IMO any trouble that Labour might get into after a close GE result, would be nought compared to the trouble Dave would experience trying to navigate an EU negotiation.
That may be so, but it's a theme which has been well explored. In fact it's not the only such trouble Dave might face:
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
You can dislike Farage and his policies all you want but having led his party to victory in the European elections, built a considerable councillor base in local government, pushed the Conservatives to the right, forced Cameron to pledge an in/out referendum and engineered the defections of two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
How many points clear of Miliband and Clegg is he?
If that is from all voters, he is doing very well.,I keep hearing that UKIP are the most disliked party, yet he is not unpopular, and two of his rivals are 30-40 points more unpopular, despite leading more popular parties
You wrote "I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders" which I proved causes epistemological problems.
What are you arguing about here?
Your original point that the guardian misreported their own poll.
I am mystified by Turkey's continued stasis. Sure, I can see why Erdogan was reluctant to tackle ISIS, he prefers them to the PKK.
But violent riots are now erupting across Turkey. Twitter says one Kurd has been shot dead by police in Varto. Statues of Ataturk are going up in flames:
Turkey's inaction as Kobane falls pretty much guarantees a new generation of Kurdish resentment, possibly even nationwide violence and insurrection. Stupid. Turkey is sowing the wind but will reap the whirlwind.
Kobane will be Turkey's Srebrenica. Well armed soldiers standing by and passively allowing a massacre. The idea that air power can somehow hold back the tide is being well and truly deconstructed in front of our eyes. I'm sure Turkey's Nato friends are thoroughly impressed. Not
Erdogan will be pleased that statues of Ataturk are going up in flames. Ataturk, was anti religious and tried hard to follow western thought and methods when he was in power. Erdogan is the opposite, an islamist whose plan is to make all Turkey into a religious muslim state: Ataturk going up in flames will be a balm to his breast.
All areas with a high Catholic vote. And areas that voted Yes in high numbers. All a coincidence.
If EVEL can free us from these medieval religious influences then we should all applaud.
139 Conservative MPs voted against
Not sure I'd use the word medieval. Around 15 years ago, a majority of public opinion would have been clearly against - not sure we were medieval in 1999?
Rightly or wrongly (and I'm not sure I'm too fussed either way) there are still a significant number of people who hold a traditional view of marriage: a legal sexual union of two opposing genders. I don't think they should be vilified for it, although I recognise that it's now outdated.
What gripes with me is how it's almost impossible for anyone to oppose same-sex marriage, today, without being called homophobic. You sometimes can't even defend those that do without being 'implicated' yourself.
I don't like that. Not at all. Bigotry seems to be wonderful when it's in the name of opposing alleged bigotry.
There are a number of commonplaces of conversation from years ago that I remember hearing and saying in maybe the 1970s, but no longer do.
One is: It's a free country. Two is: I'm entitled to my opinion. Three is: Nice one Cyril.
Have I stopped hearing all three for rhe same reason? Or is there something sinister about the extinction of the first two? When did this happen?
Damian McBride @DPMcBride · 11m11 minutes ago There comes a time when every leader needs 'fat men' around them. Ed M will finally be learning that now.
do what ? - Is that some odd reference to Labour Grandee John Prescott?
It means he needs some muscle. In Ed's place I would be on the phone to Mandelson and McBride today and getting them into my tent for the campaign while sending the likes of Axelrod and the other imported campaign runners packing. Part of this obsession Labour have with the Obama victory of 2008 is going to kill them in 2015.
Ed going back to the arch-prince of New Labour in the Prince of Darkness?
Can't see it. Even Brown had to be dragged kicking and screaming to use Mandy again.
If Ed is serious about winning then he needs to get Mandy on the phone sooner rather than later. The fact that he hasn't is quite telling though. 35% becomes 33% and that will become 30% by May 2015, now it is all about how poorly the Lib Dems do and how much the Tories can draw away from Lab 2010 and UKIP's current VI.
How well would campaigning for a Labour government go down with Mandelson's banking paymasters, the brothers Lazard etc?
Its one thing (albeit bad enough) to bring Mandelson back when you are in govt and he can sit on and chair cabinet committees and pull strings, but its another when you are an opposition and he has little he can do. But does anyone really see the nation's bush telegraph flickering with joy at the announcement that 'Mandy is back'?
IMO any trouble that Labour might get into after a close GE result, would be nought compared to the trouble Dave would experience trying to navigate an EU negotiation.
That may be so, but it's a theme which has been well explored. In fact it's not the only such trouble Dave might face:
A Labour administration could be the more stable option.
Dave has not made a second term easy for himself
(a) raising expectations on tax cuts and ring-fenced budgets (b) kicking cans down the road (on which he will now be expected to deliver) most of all the EU (c) an increasingly itchy 2010 intake who see their careers not happening.
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
How many points clear of Miliband and Clegg is he?
If that is from all voters, he is doing very well.,I keep hearing that UKIP are the most disliked party, yet he is not unpopular, and two of his rivals are 30-40 points more unpopular, despite leading more popular parties
You wrote "I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders" which I proved causes epistemological problems.
What are you arguing about here?
Your original point that the guardian misreported their own poll.
EDIT: Actually, don't respond, I cant be getting into pointless arguments like this, so dull
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
You can dislike Farage and his policies all you want but having led his party to victory in the European elections, built a considerable councillor base in local government, pushed the Conservatives to the right, forced Cameron to pledge an in/out referendum and engineered the defections of two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
As usual you can't stop talking rubbish or using hyperbole where UKIP and Farage is concerned. Do grow up!
All areas with a high Catholic vote. And areas that voted Yes in high numbers. All a coincidence.
If EVEL can free us from these medieval religious influences then we should all applaud.
139 Conservative MPs voted against
117 Conservative MPs vote in favour.
And they all represented English constituencies, voting on an issue that would only affect them.
Why should Scottish voters have two says in the matter - once in Scotland, and again in England?
Because they are MPs all of whom are entitled to vote on all Westminster votes?
Yes, well spotted, but the question under review is whether they should continue to have that entitlement. As has already been said this really isn't difficult.
Apparently it is difficult
Precisely which bills are ‘English’? A large proportion are a mixture of English and UK extent, as other measures are added during the passage of a Bill. What about ‘English’ bills that have public expenditure implications across the UK? Would such a system create two classes of MP?
It's very simple.
If the matter is one devolved to the Scotch parliament then Scotch MPs are excluded from the vote at Westminster.
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
You can dislike Farage and his policies all you want but having led his party to victory in the European elections, built a considerable councillor base in local government, pushed the Conservatives to the right, forced Cameron to pledge an in/out referendum and engineered the defections of two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
An in/out referendum probably cannot be won in 2017 under a Tory government. Cameron will declare a great victory for Britain regardless of negotiations and big business will put the frighteners on people as they did in Scotland. Better wait until a Labour government is forced into giving a referendum or a genuine Eurosceptic becomes Tory leader. A lost referendum in 2017 would probably be a mortal blow for UKIP and any chance of the UK ever leaving the EU.
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
You can dislike Farage and his policies all you want but having led his party to victory in the European elections, built a considerable councillor base in local government, pushed the Conservatives to the right, forced Cameron to pledge an in/out referendum and engineered the defections of two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
Piffle. Farage knows very well that an IN/OUT vote under Cameron, after some phoney reform, would very likely be won by IN. 95% chance.
He wants - like Salmond - to seize the day at the right moment. An EU vote in the early 2020s under a Tory-UKIP Coalition would be much more winnable.
Tory fear and loathing of Farage - shared by many on the left - blinds them to his ovbvious skills and nous. He is a smart operator. He really is like Salmond. He's played a blinder the last five years.
You mean like Salmond that lost the referendum and possibly ended Scottish independence for a generation ?
Yes I see the comparison. Both ultimately vanquished by Cameron
All areas with a high Catholic vote. And areas that voted Yes in high numbers. All a coincidence.
If EVEL can free us from these medieval religious influences then we should all applaud.
139 Conservative MPs voted against
Not sure I'd use the word medieval. Around 15 years ago, a majority of public opinion would have been clearly against - not sure we were medieval in 1999?
Rightly or wrongly (and I'm not sure I'm too fussed either way) there are still a significant number of people who hold a traditional view of marriage: a legal sexual union of two opposing genders. I don't think they should be vilified for it, although I recognise that it's now outdated.
What gripes with me is how it's almost impossible for anyone to oppose same-sex marriage, today, without being called homophobic. You sometimes can't even defend those that do without being 'implicated' yourself.
I don't like that. Not at all. Bigotry seems to be wonderful when it's in the name of opposing alleged bigotry.
And being guilty of a PC-thought crime, NuLabour´s storm troopers will happily come round to arrest you.
(c) an increasingly itchy 2010 intake who see their careers not happening.
Not sure that's right. Yes, of course not all of the 100 or so new 2010 MPs will see their careers taking off - that's just arithmetic, would be true of any government, and is exacerbated by the fact of being in coalition. Even so, it's hard to argue that, for example, Nicky Morgan (entered parliament 2010, promoted to a senior cabinet role in 2014) has seen her career 'not happening'.
Damian McBride @DPMcBride · 11m11 minutes ago There comes a time when every leader needs 'fat men' around them. Ed M will finally be learning that now.
do what ? - Is that some odd reference to Labour Grandee John Prescott?
It means he needs some muscle. In Ed's place I would be on the phone to Mandelson and McBride today and getting them into my tent for the campaign while sending the likes of Axelrod and the other imported campaign runners packing. Part of this obsession Labour have with the Obama victory of 2008 is going to kill them in 2015.
Ed going back to the arch-prince of New Labour in the Prince of Darkness?
Can't see it. Even Brown had to be dragged kicking and screaming to use Mandy again.
If Ed is serious about winning then he needs to get Mandy on the phone sooner rather than later. The fact that he hasn't is quite telling though. 35% becomes 33% and that will become 30% by May 2015, now it is all about how poorly the Lib Dems do and how much the Tories can draw away from Lab 2010 and UKIP's current VI.
How well would campaigning for a Labour government go down with Mandelson's banking paymasters, the brothers Lazard etc?
Its one thing (albeit bad enough) to bring Mandelson back when you are in govt and he can sit on and chair cabinet committees and pull strings, but its another when you are an opposition and he has little he can do. But does anyone really see the nation's bush telegraph flickering with joy at the announcement that 'Mandy is back'?
The cult of Mandelson is all very well but he lost for Kinnock, won with Blair but built on a lead established by John Smith who'd had nothing to do with Mandelson, and then lost again with Brown. Whether Mandelson was the author of some of Brown's dafter stunts, I could not say.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
You can dislike Farage and his policies all you want but having led his party to victory in the European elections, built a considerable councillor base in local government, pushed the Conservatives to the right, forced Cameron to pledge an in/out referendum and engineered the defections of two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
As usual you can't stop talking rubbish or using hyperbole where UKIP and Farage is concerned. Do grow up!
Well some of us are worried about the devastation caused by little boy and fat man(The Two Eds) being unleashed on the country.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
It's great fun to watch Richard. Kippers can be very entertaining. Every zoo should have a pair.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
I'm sorry. Ed as PM is too higher a price to pay for that.
This is a most ridiculous article as the Labour party supporters would never allow it to happen. If there was a plot then members of the party would leave in droves leaving them with no income. Why oh why do i have to read such drivel
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
You cant be amused often as no one has said Cameron is a traitor as far as I can remember
Plenty of people call Carswell and Reckless traitors though, despite being men who left cushy jobs after hearing first hand what Cameron plans to do regarding EU renegotiations
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
There are three flaws in that argument. Firstly it's almost certainly the only chance of a referendum we'll get for a generation; secondly, and more importantly, a Stay In result is near-certain in all circumstances; and thirdly, the 'strategy' (if that's the right word) is based on a fantasy that somehow the lesson of the SDP doesn't need to be learnt, and that a divided Right can actually win an election. That's a poor basis to wreck the UK recovery on.
Christopher Hope @christopherhope · 2 mins2 minutes ago Interesting. Labour could seize power in a hung Parliamemt by striking a deal with the SNP after #GE2015, Labour donor John Mills says
Yeah...because that won't increase the level of WLQ at all..
All of a sudden we see the opinionated anti EU brigade running a mile from the prospect of an EU referendum. And this at a time when there would be something worth voting on, at a time when the EU was changing to an ever closer union where we would have every instinct to vote against.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Labour MPs voted on an English only matter for which they had no responsibility for with their own constituents. They could vote without any fear of reaction from their own constituents.
Except that, oddly, in the case of Gay Marriage, quite the opposite seems to be the case. Some of them voted against precisely because they were scared of the response of their more strident Catholic constituents.
It will be their constituents who will object to having second-class MPs in Westminster, barred from certain votes, and that's why Socrates is right to argue that English Votes for English Laws is uniquely dangerous for the future of the Union.
This is a most ridiculous article as the Labour party supporters would never allow it to happen. If there was a plot then members of the party would leave in droves leaving them with no income. Why oh why do i have to read such drivel
You don't have to. In any case, wild speculation about unlikely outcomes is the order of the day in political bloggin, unless one can find an audience for a particular niche theme, eg, Ed M is always terrible even when he's on course for majority, a la Dan H
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
Keep being amused. Cameron is what he is; a hubristic egotist who is leading the country on the path chosen by the governing elite since 1951. That path, as you know, is to perdition.
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour l.
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The
Seems fair.
f two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
Piffle. Farage knows very well that an IN/OUT vote under Cameron, after some phoney reform, would very likely be won by IN. 95% chance.
He wants - like Salmond - to seize the day at the right moment. An EU vote in the early 2020s under a Tory-UKIP Coalition would be much more winnable.
Tory fear and loathing of Farage - shared by many on the left - blinds them to his ovbvious skills and nous. He is a smart operator. He really is like Salmond. He's played a blinder the last five years.
You mean like Salmond that lost the referendum and possibly ended Scottish independence for a generation ?
Yes I see the comparison. Both ultimately vanquished by Cameron
Don't be a dick. Salmond's achievement was incredible. Who'd have thought Scotland would come that close to independence - losing by just ten points to NO - five or ten years ago? It was all Salmond's doing. He danced round Cameron. And Cameron got so desperate to win he had to promise the devomax he refused in the first place.
Salmond is a brilliant operator. Cameron is mediocre. That said, Cameron might still win in 2015 because he faces probably the worst Opposition leader in a century of British politics.
Cameron is mediocre... but maybe lucky.
So Cameron is mediocre. Yet the Scots voted to continue to have Dave as PM.
All those that said Dave would have to resign if Yes won are going to have to live with the flip side. A no victory is a great tribute for Dave.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
There are three flaws in that argument. Firstly it's almost certainly the only chance of a referendum we'll get for a generation; secondly, and more importantly, a Stay In result is near-certain in all circumstances; and thirdly, the 'strategy' (if that's the right word) is based on a fantasy that somehow the lesson of the SDP doesn't need to be learnt, and that a divided Right can actually win an election. That's a poor basis to wreck the UK recovery on.
"Firstly it's almost certainly the only chance of a referendum we'll get for a generation"
Absolute nonsense
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
The piece has somewhat been overtaken by events, with Miliband being briefed against quite a bit (although I'm uncertain whether or not Gareth remains loyal).
I'm not sure it'd happen. Labour failed to axe Brown, they're failing to axe Miliband now. They're just not very competent. Burnham's overrated, probably because everyone else seems even worse.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Miliband and Cameron: two peas in a pod. Kippers like peeling peas.
Christopher Hope @christopherhope · 2 mins2 minutes ago Interesting. Labour could seize power in a hung Parliamemt by striking a deal with the SNP after #GE2015, Labour donor John Mills says
Yeah...because that won't increase the level of WLQ at all..
Suggestions from an obscenely rich Labour bankroller that his party should 'seize' power, doesn't strike one as particularly democratic.
Imagine the kerfuffle here if a Tory backer had come up with that line.
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
Ousted and replaced by Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham. Not by Nigel Farage.
All areas with a high Catholic vote. And areas that voted Yes in high numbers. All a coincidence.
If EVEL can free us from these medieval religious influences then we should all applaud.
139 Conservative MPs voted against
Not sure I'd use the word medieval. Around 15 years ago, a majority of public opinion would have been clearly against - not sure we were medieval in 1999?
Rightly or wrongly (and I'm not sure I'm too fussed either way) there are still a significant number of people who hold a traditional view of marriage: a legal sexual union of two opposing genders. I don't think they should be vilified for it, although I recognise that it's now outdated.
What gripes with me is how it's almost impossible for anyone to oppose same-sex marriage, today, without being called homophobic. You sometimes can't even defend those that do without being 'implicated' yourself.
I don't like that. Not at all. Bigotry seems to be wonderful when it's in the name of opposing alleged bigotry.
Completely agree. We have this juvenile streak in politics today which brands anything other than a 'liberal' view as being something to be ridiculed or to be angry about. Probably started by 'right-on' comedians but now entered mainstream . Lets kick it out and act grown up
Thanks. We need to be careful. Otherwise we'll end up with more things like that - for instance, that human 'real-life' slavery exhibition being intimidated into cancellation by protesters (who hadn't seen it) because they thought it was racist.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
Keep being amused. Cameron is what he is; a hubristic egotist who is leading the country on the path chosen by the governing elite since 1951. That path, as you know, is to perdition.
A pretty ignorant comment based on nothing more than prejudice and devoid of facts. It just hides what a rabid extremist right winger you are and why you want to see a sane centre party destroyed.
Fascinating to read Labour "supporters" panicking after three basically statistical dead-heats from YouGov (leads of 1-2% are well within MoE) yet ignoring yesterday's Populus showing a 6% Labour lead.
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
You mean like the Guardian?
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
I am sure I read in The Guardian yesterday that Farage wasn't doing much better in terms of popularity than other party leaders, showed by him being on net (-1) against Miliband and Clegg who were (-36) & (-40odd)
The Guardian wrote this
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
You can dislike Farage and his policies all you want but having led his party to victory in the European elections, built a considerable councillor base in local government, pushed the Conservatives to the right, forced Cameron to pledge an in/out referendum and engineered the defections of two tory MP's in almost total secrecy I don't see how anyone can objectively say he is performing badly.
He's making sure the UKIP raison d'être, an in/out referendum is less likely.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
An in/out referendum probably cannot be won in 2017 under a Tory government. Cameron will declare a great victory for Britain regardless of negotiations and big business will put the frighteners on people as they did in Scotland. Better wait until a Labour government is forced into giving a referendum or a genuine Eurosceptic becomes Tory leader. A lost referendum in 2017 would probably be a mortal blow for UKIP and any chance of the UK ever leaving the EU.
Possibly. Alternatively a mid term referendum with an unpopular Tory government. They say vote YES, protest votes vote NO.
@Richard Nabavi - agreed, thanks. Sorry I should have caveated my post with what happens if Labour are in government. That possibility must have slipped my mind.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The piece has somewhat been overtaken by events, with Miliband being briefed against quite a bit (although I'm uncertain whether or not Gareth remains loyal).
I can assure you, if Gareth has not received his free owl by May, he'll not be voting for Ed.
The SNP clearly can distinguish between things that affect Scotland and those that don't as they abstain from any English/Welsh votes
Will this meme never die?
The SNP voted on English tuition fees. They abstain on some votes, but they vote on other things when it suits their purpose
Barnett consequentials, remember.
That's a pretty spurious argument. Firstly it's very much a second-order effect, but more importantly, spending is set in the Budget and the Autumn Statement. Scottish MPs should vote on those, not on any bills implementing the detail of policy as it applies to England & Wales.
Point taken, from one viewpoint, but from another, it was a pretty massive financial change, and they wouldn't be changing the Budget unless the vote had happened.
Also - it may be that some of us are forgetting that the issue was not so much the fees for English students, but the pro rata cuts in university grant moneys which most certainly had an immediate effect. This is the statement at the time.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
On topic, nope, once he's PM he's PM. Apart from anything else the rules make him hard to shift, unlike the Tory ones which merely require the most unhinged 15% of the parliamentary party to clear their throats.
The time to knife him is if he doesn't get a majority, right before he becomes PM. That's exactly the move Labour insiders and the LibDems pulled on Gordon Brown, and all the same reasons would hold if they actually had the numbers.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The Tories resorting to ballot-rigging in 2017? That's certainly a novel one.
The time to knife him is if he doesn't get a majority, right before he becomes PM. That's exactly the move Labour insiders and the LibDems pulled on Gordon Brown, and all the same reasons would hold if they actually had the numbers.
Yes, that's an interesting point. The Steve Webb comments of yesterday make me wonder if it's a point being actively considered. It would be tricky to pull off without a lot of collateral damage, though.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The Tories resorting to ballot-rigging in 2017? That's certainly a novel one.
They'd have MI5 on their side like they did in the Indyref
Labour MPs voted on an English only matter for which they had no responsibility for with their own constituents. They could vote without any fear of reaction from their own constituents.
Except that, oddly, in the case of Gay Marriage, quite the opposite seems to be the case. Some of them voted against precisely because they were scared of the response of their more strident Catholic constituents.
It will be their constituents who will object to having second-class MPs in Westminster, barred from certain votes, and that's why Socrates is right to argue that English Votes for English Laws is uniquely dangerous for the future of the Union.
Why should people in Glasgow be interested in what happens in England? Why should they be upset that their MP did not vote on an issue which did not not affect them? ''barred from certain laws'? What on earth is that garbage comment about. Barred from voting on English only matters in the same way that English MPs are barred from voting on Scottish only matters. There is a reek of prejudice and bias all over your remarks. its hardly sur[prising the labour lead has slumped.
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
Ousted and replaced by Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham. Not by Nigel Farage.
Who said anything about Farage?
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
I see that the PB Tories are getting pretty twitchy and spiteful today. Can it be that in less than 48 hours, two important bi-elections start have anything to do with it?
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The Tories resorting to ballot-rigging in 2017? That's certainly a novel one.
They'd have MI5 on their side like they did in the Indyref
How crass of me to forget that. Jonathan may have a point after all.
Christopher Hope @christopherhope · 2 mins2 minutes ago Interesting. Labour could seize power in a hung Parliamemt by striking a deal with the SNP after #GE2015, Labour donor John Mills says
Yeah...because that won't increase the level of WLQ at all..
So? Tories and LDs imposing control over Scotland by striking a deal and seizing power? Goose and gander?
More importantly, I find Mr Hope's notion extraordinary, given SLAB's attitude to the SNP (remember the Bain Principle). That really would mean London Labour imposing a huge degree of control over SLAB, for whom that would seem the ultimate betrayal. I am almost inclined to think that SLAB - or a large chunk of it - would rather split off than come to Mr Miliband's heel. Which would defeat the aim.
I read about that via a piece from David Aaronovitch - I was WTF? It reminded me of the play a load of Sikhs objected to and they'd not seen it either.
AFAIC, if you don't want to see it, don't see it. The Banning Brigade has the bit between its teeth far too often for me.
All areas with a high Catholic vote. And areas that voted Yes in high numbers. All a coincidence.
If EVEL can free us from these medieval religious influences then we should all applaud.
139 Conservative MPs voted against
Not sure I'd use the word medieval. Around 15 years ago, a majority of public opinion would have been clearly against - not sure we were medieval in 1999?
Rightly or wrongly (and I'm not sure I'm too fussed either way) there are still a significant number of people who hold a traditional view of marriage: a legal sexual union of two opposing genders. I don't think they should be vilified for it, although I recognise that it's now outdated.
What gripes with me is how it's almost impossible for anyone to oppose same-sex marriage, today, without being called homophobic. You sometimes can't even defend those that do without being 'implicated' yourself.
I don't like that. Not at all. Bigotry seems to be wonderful when it's in the name of opposing alleged bigotry.
Completely agree. We have this juvenile streak in politics today which brands anything other than a 'liberal' view as being something to be ridiculed or to be angry about. Probably started by 'right-on' comedians but now entered mainstream . Lets kick it out and act grown up
Thanks. We need to be careful. Otherwise we'll end up with more things like that - for instance, that human 'real-life' slavery exhibition being intimidated into cancellation by protesters (who hadn't seen it) because they thought it was racist.
All those that said Dave would have to resign if Yes won are going to have to live with the flip side. A no victory is a great tribute for Dave.
No way. The No victory, such as it was, owed absolutely nothing to him. The only thing Dave contributed was a sense of panic.
If he was going to be responsible for defeat then you're going to have to say he was responsible for victory. Cameron henceforth is known as Malleus Salmondtorum
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
Why should they? They would be maintained in power precisely by UKIP squabbling with the Tories, defectors defecting, all the usual stuff. The last thing they'd want to do is interrupt the fight going on in the opposite corner of the room whilst they get on with enjoying power.
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The Tories resorting to ballot-rigging in 2017? That's certainly a novel one.
They'd have MI5 on their side like they did in the Indyref
How crass of me to forget that. Jonathan may have a point after all.
How else do you think us PB Tories managed to get our Indyref predictions so close to the actual result unlike the on ground Nats.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
There are three flaws in that argument. Firstly it's almost certainly the only chance of a referendum we'll get for a generation; secondly, and more importantly, a Stay In result is near-certain in all circumstances; and thirdly, the 'strategy' (if that's the right word) is based on a fantasy that somehow the lesson of the SDP doesn't need to be learnt, and that a divided Right can actually win an election. That's a poor basis to wreck the UK recovery on.
Correct. I for one an grateful that you are continually willing to make the points to a group of people who are deaf to reason.
Christopher Hope @christopherhope · 2 mins2 minutes ago Interesting. Labour could seize power in a hung Parliamemt by striking a deal with the SNP after #GE2015, Labour donor John Mills says
Yeah...because that won't increase the level of WLQ at all..
So? Tories and LDs imposing control over Scotland by striking a deal and seizing power? Goose and gander?
Except the areas the Tories and Lib Dems are imposing control over are non-devolved UK-wide issues. An SNP-Labour government would be imposing control over English-only issues despite having a minority in England.
You Scots don't get to have one-way control over England any more. You've wanted devolved status. Now you've got it, so you don't get to whinge when England demands the same.
All those that said Dave would have to resign if Yes won are going to have to live with the flip side. A no victory is a great tribute for Dave.
No way. The No victory, such as it was, owed absolutely nothing to him. The only thing Dave contributed was a sense of panic.
If he was going to be responsible for defeat then you're going to have to say he was responsible for victory.
Nope. Pure revisionism. Doubt Dave secured a single vote for the UK, but a great many against. If any Tory deserve credit, it is the hugely impressive Ruth Davidson.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
I'm sorry. Ed as PM is too higher a price to pay for that.
No shit Sherlock. But we face the very real and very horrifying prospect of a weak EICIPM administration taking the UK in all sorts of Hollandish directions. Buckle up! (Lord - can we really, really be heading for another Labour government? WTF is wrong with 1/3 of the country?).
How many times this year has Nigel Farage predicted the demise of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband? If only shadsy had run a book on this at the start of the year.
The time to knife him is if he doesn't get a majority, right before he becomes PM. That's exactly the move Labour insiders and the LibDems pulled on Gordon Brown, and all the same reasons would hold if they actually had the numbers.
Yes, that's an interesting point. The Steve Webb comments of yesterday make me wonder if it's a point being actively considered. It would be tricky to pull off without a lot of collateral damage, though.
No election for five years, they can do what they like.
They interesting thing about this possibility from the LibDem point of view is that they get to play Labour factions off against each other. If they back Ed Miliband he gets to be PM, if they work with rivals his career is over.
Labour MPs voted on an English only matter for which they had no responsibility for with their own constituents. They could vote without any fear of reaction from their own constituents.
Except that, oddly, in the case of Gay Marriage, quite the opposite seems to be the case. Some of them voted against precisely because they were scared of the response of their more strident Catholic constituents.
It will be their constituents who will object to having second-class MPs in Westminster, barred from certain votes, and that's why Socrates is right to argue that English Votes for English Laws is uniquely dangerous for the future of the Union.
Why should people in Glasgow be interested in what happens in England? Why should they be upset that their MP did not vote on an issue which did not not affect them? ''barred from certain laws'? What on earth is that garbage comment about. Barred from voting on English only matters in the same way that English MPs are barred from voting on Scottish only matters. There is a reek of prejudice and bias all over your remarks. its hardly sur[prising the labour lead has slumped.
Why else did Labour MPs representing Catholic areas vote against the law in England? It was because their constituents were interested.
I'm not saying that is democratically justified, I was just pointing out what I thought was an interesting contradiction in your post. Quite what it has to do with the Labour poll lead is baffling.
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
Why should they? They would be maintained in power precisely by UKIP squabbling with the Tories, defectors defecting, all the usual stuff. The last thing they'd want to do is interrupt the fight going on in the opposite corner of the room whilst they get on with enjoying power.
Sorry?
"Enjoying" power so much that they are getting rid of their own PM according to your theory..
The "defectors" are Tories, don't forget.. Tories who know the inner workings of the party better than you and I
So Cameron is mediocre. Yet the Scots voted to continue to have Dave as PM.
All those that said Dave would have to resign if Yes won are going to have to live with the flip side. A no victory is a great tribute for Dave.
I know you are just being contrary for the lolz but the third largest city in the country doesn't want to be part of the country. If you think that's an awesome epitaph for a Prime Minister of a country then you are easily pleased.
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
Ousted and replaced by Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham. Not by Nigel Farage.
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
Crazy thinking.
You're quite deluded if you think Labour would go for a referendum.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
There are three flaws in that argument. Firstly it's almost certainly the only chance of a referendum we'll get for a generation; secondly, and more importantly, a Stay In result is near-certain in all circumstances; and thirdly, the 'strategy' (if that's the right word) is based on a fantasy that somehow the lesson of the SDP doesn't need to be learnt, and that a divided Right can actually win an election. That's a poor basis to wreck the UK recovery on.
"Firstly it's almost certainly the only chance of a referendum we'll get for a generation"
Absolute nonsense
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
All three of his points are completely wrong. On one, if the Tories lose because of a big UKIP vote, they will almost certainly swing right on EU issues and give us a referendum in their next manifesto, and there's a fair chance Labour will too. On two, referendums in Denmark, France and Holland have shown eurosceptics can win debates despite the entire establishment being in favour - and we're starting from a stronger polling position. On three, if a Lib-Lab government brings in PR then it's quite possible a UKIP-Tory coalition could win an election. Even if they don't, an electoral non-compete alliance could also see the right win.
I don't think I have ever experienced anything - from the safety of Primrose Hill borders - as vicariously compelling yet unnerving as the whole ISIS phenomenon. The internet and social media means you can follow the war and the atrocities second by second, and see film as it is shot, there and then.
Very hard to look away. Yet very hard to watch.
Reminds me actions in the town of Suez towards the end of the Yom Kippor War.
Labour could, by such a hypothetical move, win power in 2015, but it might very well prove Pyrrhic (except, of course, that Pyrrhus was a competent general known for being personally loyal to his friends and family).
@skymarkwhite 2m2 minutes ago 4 men arrested by counter terror police in London, one was tasered during arrest. All 4 being questioned re Islamist related terrorism
ISIS in England.
You're surprised?
The flag was flying in Tower Hamlets two months ago
I see that the PB Tories are getting pretty twitchy and spiteful today. Can it be that in less than 48 hours, two important bi-elections start have anything to do with it?
Well there is a lot of concern that a large number of misguided people are going to give succour to a party that will help Red into No 10.
@skymarkwhite 2m2 minutes ago 4 men arrested by counter terror police in London, one was tasered during arrest. All 4 being questioned re Islamist related terrorism
ISIS in England.
Err, so the previous terrorists were ISIS too were they?
Best you stay barricaded in your Camden bedsit, lest they pick you off in Inverness Street or Parkway.
How many times this year has Nigel Farage predicted the demise of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband? If only shadsy had run a book on this at the start of the year.
Probably about 500 times less on each than smart arse PB commentators
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
Why should they? They would be maintained in power precisely by UKIP squabbling with the Tories, defectors defecting, all the usual stuff. The last thing they'd want to do is interrupt the fight going on in the opposite corner of the room whilst they get on with enjoying power.
Except a big part of the Labour vote are people that are only backing them as a protest to the Tories, and will become massively disillusioned with them in power. Once they lose faith in Labour, they're hardly going to go back to Coalition parties, but UKIP will be waiting in the wings to sweep them up. That movement will trigger panic in Labour. As much as they want to win by getting big majorities among students and ethnic minorities, they can't afford to lose the white working class.
@skymarkwhite 2m2 minutes ago 4 men arrested by counter terror police in London, one was tasered during arrest. All 4 being questioned re Islamist related terrorism
ISIS in England.
And now here on the BBC, we go for a quiet friendly chat with former bookshop owner Moazzam Begg....
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The Tories resorting to ballot-rigging in 2017? That's certainly a novel one.
They'd have MI5 on their side like they did in the Indyref
How crass of me to forget that. Jonathan may have a point after all.
How else do you think us PB Tories managed to get our Indyref predictions so close to the actual result unlike the on ground Nats.
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
I'm sorry. Ed as PM is too higher a price to pay for that.
No shit Sherlock. But we face the very real and very horrifying prospect of a weak EICIPM administration taking the UK in all sorts of Hollandish directions. Buckle up! (Lord - can we really, really be heading for another Labour government? WTF is wrong with 1/3 of the country?).
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
Ousted and replaced by Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham. Not by Nigel Farage.
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
Crazy thinking.
You're quite deluded if you think Labour would go for a referendum.
Sorry , I was actually thinking if they had a quick GE with a new leader because of a minority government.. if they just sack Ed three months into a Labour majority (prob about 10,000/1) then of course they wont offer one
So Cameron is mediocre. Yet the Scots voted to continue to have Dave as PM.
All those that said Dave would have to resign if Yes won are going to have to live with the flip side. A no victory is a great tribute for Dave.
I know you are just being contrary for the lolz but the third largest city in the country doesn't want to be part of the country. If you think that's an awesome epitaph for a Prime Minister of a country then you are easily pleased.
I'm pleased that by a majority 10% on an 80% plus turnout the Scots wanted to remain part of the UK.
I'm pleased that Edinburgh the heart of Scotland overwhelmingly voted No.
How many times this year has Nigel Farage predicted the demise of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband? If only shadsy had run a book on this at the start of the year.
Probably about 500 times less on each than smart arse PB commentators
I understand that Nigel Farage's touch cures scrofula as well.
All three of his points are completely wrong. On one, if the Tories lose because of a big UKIP vote, they will almost certainly swing right on EU issues and give us a referendum in their next manifesto, and there's a fair chance Labour will too. On two, referendums in Denmark, France and Holland have shown eurosceptics can win debates despite the entire establishment being in favour - and we're starting from a stronger polling position. On three, if a Lib-Lab government brings in PR then it's quite possible a UKIP-Tory coalition could win an election. Even if they don't, an electoral non-compete alliance could also see the right win.
Err, there will be a referendum commitment in the 2015 manifesto. Why on earth go through a whole series of increasingly fantastical hypothetical steps to get a referendum in the distant future which you can have one in 2017?
Do you want a referendum or not? If you're so sure it could be won, why in heaven's name vote anything other than Conservative? You might even get support for a No from people like myself, once renegotiation has been tried, provided a sane Out case (not based on fantasy à la Salmond) has been put together
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
I'm sorry. Ed as PM is too higher a price to pay for that.
No shit Sherlock. But we face the very real and very horrifying prospect of a weak EICIPM administration taking the UK in all sorts of Hollandish directions. Buckle up! (Lord - can we really, really be heading for another Labour government? WTF is wrong with 1/3 of the country?).
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
Ousted and replaced by Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham. Not by Nigel Farage.
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
Crazy thinking.
You're quite deluded if you think Labour would go for a referendum.
Jon Cruddas, who writes the policy, and Ed Balls are in favour of one.
@skymarkwhite 2m2 minutes ago 4 men arrested by counter terror police in London, one was tasered during arrest. All 4 being questioned re Islamist related terrorism
ISIS in England.
Suspected ISIS in England. Wait and see if it pans out, sometimes they just shoot a random Brazilian.
How many times this year has Nigel Farage predicted the demise of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband? If only shadsy had run a book on this at the start of the year.
Probably about 500 times less on each than smart arse PB commentators
I understand that Nigel Farage's touch cures scrofula as well.
How many times this year has Nigel Farage predicted the demise of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband? If only shadsy had run a book on this at the start of the year.
Probably about 500 times less on each than smart arse PB commentators
I understand that Nigel Farage's touch cures scrofula as well.
Oh fo sho!
(wtf?)
I tell you isam, who the gods want dead, they first make mad.
How many times this year has Nigel Farage predicted the demise of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband? If only shadsy had run a book on this at the start of the year.
Probably about 500 times less on each than smart arse PB commentators
I understand that Nigel Farage's touch cures scrofula as well.
Oh fo sho!
(wtf?)
You need to lighten up a little when anything that might be construed as criticism of Nigel Farage is made.
Anyway, are there any other sorts of commentators on PB other than smart arse ones?
It always amuses me to see the Kippers slide seamlessly from 'Cameron is a traitor because he won't give us a referendum!' to 'Cameron is a traitor because he is going to give us a referendum!'
And even more seeing them spluttering with laughable indignation when the self evident truth that they are willing collaborators in ushering in a Miliband government is gently pointed out to them.
Why would anyone look at the conduct in the AV referendum campaign which was by any standard a pretty nasty affair and trust them to deliver a fair vote?
The Tories resorting to ballot-rigging in 2017? That's certainly a novel one.
They'd have MI5 on their side like they did in the Indyref
How crass of me to forget that. Jonathan may have a point after all.
How else do you think us PB Tories managed to get our Indyref predictions so close to the actual result unlike the on ground Nats.
JackW was miles out wasnt he?
Have you solved the WLQ in the last 2 hrs?
Apparently its very difficult.
The simplest way to solve the WLQ and EV4EL is have a directly elected Dictator.
Comments
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/robertcolvile/100288771/does-david-cameron-realise-how-miserable-a-second-term-would-be/
Happens to the best of us.
As strategic blunders go, it's up there with the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbour to keep America out of the Second World War
"I can say what I like".
Not anymore.
Dave has not made a second term easy for himself
(a) raising expectations on tax cuts and ring-fenced budgets
(b) kicking cans down the road (on which he will now be expected to deliver) most of all the EU
(c) an increasingly itchy 2010 intake who see their careers not happening.
If the matter is one devolved to the Scotch parliament then Scotch MPs are excluded from the vote at Westminster.
Yes I see the comparison. Both ultimately vanquished by Cameron
Maybe Farage is a deeper thinker than you give credit for. A 2017 referendum will very likely result in a a No (ie stay in). Dave knows this. Hell, even the LibDems are saying a 2017 referendum need not be feared. It'd be Sindy on steroids.
So...Farage needs Dave to lose 2015 and Ed Is Crap Is PM to come to pass. The EU itself (or the Euro) will be 5 years closer to the undertakers anyway by then. And 5 years of lefty EU surrender from Ed - marvelous!
Strategically Nigel needs to eat into Dave as far as possible and ruin his election if we are ever to actually leave the EU.
Aa well as not fighting themselves, the Turks are preventing thousands of Kurds from crossing the border into Kobane to help the Kurdish fighters.
Even without the Turks, the Kurds could probably turn the town into a giant killing field for ISIS (and themselves).
Why oh why do i have to read such drivel
Plenty of people call Carswell and Reckless traitors though, despite being men who left cushy jobs after hearing first hand what Cameron plans to do regarding EU renegotiations
And it's NOT the one the SNP use in Westminster today.
Interesting. Labour could seize power in a hung Parliamemt by striking a deal with the SNP after #GE2015, Labour donor John Mills says
Yeah...because that won't increase the level of WLQ at all..
It will be their constituents who will object to having second-class MPs in Westminster, barred from certain votes, and that's why Socrates is right to argue that English Votes for English Laws is uniquely dangerous for the future of the Union.
All those that said Dave would have to resign if Yes won are going to have to live with the flip side. A no victory is a great tribute for Dave.
Absolute nonsense
You just wrote a thread, this thread, saying Ed may well be ousted after months as PM if he wins next year.. its incredible you are making this argument in light of that
The piece has somewhat been overtaken by events, with Miliband being briefed against quite a bit (although I'm uncertain whether or not Gareth remains loyal).
I'm not sure it'd happen. Labour failed to axe Brown, they're failing to axe Miliband now. They're just not very competent. Burnham's overrated, probably because everyone else seems even worse.
Imagine the kerfuffle here if a Tory backer had come up with that line.
Possibly.
Alternatively a mid term referendum with an unpopular Tory government. They say vote YES, protest votes vote NO.
Also - it may be that some of us are forgetting that the issue was not so much the fees for English students, but the pro rata cuts in university grant moneys which most certainly had an immediate effect. This is the statement at the time.
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2010/dec/snp-mps-vote-against-student-fee-hike
The time to knife him is if he doesn't get a majority, right before he becomes PM. That's exactly the move Labour insiders and the LibDems pulled on Gordon Brown, and all the same reasons would hold if they actually had the numbers.
'Precisely which bills are ‘English’?'
Foundation hospitals & increased tuition fees (England only) only voted through due to Scottish MP's.
Why should they be upset that their MP did not vote on an issue which did not not affect them?
''barred from certain laws'? What on earth is that garbage comment about. Barred from voting on English only matters in the same way that English MPs are barred from voting on Scottish only matters.
There is a reek of prejudice and bias all over your remarks. its hardly sur[prising the labour lead has slumped.
If you think a weak Labour government with a new leader and a strong UKIP taking votes from it has zero chance of offering an EU referendum for a generation, then we will have to agree to disagree
More importantly, I find Mr Hope's notion extraordinary, given SLAB's attitude to the SNP (remember the Bain Principle). That really would mean London Labour imposing a huge degree of control over SLAB, for whom that would seem the ultimate betrayal. I am almost inclined to think that SLAB - or a large chunk of it - would rather split off than come to Mr Miliband's heel. Which would defeat the aim.
AFAIC, if you don't want to see it, don't see it. The Banning Brigade has the bit between its teeth far too often for me.
You Scots don't get to have one-way control over England any more. You've wanted devolved status. Now you've got it, so you don't get to whinge when England demands the same.
They interesting thing about this possibility from the LibDem point of view is that they get to play Labour factions off against each other. If they back Ed Miliband he gets to be PM, if they work with rivals his career is over.
I'm not saying that is democratically justified, I was just pointing out what I thought was an interesting contradiction in your post. Quite what it has to do with the Labour poll lead is baffling.
"Enjoying" power so much that they are getting rid of their own PM according to your theory..
The "defectors" are Tories, don't forget.. Tories who know the inner workings of the party better than you and I
The turnout bet is now 8/11 btw, are you on?
You're quite deluded if you think Labour would go for a referendum.
Labour could, by such a hypothetical move, win power in 2015, but it might very well prove Pyrrhic (except, of course, that Pyrrhus was a competent general known for being personally loyal to his friends and family).
The flag was flying in Tower Hamlets two months ago
Best you stay barricaded in your Camden bedsit, lest they pick you off in Inverness Street or Parkway.
Have you solved the WLQ in the last 2 hrs?
Apparently its very difficult.
I'm pleased that Edinburgh the heart of Scotland overwhelmingly voted No.
Do you want a referendum or not? If you're so sure it could be won, why in heaven's name vote anything other than Conservative? You might even get support for a No from people like myself, once renegotiation has been tried, provided a sane Out case (not based on fantasy à la Salmond) has been put together
So is Len McCluskey
So, why deluded?
On a brighter note
The good news is Maccabi Petach Tikvaood have just taken the lead i am laying my bet now
(wtf?)
Anyway, are there any other sorts of commentators on PB other than smart arse ones?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/george-osborne-is-the-publics-favourite-politician--with-a-score-of-zero-9779764.html
This post was sponsored by NewsSense™
My solution has real élan.