Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day after: Betting and other by-election round up

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited October 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day after: Betting and other by-election round up

Some comfort for the Tories. UKIP lost two of the three council elections it was defending last night.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    edited October 2014
    First!

    FPT

    Was very surprised to see this result from last night: Waterloo (Blackpool) BNP - 1.4% (+1.4)

    Anyone familiar with the ‘Waterloo Blackpool’ area and know what might account for this unpleasant reappearance?

    My My. I thought the BNP belonged on the history book on the shelf.
    I can't believe that nobody has roundly abused TSE for this marvellously subtle musical reference. Bravo, Sir!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    UKIP next leader looks like an absolute mug market to my eyes.
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376
    GeoffM said:

    First!

    FPT

    Was very surprised to see this result from last night: Waterloo (Blackpool) BNP - 1.4% (+1.4)

    Anyone familiar with the ‘Waterloo Blackpool’ area and know what might account for this unpleasant reappearance?

    My My. I thought the BNP belonged on the history book on the shelf.
    I can't believe that nobody has roundly abused TSE for this marvellously subtle musical reference. Bravo, Sir!
    You wouldn't have been first if Mike hadn't removed my criticism of Ashcroft polling ;) So let me put it a little more gently:

    Can we please cease giving any credence to Ashcroft polls as they massively overstated Labour's share of the vote?

    Hopefully that won't be removed, or are we running scared of Lord A's bullying tactics?

  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited October 2014
    The bubble was meant to have burst by now! Oh for the days of Godfrey Bloom.
  • Quote from Matthew Goodwin on the BBC talking about UKIP

    'Perhaps it's time for all of us to ask the question of whether we really understand this party and its support'

    Hopefully it will occur to him to rethink his book!
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    The 56 voters of Charlotte Rose were not quite enough to overcome the 483 LibDem voters in Clacton.Considering this, Clacton is a great result for the LibDems.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11153401/How-Clacton-spells-yet-more-by-election-doom-for-Lib-Dems.html
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Latest Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2), Con 34 (+3), LD 9 (+1), UKIP 13 (-2), Oth 9 (+1).

    Can't believe there's no mention of Clegg's conference bounce in the thread header....

  • The 56 voters of Charlotte Rose were not quite enough to overcome the 483 LibDem voters in Clacton.Considering this, Clacton is a great result for the LibDems.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11153401/How-Clacton-spells-yet-more-by-election-doom-for-Lib-Dems.html

    Lembit Opek was out there supporting Charlotte Rose the turncoat hussy that he is!
  • Pulpstar said:

    UKIP next leader looks like an absolute mug market to my eyes.

    Why?
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    Pulpstar said:

    UKIP next leader looks like an absolute mug market to my eyes.

    Indeed - I want a 'None of the above' option at long odds
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    The 15% UKIP vote looks solid now, even Cameron's UKIP friendly announcements at the Conservatives party conference failed to move it. They may need some more defections to keep the momentum going in the few months at the start of next year.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    What I'm really interested in are the next few polls post-Clacton/H&M - will the Not A Wasted Vote After All meme catch on and convince those who've flirted with the idea the confidence to do so in reality?

    I'm not suggesting a Cleggasm for Mr Farage's party - but I wouldn't be surprised by a healthy uptick.
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    FPT for AntiFrank (thought I had better reiterate as he obviously has problems today understanding the written word"
    ZenPagan said:

    antifrank said:

    ZenPagan said:

    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    Unless Nigel Farage is planning on introducing mandatory HIV tests as part of the immigration process, I'm not sure that a ban on HIV positive people entering the UK is going to be awfully effective.

    Quite:

    Why barriers at the UK border won’t work for HIV
    No one is going to set up booths with testing kits at Heathrow and Gatwick airports, let alone at the Channel ports


    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/oct/10/hiv-uk-border-barriers-nigel-farage-ukip-secrecy-analysis

    I thought 'making promises they know they can't keep' was the speciality of other parties, not UKIP?
    It's barely any sillier than the Ebola testing that's being introduced by the current Government.

    (That is to say, very silly).
    You're confusing visitors, with those who wish to settle here permanently and gain official rights of residence/citizenship. Is it deliberate?
    If, hypothetically, I were an HIV positive man wishing to make my way in Britain, I would choose a form of entry that did not require an HIV test. Any system that assumes that people are going to play by the rules is a very silly system.
    Then you would never be accepted here legally. Same as TB.



    I see. If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?
    Where and who they contracted it from is irrelevant. The NHS is for legal residents of this country. If you lied about an illness to gain entry then you are no longer a legal resident and therefore not eligible for treatment nor for staying here.

    Contract it while a legal resident then you deserve the same treatment as any other legal resident

    So you would refuse NHS treatment to someone lawfully here who contracted an illness here? Interesting.
    So you can't read?

    Here is where I covered that "Contract it while a legal resident then you deserve the same treatment as any other legal resident"

    Don't try and smear me with your rancid accusations thank you

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Artist, Rochester could prevent or encourage more defections.
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,808
    I'm almost looking forward to a UKIP Tory coalition tearing each other apart in about a year's time. Could be popcorn time. Listening to Jacob Rees-Mogg describing them as Purple partners on the radio just now had me PMSL.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    GeoffM said:

    First!

    FPT

    Was very surprised to see this result from last night: Waterloo (Blackpool) BNP - 1.4% (+1.4)

    Anyone familiar with the ‘Waterloo Blackpool’ area and know what might account for this unpleasant reappearance?

    My My. I thought the BNP belonged on the history book on the shelf.
    I can't believe that nobody has roundly abused TSE for this marvellously subtle musical reference. Bravo, Sir!
    You wouldn't have been first if Mike hadn't removed my criticism of Ashcroft polling ;) So let me put it a little more gently:

    Can we please cease giving any credence to Ashcroft polls as they massively overstated Labour's share of the vote?

    Hopefully that won't be removed, or are we running scared of Lord A's bullying tactics?

    A quick glance at the tables indicates that the following should perhaps be done:

    Take only the Labour 10 out of 10 voters.
    Take the Tory 9 and 10 out of 10 voters
    Take UKIP 6 to 10/10 voters.

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    While we're on the subject of a new UKiP leader - anyone know how the process is run?
  • Pulpstar said:

    UKIP next leader looks like an absolute mug market to my eyes.

    Somewhat bizarre to put it up now, especially when Farage has to have a good chance of outlasting Cameron and Clegg and Miliband
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689

    While we're on the subject of a new UKiP leader - anyone know how the process is run?

    Knowing Farage it is probably in the form of a last man standing pint quaffing competition

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Monksfield, cannot see a Con-KIP Coalition. If UKIP does well enough to get more than a few seats they'll take so many Conservatives votes the blues won't be in a position to offer coalition.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    Pulpstar said:

    UKIP next leader looks like an absolute mug market to my eyes.

    Why?
    It'll take ages to get paid, may well be someone completely different.

    I'm not touching it !
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    ZenPagan said:



    So you can't read?

    Here is where I covered that "Contract it while a legal resident then you deserve the same treatment as any other legal resident"

    Don't try and smear me with your rancid accusations thank you


    So to repeat the question:

    If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?

    You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.

    Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Vale, be interesting if Farage fails to win his seat but there is a UKIP Parliamentary Party.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    ZenPagan said:

    While we're on the subject of a new UKiP leader - anyone know how the process is run?

    Knowing Farage it is probably in the form of a last man standing pint quaffing competition
    Awesome - If so, I hope it's televised ; )

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgap_CzceBM
  • I would be interested in people's opinion of the postal vote system. I'm amazed that nearly 10,000 postal votes were issued in the H&M by-election. I've never used it myself but it seems, according to the Electoral Commission site you have to apply on-line for it, print it off, sign it and send it in. Did 10,000 people really do that rather than just vote? Remarkably you can have the ballot paper sent to any address including overseas. Seems wide-open to abuse in my opinion.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    Who will be leader if Farage runs true to form and fails to get elected in May? Carswell, James, Nuttal and Reckless sorting it out while Farage sits impotently in the pub across the road!
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    antifrank said:

    ZenPagan said:



    So you can't read?

    Here is where I covered that "Contract it while a legal resident then you deserve the same treatment as any other legal resident"

    Don't try and smear me with your rancid accusations thank you

    So to repeat the question:

    If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?

    You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.

    Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.

    It's a bit hard to make the case that this sort of ban is politically impossible when a dozen or so other Western nations do it.
  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited October 2014

    GeoffM said:

    First!

    FPT

    Was very surprised to see this result from last night: Waterloo (Blackpool) BNP - 1.4% (+1.4)

    Anyone familiar with the ‘Waterloo Blackpool’ area and know what might account for this unpleasant reappearance?

    My My. I thought the BNP belonged on the history book on the shelf.
    I can't believe that nobody has roundly abused TSE for this marvellously subtle musical reference. Bravo, Sir!
    You wouldn't have been first if Mike hadn't removed my criticism of Ashcroft polling ;) So let me put it a little more gently:

    Can we please cease giving any credence to Ashcroft polls as they massively overstated Labour's share of the vote?

    Hopefully that won't be removed, or are we running scared of Lord A's bullying tactics?

    Ashcroft was 5 points out on Labour in Clacton. Survation was two points too high

    Both polls were done weeks before the election so the figures changing is of little surprise.

    Clacton was wet and miserable yesterday therefore Labour who ran no campaign and knew they would lose may have stayed at home a little moreso than the Tories who had much to lose and UKIP who had much to gain

    Ashcroft was 6 points too high on Labour in Heywood. Survation was 9 points too high
    Ashcroft was 11 points shy on the UKIP figure in Heywood. Survation was 8 points too low.

    Survation was much less accurate on heywood than Ashcroft

    Clearly there was something else going on in Heywood. The weather was again miserable. People may have stayed at home, their could have been a Shy Kipper syndrome, their could have been a late tactical vote.

    I suggest if you think there is something wrong with the Ashcroft polling you need to come up with more evidence which demonstrates that specifically the Ashcroft polling looks questionable.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Socrates said:

    antifrank said:

    ZenPagan said:



    So you can't read?

    Here is where I covered that "Contract it while a legal resident then you deserve the same treatment as any other legal resident"

    Don't try and smear me with your rancid accusations thank you

    So to repeat the question:

    If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?

    You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.

    Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.
    It's a bit hard to make the case that this sort of ban is politically impossible when a dozen or so other Western nations do it.

    I'm not saying it's politically impossible. I'm saying it's bloody stupid.

    Numerous examples, including the Ebola screening, show that the bloody stupid is politically possible.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    Mr. Vale, be interesting if Farage fails to win his seat but there is a UKIP Parliamentary Party.

    That is eminently possible, Thanet South is very much in the mix according to the polls and he isn't the best personal campaigner out there... !
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited October 2014


    So to repeat the question:

    If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?

    You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.

    Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.

    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    After your last effort I cant trust any quotes you provide... you're not a trustworthy source, so we cant "know" anything
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    antifrank said:

    ZenPagan said:



    So you can't read?

    Here is where I covered that "Contract it while a legal resident then you deserve the same treatment as any other legal resident"

    Don't try and smear me with your rancid accusations thank you

    So to repeat the question:

    If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?

    You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.

    Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.

    As I am not a ukip supporter I don't know why you think the farage part is relevant to our discussion and the same still applies if you are here legally and contract it while here you get treatment while you remain resident legally. For short term visitors that will be until they are stabilised and return home same as any other long term illness. The NHS is however only responsible for your treatment for the time you are resident here exactly as they would be for any other long term illness that manifested itself while you are here.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    After your last effort I cant trust any quotes you provide... you're not a trustworthy source, so we cant "know" anything
    I expect the reference is to this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766

    "Tory defector and UKIP candidate for the parliamentary seat of Rochester and Strood, Mark Reckless, said he did not believe there should be a blanket ban on people with HIV entering the country."
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704

    GeoffM said:

    First!

    FPT

    Was very surprised to see this result from last night: Waterloo (Blackpool) BNP - 1.4% (+1.4)

    Anyone familiar with the ‘Waterloo Blackpool’ area and know what might account for this unpleasant reappearance?

    My My. I thought the BNP belonged on the history book on the shelf.
    I can't believe that nobody has roundly abused TSE for this marvellously subtle musical reference. Bravo, Sir!
    You wouldn't have been first if Mike hadn't removed my criticism of Ashcroft polling ;) So let me put it a little more gently:

    Can we please cease giving any credence to Ashcroft polls as they massively overstated Labour's share of the vote?

    Hopefully that won't be removed, or are we running scared of Lord A's bullying tactics?

    Ashcroft was 5 points out on Labour in Clacton. Survation was two points too high

    Both polls were done weeks before the election so the figures changing is of little surprise.

    Clacton was wet and miserable yesterday therefore Labour who ran no campaign and knew they would lose may have stayed at home a little moreso than the Tories who had much to lose and UKIP who had much to gain

    Ashcroft was 6 points too high on Labour in Heywood. Survation was 9 points too high
    Ashcroft was 11 points shy on the UKIP figure in Heywood. Survation was 8 points too low.

    Survation was much less accurate on heywood than Ashcroft

    Clearly there was something else going on in Heywood. The weather was again miserable. People may have stayed at home, their could have been a Shy Kipper syndrome, their could have been a late tactical vote.

    I suggest if you think there is something wrong with the Ashcroft polling you need to come up with more evidence which demonstrates that specifically the Ashcroft polling looks questionable.
    Anyone any idea of the turnout in Jaywick?
  • I'm almost looking forward to a UKIP Tory coalition tearing each other apart in about a year's time. Could be popcorn time. Listening to Jacob Rees-Mogg describing them as Purple partners on the radio just now had me PMSL.

    Farage made it clear today there will be no 'partnership'. The best UKIP might provide is some sort of supply and confidence arrangement if of course the actually become the balance of power. I think it is highly unlikely though that the Tories under Cameron would go to UKIP. They will go to the Libdems if at all possible.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,118
    Talking of shy kippers (and I love that image - what do they do hide under the seaweed?), what are the chances that pollsters are not picking up shy LibDems, given how negative everyone is about Clegg?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    SeanT said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    Why the confusion? Why don't you just pluck a quote from it, wrongly attribute it, then use it to try and smear Farage in a risibly transparent, inadvertently desperate lie, which makes you like a clown?

    It's what you do. I see no need for confusion.
    Its how the news is reported dear....and so far we've had a major cow pat in UKIP's gay skip across the meadows on their by-election day.

    What's touching is that the Kippers can't see it, or attribute it to conspiracy, or can't see that having The Leader, the elected MP and the prospective MP saying three different things could possibly lead to any problems.

    The structural weakness in UKIP is the lack of policy and 'what Nigel says goes'

    You are as deluded as when you were wetting yourself over the loss of the Union and panicking like a cross between Corporal Jones and Private Fraser - some of us with greater intestinal fortitude (unlike the Westminster leaders) held our nerve and were proved right.

    I understand your continuing embarrassment at that episode........
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited October 2014
    Liz McInnes may be poor but I suppose if she had been selected, Miriam O'Reilly could have really lost Heywood and Middleton to UKIP.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    After your last effort I cant trust any quotes you provide... you're not a trustworthy source, so we cant "know" anything
    I expect the BBC is not good enough:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766

    Happy now?

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    Alanbrooke

    "Really tories are making arses of themselves on this, just give it up, you're simply boosting UKIPs vote."

    How does a Manchester University alumni the home of the greatest left wing comedians the country has seen.....who used to watch the Woodentops manage to turn into a Farage apologist.....Maybe this'll bring you back from the dark side

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OdtkPs-fl8


  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited October 2014
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    After your last effort I cant trust any quotes you provide... you're not a trustworthy source, so we cant "know" anything
    I expect the reference is to this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766

    "Tory defector and UKIP candidate for the parliamentary seat of Rochester and Strood, Mark Reckless, said he did not believe there should be a blanket ban on people with HIV entering the country."
    I don't think there should be either.. if someone with AIDS wants to come here on holiday, I think he should be allowed to enter the country, no problem

    Farage probably agrees too
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    FPT: The obvious way (unless I'm missing something) to deal with health tourism is to require all visitors (whether short or long-term) to the UK to have health insurance - and for this to be a requirement of their visa.

    Otherwise you are going to have to come to terms with the fact that a "free at the point of use" health system will be used/abused (depending on your point of view) by people from outside the country who have not contributed to its costs.

    Much as with other parts of our welfare system, in an era of cheap travel, we have to accept that either it will be used by all - regardless of nationality/contribution and thus may seem unfair to those who have contributed and are British nationals - or some groups will be excluded, which may seem unfair to those who think need should trump all other considerations.

    A choice will have to be made. Currently our political class are busy pretending that no choice is needed while simultaneously promising to spend ever more on the NHS. Those who do pay and will have to pay are, frankly, entitled to ask: "For who's benefit?"
  • Who will be leader if Farage runs true to form and fails to get elected in May? Carswell, James, Nuttal and Reckless sorting it out while Farage sits impotently in the pub across the road!

    Leader of the Parliamentary party you mean I presume? Well it will depend on who is elected I suppose. Unless Farage actually stands down he will be the Party leader because he has just been re-appointed unopposed for another four years.

    That said I can't see any UKIP candidates winning if Farage fails in Thanet South. Carswell perhaps but that's about it.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    After your last effort I cant trust any quotes you provide... you're not a trustworthy source, so we cant "know" anything
    I expect the BBC is not good enough:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766

    Happy now?

    Any of those shows where Piers Morgan gets interviewed on at the weekend?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    How about we just take it as read that sometimes members of UKIP will have different views on some issues and not take to questioning all of them about every policy between now and the GE?

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    How about we just take it as read that sometimes members of UKIP will have different views on some issues and not take to questioning all of them about every policy between now and the GE?
    I think where two newspapers have reported diametrically opposite reports on the views of their one MP and another of their next by-election candidate and a third of their leader it would be churlish to prevent Kippers from explaining the position.....isn't that what they're for - 'straight talking'?

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    JackCade said:

    I would be interested in people's opinion of the postal vote system. I'm amazed that nearly 10,000 postal votes were issued in the H&M by-election. I've never used it myself but it seems, according to the Electoral Commission site you have to apply on-line for it, print it off, sign it and send it in. Did 10,000 people really do that rather than just vote? Remarkably you can have the ballot paper sent to any address including overseas. Seems wide-open to abuse in my opinion.

    You get the application form, sign it and send it off and the level of verification is the same as if you're voting in person afaik.

    Then when an election comes around they send a ballot paper out to you. You sign it, send it back. They check the signatures match and count it as a vote.

    They usually get sent out a week before an election, so if you sent them to the home address rather than where the person is you run into time scale problems.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Corporeal, mail for you [many thanks, incidentally].
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    How about we just take it as read that sometimes members of UKIP will have different views on some issues and not take to questioning all of them about every policy between now and the GE?
    I think where two newspapers have reported diametrically opposite reports on the views of their one MP and another of their next by-election candidate and a third of their leader it would be churlish to prevent Kippers from explaining the position.....isn't that what they're for - 'straight talking'?

    Dont worry, I didnt expect you to change.

  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: The obvious way (unless I'm missing something) to deal with health tourism is to require all visitors (whether short or long-term) to the UK to have health insurance - and for this to be a requirement of their visa.

    Otherwise you are going to have to come to terms with the fact that a "free at the point of use" health system will be used/abused (depending on your point of view) by people from outside the country who have not contributed to its costs.

    Much as with other parts of our welfare system, in an era of cheap travel, we have to accept that either it will be used by all - regardless of nationality/contribution and thus may seem unfair to those who have contributed and are British nationals - or some groups will be excluded, which may seem unfair to those who think need should trump all other considerations.

    A choice will have to be made. Currently our political class are busy pretending that no choice is needed while simultaneously promising to spend ever more on the NHS. Those who do pay and will have to pay are, frankly, entitled to ask: "For who's benefit?"

    Had an AIDs test for my long term visa to Russia and you require travel insurance for a tourist visa, except where a reciprocal arrangement exists.

    If the Conservatives were smart they would come out in support of a policy both sensible and moral, pointing out they proposed it. They won't.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @RobDotHutton: Asked Carswell if Malala should have been allowed to come UK for healthcare. "I'm not familiar with that case." She just won Nobel Prize.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    isam said:

    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    After your last effort I cant trust any quotes you provide... you're not a trustworthy source, so we cant "know" anything
    I expect the reference is to this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766

    "Tory defector and UKIP candidate for the parliamentary seat of Rochester and Strood, Mark Reckless, said he did not believe there should be a blanket ban on people with HIV entering the country."
    I don't think there should be either.. if someone with AIDS wants to come here on holiday, I think he should be allowed to enter the country, no problem

    Farage probably agrees too
    It just shows how down the toilet our media has gone. I have to say if three different politicians from any party had identical views on every single aspect of immigration policy, I'd just think they were party stooges incapable of having an independent thought.

  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,034
    One big issue is that the pollsters have refined their models over the years and elections to best meet the existing system - as the raw figures are, understandably, likely to be inaccurate due to differential sampling and even sample-weighted figures have issues on relative turnout and accuracy of recall.

    However, the UKIP modelling is going to be far more difficult and subject to a noticeable amount of guesswork - which explains the wide variance in reported UKIP polling scores between the various companies. Will previous non-voters (a significant chunk of their support) revert to type and not vote again? Or will it turn out that the perceived similarity between the Big 3 was the main discouragement for them and a realistic alternative will galvanise them into actually voting? (for example of just one element of the guessy aspect of the modelling)

    And, given that the numbers always have to add up to 100 (or so, less rounding errors), this will have a bit of a knock-on effect on the other numbers.

    In short - whilst polls have always required a bit of reserve on behalf of the reader, right now, they're more uncertain than ever.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2014
    Mr Hodges made an interesting point - but is it true? It feels to me like the Bleedin' Obvious, then again - would Labour really lose more than it gained? blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100289196/after-the-catastrophe-of-heywood-labour-is-staring-down-the-barrels-of-ukips-tanks/

    What do the 6% LD voters look like? How many DNVers are there that are going Kipper which Labour could bring home? Is having EdM in charge a fatal flaw in any such plan as he's just too metropolitan?
    But only one party is in a position to do anything about it. Cameron can shift his party to the Right to meet the Ukip threat. If he shifts too far it will be electorally disastrous. But he can reach out incrementally to disaffected Ukip supporters in a range of areas – immigration, welfare, English votes, Europe, law and order, etc, and still go with the political grain of his party.

    Miliband can’t. Last night wasn’t the moment he nearly lost a parliamentary seat. It was the moment he lost his entire electoral strategy. He has built his hopes of victory around taking the 29 per cent of people who voted Labour in 2010, and bolting on an additional 6 per cent of disaffected Lib Dem voters. The 35 per cent strategy.

    That strategy is dead. His 35 per cent coalition is fracturing (or is at least perceived to be fracturing). And there is nothing – literally nothing – he can do about it. To beat back Farage he needs to move Right on all those issues I listed above. But he can’t. Because if he turns right on immigration or welfare or law and order, the Left of his party will turn on him and the Lib Dem refugees will abandon him.
  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited October 2014

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    How about we just take it as read that sometimes members of UKIP will have different views on some issues and not take to questioning all of them about every policy between now and the GE?
    I think where two newspapers have reported diametrically opposite reports on the views of their one MP and another of their next by-election candidate and a third of their leader it would be churlish to prevent Kippers from explaining the position.....isn't that what they're for - 'straight talking'?

    Well if you want straight talk here it is. Its not for us to speak for our representatives as we are not qualified to do so. They are quite capable of speaking for themselves so if you are that determined to find out why the variations why don't you 'toddle off' and see if you can ask them yourself?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    Cameron has often been compared to Blair but for all Blair's faults I would be surprised if he would ever say anything as crass and as personal as 'if you vote UKIP you'll get Miliband and Balls.' Blair always had an elegance that is rare in politicians. Cameron just hasn't. Perhaps it was all those years in the dog eat dog world of advertising
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    How about we just take it as read that sometimes members of UKIP will have different views on some issues and not take to questioning all of them about every policy between now and the GE?

    Party splits make good headlines. The media are going to look for UKIP and especially Farage-Carswell divisions. (some bloke wrote an article on that the other day).
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    I make it a 12-party system for GE2015 including NI.This means 11 bilateral relationships for each party and any number of trilaterals,quadrilaterals etc.The next government could depend on any one.The Ulster Votes for English Laws worked well for the Tories in the past but will it work again?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,878
    edited October 2014
    Fascinating discussion on BBC Parliament Oct 1974 election programme on whether or not Heath should stand down after narrow loss. Joseph seen as too sensitive to lead, Willie Whitelaw lacks persona but seen as who would emerge. He seen as Butlerite and party needed to return to those values. General lack of talent on the frontbenches discussed, brief mention of one Mrs Thatcher, seen as relatively bright but brushed over. If only they knew!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    edited October 2014
    Mr. Roger, elegance? He was slippery as hell.
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited October 2014
    I think this would be reasonable:

    No entry to the UK without a visa unless the country concerned provided reciprocal medical cover from their "NHS" to UK citizens visiting the country (as EU and Australia among others do)

    For other states. No visa issued unless one of the following is provided:

    * proof of medical insurance covering any pre existing medical condition that they suffer from covering the whole validity of the visa

    or

    * paying of a £10,000 deposit lodged with the NHS which will be returned (without interest - the interest covers the admin), minus any medical charges for NHS treatment while here upon their departure.


    Why should UK taxpayers pay for the medical costs of people from states where UK taxpayers visiting their country would have to pay for medical costs?

    Similarly, ALL foreign aid from the UK should be stopped until such time as the national debt is paid off and we have a sovereign wealth fund like Norway do. Get our own house in order first.

    The more the progressive media foam about this, the more they give UKIP publicity and demonstrate how out of touch they are. What part of "A country with £1.4 Billion debt increasing by £100Billion a year can't afford any more compassion funded by other peoples money" dont they get?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Scott_P said:

    @RobDotHutton: Asked Carswell if Malala should have been allowed to come UK for healthcare. "I'm not familiar with that case." She just won Nobel Prize.

    It's a triumph for news management!
  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721
    Roger said:

    Cameron has often been compared to Blair but for all Blair's faults I would be surprised if he would ever say anything as crass and as personal as 'if you vote UKIP you'll get Miliband and Balls.' Blair always had an elegance that is rare in politicians. Cameron just hasn't. Perhaps it was all those years in the dog eat dog world of advertising


    Didn´t Blair come out with the crass "24 Hours to save the NHS".
    Time and time again.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Plato said:

    Mr Hodges made an interesting point - but is it true? It feels to me like the Bleedin' Obvious, then again - would Labour really lose more than it gained? blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100289196/after-the-catastrophe-of-heywood-labour-is-staring-down-the-barrels-of-ukips-tanks/

    What do the 6% LD voters look like? How many DNVers are there that are going Kipper which Labour could bring home? Is having EdM in charge a fatal flaw in any such plan as he's just too metropolitan?

    But only one party is in a position to do anything about it. Cameron can shift his party to the Right to meet the Ukip threat. If he shifts too far it will be electorally disastrous. But he can reach out incrementally to disaffected Ukip supporters in a range of areas – immigration, welfare, English votes, Europe, law and order, etc, and still go with the political grain of his party.

    Miliband can’t. Last night wasn’t the moment he nearly lost a parliamentary seat. It was the moment he lost his entire electoral strategy. He has built his hopes of victory around taking the 29 per cent of people who voted Labour in 2010, and bolting on an additional 6 per cent of disaffected Lib Dem voters. The 35 per cent strategy.

    That strategy is dead. His 35 per cent coalition is fracturing (or is at least perceived to be fracturing). And there is nothing – literally nothing – he can do about it. To beat back Farage he needs to move Right on all those issues I listed above. But he can’t. Because if he turns right on immigration or welfare or law and order, the Left of his party will turn on him and the Lib Dem refugees will abandon him.
    Poor bugger ! Still thinks he could have been David Miliband's CoS after GE2015.

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    corporeal said:

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
    Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv

    Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html

    You confused over who said what again?
    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    How about we just take it as read that sometimes members of UKIP will have different views on some issues and not take to questioning all of them about every policy between now and the GE?

    Party splits make good headlines. The media are going to look for UKIP and especially Farage-Carswell divisions. (some bloke wrote an article on that the other day).
    modesty becomes you sir - ; )
  • Roger said:

    Blair always had an elegance that is rare in politicians. Cameron just hasn't. Perhaps it was all those years in the dog eat dog world of advertising

    Blair had just about as much elegance as Cookie Monster going down the biscuit aisle with a wonky shopping trolley. (Not that I'm defending Cameron's remarks either).

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Speaking of the tyranny of small differences - Mr Kirkup has a few thoughts blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100289220/ukips-by-election-successes-and-the-narcissism-of-small-differences/
    As Labour and the Conservatives ponder their respective setbacks at Ukip hands today, it’s worth pondering the similarities in the two big party’s approach to their new challenger. In essence, both big parties think they can use the other to frighten voters out of backing Ukip.
    ...The results from Heywood and Clacton suggest that neither warning has been very effective thus far.

    For both Conservative and Labour politicians, the differences between their two parties are stark and significant. Each side almost instinctively recoils from the prospect of government by the other, so great are the differences they perceive between their two sides. People on both sides talk about 1992 and another clear ideological choice at next year’s general election.

    But could it just be that voters do not see such a significant difference between the two big parties and their leaders? That the fine distinctions between two smart 40-something PPE graduates from the south east of England are lost on people who feel far removed from Westminster?

    Freud’s observation about the narcissism of small differences could have been made about Britain’s political class and its media, whose collective fixation on detail is notable and baffling: does anyone beyond London’s upper-middle class really care about the difference between David Cameron’s £2 million house in north Kensington and Ed Miliband’s £2 million house in Dartmouth Park?

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Well this is confusing:

    snip

    You confused over who said what again?

    Well, we know Reckless does not support a ban on HIV people coming - does Carswell? Who knows? Do you?

    I see how you're going to keep yourself busy between now and the GE.
    Well, now the Nats have gone quiet.......
    snip

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    MD

    "Mr. Roger, elegance? He was a slippery bastard. "

    He was indeed. An elegant slippery bastard
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    JackCade said:

    I would be interested in people's opinion of the postal vote system. I'm amazed that nearly 10,000 postal votes were issued in the H&M by-election. I've never used it myself but it seems, according to the Electoral Commission site you have to apply on-line for it, print it off, sign it and send it in. Did 10,000 people really do that rather than just vote? Remarkably you can have the ballot paper sent to any address including overseas. Seems wide-open to abuse in my opinion.

    Am not a fan of it.

    Heard from my sister who visited Glasgow, that a couple of Scots voted Yes by post (aim - screw more cash from London) - who had second thoughts when that poll put Yes ahead...can we have the envelope back stuff.

  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

    It might be useful to point out that a schengen visa as issued by the eu

    source

    http://www.internationalstudentinsurance.com/schengen-visa-insurance/
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Roger said:

    Perhaps it was all those years in the dog eat dog world of advertising

    PR surely?

    Nothing gets me crosser than politicians accusing their opponents of presenting their case as if they were "selling washing powder".

    Washing powder is held to a much higher standard than politicians....Persil cannot claim it intends to wash whiter......



  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,878
    SimonSTClare So the Tories get their poll bounce in populus a week late, just as it falls back in yougov
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited October 2014

    One big issue is that the pollsters have refined their models over the years and elections to best meet the existing system - as the raw figures are, understandably, likely to be inaccurate due to differential sampling and even sample-weighted figures have issues on relative turnout and accuracy of recall.

    However, the UKIP modelling is going to be far more difficult and subject to a noticeable amount of guesswork - which explains the wide variance in reported UKIP polling scores between the various companies. Will previous non-voters (a significant chunk of their support) revert to type and not vote again? Or will it turn out that the perceived similarity between the Big 3 was the main discouragement for them and a realistic alternative will galvanise them into actually voting? (for example of just one element of the guessy aspect of the modelling)

    And, given that the numbers always have to add up to 100 (or so, less rounding errors), this will have a bit of a knock-on effect on the other numbers.

    In short - whilst polls have always required a bit of reserve on behalf of the reader, right now, they're more uncertain than ever.

    Mr Kellner wrote the other day that he no longer expected UKIP's support to fade before the general election, the way it did in 2009>2010.

    I'm assuming that means YouGov will be changing their methodology before the election, to either include UKIP in their prompting, or not to prompt at all.

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/29/ukip-snp-and-risks-parliamentary-paralysis/
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Roger said:

    Cameron has often been compared to Blair but for all Blair's faults I would be surprised if he would ever say anything as crass and as personal as 'if you vote UKIP you'll get Miliband and Balls.' Blair always had an elegance that is rare in politicians. Cameron just hasn't. Perhaps it was all those years in the dog eat dog world of advertising

    Like his elegant attack on the "forces of conservatism" I suppose.

    That was one of the crassest comments he ever made, implying that those who want to preserve the best of the past are somehow to be swept away in order to create a New Britain. Still, only an Oxford law graduate could come up with such bilge.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Plato said:

    Mr Hodges made an interesting point - but is it true? It feels to me like the Bleedin' Obvious, then again - would Labour really lose more than it gained? blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100289196/after-the-catastrophe-of-heywood-labour-is-staring-down-the-barrels-of-ukips-tanks/

    What do the 6% LD voters look like? How many DNVers are there that are going Kipper which Labour could bring home? Is having EdM in charge a fatal flaw in any such plan as he's just too metropolitan?

    But only one party is in a position to do anything about it. Cameron can shift his party to the Right to meet the Ukip threat. If he shifts too far it will be electorally disastrous. But he can reach out incrementally to disaffected Ukip supporters in a range of areas – immigration, welfare, English votes, Europe, law and order, etc, and still go with the political grain of his party.

    Miliband can’t. Last night wasn’t the moment he nearly lost a parliamentary seat. It was the moment he lost his entire electoral strategy. He has built his hopes of victory around taking the 29 per cent of people who voted Labour in 2010, and bolting on an additional 6 per cent of disaffected Lib Dem voters. The 35 per cent strategy.

    That strategy is dead. His 35 per cent coalition is fracturing (or is at least perceived to be fracturing). And there is nothing – literally nothing – he can do about it. To beat back Farage he needs to move Right on all those issues I listed above. But he can’t. Because if he turns right on immigration or welfare or law and order, the Left of his party will turn on him and the Lib Dem refugees will abandon him.
    The result in Clacton was really bad for the Conservatives. They'd been hoping to get far closer to UKIP (cf Bunnco's post yesterday), and had campaigned with some vigour. They got nowhere.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

    Healthy young people in the US are forced to take out medical insurance, whether they want to or not, under Obamacare.

    There might well be a cost to the tourist trade but there would also, presumably, be a saving on the NHS budget and since we're always being told how important that is........

    BTW travelling to the US without health insurance is pretty daft IMO.

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    antifrank said:

    Plato said:

    Mr Hodges made an interesting point - but is it true? It feels to me like the Bleedin' Obvious, then again - would Labour really lose more than it gained? blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100289196/after-the-catastrophe-of-heywood-labour-is-staring-down-the-barrels-of-ukips-tanks/

    What do the 6% LD voters look like? How many DNVers are there that are going Kipper which Labour could bring home? Is having EdM in charge a fatal flaw in any such plan as he's just too metropolitan?

    But only one party is in a position to do anything about it. Cameron can shift his party to the Right to meet the Ukip threat. If he shifts too far it will be electorally disastrous. But he can reach out incrementally to disaffected Ukip supporters in a range of areas – immigration, welfare, English votes, Europe, law and order, etc, and still go with the political grain of his party.

    Miliband can’t. Last night wasn’t the moment he nearly lost a parliamentary seat. It was the moment he lost his entire electoral strategy. He has built his hopes of victory around taking the 29 per cent of people who voted Labour in 2010, and bolting on an additional 6 per cent of disaffected Lib Dem voters. The 35 per cent strategy.

    That strategy is dead. His 35 per cent coalition is fracturing (or is at least perceived to be fracturing). And there is nothing – literally nothing – he can do about it. To beat back Farage he needs to move Right on all those issues I listed above. But he can’t. Because if he turns right on immigration or welfare or law and order, the Left of his party will turn on him and the Lib Dem refugees will abandon him.
    The result in Clacton was really bad for the Conservatives. They'd been hoping to get far closer to UKIP (cf Bunnco's post yesterday), and had campaigned with some vigour. They got nowhere.Labour tried all out in Heywood too. They both look weak.
  • The problem with postal votes is that they are issued at the beginning of a campaign so they are returned by election day.

    This means most are received and returned before the campaign is complete, which means the voters will not be influenced by the campaign. This gives a massive and in my opinion unfair advantage to the incumbent party.

    When postal voting was restricted to a tiny number it wasn't much of a problem but now it is a problem.

    I think they should be moved on line in the same way as you can vote for building society elections online after receiving the code through the post, with online voting only allowed between 7AM and 10PM on election day.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    The problem with postal votes is that they are issued at the beginning of a campaign so they are returned by election day.

    This means most are received and returned before the campaign is complete, which means the voters will not be influenced by the campaign. This gives a massive and in my opinion unfair advantage to the incumbent party.

    When postal voting was restricted to a tiny number it wasn't much of a problem but now it is a problem.

    I think they should be moved on line in the same way as you can vote for building society elections online after receiving the code through the post, with online voting only allowed between 7AM and 10PM on election day.

    A far bigger problem is that people can be intimidated by others to vote a certain way.
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    Cyclefree said:



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

    Healthy young people in the US are forced to take out medical insurance, whether they want to or not, under Obamacare.

    There might well be a cost to the tourist trade but there would also, presumably, be a saving on the NHS budget and since we're always being told how important that is........

    BTW travelling to the US without health insurance is pretty daft IMO.

    I have been to the states on many occasions and would echo CycleFree here no matter how fit and healthy you are you can never predict accidents nor acute cases like food poisoning. Never go there without insurance.

    As I pointed out earlier it can hardly be classed as an imposition to require insurance for a visa when even the eu requires it for a schengen visa

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Cyclefree said:



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

    Healthy young people in the US are forced to take out medical insurance, whether they want to or not, under Obamacare.

    There might well be a cost to the tourist trade but there would also, presumably, be a saving on the NHS budget and since we're always being told how important that is........

    BTW travelling to the US without health insurance is pretty daft IMO.

    The cost to the tourist trade will be huge. We are talking billions here, not millions.

    Many third world citizens have to provide a health check certificate from a British Embasst doctor in their visa application. This has been going on for yonks.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited October 2014



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

    I am not talking about going on a short business or tourist trip. I am talking about relocating for work for semi to permanent amount of time e.g Canada you have to do this. There is a transitional period between arriving and being eligible for public health insurance, thus you must purchase temporary transitional private cover.

    Also, you are a fool travelling without insurance. Anything goes wrong and you are in say the US, you could easily bankrupt yourself.
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:



    Don't a large number of countries demand that those visiting on a short term basis, or even migrating permanently, must buy health insurance for a certain transitional period e.g. first 6-12 months. So if that was the case your point would be mute.

    Don't think so. I've visited about 20 countries on every continent except Australasia in the last few years. I've never been asked if I have health insurance (I don't). Wouldn't mean we couldn't do it (except for EEA citizens) but it'd be unusual and presumably have a cost to the tourist trade (hassle factor and forcing healthy young people to take a policy). A serious study of the comparative costs and savings would be helpful.

    Healthy young people in the US are forced to take out medical insurance, whether they want to or not, under Obamacare.

    There might well be a cost to the tourist trade but there would also, presumably, be a saving on the NHS budget and since we're always being told how important that is........

    BTW travelling to the US without health insurance is pretty daft IMO.

    The cost to the tourist trade will be huge. We are talking billions here, not millions.

    Many third world citizens have to provide a health check certificate from a British Embasst doctor in their visa application. This has been going on for yonks.
    If the cost to the tourist trade is so huge why does the EU seem to manage to do it without any impact. Could this possibly be an assertion made with no actual facts to back it up? Surely not!

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,031

    The problem with postal votes is that they are issued at the beginning of a campaign so they are returned by election day.

    This means most are received and returned before the campaign is complete, which means the voters will not be influenced by the campaign. This gives a massive and in my opinion unfair advantage to the incumbent party.

    When postal voting was restricted to a tiny number it wasn't much of a problem but now it is a problem.

    I think they should be moved on line in the same way as you can vote for building society elections online after receiving the code through the post, with online voting only allowed between 7AM and 10PM on election day.

    I remember voting online in 2003 in Swindon.. very convenient, but it doesn't beat putting the x on the paper and putting it in the ballot box!!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    As I was googling for a decent rendition of 'Age of Aquarius' at Woodstock or early Glastonbury it occurred to me that anyone alive and aware at that time could never have imagined that forty years later a disc jockey would have been given a suspended jail term for briefly touching a friend's clothed breasts and a fascist party led by a beer swilling vulgarian would be changing the face of British politics
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    fleetstreetfox ‏@fleetstreetfox 3m3 minutes ago
    Dear @Ed_Miliband: Just go. Please just go.

    Dan Hannan you can go by car, go by cow....
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    I think this would be reasonable:

    No entry to the UK without a visa unless the country concerned provided reciprocal medical cover from their "NHS" to UK citizens visiting the country (as EU and Australia among others do)

    For other states. No visa issued unless one of the following is provided:

    * proof of medical insurance covering any pre existing medical condition that they suffer from covering the whole validity of the visa

    or

    * paying of a £10,000 deposit lodged with the NHS which will be returned (without interest - the interest covers the admin), minus any medical charges for NHS treatment while here upon their departure.


    Why should UK taxpayers pay for the medical costs of people from states where UK taxpayers visiting their country would have to pay for medical costs?

    Similarly, ALL foreign aid from the UK should be stopped until such time as the national debt is paid off and we have a sovereign wealth fund like Norway do. Get our own house in order first.

    The more the progressive media foam about this, the more they give UKIP publicity and demonstrate how out of touch they are. What part of "A country with £1.4 Billion debt increasing by £100Billion a year can't afford any more compassion funded by other peoples money" dont they get?

    That's the daftest thing I have read.India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. would happily say, touring Britons could use their "NHS" free. Would any Briton really use those facilities except perhaps after an accident ?

    Currently, all such applicants have to provide a health insurance policy with their applications.
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    edited October 2014
    Roger said:

    As I was googling for a decent rendition of 'Age of Aquarius' at Woodstock or early Glastonbury it occurred to me that anyone alive and aware at that time could never have imagined that forty years later a disc jockey would have been given a suspended jail term for briefly touching a friend's clothed breasts and a fascist party led by a beer swilling vulgarian would be changing the face of British politics

    while "a beer swilling vulgarian" is while a fitting description of John Prescott I can't help it thinking its a little harsh, also as a note he didnt lead but was dpm
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Roger said:

    As I was googling for a decent rendition of 'Age of Aquarius' at Woodstock or early Glastonbury it occurred to me that anyone alive and aware at that time could never have imagined that forty years later a disc jockey would have been given a suspended jail term for briefly touching a friend's clothed breasts and a fascist party led by a beer swilling vulgarian would be changing the face of British politics

    Yeah man, we just thought the world would run on peace and love, and we could eat acid for breakfast and it would all be like far out

    Even hippies have to grow up.. you sound more and more like Malcolm from the Modern parents with every post
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    edited October 2014

    I make it a 12-party system for GE2015 including NI.This means 11 bilateral relationships for each party and any number of trilaterals,quadrilaterals etc.The next government could depend on any one.The Ulster Votes for English Laws worked well for the Tories in the past but will it work again?

    The Ulster Unionists were one thing. Perceived at any rate as Tories who happened to live in N. Ireland, and were a strange hangover from pre-Irish independence days.

    The DUP are savage X's who threw stones at peace-keeping British squaddies.

    Just saying!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    antifrank said:

    Plato said:

    Mr Hodges made an interesting point - but is it true? It feels to me like the Bleedin' Obvious, then again - would Labour really lose more than it gained? blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100289196/after-the-catastrophe-of-heywood-labour-is-staring-down-the-barrels-of-ukips-tanks/

    What do the 6% LD voters look like? How many DNVers are there that are going Kipper which Labour could bring home? Is having EdM in charge a fatal flaw in any such plan as he's just too metropolitan?

    But only one party is in a position to do anything about it. Cameron can shift his party to the Right to meet the Ukip threat. If he shifts too far it will be electorally disastrous. But he can reach out incrementally to disaffected Ukip supporters in a range of areas – immigration, welfare, English votes, Europe, law and order, etc, and still go with the political grain of his party.

    Miliband can’t. Last night wasn’t the moment he nearly lost a parliamentary seat. It was the moment he lost his entire electoral strategy. He has built his hopes of victory around taking the 29 per cent of people who voted Labour in 2010, and bolting on an additional 6 per cent of disaffected Lib Dem voters. The 35 per cent strategy.

    That strategy is dead. His 35 per cent coalition is fracturing (or is at least perceived to be fracturing). And there is nothing – literally nothing – he can do about it. To beat back Farage he needs to move Right on all those issues I listed above. But he can’t. Because if he turns right on immigration or welfare or law and order, the Left of his party will turn on him and the Lib Dem refugees will abandon him.
    The result in Clacton was really bad for the Conservatives. They'd been hoping to get far closer to UKIP (cf Bunnco's post yesterday), and had campaigned with some vigour. They got nowhere.
    Labour tried all out in Heywood too. They both look weak.

    Having spent the day thinking about it, I think Clacton was worse for the Conservatives than H&M was for Labour. Labour supporters largely sat on their hands in H&M, and Labour can reasonably hope that they will turn out in much greater numbers in 2015 - though Labour should be worried that yet again they have been unable to motivate their core vote to come out and vote for them. Erstwhile Conservative supporters defected to UKIP. They won't be coming back.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,034
    Roger said:

    As I was googling for a decent rendition of 'Age of Aquarius' at Woodstock or early Glastonbury it occurred to me that anyone alive and aware at that time could never have imagined that forty years later a disc jockey would have been given a suspended jail term for briefly touching a friend's clothed breasts and a fascist party led by a beer swilling vulgarian would be changing the face of British politics

    I think that the characterisation of UKIP there is one key issue in their rise.
    Because they're not fascist, and the default treatment of them as such now looks daft to all but the dedicated tribalists (who are fewer and farther between than ever). Continuing with that (especially with some of the very real issues that are pushing people to them in the fields of immigration concern, negative campaigning on each other and failure to communicate) is like responding to an utterly failed advertising campaign by trying to double down on what didn't work last time.
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    surbiton said:

    I think this would be reasonable:

    No entry to the UK without a visa unless the country concerned provided reciprocal medical cover from their "NHS" to UK citizens visiting the country (as EU and Australia among others do)

    For other states. No visa issued unless one of the following is provided:

    * proof of medical insurance covering any pre existing medical condition that they suffer from covering the whole validity of the visa

    or

    * paying of a £10,000 deposit lodged with the NHS which will be returned (without interest - the interest covers the admin), minus any medical charges for NHS treatment while here upon their departure.


    Why should UK taxpayers pay for the medical costs of people from states where UK taxpayers visiting their country would have to pay for medical costs?

    Similarly, ALL foreign aid from the UK should be stopped until such time as the national debt is paid off and we have a sovereign wealth fund like Norway do. Get our own house in order first.

    The more the progressive media foam about this, the more they give UKIP publicity and demonstrate how out of touch they are. What part of "A country with £1.4 Billion debt increasing by £100Billion a year can't afford any more compassion funded by other peoples money" dont they get?

    That's the daftest thing I have read.India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. would happily say, touring Britons could use their "NHS" free. Would any Briton really use those facilities except perhaps after an accident ?

    Currently, all such applicants have to provide a health insurance policy with their applications.
    I guess it didn't actually occur to you that reciprocality requires both parties to agree? Have you perhaps been reading Alex Salmonds "a dummies guide to negotiating agreements"?

This discussion has been closed.