionally worked in Rotherham?
That's bold.
Again I point you at:
https://www.gov.uk/domestic-violence-and-abuse
Which is fairly gender-neutral, although could certainly be improved.
Still given UKIP's continued strength and likely addition of MPs my expectation of a hung parliament remains.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/japan-pre-qualifying.html
No tip, but there are a few interesting news stories floating around.
I'm pretty sure you both have fairly high IQs, but you are embarrassing yourselves now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes_paradox
You failed to notice the 'very tight fitting dock' bit of the question.
Or does this one poll PROVE that the Tories will WIN?
Bad strategy from Tories to go on Human Rights so soon after their successful conference.
Why not let the warm fuzziness bed in for a bit before retreating back to your bad old ways?
TIPPING POINT
Losing this support to UKIP is likely to cost them gains here in the East Midlands, Nick's seat certainly could be one of them and there are others.
I expect Labour to end up polling above the 29% in 2010 but below the 35% they need, that might be enough to gain most seats but I can't see Miliband having enough appeal to gain an overall majority.
It is likely to be a very close election with both main parties very close on seats and between them having a vote share less than 2010. In that event surely it would be the time for the main parties to find some common ground and work together for the good of the nation.
I agree with the broad thrust of what David has been telling us recently, clearing the deficit and keeping the conditions for future economic growth from 2015 to 2018 has to be done, hitting that to the long grass is not an option, those comments hitting at Balls for addressing the deficit are wrong, whoever is in charge this has to be dealt with and dealt with effectively.
Opposition for opposition sake is turgid and this opposition has been as opportunistic as any, it will be time in 2015 for some new thinking.
I do agree with Sean F that we need to hold Heywood & Middleton. That's one by-election where we're working hard.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/scottish-post-referendum-special.html
I remember spending a skiing holiday arguing with a friend who believed that you could take a snooker ball sized object and cut it in such a way that you ended up with two objects the same size, mass and weight as the original. It didn't (and doesn't) sound plausible to me. But as he's now a tenured professor in pure maths at Yale I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt...
R+S : Con 2.42 , Kip 1.87
GE (most seats) : Lab 1.75, Con 2.36
I was voting Tony by then out of despair. It's a bit much when you have to vote for the nearest thing you can get to a sensible looking Tory, by voting Labour... The crowning of EdM has been an even bigger mistake, and they've had 4yrs to fix it. Desperate stuff for the faithful.
It's going to be a factor - question is how big.
"That said, there is a worm in the apple. Because Scottish politics is currently all about independence and devolution after a very polarising debate, the SNP must now be vulnerable to some measure of tactical voting against it. This may make targets a bit harder to take than they would otherwise be."
"Labour might seek tactical votes from Conservative and Lib Dem supporters against the SNP. I'm doubtful whether many true blues would vote for Labour, but Labour may scoop up more of the few remaining Lib Dem voters. So I don't see much prospect for much relief on that front."
"A further proviso: in seats where the Lib Dems' main challenger is the SNP, the Lib Dems may well be able to get more tactical votes from both Labour and the Conservatives. That could conceivably help the Lib Dems get home. But for this to make much difference in any seat, the Lib Dem poll ratings are going to need to revive. There's absolutely no sign of that yet."
Sure, we see the same election bribes and economic cycle ploys at work - now we can just predict more accurately when the rabbits will pop out of the top hat. They're the same rabbits.
Even in open water the hull is only touching / supported by a layer one molecule thick. That layer only touches / is supported by the next molecule-thick layer out. Ad infintium. Replace the second layer with a 'very tight fitting dock' (ie only one molecule away from the the hull) and - ta da - it floats. This is a well known conundrum.
I can't imagine how this could be a subject of argument on a skiing holiday.
I can't see that bleeding over into anything for EdM - he's like a distant cousin to New Labour, and he's done nothing but attempt to trash it from Day One. Why would Mandy want to put himself out for him? He doesn't even have a clunking fist as a USP.
Really? Pass that pipe, I want a hit....
The big unknown here is the one you point to in this sentence: "It remains to be seen whether this is a sympathy surge that will subside with time or a lasting level of support for the SNP ". I'd actually put it slightly more strongly than that: are the SNP going to be able to build on that surge and take even larger chunks out of the Labour Westminster vote?
I don't think we can discount the possibility that they might - which means, I think, that some of the longish-shot bets on the SNP remain good value.
Con ............ 288 (-11 seats)
Lab ............. 306 (+9 seats)
LibDem ......... 28 (+2 seats)
Others ...........28 (unchanged)
Total ...........650 seats
Point of requisite pedantry, 5 of the 6 SNP's Westminster seats are partially or wholly outwith the Highlands & Islands (in fact they're all outwith the Highland council area), so not really rural highland.
"It is a question of "ownership" of the current coalition's achievements."
Do you think if Lib Dems considered the coalition to have produced 'achievements' they would still be on 7%?
I suspect they feel rather like the Tate did about taking 'ownership' of Merda d'artista.
And the piss-take of Armageddon as a political film. I hope we get stuff like this again.
Let's just say there were some verrrry looooong chair lift rides ;-)
Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.
Works both ways divvie.
They had just won the war.
Westminster 2015 is the next battle.
Is it too cynical to point out that both coalition parties benefit from this timing? I wonder if a bit of 'differentiation' is part of the plan?
And the Yessers who feel thwarted may also want to kick Labour for being in the No camp. Be interesting to see what the SLabers who voted Yes feel about their party now.
DYOR
In Lib-Con marginals, we can expect considerable tactical voting unwind - people who only voted Lib Dem to keep the Tories out returning to Labour. This could actually benefit the Conservatives, but doesn't affect the number of Labour MPs.
"Thank you - it was clear listening to Salmond at FMQs yesterday that the SNP are going to keep going on and on and on and on about "Labour and their best mates the Tories"... ....."
Lest we get on to Salmond and his best mate Trump.....
@CCHQPress: Looks like @DouglasCarswell last night bottled debating our candidate @GilesWatling when he didn't show for an ITV Anglia Clacton debate