Looking at that map, the following Libdem Parliamentary Constituencies voted UKIP in the 2014 elections:
Carshalton & Wallington Cheadle Colchester Eastbourne Eastleigh Hazel Grove Lewes Mid Dorset & North Poole North Cornwall North Devon North Norfolk Portsmouth South Redcar Solihull St Austell & Newquay St Ives Somerton & Frome (part) Sutton & Cheam Taunton Deane Thornbury & Yate Torbay Yeovil
ie of 44 English constituencies, half, 22 placed UKIP first place in 2014. That is an enormous psephological swing between ideologies.
Does this mean that voter loyalty to Libdems here is skindeep and they were voted in because they were the only feasible alternative to the Tories, not because of any great support for Libdem polices.
If even a quarter of the Libdems 2010 votes go to UKIP in 2015 then I suspect the Libs will lose those seats and the Tories gain 22 extra seats. Ouch
Or do people vote differently in different elections? You could easily vote LD in Parliamentary elections but be less than enamoured of their Euro-fanaticism, just as people may feel the Tories are on balance the best party to run the country but prefer to vote UKIP in Euro elections. And then you have differential turnout to account for as well.
Dr. Spyn, to be fair, I think it's accurate to say that soiling oneself in front of twenty million people would not be career-enhancing for any politician.
Hmm. This might be terribly modern, but I wonder if a live Youtube/Twitch reaction video by Farage to the debates (he isn't in, of course) might be a clever idea for him.
Gogglebox style! That would be brilliant!
I think Farage has said he will do this if excluded!
I'm impressed that Farage/UKIP have come up with that response so quickly. I have no doubt someone from one of the TV stations will be on to him like a shot.
If the Greens/SNP/Respect did the same would anyone even notice?
UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage has said he will produce a "fun" alternative broadcast if he is not allowed to take part in the leaders' TV debate at the next election.
What's he gonna do? Magic tricks? Ventriloquism?
Buffoon.
If he live streams a panel show, maybe similar to a QT format, maybe a chat show format at the same time as the debates, or maybe another channel takes it, how many people would put their laptops on at the same time as the debates. Assuming people are interested in politics in the first place. I don't watch Gogglebox but I hear it's quite popular.
If it happens I'll be happy to bet that Farage's show would get a million viewers.
Also, if Farage confirms he will put on a show. The others will all look like idiots, especially if another TV channel takes UKIP to do a simulcast.
An ideal scenario would be to have Nige 'translating' the debate in the bottom right hand corner, a la those sign language broadcasts for the hard of hearing. Farage could talk and sign at the same time. I can only imagine the hand signals when Dave is on camera
Well exactly, it's not really possible to exclude the public from debate anymore.
My mother who is 84 can use a tablet and my father was programming S/370s before most people here were born.
Looking at that map, the following Libdem Parliamentary Constituencies voted UKIP in the 2014 elections:
Carshalton & Wallington Cheadle Colchester Eastbourne Eastleigh Hazel Grove Lewes Mid Dorset & North Poole North Cornwall North Devon North Norfolk Portsmouth South Redcar Solihull St Austell & Newquay St Ives Somerton & Frome (part) Sutton & Cheam Taunton Deane Thornbury & Yate Torbay Yeovil
ie of 44 English constituencies, half, 22 placed UKIP first place in 2014. That is an enormous psephological swing between ideologies.
Does this mean that voter loyalty to Libdems here is skindeep and they were voted in because they were the only feasible alternative to the Tories, not because of any great support for Libdem polices.
If even a quarter of the Libdems 2010 votes go to UKIP in 2015 then I suspect the Libs will lose those seats and the Tories gain 22 extra seats. Ouch
Strangely enough in the local elections on the same day, the "skin deep loyalty" of the Liberal Democrat vote in Carshalton & Wallington and Sutton & Cheam swept the LDs back to control of Sutton Council with an increased majority.
Perhaps you should be looking at the Conservative areas which voted UKIP and ask why your party is languishing at 30% in the polls.
I will be voting UKIP in 2015, not for Camerons lot thank you very much.
You surprise me. From your posting on here I had you down as a SWP.
Dr. Spyn, to be fair, I think it's accurate to say that soiling oneself in front of twenty million people would not be career-enhancing for any politician.
sympathy vote - I wasn't really paying attention at when Cowley was on, but the 'remarks' are on twitter.
Surbiton No, it is blatantly unreasonable. The Greens had an MP before UKIP, they have control of a council unlike UKIP and MEPs and they beat the LDs in the Euros. If Farage is included so should Bennett be. Could be separate Scottish or Welsh debates but as I pointed out New Zealand had 1 debate with 8 party leaders, that way we could include UKIP and the Greens, Plaid Cymru, the SNP and Respect so everyone happy. Northern Ireland has its own parties and neither the Tories, Labour or LDs are competitive there so could hold its own debate
SNP and PC have no relevance outside of Scotland and Wales respectively and should be confined to the debates relevant to those places.
However, a 'lower tier' debate to include UKIP, LDs, Greens, Respect, English Democrats, BNP, SWP etc would be useful in giving the lesser known parties wider publicity. A second debate could be limited to the top 5 and a final showdown to the Cons and LAB.
You are talking about parties that do not put up enough candidates to qualify for a PPB (you need 109 candidates under Ofcom rules). Parties such as the SWP and English democrats are not relevant to the vast majority of the country because they do not stand there. In fact Respect only put up 11 candidates and the SWP put up none at all under that name. What purpose would it be to present them to a national audience who couldn't vote for them. Such a debate would be a complete waste of time.
There should be two sets of debates. One set to address the devolved regions and the other to include only those parties who are able and willing to put up say 500 candidates. There should be no other differentiation.
Surely the SNP could put up enough paper candidates in English seats to qualify for a place. It would have to decide whether the expenditure on deposits was worth the extra publicity generated.
I have in the past managed to muddle up Nicola Sturgeon and Wendy Alexander on numerous occasions on this site! But luckily back then, most folk on the site managed to see the funny side of that genuine mistake. My spelling of this politician's name is a genuine mistake, that you seem to have become obsessively sensitive about this says more about you than it does me. I have been posting on this site for nearly a decade, I don't address politicians by deliberately twisting their names into puerile nicknames. So get over it, and move on before you bore us all off the site for the evening!
Oh by the way, @Fitalass said she didn't deliberately mis spell "Carswell" and that my assumption that she had "says more about him than it does about me as a poster on this site"
But I had pointed it out to her last month, and didn't infer any pejorative cause on her part
isam • Posts: 8,540 September 24 • edited September 24 You're angrier than his constituents, they're just about to elect him by a landslide.
You're spelling Carswell incorrectly, I know you wouldn't be childish enough to do it deliberately
fitalass said: Your accusing me of trolling because I pointed out the fact that Carsewell and UKIP's political stunt had left his constituents without a voice in Westminster while Parliament has been recalled? Utterly pathetic! I few years ago, I cared enough to write and complain to my MP because he sat on his behookie while MPs rejected proposals to hold a UK-wide referendum on whether to ratify the EU's Lisbon Treaty! I would have been absolutely livid if he had pulled a stunt like Carsewell did just months before GE and missed the voted altogether, never mind while we were holding an Independence Referendum in another part of the UK while we were facing a serious terrorist threat from abroad.
Looking at that map, the following Libdem Parliamentary Constituencies voted UKIP in the 2014 elections:
Carshalton & Wallington Cheadle Colchester Eastbourne Eastleigh Hazel Grove Lewes Mid Dorset & North Poole North Cornwall North Devon North Norfolk Portsmouth South Redcar Solihull St Austell & Newquay St Ives Somerton & Frome (part) Sutton & Cheam Taunton Deane Thornbury & Yate Torbay Yeovil
ie of 44 English constituencies, half, 22 placed UKIP first place in 2014. That is an enormous psephological swing between ideologies.
Does this mean that voter loyalty to Libdems here is skindeep and they were voted in because they were the only feasible alternative to the Tories, not because of any great support for Libdem polices.
If even a quarter of the Libdems 2010 votes go to UKIP in 2015 then I suspect the Libs will lose those seats and the Tories gain 22 extra seats. Ouch
Strangely enough in the local elections on the same day, the "skin deep loyalty" of the Liberal Democrat vote in Carshalton & Wallington and Sutton & Cheam swept the LDs back to control of Sutton Council with an increased majority.
Perhaps you should be looking at the Conservative areas which voted UKIP and ask why your party is languishing at 30% in the polls.
I will be voting UKIP in 2015, not for Camerons lot thank you very much.
You surprise me. From your posting on here I had you down as a SWP.
You don't have to be a trot to be in favour of things like compulsory land reform and a land value tax.
Hmm. This might be terribly modern, but I wonder if a live Youtube/Twitch reaction video by Farage to the debates (he isn't in, of course) might be a clever idea for him.
Gogglebox style! That would be brilliant!
I think Farage has said he will do this if excluded!
I'm impressed that Farage/UKIP have come up with that response so quickly. I have no doubt someone from one of the TV stations will be on to him like a shot.
If the Greens/SNP/Respect did the same would anyone even notice?
UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage has said he will produce a "fun" alternative broadcast if he is not allowed to take part in the leaders' TV debate at the next election.
What's he gonna do? Magic tricks? Ventriloquism?
Buffoon.
Yup.
Don't forget, he's the silly idiot who spent an election day pratting about in an aircraft, which then crashed, rather than knocking on doors.
Yup he's the idiot who has got the Tory Party running round like panicked headless chickens
And?
He's still a prize plonker, regardless of what the Tories and everyone else do!
Is he? I certainly don't view him in that light and there are far worse in Westminster....
Surbiton No, it is blatantly unreasonable. The Greens had an MP before UKIP, they have control of a council unlike UKIP and MEPs and they beat the LDs in the Euros. If Farage is included so should Bennett be. Could be separate Scottish or Welsh debates but as I pointed out New Zealand had 1 debate with 8 party leaders, that way we could include UKIP and the Greens, Plaid Cymru, the SNP and Respect so everyone happy. Northern Ireland has its own parties and neither the Tories, Labour or LDs are competitive there so could hold its own debate
SNP and PC have no relevance outside of Scotland and Wales respectively and should be confined to the debates relevant to those places.
However, a 'lower tier' debate to include UKIP, LDs, Greens, Respect, English Democrats, BNP, SWP etc would be useful in giving the lesser known parties wider publicity. A second debate could be limited to the top 5 and a final showdown to the Cons and LAB.
You are talking about parties that do not put up enough candidates to qualify for a PPB (you need 109 candidates under Ofcom rules). Parties such as the SWP and English democrats are not relevant to the vast majority of the country because they do not stand there. In fact Respect only put up 11 candidates and the SWP put up none at all under that name. What purpose would it be to present them to a national audience who couldn't vote for them. Such a debate would be a complete waste of time.
There should be two sets of debates. One set to address the devolved regions and the other to include only those parties who are able and willing to put up say 500 candidates. There should be no other differentiation.
Surely the SNP could put up enough paper candidates in English seats to qualify for a place. It would have to decide whether the expenditure on deposits was worth the extra publicity generated.
Well if it can find 440 candidates and has £220,000 to throw away. What would the point be though?
Surbiton No, it is blatantly unreasonable. The Greens had an MP before UKIP, they have control of a council unlike UKIP and MEPs and they beat the LDs in the Euros. If Farage is included so should Bennett be. Could be separate Scottish or Welsh debates but as I pointed out New Zealand had 1 debate with 8 party leaders, that way we could include UKIP and the Greens, Plaid Cymru, the SNP and Respect so everyone happy. Northern Ireland has its own parties and neither the Tories, Labour or LDs are competitive there so could hold its own debate
SNP and PC have no relevance outside of Scotland and Wales respectively and should be confined to the debates relevant to those places.
However, a 'lower tier' debate to include UKIP, LDs, Greens, Respect, English Democrats, BNP, SWP etc would be useful in giving the lesser known parties wider publicity. A second debate could be limited to the top 5 and a final showdown to the Cons and LAB.
You are talking about parties that do not put up enough candidates to qualify for a PPB (you need 109 candidates under Ofcom rules). Parties such as the SWP and English democrats are not relevant to the vast majority of the country because they do not stand there. In fact Respect only put up 11 candidates and the SWP put up none at all under that name. What purpose would it be to present them to a national audience who couldn't vote for them. Such a debate would be a complete waste of time.
There should be two sets of debates. One set to address the devolved regions and the other to include only those parties who are able and willing to put up say 500 candidates. There should be no other differentiation.
Surely the SNP could put up enough paper candidates in English seats to qualify for a place. It would have to decide whether the expenditure on deposits was worth the extra publicity generated.
Interesting thought, but, according to the SNP, they spent all on the Independence Referendum and here should be nothing left in the coffers. However, er! If there should be more than a few pence left, then one wonders how confident they actually were on winning.
Don't remind me, hubby and youngest lad have got it booked. I am still traumatised after they have just whizzed their way through four seasons of this zombies fest in the last few weeks, its enough to turn you vegetarian! I thought that if I just avoided watching the scenes I would be okay, but the sound effects are just as bad. Shudders.
The Tories have shortlisted 2 female councillors for Rochester (it's supposed to be an open primary but the Tory party has chosen the only 2 candidates beforehand).
Why not Caroline Lucas Green MP for Brighton whose party won a seat in a general election, not just an artificial byelection? Of how about Nicola Sturgeon, leader of the third largest political party in these islands? Yet another metro-centric view of British politics. No wonder so many of us here in Scotland want to be out of this.
Just to highlight my point about Guardian readers going green.
Now I'm going to see if I can improve my score on UC.
I have in the past managed to muddle up Nicola Sturgeon and Wendy Alexander on numerous occasions on this site! But luckily back then, most folk on the site managed to see the funny side of that genuine mistake. My spelling of this politician's name is a genuine mistake, that you seem to have become obsessively sensitive about this says more about you than it does me. I have been posting on this site for nearly a decade, I don't address politicians by deliberately twisting their names into puerile nicknames. So get over it, and move on before you bore us all off the site for the evening!
I don't doubt you're telling the truth, but if you did it before and Isam pulled you up that time, under any reasonable measure he had a point that he thought you were doing it deliberately, whether wrong or right. Therefore I'm surprised you made a rather him-fisted attempt to make him look bad, and have now made an even sillier one.
Telegraph - Lib Dem deputy chief whip Mark Hunter resigns " Liberal Democrat Mark Hunter has resigned his post as the party's deputy chief whip to concentrate on his constituency work.
The Cheadle MP, who held his seat with a majority of 3,272 in 2010, said it had been a "privilege" to serve in the coalition Government and he was "proud" of the party's achievements."
Meeting of the PLP this evening. Twitter Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP · 1h 1 hour ago Barnstorming speech by @Ed_Miliband at tonight's meeting of the parliamentary party.
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 43m 43 minutes ago Miliband tells the PLP: I will not let the opportunity to win "slip away".
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 33m 33 minutes ago Labour spokesman says there were 14 positive contributions at PLP meeting and two critical ones.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges · 44m 44 minutes ago Ed Miliband tells PLP Labour election win is "doable". There's a rallying cry...
The ITV debate (which is the 4 man one with Farage) CANNOT go 2nd (ie 16 April) as it will clash with the Europa League quarter-final.
I don't think there is any way Cameron (or probably Clegg) will agree to Farage being in the final debate. So, if the debates are to happen, it looks as if Farage will have to go in the 1st debate - which would be optimal for Cameron and Clegg.
I have in the past managed to muddle up Nicola Sturgeon and Wendy Alexander on numerous occasions on this site! But luckily back then, most folk on the site managed to see the funny side of that genuine mistake. My spelling of this politician's name is a genuine mistake, that you seem to have become obsessively sensitive about this says more about you than it does me. I have been posting on this site for nearly a decade, I don't address politicians by deliberately twisting their names into puerile nicknames. So get over it, and move on before you bore us all off the site for the evening!
Oh by the way, @Fitalass said she didn't deliberately mis spell "Carswell" and that my assumption that she had "says more about him than it does about me as a poster on this site"
But I had pointed it out to her last month, and didn't infer any pejorative cause on her part
isam • Posts: 8,540 September 24 • edited September 24 You're angrier than his constituents, they're just about to elect him by a landslide.
You're spelling Carswell incorrectly, I know you wouldn't be childish enough to do it deliberately
fitalass said: Your accusing me of trolling because I pointed out the fact that Carsewell and UKIP's political stunt had left his constituents without a voice in Westminster while Parliament has been recalled? Utterly pathetic! I few years ago, I cared enough to write and complain to my MP because he sat on his behookie while MPs rejected proposals to hold a UK-wide referendum on whether to ratify the EU's Lisbon Treaty! I would have been absolutely livid if he had pulled a stunt like Carsewell did just months before GE and missed the voted altogether, never mind while we were holding an Independence Referendum in another part of the UK while we were facing a serious terrorist threat from abroad.
.. or you could apologise and say you didn't see when I pointed out to you last month that you were mis spelling his name in a way that might be construed as a puerile joke given the animosity you feel for him?
As you continued to mis spell it afterwards, why would I think it was an honest mistake? I accept that it is now and fair enough, but your aggressive hyperbole is just plain weird.
All it says about me is that I noticed your mis spelling, & mentioned it while saying I was sure you didn't mean it
Meeting of the PLP this evening. Twitter Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP · 1h 1 hour ago Barnstorming speech by @Ed_Miliband at tonight's meeting of the parliamentary party.
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 43m 43 minutes ago Miliband tells the PLP: I will not let the opportunity to win "slip away".
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 33m 33 minutes ago Labour spokesman says there were 14 positive contributions at PLP meeting and two critical ones.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges · 44m 44 minutes ago Ed Miliband tells PLP Labour election win is "doable". There's a rallying cry...
Is Dugher now Miliband's new head cheerleader? He was the one they sent out last Thursday to do the media thing
Meeting of the PLP this evening. Twitter Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP · 1h 1 hour ago Barnstorming speech by @Ed_Miliband at tonight's meeting of the parliamentary party.
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 43m 43 minutes ago Miliband tells the PLP: I will not let the opportunity to win "slip away".
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 33m 33 minutes ago Labour spokesman says there were 14 positive contributions at PLP meeting and two critical ones.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges · 44m 44 minutes ago Ed Miliband tells PLP Labour election win is "doable". There's a rallying cry...
Improving polls came at a good time for Ed. It is always much easier to do this stuff with better numbers behind you than when you are trailing.
Meeting of the PLP this evening. Twitter Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP · 1h 1 hour ago Barnstorming speech by @Ed_Miliband at tonight's meeting of the parliamentary party.
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 43m 43 minutes ago Miliband tells the PLP: I will not let the opportunity to win "slip away".
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 33m 33 minutes ago Labour spokesman says there were 14 positive contributions at PLP meeting and two critical ones.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges · 44m 44 minutes ago Ed Miliband tells PLP Labour election win is "doable". There's a rallying cry...
Is Dugher now Miliband's new head cheerleader? He was the one they sent out last Thursday to do the media thing
Hmm. This might be terribly modern, but I wonder if a live Youtube/Twitch reaction video by Farage to the debates (he isn't in, of course) might be a clever idea for him.
Gogglebox style! That would be brilliant!
I think Farage has said he will do this if excluded!
I'm impressed that Farage/UKIP have come up with that response so quickly. I have no doubt someone from one of the TV stations will be on to him like a shot.
If the Greens/SNP/Respect did the same would anyone even notice?
UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage has said he will produce a "fun" alternative broadcast if he is not allowed to take part in the leaders' TV debate at the next election.
What's he gonna do? Magic tricks? Ventriloquism?
Buffoon.
You should be grateful -the more people watching Farage, the less people can watch Millband's bizarre gurning.
More of the same of centralist Westminster garbage. Murphy just comes over as another 'We know best. We just need to educate them better' twerp who insults the intelligence of real people (as opposed to the shallow nodding dogs in the Freakshow).
Janan Ganesh has finally got the wind up and has pulled out all the stops in an FT blog smearing UKIP from beginning to end. He even brings Mathew Parris to his aid.
It entertains me that the political class, especially Labour, have spent 50 years creating a cowed, thick, un-engaged, drone-like populus that they can use as voting fodder, and now the rug is being pulled from under their feet, they suddenly want their traditional voters to pick holes in the finer points of UKIP policy.
Looks like he is also appealing to core vote by raising Orgreave & Hillsborough as well. As for the NHS stuff, it has nothing to do with work as SY PCC, but every little helps.
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who are on the site tonight to discuss politics or betting.
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
Janan Ganesh has finally got the wind up and has pulled out all the stops in an FT blog smearing UKIP from beginning to end. He even brings Mathew Parris to his aid.
Ganesh is doing a very good impression of a Kenny Everett character!
I strongly believe that the Better Together campaign missed out by doing almost the reverse of what would have been the best strategy: instead of emphasising what Scots have/had got from the Union, they should have focussed on what they have given. How they've shaped the United Kingdom and contributed over the years - emphasising that it was out of proportion to their population.
And mention occasionally, in passing, some of the benefits they now receive, of course, but emphasise the value Scots have brought to the entire country (and the world through this country)
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
Oh right.. well I never do it, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt too when she did. I cant be responsible for what other people do
Surbiton No, it is blatantly unreasonable. The Greens had an MP before UKIP, they have control of a council unlike UKIP and MEPs and they beat the LDs in the Euros. If Farage is included so should Bennett be. Could be separate Scottish or Welsh debates but as I pointed out New Zealand had 1 debate with 8 party leaders, that way we could include UKIP and the Greens, Plaid Cymru, the SNP and Respect so everyone happy. Northern Ireland has its own parties and neither the Tories, Labour or LDs are competitive there so could hold its own debate
SNP and PC have no relevance outside of Scotland and Wales respectively and should be confined to the debates relevant to those places.
However, a 'lower tier' debate to include UKIP, LDs, Greens, Respect, English Democrats, BNP, SWP etc would be useful in giving the lesser known parties wider publicity. A second debate could be limited to the top 5 and a final showdown to the Cons and LAB.
You are talking about parties that do not put up enough candidates to qualify for a PPB (you need 109 candidates under Ofcom rules). Parties such as the SWP and English democrats are not relevant to the vast majority of the country because they do not stand there. In fact Respect only put up 11 candidates and the SWP put up none at all under that name. What purpose would it be to present them to a national audience who couldn't vote for them. Such a debate would be a complete waste of time.
There should be two sets of debates. One set to address the devolved regions and the other to include only those parties who are able and willing to put up say 500 candidates. There should be no other differentiation.
Surely the SNP could put up enough paper candidates in English seats to qualify for a place. It would have to decide whether the expenditure on deposits was worth the extra publicity generated.
Well if it can find 440 candidates and has £220,000 to throw away. What would the point be though?
I strongly believe that the Better Together campaign missed out by doing almost the reverse of what would have been the best strategy: instead of emphasising what Scots have/had got from the Union, they should have focussed on what they have given. How they've shaped the United Kingdom and contributed over the years - emphasising that it was out of proportion to their population.
And mention occasionally, in passing, some of the benefits they now receive, of course, but emphasise the value Scots have brought to the entire country (and the world through this country)
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
Oh right.. well I never do it, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt too when she did. I cant be responsible for what other people do
You must have seen it before? Even in it's mildest form, REd.
Bugs me too. It's a common below-the-line-moron thing though. EUSSR. Guido's sewer in particular is full of it.
A sign of relief from UKIP's point tonight, Panorama wasn't bad for them.
Seat numbers (over five) haven't moved so Mr Punter was correct.
As you say, not to bad for UKIP. I almost get the feeling that the BBC's reporter kind of accepted (to some extent) that UKIP was a new party and was bound to have it's share of cranks. A relatively soft investigation?
All the elements of a classic PB thread this evening
Two posters arguing among themselves One Labourite randomly declaring certain defeat An army of Kippers tiggerishly bouncing around PB Tories entirely absent after a slew of bad polls
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
Oh right.. well I never do it, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt too when she did. I cant be responsible for what other people do
You must have seen it before? Even in it's mildest form, REd.
Bugs me too. It's a common below-the-line-moron thing though. EUSSR. Guido's sewer in particular is full of it.
Of course I have seen it before, I normally let it pass me by, its quite pathetic, and unfunny. But I wasn't sure whether @fitalass was doing it deliberately or not. That's why I corrected her and said "I am sure you aren't doing it deliberately"
When she continued to do it, I assumed she was doing it deliberately. Isn't that easy enough to follow?
Now she says it was accidental, and I take her word for it. Hard to see what I have done wrong here really
All the elements of a classic PB thread this evening
Two posters arguing among themselves One Labourite randomly declaring certain defeat An army of Kippers tiggerishly bouncing around PB Tories entirely absent after a slew of bad polls
I was waiting for thread after thread of excited "is this what's driving the Tory slump" type analysis from TSE.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I've been wracking my brains trying to think of some other examples: I think someone mentioned Milibland earlier. Millipede is another one. Morris used to oddly refer to him as Miliband (E). Harriet Harperson and Harpie were ones I can also recall.
I still think Carsewell is the worst - although Dave Chameleon runs it close.
No chance the Tories will be dim enough to remove Dave.
He's not great but he's by far the best they have.
And Labour were not bright enough to get rid of the Unions choice Ed Milliband.
Now they are waking up to the fact he is a dud its too late.
Just try to imagine him running the country, hard I know - if they wouldn't trash the place (more) it would almost be funny watching him try to run the Country.
All the elements of a classic PB thread this evening
Two posters arguing among themselves One Labourite randomly declaring certain defeat An army of Kippers tiggerishly bouncing around PB Tories entirely absent after a slew of bad polls
I was waiting for thread after thread of excited "is this what's driving the Tory slump" type analysis from TSE.
All the elements of a classic PB thread this evening
Two posters arguing among themselves One Labourite randomly declaring certain defeat An army of Kippers tiggerishly bouncing around PB Tories entirely absent after a slew of bad polls
I was waiting for thread after thread of excited "is this what's driving the Tory slump" type analysis from TSE.
***** BETTING POST *****
If anyone can find one of Hugh's posts that is remotely connected to betting.
or
One that is remotely interesting.
I will offer £10 evens. Regular respected posters can vote and Mr Prasannan to adjudicate.
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
Oh right.. well I never do it, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt too when she did. I cant be responsible for what other people do
You must have seen it before? Even in it's mildest form, REd.
Bugs me too. It's a common below-the-line-moron thing though. EUSSR. Guido's sewer in particular is full of it.
Janan Ganesh has finally got the wind up and has pulled out all the stops in an FT blog smearing UKIP from beginning to end. He even brings Mathew Parris to his aid.
I imagine that people in the West who are losing out to globalisation respond better to people who have some sympathy to them as opposed to people like Ganesh or Parris who sneer at them.
All the elements of a classic PB thread this evening
Two posters arguing among themselves One Labourite randomly declaring certain defeat An army of Kippers tiggerishly bouncing around PB Tories entirely absent after a slew of bad polls
Yes that sums it up quite well.
Can we not just fast forward to May 2015 now and it would save months of rubbish.
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
Oh right.. well I never do it, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt too when she did. I cant be responsible for what other people do
You must have seen it before? Even in it's mildest form, REd.
Bugs me too. It's a common below-the-line-moron thing though. EUSSR. Guido's sewer in particular is full of it.
It's as bad as Gideon, isn't it Hugh?
How is Gideon a "hilarious" mispelling of the name of George Gideon Oliver Osborne, heir apparent to the Baronetcy of Ballentaylor and Ballylemon?
@Isam Luckily, been around the site long enough for a lot of other long standing posters to know that I don't tend to indulge in puerile name calling of politicians. I will call it a night on this thread as your obsession with this is in danger of boring other posters who might of come on here tonight to discuss politics or betting.
I don't see why you are so defensive, surely you can acknowledge my point?
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
In fairness, it's low-rent types from all parts of the spectrum that do it. Kippers are certainly prone to it. Fitalass isn't alone.
Oh right.. well I never do it, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt too when she did. I cant be responsible for what other people do
You must have seen it before? Even in it's mildest form, REd.
Bugs me too. It's a common below-the-line-moron thing though. EUSSR. Guido's sewer in particular is full of it.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I actually now think Labour will quite likely fall back from their 2010 share of the vote, which means the Tories could get a majority even with the same or slightly less votes than last time.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I actually now think Labour will quite likely fall back from their 2010 share of the vote, which means the Tories could get a majority even with the same or slightly less votes than last time.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
Most people don't know what policies UKIP are in favour of. Nearer to the election, I think you find that people on the left side of politics won't like some of their policies.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I actually now think Labour will quite likely fall back from their 2010 share of the vote, which means the Tories could get a majority even with the same or slightly less votes than last time.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
Most people don't know what policies UKIP are in favour of. Nearer to the election, I think you find that people on the left side of politics won't like some of their policies.
Labour will leak some votes to UKIP. The slightly, y'know, vote.
But nowhere near enough to cost them seats, at least not on the scale of the Con->UKIP flood. Net positive for Labour.
Once in Government, Labour should take it on and not pander to it. Immigrants and the poor are not the problem that working people in the country faces, no matter how much UKIP and the Rightwing media scapegoat them.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I actually now think Labour will quite likely fall back from their 2010 share of the vote, which means the Tories could get a majority even with the same or slightly less votes than last time.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
Most people don't know what policies UKIP are in favour of. Nearer to the election, I think you find that people on the left side of politics won't like some of their policies.
But a lot of Lab people who are voting UKIP don't CARE about their policies -- I bet there's even some people who vote UKIP who admit they don't really care that much about immigration or Europe. They're doing it simply because it's the easiest way of expressing their disgust with how badly Labour represents them.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I think "SNP will take handful of seats from Labour " is dramatic understimate of lokely SNP success try in the range 20-30 gains.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I actually now think Labour will quite likely fall back from their 2010 share of the vote, which means the Tories could get a majority even with the same or slightly less votes than last time.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
Most people don't know what policies UKIP are in favour of. Nearer to the election, I think you find that people on the left side of politics won't like some of their policies.
Labour will leak some votes to UKIP. The slightly, y'know, vote.
But nowhere near enough to cost them seats, at least not on the scale of the Con->UKIP flood. Net positive for Labour.
Once in Government, Labour should take it on and not pander to it. Immigrants and the poor are not the problem that working people in the country faces, no matter how much UKIP and the Rightwing media scapegoat them.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
Lol.
Which seats do you think the Tories will take - assuming they hold all they currently have - to put them over the line, Comrade?
The scenario which gives a Tory majority involves at least ten seats from the Lib Dems - this is far from being outlandish.
It would also involve UKIP picking up more votes from Labour in a clutch of northern seats, and thus giving the Tories victory in those seats without having to gain any extra votes. I'm thinking of seats like Dudley North and Newcastle-under-Lyme - even Great Grimsby, perhaps.
Now I've no idea if there's any evidence for that from recent local election results, or the European elections, etc, but it's not impossible.
Factor in that some recent polls have shown a few Labour 2010 voters switching directly to the Tories and it is possible to conceive of a Tory majority scenario.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I actually now think Labour will quite likely fall back from their 2010 share of the vote, which means the Tories could get a majority even with the same or slightly less votes than last time.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
Most people don't know what policies UKIP are in favour of. Nearer to the election, I think you find that people on the left side of politics won't like some of their policies.
But a lot of Lab people who are voting UKIP don't CARE about their policies -- I bet there's even some people who vote UKIP who admit they don't really care that much about immigration or Europe. They're doing it simply because it's the easiest way of expressing their disgust with how badly Labour represents them.
My dad is a pro EU kipper supporter. He is rather does not approve of Gay marriage or Burkas, or Catholics. I think he will vote Con in the end though, because he dislikes the LibDems even more in his constiguency!
He is 79 and remembers a different world. He is coming to visit next week, so I shall take him up the Golden mile for dinner and see the Diwali lights. He likes a good curry.
I have now officially resigned myself to a Tory majority government.
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
For that to happen the Tories would need to achieve 38% of the vote, with Labour nearer to 30%.
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I think "SNP will take handful of seats from Labour " is dramatic understimate of lokely SNP success try in the range 20-30 gains.
SNP are on a roll, but the maths in Labour seats works against them. Big gains are not lokely.
I'm having trouble getting comments below the lead article with Firefox. Works fine with Explorer. Any idea what I should do?
On the other and, Explorer features an advert which looks awfully like a virus, called "Important message - A required driver is missing", with a "fix now" button. I'm sure it's OK, but I'm not clicking on it...
I'm having trouble getting comments below the lead article with Firefox. Works fine with Explorer. Any idea what I should do?
On the other and, Explorer features an advert which looks awfully like a virus, called "Important message - A required driver is missing", with a "fix now" button. I'm sure it's OK, but I'm not clicking on it...
Comments
My mother who is 84 can use a tablet and my father was programming S/370s before most people here were born.
This political philosphy is probably nearer my own than any other. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism
I suspect G. K. Chesterton would have supported UKIP.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/tories-candidate-25206/
Recommend 571
Why not Caroline Lucas Green MP for Brighton whose party won a seat in a general election, not just an artificial byelection? Of how about Nicola Sturgeon, leader of the third largest political party in these islands?
Yet another metro-centric view of British politics. No wonder so many of us here in Scotland want to be out of this.
Just to highlight my point about Guardian readers going green.
Now I'm going to see if I can improve my score on UC.
Telegraph - Lib Dem deputy chief whip Mark Hunter resigns
" Liberal Democrat Mark Hunter has resigned his post as the party's deputy chief whip to concentrate on his constituency work.
The Cheadle MP, who held his seat with a majority of 3,272 in 2010, said it had been a "privilege" to serve in the coalition Government and he was "proud" of the party's achievements."
Twitter
Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP · 1h 1 hour ago
Barnstorming speech by @Ed_Miliband at tonight's meeting of the parliamentary party.
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 43m 43 minutes ago
Miliband tells the PLP: I will not let the opportunity to win "slip away".
George Eaton @georgeeaton · 33m 33 minutes ago
Labour spokesman says there were 14 positive contributions at PLP meeting and two critical ones.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges · 44m 44 minutes ago
Ed Miliband tells PLP Labour election win is "doable". There's a rallying cry...
I don't think there is any way Cameron (or probably Clegg) will agree to Farage being in the final debate. So, if the debates are to happen, it looks as if Farage will have to go in the 1st debate - which would be optimal for Cameron and Clegg.
As you continued to mis spell it afterwards, why would I think it was an honest mistake? I accept that it is now and fair enough, but your aggressive hyperbole is just plain weird.
All it says about me is that I noticed your mis spelling, & mentioned it while saying I was sure you didn't mean it
95% of Tory voters would have had an MP.
The latter would be a very useful scoreline for the Welsh, (who are two up in their game)
WakeupScotland blog - Carol Craig – On Selfishness and the Scottish Independence Referendum
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1439816a-52bb-11e4-a236-00144feab7de.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/comment/feed//product&siteedition=uk#axzz3G3O30LDC
Janan Ganesh has finally got the wind up and has pulled out all the stops in an FT blog smearing UKIP from beginning to end. He even brings Mathew Parris to his aid.
Half of the PCC by-election edition of the White Rose is devoted to NSH
http://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/2014/10/13/labours-pcc-candidate-literature/
The bloke they've got there Albie, is a Tory defector from last year.. known as a bit of a nutter locally
You know, the one from November 2013.
Now tell me something interesting.
I told you, very politely, that you were spelling Carswell incorrectly, and you carried on doing it.
If I were calling you @fatalass constantly, while slagging you off, and kept doing so after you had corrected me, wouldn't you think it deliberate?
UK Awakening @UK_Awakening 17m17 minutes ago
Douglas Carswell re-enters the House of Commons as a Ukip MP: http://youtu.be/aJoCf45gBo0 via @YouTube
And mention occasionally, in passing, some of the benefits they now receive, of course, but emphasise the value Scots have brought to the entire country (and the world through this country)
I doubt Labour will be making (m)any gains at all outside of London.
Bugs me too. It's a common below-the-line-moron thing though. EUSSR. Guido's sewer in particular is full of it.
As you say, not to bad for UKIP. I almost get the feeling that the BBC's reporter kind of accepted (to some extent) that UKIP was a new party and was bound to have it's share of cranks. A relatively soft investigation?
BBC maybe hedging it's bets.
Which seats do you think the Tories will take - assuming they hold all they currently have - to put them over the line, Comrade?
Two posters arguing among themselves
One Labourite randomly declaring certain defeat
An army of Kippers tiggerishly bouncing around
PB Tories entirely absent after a slew of bad polls
When she continued to do it, I assumed she was doing it deliberately. Isn't that easy enough to follow?
Now she says it was accidental, and I take her word for it. Hard to see what I have done wrong here really
Labour are doing better in the marginals than the current polling average. There are quite a lot of people in parts of the country who are not sharing in this 3% growth the country is experiencing. Public sector workers might not be keen on keeping the Tories in government.
If I were putting bets on, it would be Labour in the 290-320 range, with the Tories 250-280 range. Lib Dems will hold more seats than currently predicted, due to the fortress strategy, with I reckon about 30-35 retained. UKIP may win a handful of seats. SNP will take a handful of seats from Labour, but Labour may gain a couple from Lib Dems in Scotland.
I still think Carsewell is the worst - although Dave Chameleon runs it close.
Now they are waking up to the fact he is a dud its too late.
Just try to imagine him running the country, hard I know - if they wouldn't trash the place (more) it would almost be funny watching him try to run the Country.
If anyone can find one of Hugh's posts that is remotely connected to betting.
or
One that is remotely interesting.
I will offer £10 evens. Regular respected posters can vote and Mr Prasannan to adjudicate.
Can we not just fast forward to May 2015 now and it would save months of rubbish.
Labour simply have not understood how disillusioned their "core vote" is, and I don't think they're going to understand in time. They're going to leak working-class voters to UKIP and middle-class voters to the Greens.
But nowhere near enough to cost them seats, at least not on the scale of the Con->UKIP flood. Net positive for Labour.
Once in Government, Labour should take it on and not pander to it. Immigrants and the poor are not the problem that working people in the country faces, no matter how much UKIP and the Rightwing media scapegoat them.
I know it's the Daily Mail. Do you know who Simon Danczuk is?
Agreed.
And at the moment, UKIP are on course for about six. I suppose that's a handful, if you've fairly big hands.
It would also involve UKIP picking up more votes from Labour in a clutch of northern seats, and thus giving the Tories victory in those seats without having to gain any extra votes. I'm thinking of seats like Dudley North and Newcastle-under-Lyme - even Great Grimsby, perhaps.
Now I've no idea if there's any evidence for that from recent local election results, or the European elections, etc, but it's not impossible.
Factor in that some recent polls have shown a few Labour 2010 voters switching directly to the Tories and it is possible to conceive of a Tory majority scenario.
He is 79 and remembers a different world. He is coming to visit next week, so I shall take him up the Golden mile for dinner and see the Diwali lights. He likes a good curry.
I think "SNP will take handful of seats from Labour " is dramatic understimate of lokely SNP success try in the range 20-30 gains.
Suggest you do some careful research. It would take a miracle for Labour to lose more than a handful of seats to the SNP. Sad, but true.
On the other and, Explorer features an advert which looks awfully like a virus, called "Important message - A required driver is missing", with a "fix now" button. I'm sure it's OK, but I'm not clicking on it...