politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clegg’s big day
I expect the issue that damaged the Lib Dems from the start, tuition fees will get an airing, as that probably helped defined the Lib Dems in government, but as he apologised in the past with no benefit, it might be a mistake.
It is interesting to compare how this year's conference season impacted upon the YouGov polls against last year's. YouGov polls since 01 September 2013...
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
I saw a tweet yesterday about Clegg having the biggest announcement of the conferences in his speech, but not very political. God knows what that means
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
Actually, as I have made clear on here I agree with him. It is completely unrealistic and in many ways immoral to argue, as Osborne does, that from here spending cuts have to take all of the strain of deficit reduction. The scale of the problem is too great.
I wonder if it is just possible that Nick might be willing to pick up this point today and tell the truth (or as near as a politician can get). Will he say that deficit reduction is key but that unlike the tories they value public spending and are willing to put up taxes to protect it. Unlike Labour they think the deficit is important and one or two gimmicks are simply not going to be enough to solve the problem let alone allow for further increases. Cable, Alexander and Clegg would then be singing off the same hymn sheet and putting a serious and credible case to the electorate.
Unluckily for the Liberal Democrats, the weekend newspapers are likely to be dominated by reaction to the Clacton by-election. In the two by-elections tomorrow the Lib Dems are likely to lose both of their deposits. The timing is not ideal.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
Actually, as I have made clear on here I agree with him. It is completely unrealistic and in many ways immoral to argue, as Osborne does, that from here spending cuts have to take all of the strain of deficit reduction. The scale of the problem is too great.
I wonder if it is just possible that Nick might be willing to pick up this point today and tell the truth (or as near as a politician can get). Will he say that deficit reduction is key but that unlike the tories they value public spending and are willing to put up taxes to protect it. Unlike Labour they think the deficit is important and one or two gimmicks are simply not going to be enough to solve the problem let alone allow for further increases. Cable, Alexander and Clegg would then be singing off the same hymn sheet and putting a serious and credible case to the electorate.
I think it is not helpful to "value public spending" as an entity when we see so much waste and inefficiency every day from the public sector. For example it has been acknowledged on PB that the NHS is overmanaged but may be short of finance for operations, special drugs and care. So if a case is made for specific public sector spending then it can be supported, but there is often too much of let's cut the services whilst protecting our salaries, benefits and pensions.
From the OP: I expect the issue that damaged the Lib Dems from the start, tuition fees will get an airing, as that probably helped defined the Lib Dems in government, but as he apologised in the past with no benefit, it might be a mistake to bring it up again as it might remind a certain segment of the electorate why they no longer vote Lib Dem.
Clegg's apology exacerbated the problem. Not only had the party abandoned not just a manifesto pledge but one it actively campaigned on, but Clegg went on to explain that because the LibDems could only ever be junior partners in future coalitions, no voter should ever believe a word they said.
Unluckily for the Liberal Democrats, the weekend newspapers are likely to be dominated by reaction to the Clacton by-election. In the two by-elections tomorrow the Lib Dems are likely to lose both of their deposits. The timing is not ideal.
I'm not sure they will. Ebola and ISIS are far more newsy than the Carswell win which has been factored in already by everyone. If Reckless wins that will be much more newsworthy. Sky News have already factored in the Carswell win: http://news.sky.com/story/1349109/ukip-on-course-to-bruise-labour-and-tories: "The fact the former Tory MP will be returned on a UKIP ticket has been priced in from the moment the first opinion pollsters did the rounds of Clacton, if not before"
By-elections are often trumpeted as seismic blah blah and never are. I can't think of a single by-election in my lifetime which has turned out to be the herald of anything. They are always full of protest: people using it as a cathartic exercise because it means little.
As suggested yesterday, the LibDems won't perform as badly as the current polls indicate. They never do. I'm expecting their poll rating to rise a little from here to the election. Clegg is a good speaker and should bring back some support. That will impact most on Labour.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
Actually, as I have made clear on here I agree with him. It is completely unrealistic and in many ways immoral to argue, as Osborne does, that from here spending cuts have to take all of the strain of deficit reduction. The scale of the problem is too great.
I wonder if it is just possible that Nick might be willing to pick up this point today and tell the truth (or as near as a politician can get). Will he say that deficit reduction is key but that unlike the tories they value public spending and are willing to put up taxes to protect it. Unlike Labour they think the deficit is important and one or two gimmicks are simply not going to be enough to solve the problem let alone allow for further increases. Cable, Alexander and Clegg would then be singing off the same hymn sheet and putting a serious and credible case to the electorate.
I think it is not helpful to "value public spending" as an entity when we see so much waste and inefficiency every day from the public sector. For example it has been acknowledged on PB that the NHS is overmanaged but may be short of finance for operations, special drugs and care. So if a case is made for specific public sector spending then it can be supported, but there is often too much of let's cut the services whilst protecting our salaries, benefits and pensions.
I completely agree that wasteful public spending is a disgrace and the fact that the current government's cuts have so far been largely funded from efficiency savings is an indictment of the previous government. To be able to reduce the public sector headcount by about 1m with only a marginal reduction in service provision is shocking.
But this having been done the scale of cuts in the next Parliament is going to impact much more directly on government services and the money of the needy. I agree with the Lib Dems that if a rebalancing of £25bn (actually probably a bit more) is required and health is to be protected the consequences of having that scale of cuts elsewhere are unacceptable and tax increases should be a part of the mix.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
In this conference season this is the third day in succession that LAB 2010 retention has stayed at 77% - their lowest 2014 score. However their losses to UKIP remain at ~7% which is about the same as their current loss to the Cons.
The Cons are down a bit on retention with a few more bits going to LD and Green but still under attack to UKIP at 16%.
The LDs 2010 VI show a loss to UKIP of 18% (normal is about 11-12), which seems to have come from last weeks larger loss to the Cons.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
the strain of deficit reduction. The scale of the problem is too great.
I wonder if it is just possible that Nick might be willing to pick up this point today and tell the truth (or as near as a politician can get). Will he say that deficit reduction is key but that unlike the tories they value public spending and are willing to put up taxes to protect it. Unlike Labour they think the deficit is important and one or two gimmicks are simply not going to be enough to solve the problem let alone allow for further increases. Cable, Alexander and Clegg would then be singing off the same hymn sheet and putting a serious and credible case to the electorate.
I think it is not helpful to "value public spending" as an entity when we see so much waste and inefficiency every day from the public sector. For example it has been acknowledged on PB that the NHS is overmanaged but may be short of finance for operations, special drugs and care. So if a case is made for specific public sector spending then it can be supported, but there is often too much of let's cut the services whilst protecting our salaries, benefits and pensions.
It's an interesting manoeuvre, from "waste" to "salaries, benefits and pensions".
Last week I underwent an outpatient procedure, and was in the (London teaching) hospital for two hours, of which perhaps fifteen minutes was "clinical" time and much of the rest devoted to paperwork. I guess if you don't want to know whether or not hospitals practice racial discrimination and so on, you could cut it down a fair bit. But it's not so much the NHS staff who create the paperwork as the politicians.
Clegg's speech will be fairly polished and use one of those new contraptions, an auto-cue. Likely to attack both other parties. He has to say what the Liberals are for these days and not just being some kind of sheet anchor on the other two in coalitions.
Hodges had some nonsense yesterday about Clegg going in June 2015 and that's why he looks so relaxed. Not convinced myself. On current polling he could still be deputy PM for a couple more years and then off to EU Commission.
Clegg's speech will be fairly polished and use one of those new contraptions, an auto-cue. Likely to attack both other parties. He has to say what the Liberals are for these days and not just being some kind of sheet anchor on the other two in coalitions.
Hodges had some nonsense yesterday about Clegg going in June 2015 and that's why he looks so relaxed. Not convinced myself. On current polling he could still be deputy PM for a couple more years and then off to EU Commission.
Good to see LibDems big announcement will be on NHS and mental health services. This is Norman Lamb at work behind the scenes I suspect. As someone who undertakes voluntary work with the "Time to Change" campaign this is brilliant news, especially if it becomes a red line in any coalition agreement.
He'll have to say where the money is coming from though.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
Tory-bashing galore. The little montage of Lib Dems casting moral aspersions on the people they've been working with for years won't help them. Rightwing voters will see them as hypocrites, leftwingers will prefer the 'safe' (in terms of not joining a coalition) party of Labour.
Clegg's speech will be fairly polished and use one of those new contraptions, an auto-cue. Likely to attack both other parties. He has to say what the Liberals are for these days and not just being some kind of sheet anchor on the other two in coalitions.
Hodges had some nonsense yesterday about Clegg going in June 2015 and that's why he looks so relaxed. Not convinced myself. On current polling he could still be deputy PM for a couple more years and then off to EU Commission.
I hear that Cameron is chairing yet another COBRA meeting today.
Has he ever held one about Rotherham ?
Now six weeks after the Rotherham report and these questions remain unanswered:
1) When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take action against the South Yorkshire Police over the widespread reports of its collaboration with child rapists.
2) What is Policing Minister Mike Penning doing to ensure that the police's much hyped 'day of reckoning' with its 'wave after wave of arrests' actually takes place.
3) When is Children's Minister Edward Timpson going to place Rotherham Children's Services into special measures.
4) How much did the locally well connected former Communities Minister Sayeeda Warsi know about what was happening and what did she chose to do about it.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
On the contrary, David, it's a bet you can't lose. Think on, as they say up North...
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
On the contrary, David, it's a bet you can't lose. Think on, as they say up North...
I take your point but it would be like betting against the England cricket team. It may be the smart move but ...
We are not too far away in agreement, but around here there has been very few/no cuts in the public sector staffing, but there has been a rush to close schools, libraries, leisure centres, country buses, reduce road repairs, recycling centres etc.
In general, the UK has avoided the complete root and branch cuts that Ireland did (probably the Coalition would not wear it), but at the same time have avoided looking at ways that things could be done differently, better and at a lower cost.
For example is parts of Europe, parents have to buy their child's text books each year, there are no bin collections but waste/recycling silos every 100 metres street-side that are changed daily and children start school at 8.30 and finish at 4.30.
In other European countries there is no working tax credit and no child benefit after the first year - how much money would that save? Unemployment benefits end after 18months. Also OAP benefits are taxable if your income is too high.
Our problem is that GB etc have given away too many sweeties and there will be shrieks if they are taken away
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
You're far more astute and much better informed than I am, so I decline your challenge.
I think it is not helpful to "value public spending" as an entity when we see so much waste and inefficiency every day from the public sector. For example it has been acknowledged on PB that the NHS is overmanaged but may be short of finance for operations, special drugs and care. So if a case is made for specific public sector spending then it can be supported, but there is often too much of let's cut the services whilst protecting our salaries, benefits and pensions.
It's an interesting manoeuvre, from "waste" to "salaries, benefits and pensions".
Last week I underwent an outpatient procedure, and was in the (London teaching) hospital for two hours, of which perhaps fifteen minutes was "clinical" time and much of the rest devoted to paperwork. I guess if you don't want to know whether or not hospitals practice racial discrimination and so on, you could cut it down a fair bit. But it's not so much the NHS staff who create the paperwork as the politicians.
Indeed. If we want an internal market in the NHS, then there must be accountants and clerks to run it. If we want local commissioning groups, we must also have managers and lawyers to negotiate and draw up contracts. If we want a new NHS records system (and I see from today's papers that we do) there will be new computers and their operators and managers and training courses and so on.
I hear that Cameron is chairing yet another COBRA meeting today.
Has he ever held one about Rotherham ?
Now six weeks after the Rotherham report and these questions remain unanswered:
1) When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take action against the South Yorkshire Police over the widespread reports of its collaboration with child rapists.
2) What is Policing Minister Mike Penning doing to ensure that the police's much hyped 'day of reckoning' with its 'wave after wave of arrests' actually takes place.
3) When is Children's Minister Edward Timpson going to place Rotherham Children's Services into special measures.
4) How much did the locally well connected former Communities Minister Sayeeda Warsi know about what was happening and what did she chose to do about it.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
You're far more astute and much better informed than I am, so I decline your challenge.
It strikes me as a difficult task to put out three threads a day and effectively run the site for Mike while he's away particularly when you have another job......
So my question is this; do you find comments like the one above from Patrick offensive or is it just water off a ducks back?
It strikes me as a difficult task to put out three threads a day and effectively run the site for Mike while he's away particularly when you have another job......
So my question is this; do you find comments like the one above from Patrick offensive or is it just water off a ducks back?
Water off a duck's back.
When Mike first asked me to guest edit PB a few years ago, he gave me a few tips, one of which was "You're going to get attacked no matter what you write, look on it with amusement"
My favourite time was when I was accused of being anti Labour. About two hours later Labourlist ran a piece looking and agreeing with what I had said.
A superb article, and I agree with all of it. Especially: From globalisation to an ageing population and from climate change to the financial crash, the challenges of the 21st century have produced small and defensive politicians whose obsession with deficit reduction has bled into a reductionism of the spirit, of endeavour, of patriotism, pride and citizenship.
I no longer think that Parliamentary democracy can deliver the answers to these questions (and others: ISIIS, Ebola) that we need to survive. I don't particularly want to live in a Putin-esque shamocracy, but that seems to be where we're going.
But for now, the bridge table beckons. Enjoy yourselves...
It is interesting to compare how this year's conference season impacted upon the YouGov polls against last year's. YouGov polls since 01 September 2013...
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
Clegg's speech will be fairly polished and use one of those new contraptions, an auto-cue. Likely to attack both other parties. He has to say what the Liberals are for these days and not just being some kind of sheet anchor on the other two in coalitions.
Hodges had some nonsense yesterday about Clegg going in June 2015 and that's why he looks so relaxed. Not convinced myself. On current polling he could still be deputy PM for a couple more years and then off to EU Commission.
Clegg's speech will be fairly polished and use one of those new contraptions, an auto-cue. Likely to attack both other parties. He has to say what the Liberals are for these days and not just being some kind of sheet anchor on the other two in coalitions.
Hodges had some nonsense yesterday about Clegg going in June 2015 and that's why he looks so relaxed. Not convinced myself. On current polling he could still be deputy PM for a couple more years and then off to EU Commission.
Is there any difference between Dan at his best and Dan at his worst ? His opinions are worthless.
Haha!! I must say that it would be newsworthy if Dan Hodges gets something right. Hitherto he is the Denis Healey of journalism: what he says you can be sure the opposite is the truth. (Perhaps that's a little harsh on Dan.)
I don't think the LibDems will be wiped out. They're a tenacious bunch, with good local support where it is needed. A key question for me is whether they will beat UKIP on national vote share. They will certainly beat them for MP's.
Re. Mary Riddell: don't think so. Throughout my lifetime the death of left or right has been perennially foretold and it has never come true. I think there will always be a rump, a core, of Labour and Conservative voters at around 25% each.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
Moniker £100 at even money says Labour will get more than 25%.
I think maybe Clegg was on Today programme - trailing that there will be a waiting time target for people with mental health difficulties. Might be like McBride's tactic of safely leaking the whole budget to the Itv morning programme on the basis that nobody watches it!!!
On tuition fees. My recently graduated grandchildren don’t seem to be worried about paying back the loans. They seem to regard it as part of taxation and get on with it. Admittedly neither has yet tried to get a mortgage. However, it seems possible that one of them will try to set up a home with a partner before too long so that might change things.
Tory-bashing galore. The little montage of Lib Dems casting moral aspersions on the people they've been working with for years won't help them. Rightwing voters will see them as hypocrites, leftwingers will prefer the 'safe' (in terms of not joining a coalition) party of Labour.
Morris - agree. The Liberals pointing out the Tories' deficit amnesia day after day this week has been very helpful to Labour.
Personally I think Nick has done a decent job in government and doesn't get the credit he should. The increases in the 0% tax band are a fantastic policy, he should commit to making NI allowances match, also something new encouraging Small Business would help him. Pinch a few of Osborne's ideas he can't get through fully in the Big Business run Conservative Party.
He may have broken his word on tuition fees but the end result is a lot better and fairer than it was.
I hope Nick continues to be in government after the election, we need him to curb the extreme sides of either party.
If things go badly wrong and he loses his seat, or leadership of his party I won't feel too sorry for him, not with a wife like his.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
Moniker £100 at even money says Labour will get more than 25%.
Put up or shut up.
You're sounding like Tim, actually worse, and it's not very pleasant.
Moniker is entitled to suggest something about Labour's vote share without that sort of boorish behaviour.
Tory-bashing galore. The little montage of Lib Dems casting moral aspersions on the people they've been working with for years won't help them. Rightwing voters will see them as hypocrites, leftwingers will prefer the 'safe' (in terms of not joining a coalition) party of Labour.
Morning all and the talk on Twitter is Clegg to announce he is standing down as LibDem leader but will remain Deputy PM. Now that would be fun. Farron would be the new David Miliband.
I wonder if Clegg will be dim enough to say we are "paying down the debt" a la Dave.
I very much doubt it.
Labour should have that clip on loop and play it back to Cam in a PPB, pointing out that the Tories added more debt in five years than Labour in 13.
Utter stupidity from Cameron.
Paying down the debt would require seriously reducing Government outgoings. Which would have meant losing the disaster that is working tax credits and a lot of housing benefits.
One of those is holding the economy together the other is keeping house prices (and the banks) from collapsing.
The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?
The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?
TSE does a fabulous job. Stop stirring.
We had a thread on that yesterday reflecting the YOUGOV poll......
Was speaking to an old friend last night who is very senior among Scottish LibDems. Beyond Alistair Carmichael and Charles Kennedy, he has no idea which seats they might hold next May. They are starting to wobble in Inverness too he said. So 11 reduced to 2 or 3 is privately being conceded as quite possible by at least some who have been in the party since they were Liberals.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
You're far more astute and much better informed than I am, so I decline your challenge.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
Moniker £100 at even money says Labour will get more than 25%.
Put up or shut up.
You're sounding like Tim, actually worse, and it's not very pleasant.
Moniker is entitled to suggest something about Labour's vote share without that sort of boorish behaviour.
Moniker is a fake , a total turnip.
It is like a puppet show on here nowadays , all these virtual alter ego's pontificating and spouting mince.
Morning all and the talk on Twitter is Clegg to announce he is standing down as LibDem leader but will remain Deputy PM. Now that would be fun. Farron would be the new David Miliband.
That would make sense - giving the LibDems greater licence to attack the Tories in the run up to the GE. I think Hodges has a point, there is an unnatural calm to the Lib Dem conference.....
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
You're far more astute and much better informed than I am, so I decline your challenge.
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
You're far more astute and much better informed than I am, so I decline your challenge.
Ha Ha Ha , loser.
So says a 45er......
You still making things up
If you had posted that to Financier he would be litigating by now.
I wonder if Clegg will be dim enough to say we are "paying down the debt" a la Dave.
I very much doubt it.
Labour should have that clip on loop and play it back to Cam in a PPB, pointing out that the Tories added more debt in five years than Labour in 13.
Utter stupidity from Cameron.
Paying down the debt would require seriously reducing Government outgoings. Which would have meant losing the disaster that is working tax credits and a lot of housing benefits.
One of those is holding the economy together the other is keeping house prices (and the banks) from collapsing.
So why lie to the electorate? A bare faced lie and it's not the first time he has done it...
Clegg is excellent and I'm sure he will perform well today. I predict that in the GE the LibDem's will do far better than currently forecast and Labour will experience a catastrophe with around 25 % of the vote.
I agree that the Lib Dems have important and useful things to say. I don't agree that anyone is listening. They are going to lose a lot of seats. My guess at the moment would be close to half, more in Scotland.
You underestimate the tenacity of the LibDems, they'll lose very few if any seats.
You fancy a bet on that? I think they will lose 20+ seats. Are you willing to bet £50 that it is less? (I am happy to accept the net position so they get the credit of any gains.)
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
You're far more astute and much better informed than I am, so I decline your challenge.
Ha Ha Ha , loser.
So says a 45er......
You still making things up
If you had posted that to Financier he would be litigating by now.
So you're not one of the 37% who voted "Yes" (I was being charitable using the term they have given themselves...)?
"Morning all and the talk on Twitter is Clegg to announce he is standing down as LibDem leader but will remain Deputy PM. Now that would be fun. Farron would be the new David Miliband."
It would be very bad news for Labour. Ed foolishly hasn't given anyone a clue what Labour stands for so the stage is empty for Farron to enter stage left. All the new leadership has to do is rid the place of Clegg Alexander and laws and he might even get my vote.
I'd like to see Clegg "out" Cameron on the leaders' TV debates.Cameron is using the same delaying tactics to try to avoid them and he needs flushing out. It's the one big chance,the electorate has to see the leaders face to face,relatively unfiltered from the Dacre/Murdoch lie machine.That's why Cameron is so frightened of holding them,not forgetting the claims of a puffed-up Farage and the Greens too. When will Cameron pull his finger out on the TV debates?
That 1/16 on Cleggover still being in post presumably reflects the fact that anyone who replaced him now would be in good time to take all the blame for May 2015 but out of time to do anything to avert it.
A general question to our resident GE result forecasters. In prior GEs the date has not been known. So if you asked people in 2004 what their voting intentions were, you were asking them about an event possibly two years away. In 2009 it was clear the election was a year away.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
So what does account for his envy, spite and malice?
Actually, as I have made clear on here I agree with him. It is completely unrealistic and in many ways immoral to argue, as Osborne does, that from here spending cuts have to take all of the strain of deficit reduction. The scale of the problem is too great.
I wonder if it is just possible that Nick might be willing to pick up this point today and tell the truth (or as near as a politician can get). Will he say that deficit reduction is key but that unlike the tories they value public spending and are willing to put up taxes to protect it. Unlike Labour they think the deficit is important and one or two gimmicks are simply not going to be enough to solve the problem let alone allow for further increases. Cable, Alexander and Clegg would then be singing off the same hymn sheet and putting a serious and credible case to the electorate.
Why does "public sector spending" have a value?
Surely you should decide what needs to be done by government and then look at how best to fund it. There is no intrinstic value in public spending vs private spending vs third sector.
'Towards a Federal UK' - Interesting; will the LDs be proposing an English parliament? #cynic
Wow! That would be big. And popular. And Dave should make broadly supportive noises. Ed would be screwed and might lose proud English lefty votes back to the Yellows - so would be quite smart too.
[There is no intrinstic value in public spending vs private spending vs third sector.]
Private spending pays for the public spending so I think your quasi formula is a little simplistic. I admit that I'm very poor at third sector analysis.
"The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?"
If I had taken the trouble to get up at 6 o' clock on a rain sodden Yorkshire morning to pose a question for the delectation of PB readers I'd be slightly disappointed not to arouse a more interested response than "Who Cares?"
It's an interesting manoeuvre, from "waste" to "salaries, benefits and pensions".
Last week I underwent an outpatient procedure, and was in the (London teaching) hospital for two hours, of which perhaps fifteen minutes was "clinical" time and much of the rest devoted to paperwork. I guess if you don't want to know whether or not hospitals practice racial discrimination and so on, you could cut it down a fair bit. But it's not so much the NHS staff who create the paperwork as the politicians.
That's absolutely true: the majority of clinicians and other medical practioneers I know went into medicine to heal (I had dinner earlier this week with a vet who gave up private practice 30 years ago and he still misses surgery for that very reason).
Of course there is a degree of administation which is necssary, but the NHS has far too much paperwork - often unnecessary and poorly implemented
I've just found out that the former sex worker Charlotte Rose is standing as a candidate in the Clacton by-election, and Shadsy is offering 25/1 on her beating the Lib Dems.
I'd like to see Clegg "out" Cameron on the leaders' TV debates.Cameron is using the same delaying tactics to try to avoid them and he needs flushing out. It's the one big chance,the electorate has to see the leaders face to face,relatively unfiltered from the Dacre/Murdoch lie machine.That's why Cameron is so frightened of holding them,not forgetting the claims of a puffed-up Farage and the Greens too. When will Cameron pull his finger out on the TV debates?
The only leader who benefited last time round was the unknown Clegg.
Who is the unknown this time?
I suspect that a lot of people have learned their lesson, and that next year's debates will attract lower viewing figures and change very few minds on anything.
"The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?"
If I had taken the trouble to get up at 6 o' clock on a rain sodden Yorkshire morning to pose a question for the delectation of PB readers I'd be slightly disappointed not to arouse a more interested response than "Who Cares?"
I've just found out that the former sex worker Charlotte Rose is standing as a candidate in the Clacton by-election, and Shadsy is offering 25/1 on her beating the Lib Dems.
Local paper in Exeter reported recently - around the time of Rupert Everett's documentary she was in - that she had moved to London because her profession was not respected in Exeter, so I don't think she's a former sex worker.
I've just found out that the former sex worker Charlotte Rose is standing as a candidate in the Clacton by-election, and Shadsy is offering 25/1 on her beating the Lib Dems.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
So what does account for his envy, spite and malice?
Bullied at school, was always Tom Wolfe's theory as to why journalists are such spiteful lefties.
FPT in relation to Damian McBride's comment about every leader needing fat men about him at some point:
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat; Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights: Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Vince Cable never had an inner socialist. Back in the 1970s, not only were we in the same Party: I was his Branch Secretary. Trust me. I know whereof I speak.
So what does account for his envy, spite and malice?
Bullied at school, was always Tom Wolfe's theory as to why journalists are such spiteful lefties.
I don’t think there’s ever been any secret that Vince was in the Labour Party at one time, and IIRC was a Labour councillor for a while.
I've just found out that the former sex worker Charlotte Rose is standing as a candidate in the Clacton by-election, and Shadsy is offering 25/1 on her beating the Lib Dems.
"The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?"
If I had taken the trouble to get up at 6 o' clock on a rain sodden Yorkshire morning to pose a question for the delectation of PB readers I'd be slightly disappointed not to arouse a more interested response than "Who Cares?"
Patrick/Roger - Don't worry about it.
FYI - Mike takes over early hours of Friday.
I do worry a bit though. I was having a go at the LibDems not you and Roger is shit-stirring deliberately. Anyway - let us leave it there. You are the somewhat unsung hero of PB!
Comments
http://www.mediafire.com/view/ucts0e9657e1421/YouGov sine 01092013.jpg#
I was nearly right:
"Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights:
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous."
Ed does indeed have a problem with his lack of natural supporters in the party and his failure to build a team. One or two dodgy opinion polls and half the shadow cabinet seem to be on manoeuvres.
Nick, on the other hand, seems to have done well in keeping a team together under the most incredible pressure. The sangfroid of the Lib Dems under fire in this government has been remarkable. Every now and then Vince has to let out his inner socialist but other than that they have been incredibly disciplined. Not sure if it has done them any good but it is still impressive.
Actually, as I have made clear on here I agree with him. It is completely unrealistic and in many ways immoral to argue, as Osborne does, that from here spending cuts have to take all of the strain of deficit reduction. The scale of the problem is too great.
I wonder if it is just possible that Nick might be willing to pick up this point today and tell the truth (or as near as a politician can get). Will he say that deficit reduction is key but that unlike the tories they value public spending and are willing to put up taxes to protect it. Unlike Labour they think the deficit is important and one or two gimmicks are simply not going to be enough to solve the problem let alone allow for further increases. Cable, Alexander and Clegg would then be singing off the same hymn sheet and putting a serious and credible case to the electorate.
Clegg's apology exacerbated the problem. Not only had the party abandoned not just a manifesto pledge but one it actively campaigned on, but Clegg went on to explain that because the LibDems could only ever be junior partners in future coalitions, no voter should ever believe a word they said.
"The fact the former Tory MP will be returned on a UKIP ticket has been priced in from the moment the first opinion pollsters did the rounds of Clacton, if not before"
By-elections are often trumpeted as seismic blah blah and never are. I can't think of a single by-election in my lifetime which has turned out to be the herald of anything. They are always full of protest: people using it as a cathartic exercise because it means little.
As suggested yesterday, the LibDems won't perform as badly as the current polls indicate. They never do. I'm expecting their poll rating to rise a little from here to the election. Clegg is a good speaker and should bring back some support. That will impact most on Labour.
But this having been done the scale of cuts in the next Parliament is going to impact much more directly on government services and the money of the needy. I agree with the Lib Dems that if a rebalancing of £25bn (actually probably a bit more) is required and health is to be protected the consequences of having that scale of cuts elsewhere are unacceptable and tax increases should be a part of the mix.
In this conference season this is the third day in succession that LAB 2010 retention has stayed at 77% - their lowest 2014 score. However their losses to UKIP remain at ~7% which is about the same as their current loss to the Cons.
The Cons are down a bit on retention with a few more bits going to LD and Green but still under attack to UKIP at 16%.
The LDs 2010 VI show a loss to UKIP of 18% (normal is about 11-12), which seems to have come from last weeks larger loss to the Cons.
Last week I underwent an outpatient procedure, and was in the (London teaching) hospital for two hours, of which perhaps fifteen minutes was "clinical" time and much of the rest devoted to paperwork. I guess if you don't want to know whether or not hospitals practice racial discrimination and so on, you could cut it down a fair bit. But it's not so much the NHS staff who create the paperwork as the politicians.
Clegg's speech will be fairly polished and use one of those new contraptions, an auto-cue. Likely to attack both other parties. He has to say what the Liberals are for these days and not just being some kind of sheet anchor on the other two in coalitions.
Hodges had some nonsense yesterday about Clegg going in June 2015 and that's why he looks so relaxed. Not convinced myself. On current polling he could still be deputy PM for a couple more years and then off to EU Commission.
Blog by @DPJHodges on Nick Clegg well worth reading. Dan at his best http://fw.to/UwT1hXB
He'll have to say where the money is coming from though.
It is a bit of an odd one because it is a bet I would quite like to lose!
Tory-bashing galore. The little montage of Lib Dems casting moral aspersions on the people they've been working with for years won't help them. Rightwing voters will see them as hypocrites, leftwingers will prefer the 'safe' (in terms of not joining a coalition) party of Labour.
Has he ever held one about Rotherham ?
Now six weeks after the Rotherham report and these questions remain unanswered:
1) When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take action against the South Yorkshire Police over the widespread reports of its collaboration with child rapists.
2) What is Policing Minister Mike Penning doing to ensure that the police's much hyped 'day of reckoning' with its 'wave after wave of arrests' actually takes place.
3) When is Children's Minister Edward Timpson going to place Rotherham Children's Services into special measures.
4) How much did the locally well connected former Communities Minister Sayeeda Warsi know about what was happening and what did she chose to do about it.
I am maybe not into this betting thing enough.
@DavidL
We are not too far away in agreement, but around here there has been very few/no cuts in the public sector staffing, but there has been a rush to close schools, libraries, leisure centres, country buses, reduce road repairs, recycling centres etc.
In general, the UK has avoided the complete root and branch cuts that Ireland did (probably the Coalition would not wear it), but at the same time have avoided looking at ways that things could be done differently, better and at a lower cost.
For example is parts of Europe, parents have to buy their child's text books each year, there are no bin collections but waste/recycling silos every 100 metres street-side that are changed daily and children start school at 8.30 and finish at 4.30.
In other European countries there is no working tax credit and no child benefit after the first year - how much money would that save? Unemployment benefits end after 18months. Also OAP benefits are taxable if your income is too high.
Our problem is that GB etc have given away too many sweeties and there will be shrieks if they are taken away
When is the PCC by-election? Can’t remember!
"Liberal England died a strange death in the last century. Once again the grave-diggers are standing by."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11146579/The-death-of-the-Left-in-British-politics-cannot-be-ruled-out.html
" Patrick said:
Who cares?
It strikes me as a difficult task to put out three threads a day and effectively run the site for Mike while he's away particularly when you have another job......
So my question is this; do you find comments like the one above from Patrick offensive or is it just water off a ducks back?
The CIegg Speech:
The EagIe represents any one of six different things. The Tories. The EIectorate. The Iib Dem members. The PeopIe's Party. You name it.
PersonaIIy I think the CoaIition deserve around 7 or 8 out of 10 for what have achieved, ignoring the poIitics.
The greatest irony is that the Tuition Fees promise was wished on CIegg by his Iefty wing, who now bIame him for the consequences of their action.
Brent Crude dips below $91.
When Mike first asked me to guest edit PB a few years ago, he gave me a few tips, one of which was "You're going to get attacked no matter what you write, look on it with amusement"
My favourite time was when I was accused of being anti Labour. About two hours later Labourlist ran a piece looking and agreeing with what I had said.
I no longer think that Parliamentary democracy can deliver the answers to these questions (and others: ISIIS, Ebola) that we need to survive. I don't particularly want to live in a Putin-esque shamocracy, but that seems to be where we're going.
But for now, the bridge table beckons. Enjoy yourselves...
I very much doubt it.
Labour should have that clip on loop and play it back to Cam in a PPB, pointing out that the Tories added more debt in five years than Labour in 13.
Utter stupidity from Cameron.
I don't think the LibDems will be wiped out. They're a tenacious bunch, with good local support where it is needed. A key question for me is whether they will beat UKIP on national vote share. They will certainly beat them for MP's.
Re. Mary Riddell: don't think so. Throughout my lifetime the death of left or right has been perennially foretold and it has never come true. I think there will always be a rump, a core, of Labour and Conservative voters at around 25% each.
Put up or shut up.
My recently graduated grandchildren don’t seem to be worried about paying back the loans. They seem to regard it as part of taxation and get on with it.
Admittedly neither has yet tried to get a mortgage. However, it seems possible that one of them will try to set up a home with a partner before too long so that might change things.
Pinch a few of Osborne's ideas he can't get through fully in the Big Business run Conservative Party.
He may have broken his word on tuition fees but the end result is a lot better and fairer than it was.
I hope Nick continues to be in government after the election, we need him to curb the extreme sides of either party.
If things go badly wrong and he loses his seat, or leadership of his party I won't feel too sorry for him, not with a wife like his.
Moniker is entitled to suggest something about Labour's vote share without that sort of boorish behaviour.
Moniker has never knowingly accepted a bet against his off expressed forecasts.
When asked to back his trolling with hard cash he invariably does a runner.
One of those is holding the economy together the other is keeping house prices (and the banks) from collapsing.
Sticks to what he believes in: +10 (+5)
Strong: +13 (+4)
Good in a crisis: +14 (+2)
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/x58kyjlf36/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-071014.pdf
The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?
TSE does a fabulous job. Stop stirring.
It is like a puppet show on here nowadays , all these virtual alter ego's pontificating and spouting mince.
It's worthy of a caption competition, "This is how I managed to pull 30 women"
If you had posted that to Financier he would be litigating by now.
Good morning conference! Sadly it is our last day, but join us for 'Towards a Federal UK', the Environment Q&A and more.. #ldconf
'Towards a Federal UK' - Interesting; will the LDs be proposing an English parliament? #cynic
"Morning all and the talk on Twitter is Clegg to announce he is standing down as LibDem leader but will remain Deputy PM. Now that would be fun. Farron would be the new David Miliband."
It would be very bad news for Labour. Ed foolishly hasn't given anyone a clue what Labour stands for so the stage is empty for Farron to enter stage left. All the new leadership has to do is rid the place of Clegg Alexander and laws and he might even get my vote.
Noticed that BBC seem to have fixed that little reoccuring problem on most read articles.
It's the one big chance,the electorate has to see the leaders face to face,relatively unfiltered from the Dacre/Murdoch lie machine.That's why Cameron is so frightened of holding them,not forgetting the claims of a puffed-up Farage and the Greens too.
When will Cameron pull his finger out on the TV debates?
A general question to our resident GE result forecasters. In prior GEs the date has not been known. So if you asked people in 2004 what their voting intentions were, you were asking them about an event possibly two years away. In 2009 it was clear the election was a year away.
What effect might this have on opinion polls?
Surely you should decide what needs to be done by government and then look at how best to fund it. There is no intrinstic value in public spending vs private spending vs third sector.
Private spending pays for the public spending so I think your quasi formula is a little simplistic. I admit that I'm very poor at third sector analysis.
"The Who Cares? question was about the LibDems and their relevance! It was not a dig at TSE and the interest of the thread. It is a key question - are the LibDems still relevant in British politics or are they on the way out?"
If I had taken the trouble to get up at 6 o' clock on a rain sodden Yorkshire morning to pose a question for the delectation of PB readers I'd be slightly disappointed not to arouse a more interested response than "Who Cares?"
Of course there is a degree of administation which is necssary, but the NHS has far too much paperwork - often unnecessary and poorly implemented
You and others should also take the 1/3 on Hallam being a Lib Dem hold.
I've just found out that the former sex worker Charlotte Rose is standing as a candidate in the Clacton by-election, and Shadsy is offering 25/1 on her beating the Lib Dems.
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/British/Clacton-By-election/Politics-N-1z141maZ1z13ybcZ1z141ng/
Who is the unknown this time?
I suspect that a lot of people have learned their lesson, and that next year's debates will attract lower viewing figures and change very few minds on anything.
FYI - Mike takes over early hours of Friday.
Quite a long piece about her here http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-sex-worker-Charlotte-Rose-stand-parliament/story-22937831-detail/story.html
Apparently she used to be a “conventional” teacher!
'Well, I'm still here...'
"I've just found out that the former sex worker Charlotte Rose is standing as a candidate in the Clacton by-election,"
As Gyles Brandreth said to Jordan when interviewing her as an independent candidate standing in Salford.....
"I know you've got your knockers but I'm all for people taking part the democratic process...."
http://sotonpolitics.org/2014/10/08/polling-observatory-41-opinion-stable-for-now-but-election-battle-lines-are-being-drawn/
How outrageous!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11147495/First-alleged-Isil-terror-plot-on-UK-foiled-amid-growing-fears-of-beheadings.html?WT.mc_id=e_3595183&WT.tsrc=email&etype=frontpage&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_FAM_New_2014_10_8&utm_campaign=3595183