I would never describe LibDems as a centre party. With the unproven exception of the coalition government they have often, and normally, had far more radical policies than either the two main parties. If you've attended or listened to their conferences you would know what I mean, with a raft of speeches, statements and policies passed which would fair take away the breath of Labour and Conservative.
By the way, the Social Democrats prove my point. They formed in reaction to Labour's lurch leftward and the response to that was what? Labour moved to the centre under Kinnock, John Smith and Tony Blair. And that's where they won back power.
Centre = power. Thatcher got it. Major got it. Blair got it. Brown got it. Cameron has got it.
Don't all the polls show people consider Miliband to be closer to the centre ground than Cameron? That in my view is the whole problem and why the Tories are likely to win -- the Tories are actually looking after their own "core" voters, while Labour is promising yet more cuts for their own core voters. What you call the "centre ground" can so easily come across to the voters as drift, dullness and pointlessness, and that's where Labour have found themselves atm in my opinion.
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
It's a set-up. Mr Cameron goes to Brussels, waves the shade of a handbag around, has a dramatic meeting where he walks out without agreement, later has an emotional reconciliation at which Britain and the EU decide that they're so much stronger together and agree to work through their differences, and the charge is waived or swapped for something more valuable.
It's WWE politics, with Jean-Claude Juncker as the heel.
The demand comes as part of what is known in Brussels as an amending budget proposal, a routine event that occurs regularly and is dependent on the ebb and flow of payments into the EU machine. There are currently a further six amending budgets on the table in Brussels, some of which may entail returning funds to Britain, meaning the overall bill could yet be cut.
If you were a conspiracy theorist, you could suspect that the amendment that increases our payment has been revealed first, so that if when the total is all totted up we don't have to pay anything, Cameron can present it as a victory over the dark forces of the EU Commission.
Or the total bill to the UK could end up being a lot more than the currently talked about €2.1 billion.
What, you mean a manufactured row with Brussels that will gives Cameron the opportunity to stand up for Britain at a time when his party is leaking votes to UKIP? Surely not.
I didn’trealise seven year old’s could vote in the primary!
My handwriting may be deteriorating with advancing age, but it’s better than that! How do you know this was 6 year old. Could have been a 5 year old; but do curve those r's more.
Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick) 24/10/2014 11:11 Tory officials in Rochester refuse to give precise figures on primary vote. Admit some spoilt ballots, but say not in region of 1600
Perhaps it is in the region of 1599. Keep asking.
Anyway, whatever the number, the billy bunters appear to have made their mind up. UKIP now down to 1.18 on Betfair and not much money being traded.
I confess I was somewhat skeptical of your attempts to divine useful betting data from a primary poll, but I can see now where you were coming from. It helps of course that the outcome was definitive in the sense that the numbers were well inside the 'oh sh*t' zone and couldn't easily be spun as 'hmmmm unclear'. And it is also helps that we now also know about the efforts to promote a high turnover. (Three forms per household, ffs!)
Whilst the result of the main event in Rochester is starting to resemble a Clacton-like formality, the punters can now at least turn to the Vote Share markets with a little more confidence, thanks to the expensive but informative betting aid that the primary has given us.
Looks like UKIP are heading for somewhere between 40% and 50%. Of course the bookmakers will be as aware of the figures as anybody and will adjust their prices accordingly, but no matter - we now know what desert we are in. Just have to find the right tent.
Perhaps the mystery surrounding the precise numbers is simply down to somebody at Conservative Party HQ trying to blindside Shadsy.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Ken Clarke is a Keynesian economically, wanted to sign us up to the Euro, believes in light touch criminal sentencing, and considered even David Cameron soft euroscepticism to be "right wing nationalism". A more relevant question is how the hell is he a conservative...
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Ken Clarke is a Keynesian economically, wanted to sign us up to the Euro, believes in light touch criminal sentencing, and considered even David Cameron soft euroscepticism to be "right wing nationalism". A more relevant question is how the hell is he a conservative...
LOL at the idea of Clarke being left-wing economically. The policies he implemented when he was chancellor would've had even the likes of Macmillan turning his grave, let alone any of the pre-Blair Labour governments.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
It's a set-up. Mr Cameron goes to Brussels, waves the shade of a handbag around, has a dramatic meeting where he walks out without agreement, later has an emotional reconciliation at which Britain and the EU decide that they're so much stronger together and agree to work through their differences, and the charge is waived or swapped for something more valuable.
It's WWE politics, with Jean-Claude Juncker as the heel.
Thanks to my 11 year old son I actually know about Heels and Faces on WWE. What is your excuse?
There is nothing inherently left wing about Europhilia. You have left wing europhiles and right wing ones, just as you have left wing eurosceptics and right wing ones.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Indeed, my wife as an immigrant from non-colonial Asia had to wait until she got her British Citizenship to vote, which seems fair since I am currently resident in her country and cannot vote here, but could if I took citizenship. Why could another person who is only resident in the UK and holds no citizenship vote when my wife could not.
Quite. The fact that people are responding to the criticism with shrieks of "racist!" just shows how they have no case. British votes for British people is the only sensible policy here. The fact that the Coalition haven't changed this is just another example of them running scare from the "racist" slur. It's pathetic, and why we need UKIP in parliament to keep them honest.
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
It's a set-up. Mr Cameron goes to Brussels, waves the shade of a handbag around, has a dramatic meeting where he walks out without agreement, later has an emotional reconciliation at which Britain and the EU decide that they're so much stronger together and agree to work through their differences, and the charge is waived or swapped for something more valuable.
It's WWE politics, with Jean-Claude Juncker as the heel.
Thanks to my 11 year old son I actually know about Heels and Faces on WWE. What is your excuse?
There is nothing inherently left wing about Europhilia. You have left wing europhiles and right wing ones, just as you have left wing eurosceptics and right wing ones.
Europhilia is firmly a social democratic position. People support the EU because they want to bring forward left-wing policies where there isn't the electoral support for it in the UK. Name me three Europhiles that are to the right of David Cameron.
Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick) 24/10/2014 11:11 Tory officials in Rochester refuse to give precise figures on primary vote. Admit some spoilt ballots, but say not in region of 1600
Perhaps it is in the region of 1599. Keep asking.
Anyway, whatever the number, the billy bunters appear to have made their mind up. UKIP now down to 1.18 on Betfair and not much money being traded.
I confess I was somewhat skeptical of your attempts to divine useful betting data from a primary poll, but I can see now where you were coming from. It helps of course that the outcome was definitive in the sense that the numbers were well inside the 'oh sh*t' zone and couldn't easily be spun as 'hmmmm unclear'. And it is also helps that we now also know about the efforts to promote a high turnover. (Three forms per household, ffs!)
Whilst the result of the main event in Rochester is starting to resemble a Clacton-like formality, the punters can now at least turn to the Vote Share markets with a little more confidence, thanks to the expensive but informative betting aid that the primary has given us.
Looks like UKIP are heading for somewhere between 40% and 50%. Of course the bookmakers will be as aware of the figures as anybody and will adjust their prices accordingly, but no matter - we now know what desert we are in. Just have to find the right tent.
Perhaps the mystery surrounding the precise numbers is simply down to somebody at Conservative Party HQ trying to blindside Shadsy.
The 5/6 under 50% turnout looks a shoo in on those primary returns
All that can beat it is a Ukip landslide of clacton proportions, and even then it was close
Southam - lefties also are unusually partial to champagne (which is traditionally 'swilled' rather than drunk), very probably live in north London, buy overpriced food at farmers markets and hate religion. They never support England and despise the WWC, even if they are WWC. Usually, they are rich.
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Ken Clarke is a Keynesian economically, wanted to sign us up to the Euro, believes in light touch criminal sentencing, and considered even David Cameron soft euroscepticism to be "right wing nationalism". A more relevant question is how the hell is he a conservative...
LOL at the idea of Clarke being left-wing economically. The policies he implemented when he was chancellor would've had even the likes of Macmillan turning his grave, let alone any of the pre-Blair Labour governments.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
Lib Dem Voice celebrated Ken Clarke as "the sixth Lib Dem" in the cabinet:
LBC @LBC 7m7 minutes ago Farage: I want the entire postal voting system scrapped. http://l-bc.co/farage #PhoneFarage
So members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces serving this country overseas cannot vote?
Farage is such a jerk. The beauty is that it will be his undoing when the media flick the spotlight switches.
Postal votes are used most by the elderly, who tend to vote UKIP and Tory the most.
It would be very easy for Farage to modify his position that we should abolish postal voting on demand and go back to the situation that prevailed pre-1998 (?) when you could only apply for one if ill, away or had some other just need for one. Indeed, that may well be Farage's position - I've not seen the full quote in context - and it'd be wise not to go off on 'UKIP would ban squaddies from voting' before being sure of the ground first.
I doubt he has anything as thought-through as a position. Of course he won't ban squaddies from voting, but he does need to be very careful about what he proposes as it could end up disenfranchising a lot of UKIP supporters. Most users of postal votes are not immigrant fraudsters.
In my experience, the elderly are more than capable of making it to the polling station in person, assuming that's what you're referring to.
In my one stint of duty at a Polling Station, I couldn't be off noticing that not only did the elderly vote in relatively high numbers, they were evidently very determined to do so. Some of them all but crawled there on their hands and knees.
If it is true that as a group they are cosseted by the State there is at least some justification for it in their willingness to get out there and vote once in a while.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Ken Clarke is a Keynesian economically, wanted to sign us up to the Euro, believes in light touch criminal sentencing, and considered even David Cameron soft euroscepticism to be "right wing nationalism". A more relevant question is how the hell is he a conservative...
LOL at the idea of Clarke being left-wing economically. The policies he implemented when he was chancellor would've had even the likes of Macmillan turning his grave, let alone any of the pre-Blair Labour governments.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
Lib Dem Voice celebrated Ken Clarke as "the sixth Lib Dem" in the cabinet:
There is nothing inherently left wing about Europhilia. You have left wing europhiles and right wing ones, just as you have left wing eurosceptics and right wing ones.
Europhilia is firmly a social democratic position. People support the EU because they want to bring forward left-wing policies where there isn't the electoral support for it in the UK. Name me three Europhiles that are to the right of David Cameron.
What left wing policies do people want to bring forward via the EU that do not have electoral support in the UK?
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not m
Again, it would be good to get
.
LOL at the idea of Clarke being left-wing economically. The policies he implemented when he was chancellor would've had even the likes of Macmillan turning his grave, let alone any of the pre-Blair Labour governments.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
Lib Dem Voice celebrated Ken Clarke as "the sixth Lib Dem" in the cabinet:
He would clearly agree with Polly Toynbee much more than Norman Tebbit. I find it amazing I have to argue otherwise.
Clegg referred to him as the Sixth LD too, and he is clearly on the lefty side of the Tory party, that doesn't make him overall Left wing as a matter of course, and it certainly doesn't mean he is not really a Tory as many claim. All parties are coalitions remember? No doubt many current Tories would not have been seen as true Tories in the past, just as past Democrats and Republicans do not always match up with the central identity of both those parties today. Tebbit barely seems to think Cameron qualifies, when if the Tory PM is not a real Tory, perhaps it is just that the Tory party has moved on (or, Tebbit and co hopes, only the leadership has) and they are no longer Tories, not that Cameron and co are not.
Southam - lefties also are unusually partial to champagne (which is traditionally 'swilled' rather than drunk), very probably live in north London, buy overpriced food at farmers markets and hate religion. They never support England and despise the WWC, even if they are WWC. Usually, they are rich.
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
For me it has been a journey of self-discovery. I always thought I was rather proud of being British, that I always supported England, that I was wholly opposed to child rape, had never incited the murder of anyone and rarely if ever shopped at farmers' markets. Now I know differently. PB has opened my eyes to what I really am. And I am grateful for it.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Ken Clarke is a Keynesian economically, wanted to sign us up to the Euro, believes in light touch criminal sentencing, and considered even David Cameron soft euroscepticism to be "right wing nationalism". A more relevant question is how the hell is he a conservative...
LOL at the idea of Clarke being left-wing economically. The policies he implemented when he was chancellor would've had even the likes of Macmillan turning his grave, let alone any of the pre-Blair Labour governments.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
Lib Dem Voice celebrated Ken Clarke as "the sixth Lib Dem" in the cabinet:
He would clearly agree with Polly Toynbee much more than Norman Tebbit. I find it amazing I have to argue otherwise.
Interesting to see you take the word of a partisan libdem rather than actually look at Clarkes record at health education and finance. Like most tories historically he was relatively 'liberal' as a home secretary. I would say you are 'clearly' peddling your own propaganda.
Interesting to see you take the word of a partisan libdem rather than actually look at Clarkes record at health education and finance. Like most tories historically he was relatively 'liberal' as a home secretary. I would say you are 'clearly' peddling your own propaganda.
His conservative financial policies like supporting the ERM and Euro membership? Laughable!
Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick) 24/10/2014 11:11 Tory officials in Rochester refuse to give precise figures on primary vote. Admit some spoilt ballots, but say not in region of 1600
Perhaps it is in the region of 1599. Keep asking.
Anyway, whatever the number, the billy bunters appear to have made their mind up. UKIP now down to 1.18 on Betfair and not much money being traded.
I confess I was somewhat skeptical of your attempts to divine useful betting data from a primary poll, but I can see now where you were coming from. It helps of course that the outcome was definitive in the sense that the numbers were well inside the 'oh sh*t' zone and couldn't easily be spun as 'hmmmm unclear'. And it is also helps that we now also know about the efforts to promote a high turnover. (Three forms per household, ffs!)
Whilst the result of the main event in Rochester is starting to resemble a Clacton-like formality, the punters can now at least turn to the Vote Share markets with a little more confidence, thanks to the expensive but informative betting aid that the primary has given us.
Looks like UKIP are heading for somewhere between 40% and 50%. Of course the bookmakers will be as aware of the figures as anybody and will adjust their prices accordingly, but no matter - we now know what desert we are in. Just have to find the right tent.
Perhaps the mystery surrounding the precise numbers is simply down to somebody at Conservative Party HQ trying to blindside Shadsy.
The 5/6 under 50% turnout looks a shoo in on those primary returns
All that can beat it is a Ukip landslide of clacton proportions, and even then it was close
For me it has been a journey of self-discovery. I always thought I was rather proud of being British, that I always supported England, that I was wholly opposed to child rape, had never incited the murder of anyone and rarely if ever shopped at farmers' markets. Now I know differently. PB has opened my eyes to what I really am. And I am grateful for it.
Isn't Southam in Warwickshire, if so you clearly dont qualify ;-)
Southam - lefties also are unusually partial to champagne (which is traditionally 'swilled' rather than drunk), very probably live in north London, buy overpriced food at farmers markets and hate religion. They never support England and despise the WWC, even if they are WWC. Usually, they are rich.
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
You missed out that they think lengthy, boring, 'ironic', diatribes are still funny despite going out of fashion in 1987 for everyone who isn't a student
Well well well only the Tories could manage to make such a Royal f**k up of this. Instead of people talking about their candidate the big question is what the Tories are covering up (likely that something close to 25% of the ballots were spoilt I suspect). This has all the signs of being another 'Rebekah Wade's Horse' farce
And then to add injury to insult Brussels go and stick the boot in leaving the media Twitter feeds in uproar. Nigel Farage must have enjoyed his breakfast this morning.
Now here's the thing. How hard would it be to persuade anti tory voters to send back spoilt ballots in pre-paid envolopes (you know along the lines of well 'tell them what you think of them its on their dime and they've clearly got more money than sense').
The problem with open primaries is they can be so easily subverted. Its one thing to do them when you are a benign opposition party but wholly another when you are the government which is perceived as the source of everybody's woes.
"I for one find it pretty amusing to discover that even 44 years as a Tory MP does not prevent one from being a lefty"
Was George Romney a right-winger? Was Strom Thurmond a left-winger?
There are left wing and right wing conservatives. Together they get much of what they want according to the balance of the party and the circumstances of the time. Once idiots like Carswell leaps and sides with a party thats sits with a Polish nazi then you split the right wing vote and we get endless socialism and no EU referendum.
Socialists are not so daft, right wing socialists like Frank Field know how to best achieve their aims.
It's the kind of free service that makes PB what it is today. I realised that, actually, I am just a bad person. Home truths help, in the end.
It's been a bit of liberal lefty irony love-in all morning now - so dull i'd rather watch paint dry - or listen to an edMiliband speech. Pretty hard choices.
So let me get this right. The government has known about this for months, and on the day the press got wind of it ("sources close to the government" ? surely not!) there suddenly comes a willingness to talk about it. Now we have 3-4 weeks of clips of Cameron looking tough as he talks with the EUrocrats...
It's the kind of free service that makes PB what it is today. I realised that, actually, I am just a bad person. Home truths help, in the end.
Yes, it is good to be confronted with your own essential wickedness. Knowing that I hate my family, my past and so much else that I thought I actually rather liked will help me become a better, more right-wing person.
So let me get this right. The government has known about this for months, and on the day the press got wind of it ("sources close to the government" ? surely not!) there suddenly comes a willingness to talk about it. Now we have 3-4 weeks of clips of Cameron looking tough as he talks with the EUrocrats...
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Ken Clarke is a Keynesian economically, wanted to sign us up to the Euro, believes in light touch criminal sentencing, and considered even David Cameron soft euroscepticism to be "right wing nationalism". A more relevant question is how the hell is he a conservative...
LOL at the idea of Clarke being left-wing economically. The policies he implemented when he was chancellor would've had even the likes of Macmillan turning his grave, let alone any of the pre-Blair Labour governments.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
Lib Dem Voice celebrated Ken Clarke as "the sixth Lib Dem" in the cabinet:
"Chancellor George Osborne said the Treasury had first learnt about the "totally unacceptable" financial demand last week."
Analysis by economics editor Robert Peston
"Now to be absolutely clear, none of this is a surprise to the Treasury or chancellor. British officials have known for some time that the inflammatory demand from Brussels was coming.
What did catch them by surprise was what it sees as a deliberate leak by EU officials of the news last night - which they see as an attempt to embarrass David Cameron, as he meets other EU leaders to discuss, among other things, his controversial hopes of being able to restrict migration of EU nationals to Brita
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
There was a discussion about the ERS here a little while back. This is the reason why they are used.
Southam - lefties also are unusually partial to champagne (which is traditionally 'swilled' rather than drunk), very probably live in north London, buy overpriced food at farmers markets and hate religion. They never support England and despise the WWC, even if they are WWC. Usually, they are rich.
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
For me it has been a journey of self-discovery. I always thought I was rather proud of being British, that I always supported England, that I was wholly opposed to child rape, had never incited the murder of anyone and rarely if ever shopped at farmers' markets. Now I know differently. PB has opened my eyes to what I really am. And I am grateful for it.
You've made this joke several times.
It was barely funny the first time.
Now you're just being tedious, self righteous and sneering.
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
There was a discussion about the ERS here a little while back. This is the reason why they are used.
If the cost of the ballot are to be set against their election expenses this time (as it is a by-election) maybe they did it themselves to cut costs. May prove to be a false economy in the long run. Still nobody seems to know who did run it this time, I would really like to know. Come on Mike surely someone has an idea!!
Well well well only the Tories could manage to make such a Royal f**k up of this. Instead of people talking about their candidate the big question is what the Tories are covering up (likely that something close to 25% of the ballots were spoilt I suspect). This has all the signs of being another 'Rebekah Wade's Horse' farce
And then to add injury to insult Brussels go and stick the boot in leaving the media Twitter feeds in uproar. Nigel Farage must have enjoyed his breakfast this morning.
Now here's the thing. How hard would it be to persuade anti tory voters to send back spoilt ballots in pre-paid envolopes (you know along the lines of well 'tell them what you think of them its on their dime and they've clearly got more money than sense').
The problem with open primaries is they can be so easily subverted. Its one thing to do them when you are a benign opposition party but wholly another when you are the government which is perceived as the source of everybody's woes.
Subverting primaries doesn't seem to happen much in practice. There was Limbaugh's Project Mayhem in the Obama vs Hillary primary but apparently not many people really bothered with it. It's a bit unusual to be simultaneously political enough and tactically-minded enough to actually mess up a primary, as opposed to trolling it by writing in someone who isn't on the ballot paper or whatever.
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
Good question. Maybe some of our famous investigative journalists will try to find out. Or maybe not.
How about we pay this, provided the auditors sign off the EU accounts? They haven't done this in every one of the last 19 (!) years. +34
3 HOURS AGO So basically we are paying more for sex and not getting any. +32
3 HOURS AGO I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I read this in the papers today. Against EU advice, the UK implemented austerity, we all made sacrifices to ensure the country moved forward. Now the IMF suddenly says we were right, the EU decides that because we are doing better than the rest of Europe, we should now pay for it! Can anybody make any sense of that? Very hard to stomach.
Does't appear to be winning hearts and minds. EU Officials must have been drugged up to the eyeballs after they had a three in a bed romp.
People might want to read this because apparently a large part of Brussel's demand is because the new EU accounting system now counts the turnover of drug dealers, whores and smugglers in their calculations.
Apologies if this has already been asked, I haven't time to read the thread, but do we know which UK Minister/Prime Minister signed off on the formula for increasing the UK contribution on the basis of the economic output of sex workers, druggies and other criminals?
Interesting to see you take the word of a partisan libdem rather than actually look at Clarkes record at health education and finance. Like most tories historically he was relatively 'liberal' as a home secretary. I would say you are 'clearly' peddling your own propaganda.
His conservative financial policies like supporting the ERM and Euro membership? Laughable!
Exactly, because those were small-c and big-C Conservative positions. Historically it was the Conservative Party responsible for most of the pro-Europe moves and Labour for the (mild) anti-Europe ones. Wilson gave us an in-out referendum; Jim Callaghan kept us out of the snake and Gordon Brown kept us out of the Euro. In 1983, Labour's manifesto included withdrawal. It was Mrs Thatcher who kept us in (and signed the Single European Act).
You are falling into the trap of calling everyone you disagree with a lefty, especially when they wear blue rosettes. You may recall another poster on here who'd regularly tell us Edward Heath was a socialist. He wasn't; Clarke isn't.
Southam - lefties also are unusually partial to champagne (which is traditionally 'swilled' rather than drunk), very probably live in north London, buy overpriced food at farmers markets and hate religion. They never support England and despise the WWC, even if they are WWC. Usually, they are rich.
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
For me it has been a journey of self-discovery. I always thought I was rather proud of being British, that I always supported England, that I was wholly opposed to child rape, had never incited the murder of anyone and rarely if ever shopped at farmers' markets. Now I know differently. PB has opened my eyes to what I really am. And I am grateful for it.
You've made this joke several times.
It was barely funny the first time.
Now you're just being tedious, self righteous and sneering.
Thanks for pulling me up Charles. Maybe you might occasionally do the same to others on here when they accuse lefties of turning a blind eye to child rape, inciting murder, hating this country and so on. For a leftie like me that is rather tedious. And I will certainly sneer at those who think that way about people like me. Sorry.
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
There was a discussion about the ERS here a little while back. This is the reason why they are used.
If the cost of the ballot are to be set against their election expenses this time (as it is a by-election) maybe they did it themselves to cut costs. May prove to be a false economy in the long run. Still nobody seems to know who did run it this time, I would really like to know. Come on Mike surely someone has an idea!!
I assume they ran it themselves.
In my cynical way of looking at the word, presumably each returned ballot required identifying information, including an email.
And had small print somewhere allowing the Tories to use that data.
Presumably if a third party ran it, it would be a lot harder for them to use the data in a timely fashion?
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
There was a discussion about the ERS here a little while back. This is the reason why they are used.
If the cost of the ballot are to be set against their election expenses this time (as it is a by-election) maybe they did it themselves to cut costs. May prove to be a false economy in the long run. Still nobody seems to know who did run it this time, I would really like to know. Come on Mike surely someone has an idea!!
I had been under the impression that the ERS was running the primary and also that it had been decided that the costs would not count as part of the official by election campaign and so would not count towards the spending limits.
6 regulations out, 1000 in. David Cameron's EU reform process is going splendidly!
The European Union has dealt a blow to the UK by adopting just six of the Government's proposals for cutting red tape in the past year, while introducing more than 1,000 new financial regulations, research has revealed.
Southam - lefties also are unusually partial to champagne (which is traditionally 'swilled' rather than drunk), very probably live in north London, buy overpriced food at farmers markets and hate religion. They never support England and despise the WWC, even if they are WWC. Usually, they are rich.
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
For me it has been a journey of self-discovery. I always thought I was rather proud of being British, that I always supported England, that I was wholly opposed to child rape, had never incited the murder of anyone and rarely if ever shopped at farmers' markets. Now I know differently. PB has opened my eyes to what I really am. And I am grateful for it.
You've made this joke several times.
It was barely funny the first time.
Now you're just being tedious, self righteous and sneering.
Thanks for pulling me up Charles. Maybe you might do the same to others when they accuse lefties of turning a blind eye to child rape, inciting murder, hating this country and so on. For a leftie like me that is rather tedious. And I will certainly sneer at those who think that way about people like me. Sorry.
I don't think they *really* believe it, just that they are sloppy about how they write things (although may be I am being overly-charitable).
But I don't really want to get into a debate with the usual suspects on that sort of matter. They have their views and I'd rather not encourage them to post them any more than they already do.
Nobody would have even cared if there were 1500 spoiled papers, as a rule. 99.999% of the population of the UK are probably entirely unaware what primaries are, never mind that one happened this week.
Now M. Green has covered it up, he's made a big story of it. And given a free hit to Ukip. Farage must be chuckling into his lunchtime pint.
Sometimes I am stunned when faced by evidence of my own ignorance. For example, the chap who is now running NHS England, Simon Stevens, was once an advisor to Alan Milburn when he was Health Secretary and writing the 2000 plan for the NHS. The evil Tory plots to destroy the NHS thus seem to be no more than an up date of what Labour wanted all those years ago and are to be implemented by a Labour chap.
If we took the politics out of long term planning we would get to much the same place more often than not but get there a lot quicker. I really must get that book of essays edited by Charles Clarke on that very subject.
So let me get this right. The government has known about this for months, and on the day the press got wind of it ("sources close to the government" ? surely not!) there suddenly comes a willingness to talk about it. Now we have 3-4 weeks of clips of Cameron looking tough as he talks with the EUrocrats...
I note the BBC do not mention that as a result of Dave's interventions the EU went onto annual budgets and the EP voted for a 4.24 billion Euros increase in next years budget. Cameron's stoic battle to control the budget is not supported by the EP and the EU Commission. So will democracy or oligarchical diktat prevail?
People might want to read this because apparently a large part of Brussel's demand is because the new EU accounting system now counts the turnover of drug dealers, whores and smugglers in their calculations.
Also people working in the financial industry, to the extent that they're not already covered by the three categories you mention.
British Prime Minister David Cameron has challenged a demand from the European Union for an additional 2.1-billion-euro payment into the EU budget in the coming weeks following a revision of economic statistics.
A British spokesman at an EU summit in Brussels on Friday said Cameron discussed the issue, triggered by a revision of EU data for national income and hence for countries' contributions to EU funding, with his Dutch counterpart Mark Rutte. His country also faced a large bill, to be paid by Dec. 1.
"This is money the European Commission was not expecting and does not need, and we will be working with other countries to do all we can to challenge this," the British spokesman said.
No 10 is drawing a red line on the Great EU Shakedown:
A Downing Street source said: “It’s not acceptable to just change the fees for previous years and demand them back at a moment’s notice.”
3-4 weeks of looking tough for the media, then they discover that the other five budget adjustments sitting on the table effectively cancel out this one giving a tiny rebate for the UK, honor is satisfied, everyone goes home happy... you heard it here first!
The more interesting question is what is the quid pro quo.
This is money the European Commission was not expecting and does not need, and we will be working with other countries to do all we can to challenge this,"
Its this craven, servile, weak rhetoric that boosts UKIP as much as anything the EU can throw at us.
Sometimes I am stunned when faced by evidence of my own ignorance. For example, the chap who is now running NHS England, Simon Stevens, was once an advisor to Alan Milburn when he was Health Secretary and writing the 2000 plan for the NHS. The evil Tory plots to destroy the NHS thus seem to be no more than an up date of what Labour wanted all those years ago and are to be implemented by a Labour chap.
If we took the politics out of long term planning we would get to much the same place more often than not but get there a lot quicker. I really must get that book of essays edited by Charles Clarke on that very subject.
Which is another way of saying it doesn't matter who you vote for, you get the same policies... Sir Humphrey would understand completely!
This is money the European Commission was not expecting and does not need, and we will be working with other countries to do all we can to challenge this,"
Its this craven, servile, weak rhetoric that boosts UKIP as much as anything the EU can throw at us.
On the contrary if you read the piece I linked below the EU budgets are in as much of a mess as ever. They need money to cover their profligacy.
Not sure it's surprising. This is a key by-election. I see UKIP MEPs are laying into the low return for primary with gusto. Might come back to haunt them in 4 weeks time.
Tories: "I’m not surprised that Ukip are talking us down, because their candidate was chosen by six people in London. Our candidate was chosen by 1,000 times more people."
Lol, great spinning Tory boys!
One could counter such disingenuosness by saying that Reckless was chosen by 23,604 people - four years ago at the general election.
Interesting to see you take the word of a partisan libdem rather than actually look at Clarkes record at health education and finance. Like most tories historically he was relatively 'liberal' as a home secretary. I would say you are 'clearly' peddling your own propaganda.
His conservative financial policies like supporting the ERM and Euro membership? Laughable!
Those would traditionally be right-wing conservative positions, providing for sound, stable money as opposed to the left-wing view that you need your own free-floating currency so that you can fund government spending by debasing your currency and robbing savers of the money they worked for. They only stopped being British conservative policies because of the combination of nationalism and the ERM doing for a previous Tory government.
I'm in for £20 on the under 50% with Ladbrokes off the back of @isam, @PtP (And @OblitusSumMe)'s analysis.
Also if you are long Conservative this strikes me as a superb hedge. It is also good value as a naked standalone bet.
Think this through:
In order to WIN, the Tories will need at least 35% I think (Probably more but it is a useful lower bound)
5688 returns yields 16251 "equivalent returns" if every party ran a similiar primary (Bear with this). Given the electorate is 47971/.649 = 73915, so 50% = 36957
That would mean a multiplier rate of 2.3 for primary returns (I don't think that has ever happened, the odds should certainly be long on it at any rate) . And heading upwards towards more realistic winning %s only makes the "multiplier return rate" even higher...
On the other side, the price for UKIP to get a Carswell type majority is long (55%+ is not indicated by any poll) which is what it would take to get the Tory vote low enough that betting overs would be the correct move.
So (especially) if your position is long Tory, I reckon smashing into unders is the best move.
So let me get this right. The government has known about this for months, and on the day the press got wind of it ("sources close to the government" ? surely not!) there suddenly comes a willingness to talk about it. Now we have 3-4 weeks of clips of Cameron looking tough as he talks with the EUrocrats...
Never let it be said that the EU is not reasonable. They are perfectly willing to accommodate people with concerns by letting them air those concerns publicly, have an emergency summit or too, perhaps even in extreme situations permit a joint statement about how things need to be looked at, in future. How can anyone ask for more than the toleration of nations raising concerns to give them some cover in the press, and then letting the EU carry on course afterwards. Everybody wins, right? The EU gets to never change direction, and national governments get to say, "Well, we tried". Fair division there.
Tories: "I’m not surprised that Ukip are talking us down, because their candidate was chosen by six people in London. Our candidate was chosen by 1,000 times more people."
Lol, great spinning Tory boys!
One could counter such disingenuosness by saying that Reckless was chosen by 23,604 people - four years ago at the genral election.
Exactly. The Tory spinning on this is quite desperate - and funny for that reason.
Personally I am sorry that the Open Primary system, which I think is a very good idea, has been so screwed up by the Tory ineptitude that it has devalued the whole process.
Kind of sums up so much that the Tories do these days.
Tories: "I’m not surprised that Ukip are talking us down, because their candidate was chosen by six people in London. Our candidate was chosen by 1,000 times more people."
Lol, great spinning Tory boys!
One could counter such disingenuosness by saying that Reckless was chosen by 23,604 people - four years ago at the general election.
I take your point about the spinning, but that counter would be ridiculous, because as was pointed out on here yesterday, while it is fashionable to claim people vote for a candidate and not a party, a lot of people do vote for a party not a candidate, and many of those who chose Reckless would have chosen a donkey wearing the same rosette, so it's not much of a defence. Granted, many of those who did choose him in 2010 may well do so again even under different colours, but it cannot be taken for granted.
As an aside on the Rochester By Election interesting to note that Kelly Tolworth will be opposing the same Lodge Hill development that the council cabinet she belonged to has been fighting to impose on the people of Hoo.
Just caught up on the thread and I think the most remarkable thing about the EU demand more cash story is that two regular posters here, who are not normally regarded as being in the tin-foil hat category, think that the story is made up! They think that it has been "confected" by HMG for political purposes. Truly awesome.
Since you borrowed my word, I take it that you're referring to me. I don't think that the story is imaginary. I do think that the story has been given far greater prominence and been released at a time in the run-up to the general election (NB not the Rochester & Strood by-election) so as to give David Cameron the opportunity to stand up to "Brussels" on an essentially small point. This may be with or without the connivance of the Commission (my expectation is that they are the fall guys here, actually).
Put another way, if there were a market on whether this sum of money will be paid to the EU by the British government before 7 May 2015, I would regard that as a heavily odds-against proposition.
You put it too mildly. 'Not a snowflake's chance in hell' would be about right, and what's more Cameron will say so very loudly. It's a gift to him, not to UKIP.
Sometimes I am stunned when faced by evidence of my own ignorance. For example, the chap who is now running NHS England, Simon Stevens, was once an advisor to Alan Milburn when he was Health Secretary and writing the 2000 plan for the NHS. The evil Tory plots to destroy the NHS thus seem to be no more than an up date of what Labour wanted all those years ago and are to be implemented by a Labour chap.
If we took the politics out of long term planning we would get to much the same place more often than not but get there a lot quicker. I really must get that book of essays edited by Charles Clarke on that very subject.
Which is another way of saying it doesn't matter who you vote for, you get the same policies... Sir Humphrey would understand completely!
Oh you cynic, Mr. Indigo! I don't think your hypothesis holds true, or at least it need not hold true if our elected representatives could be encouraged to think in terms longer than the next GE on matters that need long term planning (e.g. energy, education, health, defence, transport). As for the Civil Service, it is I think a shadow of what it once was. Sir Humphrey would be appalled if he were alive today and saw the politicised, dumbed down mess it has become.
As a fine point of interest, the politicisation of the Civil Service began in my view under major. I was at the Home Office when Michael Hesaltine moved from one department to another and insisted (and was allowed) that he took his top level civil servants with him. The mandarins were scandalised and horrified by such a development, saying correctly that it was the end of the impartial Civil Servant.
Tories: "I’m not surprised that Ukip are talking us down, because their candidate was chosen by six people in London. Our candidate was chosen by 1,000 times more people."
Lol, great spinning Tory boys!
One could counter such disingenuosness by saying that Reckless was chosen by 23,604 people - four years ago at the general election.
I take your point about the spinning, but that counter would be ridiculous, because as was pointed out on here yesterday, while it is fashionable to claim people vote for a candidate and not a party, a lot of people do vote for a party not a candidate, and many of those who chose Reckless would have chosen a donkey wearing the same rosette, so it's not much of a defence. Granted, many of those who did choose him in 2010 may well do so again even under different colours, but it cannot be taken for granted.
I was fighting disingenuosness with more disingenuosness.
More tedious europhobe frothing over something the EU has to do per the Treaties Britain freely signed up to.
Don't worry Ben. The money raised by the mansion tax can be used to pay for this, instead of going to the NHS. I'm sure everyone can be happy with that.
In its own way, it's quite impressive to make annualised growth of roughly 3% sound alarmingly weak. By way of contrast, this was the FT's Chris Giles's take:
"Healthy and steady UK economic growth for now".
Careful, that almost sounds like you might be implying that the coverage has been slanted in a way not entirely helpful to the Conservatives.
Comments
Was George Romney a right-winger? Was Strom Thurmond a left-winger?
Or the total bill to the UK could end up being a lot more than the currently talked about €2.1 billion.
What, you mean a manufactured row with Brussels that will gives Cameron the opportunity to stand up for Britain at a time when his party is leaking votes to UKIP? Surely not.
"It's WWE politics"
That's a neat phrase to describe it.
As a launch pad for the successful candidate it has been up there with Apollo 1.
My handwriting may be deteriorating with advancing age, but it’s better than that!
How do you know this was 6 year old. Could have been a 5 year old; but do curve those r's more.
Anyway, whatever the number, the billy bunters appear to have made their mind up. UKIP now down to 1.18 on Betfair and not much money being traded.
I confess I was somewhat skeptical of your attempts to divine useful betting data from a primary poll, but I can see now where you were coming from. It helps of course that the outcome was definitive in the sense that the numbers were well inside the 'oh sh*t' zone and couldn't easily be spun as 'hmmmm unclear'. And it is also helps that we now also know about the efforts to promote a high turnover. (Three forms per household, ffs!)
Whilst the result of the main event in Rochester is starting to resemble a Clacton-like formality, the punters can now at least turn to the Vote Share markets with a little more confidence, thanks to the expensive but informative betting aid that the primary has given us.
Looks like UKIP are heading for somewhere between 40% and 50%. Of course the bookmakers will be as aware of the figures as anybody and will adjust their prices accordingly, but no matter - we now know what desert we are in. Just have to find the right tent.
Perhaps the mystery surrounding the precise numbers is simply down to somebody at Conservative Party HQ trying to blindside Shadsy.
(The first entry is the previous results, scroll down for the new ones)
http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/4994/elections-23th-october?page=1#page=1
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.115707446#id=1.115925336
9 for 50.01%-55.00% looks interesting.
Edit; just changed to 5.8.
I'm not sure being pro-EU is really an ideologically left-wing position either.
There is nothing inherently left wing about Europhilia. You have left wing europhiles and right wing ones, just as you have left wing eurosceptics and right wing ones.
All that can beat it is a Ukip landslide of clacton proportions, and even then it was close
I have learned a lot about what it means to be a lefty, here on PB.
You are dangerously, creepily, weirdly and worryingly obsessed with me.
Ugh.
http://www.libdemvoice.org/ken-clarke-the-sixth-lib-dem-cabinet-minister-21448.html
He would clearly agree with Polly Toynbee much more than Norman Tebbit. I find it amazing I have to argue otherwise.
If it is true that as a group they are cosseted by the State there is at least some justification for it in their willingness to get out there and vote once in a while.
Electoral Reform Society independently ran the Totnes and Gosport primaries but didn't run Rochester. Still trying to find out who did run it, anyone know?
So people want Mark Reckless back as the Conservative candidate?
Interesting.
I would say you are 'clearly' peddling your own propaganda.
Will you join me in a rain dance on the day?
EU agrees to budget talks after £1.7bn cash demand on UK
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29754168
It's the kind of free service that makes PB what it is today. I realised that, actually, I am just a bad person. Home truths help, in the end.
And then to add injury to insult Brussels go and stick the boot in leaving the media Twitter feeds in uproar. Nigel Farage must have enjoyed his breakfast this morning.
Now here's the thing. How hard would it be to persuade anti tory voters to send back spoilt ballots in pre-paid envolopes (you know along the lines of well 'tell them what you think of them its on their dime and they've clearly got more money than sense').
The problem with open primaries is they can be so easily subverted. Its one thing to do them when you are a benign opposition party but wholly another when you are the government which is perceived as the source of everybody's woes.
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/exclusive-mp-and-home-office-failed-to-act-on-rotherham-grooming-11-years-ago-1-6913834
MacShane and Home Office ignored letter from a child protection charity. Guido has posted the letter.
Once idiots like Carswell leaps and sides with a party thats sits with a Polish nazi then you split the right wing vote and we get endless socialism and no EU referendum.
Socialists are not so daft, right wing socialists like Frank Field know how to best achieve their aims.
Analysis by economics editor Robert Peston
"Now to be absolutely clear, none of this is a surprise to the Treasury or chancellor. British officials have known for some time that the inflammatory demand from Brussels was coming.
What did catch them by surprise was what it sees as a deliberate leak by EU officials of the news last night - which they see as an attempt to embarrass David Cameron, as he meets other EU leaders to discuss, among other things, his controversial hopes of being able to restrict migration of EU nationals to Brita
There was a discussion about the ERS here a little while back. This is the reason why they are used.
"So thanks in part to the inclusion in the official economy of our productive sex workers, our EU membership fee has been augmented."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29753529
You randy sods are having too much sex!
It was barely funny the first time.
Now you're just being tedious, self righteous and sneering.
If the cost of the ballot are to be set against their election expenses this time (as it is a by-election) maybe they did it themselves to cut costs. May prove to be a false economy in the long run. Still nobody seems to know who did run it this time, I would really like to know. Come on Mike surely someone has an idea!!
Good question. Maybe some of our famous investigative journalists will try to find out. Or maybe not.
"This has all the signs of being another 'Rebekah Wade's Horse' farce."
Indeed, Man, such a monumental FU that I detect the hand of Grant Shapps.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29753529
How about we pay this, provided the auditors sign off the EU accounts? They haven't done this in every one of the last 19 (!) years.
+34
3 HOURS AGO
So basically we are paying more for sex and not getting any.
+32
3 HOURS AGO
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I read this in the papers today.
Against EU advice, the UK implemented austerity, we all made sacrifices to ensure the country moved forward.
Now the IMF suddenly says we were right, the EU decides that because we are doing better than the rest of Europe, we should now pay for it!
Can anybody make any sense of that? Very hard to stomach.
Does't appear to be winning hearts and minds. EU Officials must have been drugged up to the eyeballs after they had a three in a bed romp.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11184605/Explainer-Why-must-Britain-pay-1.7bn-to-the-European-Union-and-can-we-stop-it-happening.html
Even better is the fact that Germany get a rebate and Greece has to pay more money. You couldn't make it up!
You are falling into the trap of calling everyone you disagree with a lefty, especially when they wear blue rosettes. You may recall another poster on here who'd regularly tell us Edward Heath was a socialist. He wasn't; Clarke isn't.
I assume they ran it themselves.
In my cynical way of looking at the word, presumably each returned ballot required identifying information, including an email.
And had small print somewhere allowing the Tories to use that data.
Presumably if a third party ran it, it would be a lot harder for them to use the data in a timely fashion?
I had been under the impression that the ERS was running the primary and also that it had been decided that the costs would not count as part of the official by election campaign and so would not count towards the spending limits.
Farage: Yes I think we are
Has all the hallmarks of M. Green Esq.
The European Union has dealt a blow to the UK by adopting just six of the Government's proposals for cutting red tape in the past year, while introducing more than 1,000 new financial regulations, research has revealed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11183141/EU-agrees-with-UK-to-cut-six-regulations-but-brings-in-1000.html
But I don't really want to get into a debate with the usual suspects on that sort of matter. They have their views and I'd rather not encourage them to post them any more than they already do.
Nobody would have even cared if there were 1500 spoiled papers, as a rule. 99.999% of the population of the UK are probably entirely unaware what primaries are, never mind that one happened this week.
Now M. Green has covered it up, he's made a big story of it. And given a free hit to Ukip. Farage must be chuckling into his lunchtime pint.
A Downing Street source said: “It’s not acceptable to just change the fees for previous years and demand them back at a moment’s notice.”
If we took the politics out of long term planning we would get to much the same place more often than not but get there a lot quicker. I really must get that book of essays edited by Charles Clarke on that very subject.
https://www.devex.com/news/meps-vote-to-increase-eu-budget-including-development-84619
A British spokesman at an EU summit in Brussels on Friday said Cameron discussed the issue, triggered by a revision of EU data for national income and hence for countries' contributions to EU funding, with his Dutch counterpart Mark Rutte. His country also faced a large bill, to be paid by Dec. 1.
"This is money the European Commission was not expecting and does not need, and we will be working with other countries to do all we can to challenge this," the British spokesman said.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/24/uk-eu-britain-budget-idUKKCN0ID04X20141024
Will turn into a walk in the park for them.
The more interesting question is what is the quid pro quo.
Its this craven, servile, weak rhetoric that boosts UKIP as much as anything the EU can throw at us.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/oct/24/rochester-and-strood-byelection-politics-live-blog
Lol, great spinning Tory boys!
One could counter such disingenuosness by saying that Reckless was chosen by 23,604 people - four years ago at the general election.
I'm in for £20 on the under 50% with Ladbrokes off the back of @isam, @PtP (And @OblitusSumMe)'s analysis.
Also if you are long Conservative this strikes me as a superb hedge. It is also good value as a naked standalone bet.
Think this through:
In order to WIN, the Tories will need at least 35% I think (Probably more but it is a useful lower bound)
5688 returns yields 16251 "equivalent returns" if every party ran a similiar primary (Bear with this). Given the electorate is 47971/.649 = 73915, so 50% = 36957
That would mean a multiplier rate of 2.3 for primary returns (I don't think that has ever happened, the odds should certainly be long on it at any rate) . And heading upwards towards more realistic winning %s only makes the "multiplier return rate" even higher...
On the other side, the price for UKIP to get a Carswell type majority is long (55%+ is not indicated by any poll) which is what it would take to get the Tory vote low enough that betting overs would be the correct move.
So (especially) if your position is long Tory, I reckon smashing into unders is the best move.
Personally I am sorry that the Open Primary system, which I think is a very good idea, has been so screwed up by the Tory ineptitude that it has devalued the whole process.
Kind of sums up so much that the Tories do these days.
http://order-order.com/2014/10/24/child-abuse-campaigners-warned-macshane-in-2009-but-rotherham-mp-never-replied-and-didnt-act-on-claims/
As a fine point of interest, the politicisation of the Civil Service began in my view under major. I was at the Home Office when Michael Hesaltine moved from one department to another and insisted (and was allowed) that he took his top level civil servants with him. The mandarins were scandalised and horrified by such a development, saying correctly that it was the end of the impartial Civil Servant.
a lot more of us though do not wish to live with it.