Agree with those posters suggesting the Labour problems in Scotland are a big issue and in terms of GE2015 probably a lot bigger than the two by elections. If Labour lose, what, 10 seats or more north of the border then they are in even bigger trouble.
(p.s. No idea what the chirruping is about and actually I can't be bothered to check)
Carthage like Farage is moaning old woman, yearning for old glories and days gone by, never to return (or sluts as one of your ex MEPs would describe them)
Has there been a party forming a new government as bedraggled as Labour will be in 2015 or any with a leader as weak as EdM will be ?
No, not in living memory.
There are two possibilities. Either voters will take a look before the election, and decide 'Nah, not on', or we'll drift into a Labour government not remotely ready for office. It was the latter possibility that got me thinking that they'd end up ditching Ed even if he does become PM.
They've already decided on the first course.
But if by chance the alchemy of FPTP transmutes Miliband into office, the second option can only occur after a card vote at an annual party conference...
Labour supporters more inclined towards fantasy. Writes itself doesn't it?
But I agree with the posts down thread that the big political story of the weekend is Johann Lamont's resignation and her fury with Ed Miliband. It is likely that her resignation will have more impact than anything she achieved as leader.
The problems Labour now have in Scotland are profound and those pointing to swings of more than 10% required before a significant number of seats change hands are missing the point. It can happen. It did in 2011. Those same Labour heartland seats where the Labour vote was weighed not counted fell one after another to the SNP.
Scottish Labour is desperately short of talent but they are not stupid and they know how to win elections. They know that Ed's apparent plan of sleepwalking into Downing Street saying as little as possible just will not face the SNP challenge in Scotland. They are fed up with having nothing to say, no vision to sell.
We are about to see the devolution of the Scottish party, a bit like the CDU. They will break away and will not commit themselves to UK policy or non policy any more. Scottish Tories should take note. This is what is required to survive in the post referendum Scotland.
In looking for SNP gains I would suggest that you first look for areas that voted Yes or were at least close. Then look for seats where the Unionist vote is split by either the Tories or, historically, the Lib Dems playing a role. A spilt unionist vote and a strong Yes vote equals an SNP gain.
And Ed? Well it is late in the day but his position has never been weaker.
Betting advice: Man City to win the Premier League, each-way @ 4/1 (1/4 1-2) with Coral.
The win part is no value but the place part is a steal. Most of the time you'll simply break-even on this bet but the upside is worth the downside risk .
Some people cannot believe their eyes or their ears: they have made up their minds and thats that.
May I remind all PBers that the prognosis for UKIP success has ever been dire.
May 2013 after local successes: PB opinion: not to worry they'll fall back to their 3%; they'll never win a seat at westminster.
May 2014 after winning EU: PB opinion: not to worry thats the EU not like FPTP they'll fall back to 9%. Not a chance of a seat.
Oct 2014 after Clacton and Heyward. PB opinion they may get a 3/4 seats but they'll probably fall back before then.
To my half Kipper, you of little faith @Richard Tyndall, I bet you £100 evens now that UKIP get more than 12 seats at the GE 2015 if it's called in May and more than 8 even if it's called next week.
There is nothing wrong with standing in every seat in the kingdom if they can manage it, as well as concentrating on 100 seats if they can manage that too. I thing that Farage is doing a great job at present and is seeing that the UKIP surge is maintained and extended in every way. RT doesn't like Nigel - is it personal in some way - and true, he laughs a lot, but he sees what I see, that for UKIP this is a chance for success that may not come ever again if the party doesn't grab it now.
There comes a tide in the affairs of men and political parties etc...... It behove UKIP to ride this tide.
But if by chance the alchemy of FPTP transmutes Miliband into office, the second option can only occur after a card vote at an annual party conference...
Procedurally, yes. But the political reality is that if Balls, Yvette, Burnham, Hunt, Chukka, Harriet, plus the various grandees and Len McCluskey, tell Ed that it's Game Over, then it's Game Over.
'To me the SNP lost all credibility in 2012 when it made ludicrous predictions and claims ahead of the locals. Remember how they were going to take Glasgow? LAB won city back with an overall majority.'
Yes,but that was in 2012 with the over-the-top expectations after 2011,also Ed was still very much in his honeymoon period.
What really surprised me was how close the SNP came to winning the referendum and then after losing it had a massive surge in membership.
Labour's policy of command and control from Westminster evidenced by the Lamont fiasco is a gift to the SNP and their claim that they are the 'only' party that represents Scottish interests
I think it's such turbulent times in both England & Scotland & with 5/6 party politics almost anything can happen.
Some people cannot believe their eyes or their ears: they have made up their minds and thats that.
May I remind all PBers that the prognosis for UKIP success has ever been dire.
May 2013 after local successes: PB opinion: not to worry they'll fall back to their 3%; they'll never win a seat at westminster.
May 2014 after winning EU: PB opinion: not to worry thats the EU not like FPTP they'll fall back to 9%. Not a chance of a seat.
Oct 2014 after Clacton and Heyward. PB opinion they may get a 3/4 seats but they'll probably fall back before then.
To my half Kipper, you of little faith @Richard Tyndall, I bet you £100 evens now that UKIP get more than 12 seats at the GE 2015 if it's called in May and more than 8 even if it's called next week.
There is nothing wrong with standing in every seat in the kingdom if they can manage it, as well as concentrating on 100 seats if they can manage that too. I thing that Farage is doing a great job at present and is seeing that the UKIP surge is maintained and extended in every way. RT doesn't like Nigel - is it personal in some way - and true, he laughs a lot, but he sees what I see, that for UKIP this is a chance for success that may not come ever again if the party doesn't grab it now.
There comes a tide in the affairs of men and political parties etc...... It behove UKIP to ride this tide.
It is a long way from 12 seats to the 108 you are claiming.
Unfortunately I don't bet with money I don't have so I will decline as my limited resources are already tied up in a bet with Richard N. Make it a tenner and I will be happy to take you up on it though.
UKIP is to make a serious attempt to win 100 seats at next year’s general election and will try to oust even Eurosceptic Tories.
At a strategy meeting last week, senior party figures agreed to field candidates in every seat — and run serious campaigns in 100 of them — and not give a free ride to MPs who want to leave the EU. The decision was backed by Douglas Carswell, who became Ukip’s first elected MP earlier this month after defecting from the Tories.
Paul Sykes, the party’s biggest donor, is prepared to give more than £1.5m to help fund the campaign. “We want to make it absolutely clear that we are not interested in behind-the-scenes deals with other parties, all of whom are committed to our continued membership of the failing European Union,” said the party leader, Nigel Farage. “We will not be doing grubby deals.”
I would consider it a real achievement for UKIP to win 5 seats at the GE and think that (in keeping with the tone of the thread header) 10 is probably a wild fantasy. A touch of realism in their expectations would probably be a good idea for the party at this point.
I think this is one of those situations best described as "More money than sense"
I'm sure from a UKIP point of view, Paul Sykes would be better of allocating that £1.5million at say the top 20 UKIP targets, rather than those 100 seats they are now going for.
All they need to do is to adopt an anti-gas drilling/shale/fracking policy and roll over the 120 Conservative seats facing a major fracking rebellion. 100 seats would be well within reach.
Maybe UKIP have raised the bar due to private polling and major cash injections from donors that we dont know about yet? I doubt they would deliberately spread things too thinly. I suspect Mr Sykes or another of their donors has upped the ante.
Don't worry Nick. Broxtowe not an LD target & they'll be putting in very little effort - one reason why my LD switcher analysis will work. All that matters to you is that you get more of them than the Tories
Yes, it has not escaped notice that they've not actually chosen a candidate yet...
Some people cannot believe their eyes or their ears: they have made up their minds and thats that.
May I remind all PBers that the prognosis for UKIP success has ever been dire.
May 2013 after local successes: PB opinion: not to worry they'll fall back to their 3%; they'll never win a seat at westminster.
May 2014 after winning EU: PB opinion: not to worry thats the EU not like FPTP they'll fall back to 9%. Not a chance of a seat.
Oct 2014 after Clacton and Heyward. PB opinion they may get a 3/4 seats but they'll probably fall back before then.
To my half Kipper, you of little faith @Richard Tyndall, I bet you £100 evens now that UKIP get more than 12 seats at the GE 2015 if it's called in May and more than 8 even if it's called next week.
There is nothing wrong with standing in every seat in the kingdom if they can manage it, as well as concentrating on 100 seats if they can manage that too. I thing that Farage is doing a great job at present and is seeing that the UKIP surge is maintained and extended in every way. RT doesn't like Nigel - is it personal in some way - and true, he laughs a lot, but he sees what I see, that for UKIP this is a chance for success that may not come ever again if the party doesn't grab it now.
There comes a tide in the affairs of men and political parties etc...... It behove UKIP to ride this tide.
Last night I came across a John Curtice tweet from march last year saying Ukip may get as much as 6-8% in the GE
Tim commented.. 'Sounds about right, and that'll be enough to kill Dave off"
Scottish seats which might change hands and if they do, to whom (inc long shots) Caithness, Sutherland + Easter Ross LibDem to SNP Inverness etc LibDem to SNP Argyll LibDem to SNP or Tory Gordon LibDem to SNP West Aberdeen LibDem to Tory or SNP Aberdeen South Lab to SNP or Tory Dundee West Lab to SNP Stirling Lab to SNP or Tory Ochil Lab to SNP Edin S Lab to SNP or Tory Edin W LibDem to Tory or SNP Edin SW (without Darling) Lab to SNP or Tory Edin N and Leith Lab to SNP Glas N Lab to SNP Glas E Lab to SNP Glas Govan Lab to SNP Dunbartonshire E LibDem to SNP or Lab Dunbartonshire W Lab to SNP Ayrshire N and Arran Lab to SNP Ayr, Carrick etc Lab to SNP or Tory Dumfries and Galloway Lab to Tory East Renfrewshire (without Murphy) Lab to Tory or SNP NE Fife LibDem to SNP or Tory Berwickshire, Roxburgh LibDem to Tory or SNP
Some of these might seem silly and they are only a list of seats which for various reasons could change hands. Currently there are 6 Scottish Labour held seats where Baxter has the Tories within 7% and one, Edinburgh South where he shows the Tories taking the seat. He also has them taking 2 LibDem seats and 3 others where they are within 5%. I am not for a second suggesting the Tories will take more than 2-3 seats in total but it does show how everything is to play for in Scotland and if the level of anger and betrayal directed by the 45 to SLAB continues, we could see a repeat of 2011 where the SNP swept away Labour constituency MSPs in seats they had never come close before.
The election of the SNP deputy leader takes on increased significance. Stewart Hosie is the only candidate who is a Westminster MP.
UKIP is to make a serious attempt to win 100 seats at next year’s general election and will try to oust even Eurosceptic Tories.
At a strategy meeting last week, senior party figures agreed to field candidates in every seat — and run serious campaigns in 100 of them — and not give a free ride to MPs who want to leave the EU. The decision was backed by Douglas Carswell, who became Ukip’s first elected MP earlier this month after defecting from the Tories.
Paul Sykes, the party’s biggest donor, is prepared to give more than £1.5m to help fund the campaign. “We want to make it absolutely clear that we are not interested in behind-the-scenes deals with other parties, all of whom are committed to our continued membership of the failing European Union,” said the party leader, Nigel Farage. “We will not be doing grubby deals.”
I would consider it a real achievement for UKIP to win 5 seats at the GE and think that (in keeping with the tone of the thread header) 10 is probably a wild fantasy. A touch of realism in their expectations would probably be a good idea for the party at this point.
I think this is one of those situations best described as "More money than sense"
I'm sure from a UKIP point of view, Paul Sykes would be better of allocating that £1.5million at say the top 20 UKIP targets, rather than those 100 seats they are now going for.
All they need to do is to adopt an anti-gas drilling/shale/fracking policy and roll over the 120 Conservative seats facing a major fracking rebellion. 100 seats would be well within reach.
Some people cannot believe their eyes or their ears: they have made up their minds and thats that.
May I remind all PBers that the prognosis for UKIP success has ever been dire.
May 2013 after local successes: PB opinion: not to worry they'll fall back to their 3%; they'll never win a seat at westminster.
May 2014 after winning EU: PB opinion: not to worry thats the EU not like FPTP they'll fall back to 9%. Not a chance of a seat.
Oct 2014 after Clacton and Heyward. PB opinion they may get a 3/4 seats but they'll probably fall back before then.
To my half Kipper, you of little faith @Richard Tyndall, I bet you £100 evens now that UKIP get more than 12 seats at the GE 2015 if it's called in May and more than 8 even if it's called next week.
There is nothing wrong with standing in every seat in the kingdom if they can manage it, as well as concentrating on 100 seats if they can manage that too. I thing that Farage is doing a great job at present and is seeing that the UKIP surge is maintained and extended in every way. RT doesn't like Nigel - is it personal in some way - and true, he laughs a lot, but he sees what I see, that for UKIP this is a chance for success that may not come ever again if the party doesn't grab it now.
There comes a tide in the affairs of men and political parties etc...... It behove UKIP to ride this tide.
It is a long way from 12 seats to the 108 you are claiming.
Unfortunately I don't bet with money I don't have so I will decline as my limited resources are already tied up in a bet with Richard N. Make it a tenner and I will be happy to take you up on it though.
£10 it is @Richard. And you must know that my 108 seat forecast was to needle the opposition.
I remember when you told us that fracking would cost the Tories the Newark by-election.
How did that turn out?
It might have done had Roger Helmer heeded my advice and dumped gas drilling through the aquifer for a coal policy. In Newark can you imagine the extra job potential? As it was, an independent candidate took 5% of the vote, and UKIP was left out of the running.
But if by chance the alchemy of FPTP transmutes Miliband into office, the second option can only occur after a card vote at an annual party conference...
Procedurally, yes. But the political reality is that if Balls, Yvette, Burnham, Hunt, Chukka, Harriet, plus the various grandees and Len McCluskey, tell Ed that it's Game Over, then it's Game Over.
Nope. The British system (not to mention the Labour rules) just doesn't work that way...
Will the penny finally drop for some in Labour? I have to say, the impression of ostrich-like head-in-the-sand stuff from even Labour MPs has really been irking me.
'To me the SNP lost all credibility in 2012 when it made ludicrous predictions and claims ahead of the locals. Remember how they were going to take Glasgow? LAB won city back with an overall majority.'
Yes,but that was in 2012 with the over-the-top expectations after 2011,also Ed was still very much in his honeymoon period.
What really surprised me was how close the SNP came to winning the referendum and then after losing it had a massive surge in membership.
Labour's policy of command and control from Westminster evidenced by the Lamont fiasco is a gift to the SNP and their claim that they are the 'only' party that represents Scottish interests
I think it's such turbulent times in both England & Scotland & with 5/6 party politics almost anything can happen.
I'm not sure OGH understands STV elections. They very much depend on marginal assessments by the parties as to how many candidates to put up in each ward.
Without real Scottish polls, it's difficult to assess party strengths in Scotland - obviously for those parties who share party ID across GB, the Scottish crossbreak is just as unreliable as for any other geographic area. For the SNP the opposite is true. Both Populus & YG (though they confuse things slightly by including Plaid) weight on the SNP share of GP party ID, and these people aren't spread over other areas.
Whether the clearly identified SNP rise in FPTP will give them a big enough lead over Lab to cross the "tipping point" is not clear. It could also be that there is no national tipping point in Scotland. It could be (we don't know) that the SNP gain from Lab is concentrated in seats that would allow fewer or more Lab seats to fall.
The Oban N & Lorn by-election suggested that while the vote shares of Con, Lab, Ind all dropped 4-5% since July, with the SNP gaining, the remaining core voters of Unionist parties were even more "anyone but SNP" than before - so I wouldn't rule out Easterross's idea of a Tory resurgence, though they are likely to suffer from losing votes to UKIP.
Yes, Andy, although they're toning it down for obvious reasons, and mentioning coal more now. Yet they should go a step further and drop fracking/shale gas. There is an anti-gas drilling vote which is growing by the day, and many seats will be affected by anti-frack campaigning. The Greens will pick up this constituency as the only party in the running to oppose fracking. UKIP could get a big lift in 120 Conservative seats by going anti-fracking. It's hard to fathom why they don't just go for it.
Also, I agree that, despite Scottish Labour's profound problems, they probably won't lose that many seats to the SNP. Not yet anyway.
The thing is that most of the very "Yes" areas are ones where Labour's firewall is the strongest and where it would require absolutely mammoth swings to fall. The more middle-class Labour seats where they have thinner majorities were also more anti-independence, so you'd expect Labour to hold up better. There's only really Falkirk, Ochil and Dundee West that look like feasible Labour losses next year.
Some people cannot believe their eyes or their ears: they have made up their minds and thats that.
May I remind all PBers that the prognosis for UKIP success has ever been dire.
May 2013 after local successes: PB opinion: not to worry they'll fall back to their 3%; they'll never win a seat at westminster.
May 2014 after winning EU: PB opinion: not to worry thats the EU not like FPTP they'll fall back to 9%. Not a chance of a seat.
Oct 2014 after Clacton and Heyward. PB opinion they may get a 3/4 seats but they'll probably fall back before then.
To my half Kipper, you of little faith @Richard Tyndall, I bet you £100 evens now that UKIP get more than 12 seats at the GE 2015 if it's called in May and more than 8 even if it's called next week.
There is nothing wrong with standing in every seat in the kingdom if they can manage it, as well as concentrating on 100 seats if they can manage that too. I thing that Farage is doing a great job at present and is seeing that the UKIP surge is maintained and extended in every way. RT doesn't like Nigel - is it personal in some way - and true, he laughs a lot, but he sees what I see, that for UKIP this is a chance for success that may not come ever again if the party doesn't grab it now.
There comes a tide in the affairs of men and political parties etc...... It behove UKIP to ride this tide.
It is a long way from 12 seats to the 108 you are claiming.
Unfortunately I don't bet with money I don't have so I will decline as my limited resources are already tied up in a bet with Richard N. Make it a tenner and I will be happy to take you up on it though.
£10 it is @Richard. And you must know that my 108 seat forecast was to needle the opposition.
Fair enough. I am happy with that and of course this is one bet I actually hope I lose :-)
They are. They'd do better in leafier parts of Kent and into Susex if they were not. Lot of unhappy Tories concerned that their greenbelt is going to get dug-up.
I remember when you told us that fracking would cost the Tories the Newark by-election.
How did that turn out?
It might have done had Roger Helmer heeded my advice and dumped gas drilling through the aquifer for a coal policy. In Newark can you imagine the extra job potential? As it was, an independent candidate took 5% of the vote, and UKIP was left out of the running.
There was and is no fracking planned within the Newark constituency because the geology is wrong. You really have no idea about any of this do you.
Yes, Andy, although they're toning it down for obvious reasons, and mentioning coal more now. Yet they should go a step further and drop fracking/shale gas. There is an anti-gas drilling vote which is growing by the day, and many seats will be affected by anti-frack campaigning. The Greens will pick up this constituency as the only party in the running to oppose fracking. UKIP could get a big lift in 120 Conservative seats by going anti-fracking. It's hard to fathom why they don't just go for it.
Perhaps because it is garbage and based on the sorts of idiotic theories only the tin hat brigade like you believe. That seems like a good reason to start with,
They are. They'd do better in leafier parts of Kent and into Susex if they were not. Lot of unhappy Tories concerned that their greenbelt is going to get dug-up.
I don't think it would make much sense to be against both windfarms and fracking.
Also, I agree that, despite Scottish Labour's profound problems, they probably won't lose that many seats to the SNP. Not yet anyway.
The thing is that most of the very "Yes" areas are ones where Labour's firewall is the strongest and where it would require absolutely mammoth swings to fall. The more middle-class Labour seats where they have thinner majorities were also more anti-independence, so you'd expect Labour to hold up better. There's only really Falkirk, Ochil and Dundee West that look like feasible Labour losses next year.
In Lab's middle-class seats (eg East Renfrewshire), I wouldn't discount the possibility of some SNP voters holding their noses and voting Tory to dislodge Murphy - especially if he has become SLab leader.
Yes, Andy, although they're toning it down for obvious reasons, and mentioning coal more now. Yet they should go a step further and drop fracking/shale gas. There is an anti-gas drilling vote which is growing by the day, and many seats will be affected by anti-frack campaigning. The Greens will pick up this constituency as the only party in the running to oppose fracking. UKIP could get a big lift in 120 Conservative seats by going anti-fracking. It's hard to fathom why they don't just go for it.
Actually Tapestry is right on this, at least to an extent in regions where fracking is a live issue. However, it's too late for UKIP to 'tap' into this market; of course they are cynical and would say anything to get votes, but, even for them, switching from being the most pro-fracking party in the country to opposing fracking, in the space of a few months, would be a cynical manoeuvre too far.
The Greens will pick up the anti-fracking vote, in some cases from voters who would run a mile from most Green policies.
The Greens will pick up the anti-fracking vote, in some cases from voters who would run a mile from most Green policies.
Yes, I agree with this. I think fracking could mean the Greens make surges in some very unexpected places next year. I've said before that I can see them saving their deposit in George Osborne's constituency in Tatton where fracking is a big issue
Yes, Andy, although they're toning it down for obvious reasons, and mentioning coal more now. Yet they should go a step further and drop fracking/shale gas. There is an anti-gas drilling vote which is growing by the day, and many seats will be affected by anti-frack campaigning. The Greens will pick up this constituency as the only party in the running to oppose fracking. UKIP could get a big lift in 120 Conservative seats by going anti-fracking. It's hard to fathom why they don't just go for it.
Actually Tapestry is right on this, at least to an extent in regions where fracking is a live issue. However, it's too late for UKIP to 'tap' into this market; of course they are cynical and would say anything to get votes, but, even for them, switching from being the most pro-fracking party in the country to opposing fracking, in the space of a few months, would be a cynical manoeuvre too far.
The Greens will pick up the anti-fracking vote, in some cases from voters who would run a mile from most Green policies.
I think a very heavy winter may help change peoples minds on how the UK gets it's fuel.
Caithness, Sutherland + Easter Ross LibDem to SNP: Very unlikely Inverness etc LibDem to SNP: Better than evens. Argyll LibDem to SNP or Tory: SNP see local by election this week. Gordon LibDem to SNP: Very likely, tories big outsiders as the SNP goes left. West Aberdeen LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory but tight. Aberdeen South Lab to SNP or Tory: Probably Labour hold, SNP not strong in Aberdeen Dundee West Lab to SNP: Very likely Stirling Lab to SNP or Tory: probable SNP, Tory no chance. Ochil Lab to SNP: Good chance of SNP gain. Unionist split. Edin S Lab to SNP or Tory: probably Labour, unionist vote split but No territory. Edin W LibDem to Tory or SNP: ditto. Edin SW (without Darling) Lab to SNP or Tory: Lab hold. Edin N and Leith Lab to SNP: Labour hold. Glas N Lab to SNP: Only in a meltdown, unionist vote not split Glas E Lab to SNP: ditto Glas Govan Lab to SNP:ditto Dunbartonshire E LibDem to SNP or Lab: Labour Dunbartonshire W Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown Ayrshire N and Arran Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown. Ayr, Carrick etc Lab to SNP or Tory: SNP again likely to gain from split unionist vote. Dumfries and Galloway Lab to Tory: think this is a good chance for the tories. East Renfrewshire (without Murphy) Lab to Tory or SNP: Risk of split unionist vote again helping SNP NE Fife LibDem to SNP or Tory: probable SNP Berwickshire, Roxburgh LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory, Borders very No.
As expected the Sunday Herald (which supported YES) not pulling any punches!
That's a great front page. But shouldn't there be several dinosaurs fighting each other?
I never tire of reposting this from the Daily Mash:
The Labour-Falkirk controversy explained 04-07-13
The Labour Party is a poisonous collection of chippy, tribal cretins, none of whom are capable of running a bath. This is especially true in Scotland. Falkirk is in Scotland.
I think a very heavy winter may help change peoples minds on how the UK gets it's fuel.
It really won't, believe me. I know quite a lot about this because fracking is quite a big issue here in deepest Sussex. Those who oppose it (even if they actually drive around in massive gas-guzzling 4x4s) oppose it really, really strongly, such that it will be their most important issue of all. They are very well organised as a true grassroots campaigning movement, which is drawing active support from people not previously involved at all in politics. What's more, the argument has already been won by the anti-frackers.
I'm not saying that in numeric terms this is going to make a big difference in these (mostly very safe Tory) seats, but those who do care about it care very strongly.
Betting-wise, maybe is now the time to start looking at those Tory seats which rank between 30-50 on Labour's capture list. If Labour are set to win around 280-290 seats next May, then there are a number of these they ain't going to win and currently there are some sexy odds on offer.
That said its difficult to know what official Tory Policy on Energy is as they didn't seem to have an Energy Spokesman at their conference (well not one who spoke anyway). Even more bizarre they didn't seem to have a business spokesman either......
TimB Yes, Brad Pitt heads a tank unit advancing through Germany in 1945, gripping stuff, if pretty brutal at times. Has just pipped 'Gone Girl' in my view to movie of the year so far
I've just noticed what a horror story tonight's Opinium poll is for the LibDems, down by 3% to 6%. Unlike Martin Day, I promise not to utter the dreaded word T*x*, either in the singular or the low multiple plural.
The NFL efforts in London continue to be interesting.
Tomorrow's game at Wembley starts at 13.30 GMT, 9.30 EDT (6.30 PDT!). This is deliberate. The cover story is so that the team can fly home that night. The real story is so that the league can see what the TV ratings are for the game at that time, both in the UK and US.
Wembley NFL games are already among the highest in merchandise sales in regular season games, over $1 million every game.
The NFL is serious about having a London based team. They have already talked with Wembley about availability and upgrading the playing surface, and the favorite candidate to relocate is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
There are 3 games there this year - tomorrow and November 9 when America's Team hits town. There will be 4 games next year.
Caithness, Sutherland + Easter Ross LibDem to SNP: Very unlikely Inverness etc LibDem to SNP: Better than evens. Argyll LibDem to SNP or Tory: SNP see local by election this week. Gordon LibDem to SNP: Very likely, tories big outsiders as the SNP goes left. West Aberdeen LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory but tight. Aberdeen South Lab to SNP or Tory: Probably Labour hold, SNP not strong in Aberdeen Dundee West Lab to SNP: Very likely Stirling Lab to SNP or Tory: probable SNP, Tory no chance. Ochil Lab to SNP: Good chance of SNP gain. Unionist split. Edin S Lab to SNP or Tory: probably Labour, unionist vote split but No territory. Edin W LibDem to Tory or SNP: ditto. Edin SW (without Darling) Lab to SNP or Tory: Lab hold. Edin N and Leith Lab to SNP: Labour hold. Glas N Lab to SNP: Only in a meltdown, unionist vote not split Glas E Lab to SNP: ditto Glas Govan Lab to SNP:ditto Dunbartonshire E LibDem to SNP or Lab: Labour Dunbartonshire W Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown Ayrshire N and Arran Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown. Ayr, Carrick etc Lab to SNP or Tory: SNP again likely to gain from split unionist vote. Dumfries and Galloway Lab to Tory: think this is a good chance for the tories. East Renfrewshire (without Murphy) Lab to Tory or SNP: Risk of split unionist vote again helping SNP NE Fife LibDem to SNP or Tory: probable SNP Berwickshire, Roxburgh LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory, Borders very No.
Where Salmond stands could well be a gain too. I'd hope he'd stand in Caithness as thats my big SNP-Lib Dem outsider, but I suspect he may well go for an easier target.
Caithness, Sutherland + Easter Ross LibDem to SNP: Very unlikely Inverness etc LibDem to SNP: Better than evens. Argyll LibDem to SNP or Tory: SNP see local by election this week. Gordon LibDem to SNP: Very likely, tories big outsiders as the SNP goes left. West Aberdeen LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory but tight. Aberdeen South Lab to SNP or Tory: Probably Labour hold, SNP not strong in Aberdeen Dundee West Lab to SNP: Very likely Stirling Lab to SNP or Tory: probable SNP, Tory no chance. Ochil Lab to SNP: Good chance of SNP gain. Unionist split. Edin S Lab to SNP or Tory: probably Labour, unionist vote split but No territory. Edin W LibDem to Tory or SNP: ditto. Edin SW (without Darling) Lab to SNP or Tory: Lab hold. Edin N and Leith Lab to SNP: Labour hold. Glas N Lab to SNP: Only in a meltdown, unionist vote not split Glas E Lab to SNP: ditto Glas Govan Lab to SNP:ditto Dunbartonshire E LibDem to SNP or Lab: Labour Dunbartonshire W Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown Ayrshire N and Arran Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown. Ayr, Carrick etc Lab to SNP or Tory: SNP again likely to gain from split unionist vote. Dumfries and Galloway Lab to Tory: think this is a good chance for the tories. East Renfrewshire (without Murphy) Lab to Tory or SNP: Risk of split unionist vote again helping SNP NE Fife LibDem to SNP or Tory: probable SNP Berwickshire, Roxburgh LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory, Borders very No.
Where Salmond stands could well be a gain too. I'd hope he'd stand in Caithness as thats my big SNP-Lib Dem outsider, but I suspect he may well go for an easier target.
Salmond will stand in Gordon. Constituency workload for that & E Aberdeenshire MSP the same as for an English MP.
The NFL efforts in London continue to be interesting.
Tomorrow's game at Wembley starts at 13.30 GMT, 9.30 EDT (6.30 PDT!). This is deliberate. The cover story is so that the team can fly home that night. The real story is so that the league can see what the TV ratings are for the game at that time, both in the UK and US.
Wembley NFL games are already among the highest in merchandise sales in regular season games, over $1 million every game.
The NFL is serious about having a London based team. They have already talked with Wembley about availability and upgrading the playing surface, and the favorite candidate to relocate is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
There are 3 games there this year - tomorrow and November 9 when America's Team hits town. There will be 4 games next year.
The Football Association want an NFL franchise to help pay the bills for Wembley, as they want the England team to go back on tour as when Wembley was being rebuilt.
Why are BBC reporters using such despondent tones of voice to report the death of a fourth jihadist from Portsmouth? It's not that I think they should be celebratory about it, but I think a neutral tone would be most appropriate.
Newark is a coal mining area where a coal policy would have sold many on a UKIP vote. The licences to explore for gas cover 65% of the UK, as from July this year, including Newark. I get my figures of the 120 Conservative seats being targetable for UKIP going anti-fracking/shale gas from The Guardian. http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/conservative-face-electoral-destruction.html Take a look, sceptical ones.
People won't care if UKIP trade a policy here and there. It's almost expected in the pre-election horse-trade. They went for the luxury goods 25% VAT rate at Doncaster, but dropped it a few days later, for example. That didn't affect their support. Right now UKIP could adopt or drop any policy and their support would still grow. When you're on a roll, you're on a roll. Now is the moment to seize big opportunities.
I wonder if I can access the PB techie hivemind? When I try to open any zipped PDF file downloaded with either Firefox or Explorer with Winzip, instead of opening it, it tries to open what seems to be an infinite number of copies or firefox or Explorer, at about 1 per second. I can only stop the process by closing the browser. I've tried upgrading to the current release of Winzip - it doesn't help. Presumably there is malware at work - has anyone come across this?
The NFL efforts in London continue to be interesting.
Tomorrow's game at Wembley starts at 13.30 GMT, 9.30 EDT (6.30 PDT!). This is deliberate. The cover story is so that the team can fly home that night. The real story is so that the league can see what the TV ratings are for the game at that time, both in the UK and US.
Wembley NFL games are already among the highest in merchandise sales in regular season games, over $1 million every game.
The NFL is serious about having a London based team. They have already talked with Wembley about availability and upgrading the playing surface, and the favorite candidate to relocate is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
There are 3 games there this year - tomorrow and November 9 when America's Team hits town. There will be 4 games next year.
The Football Association want an NFL franchise to help pay the bills for Wembley, as they want the England team to go back on tour as when Wembley was being rebuilt.
It's just 2 pre-season games per year plus 8 regular season games, mainly on a Sunday but one Thursday game. If it's Jacksonville then playoffs are unlikely for a while.
As an aside, why would the FA need help paying Wembley bills? A place that size should be able to be filled with everything from motocross to concerts frequently.
Why are BBC reporters using such despondent tones of voice to report the death of a fourth jihadist from Portsmouth? It's not that I think they should be celebratory about it, but I think a neutral tone would be most appropriate.
Why are BBC reporters using such despondent tones of voice to report the death of a fourth jihadist from Portsmouth? It's not that I think they should be celebratory about it, but I think a neutral tone would be most appropriate.
I wonder if I can access the PB techie hivemind? When I try to open any zipped PDF file downloaded with either Firefox or Explorer with Winzip, instead of opening it, it tries to open what seems to be an infinite number of copies or firefox or Explorer, at about 1 per second. I can only stop the process by closing the browser. I've tried upgrading to the current release of Winzip - it doesn't help. Presumably there is malware at work - has anyone come across this?
I wonder if I can access the PB techie hivemind? When I try to open any zipped PDF file downloaded with either Firefox or Explorer with Winzip, instead of opening it, it tries to open what seems to be an infinite number of copies or firefox or Explorer, at about 1 per second. I can only stop the process by closing the browser. I've tried upgrading to the current release of Winzip - it doesn't help. Presumably there is malware at work - has anyone come across this?
I wonder if I can access the PB techie hivemind? When I try to open any zipped PDF file downloaded with either Firefox or Explorer with Winzip, instead of opening it, it tries to open what seems to be an infinite number of copies or firefox or Explorer, at about 1 per second. I can only stop the process by closing the browser. I've tried upgrading to the current release of Winzip - it doesn't help. Presumably there is malware at work - has anyone come across this?
what OS are you running?
Windows 7.
I don't think you need winzip on windows 7. The file browser should be able to do it for you.
I wonder if I can access the PB techie hivemind? When I try to open any zipped PDF file downloaded with either Firefox or Explorer with Winzip, instead of opening it, it tries to open what seems to be an infinite number of copies or firefox or Explorer, at about 1 per second. I can only stop the process by closing the browser. I've tried upgrading to the current release of Winzip - it doesn't help. Presumably there is malware at work - has anyone come across this?
I wonder if I can access the PB techie hivemind? When I try to open any zipped PDF file downloaded with either Firefox or Explorer with Winzip, instead of opening it, it tries to open what seems to be an infinite number of copies or firefox or Explorer, at about 1 per second. I can only stop the process by closing the browser. I've tried upgrading to the current release of Winzip - it doesn't help. Presumably there is malware at work - has anyone come across this?
The NFL efforts in London continue to be interesting.
Tomorrow's game at Wembley starts at 13.30 GMT, 9.30 EDT (6.30 PDT!). This is deliberate. The cover story is so that the team can fly home that night. The real story is so that the league can see what the TV ratings are for the game at that time, both in the UK and US.
Wembley NFL games are already among the highest in merchandise sales in regular season games, over $1 million every game.
The NFL is serious about having a London based team. They have already talked with Wembley about availability and upgrading the playing surface, and the favorite candidate to relocate is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
There are 3 games there this year - tomorrow and November 9 when America's Team hits town. There will be 4 games next year.
The Football Association want an NFL franchise to help pay the bills for Wembley, as they want the England team to go back on tour as when Wembley was being rebuilt.
It's just 2 pre-season games per year plus 8 regular season games, mainly on a Sunday but one Thursday game. If it's Jacksonville then playoffs are unlikely for a while.
As an aside, why would the FA need help paying Wembley bills? A place that size should be able to be filled with everything from motocross to concerts frequently.
Because it cost nearly £800 million to build (£425 million being a loan)
Tried that, thanks! That safely unzips the file - so it's NOT a Zip problem. But when I try to open the resulting file (which is listed as a "Firefox HTML document" rather than a PDF document) by double-clicking it, it goers into its frenzied "multiple tabs of Firefox" routine.
If I download it with Explorer instead of Firefox, it STILL identifies it as a Firefox HTML document (perhaps because Firefox is my default browser), and opening it goes into the same loop.
Tried that, thanks! That safely unzips the file - so it's NOT a Zip problem. But when I try to open the resulting file (which is listed as a "Firefox HTML document" rather than a PDF document) by double-clicking it, it goers into its frenzied "multiple tabs of Firefox" routine.
If I download it with Explorer instead of Firefox, it STILL identifies it as a Firefox HTML document (perhaps because Firefox is my default browser), and opening it goes into the same loop.
The NFL efforts in London continue to be interesting.
Tomorrow's game at Wembley starts at 13.30 GMT, 9.30 EDT (6.30 PDT!). This is deliberate. The cover story is so that the team can fly home that night. The real story is so that the league can see what the TV ratings are for the game at that time, both in the UK and US.
Wembley NFL games are already among the highest in merchandise sales in regular season games, over $1 million every game.
The NFL is serious about having a London based team. They have already talked with Wembley about availability and upgrading the playing surface, and the favorite candidate to relocate is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
There are 3 games there this year - tomorrow and November 9 when America's Team hits town. There will be 4 games next year.
The Football Association want an NFL franchise to help pay the bills for Wembley, as they want the England team to go back on tour as when Wembley was being rebuilt.
It's just 2 pre-season games per year plus 8 regular season games, mainly on a Sunday but one Thursday game. If it's Jacksonville then playoffs are unlikely for a while.
As an aside, why would the FA need help paying Wembley bills? A place that size should be able to be filled with everything from motocross to concerts frequently.
Because it cost nearly £800 million to build (£425 million being a loan)
That's an absurdly large amount for a place that size. The new Dallas Cowboys Stadium - much bigger, more luxurious and with more and better facilities, cost $1.2 billion (about the same as Wembley), all funded by the Cowboys and Jerry Jones.
They have a huge lot of functions there of all sorts. I suspect Wembley is woefully under-utilized, as the FA seems to have no business sense at all based on the TV contracts it negotiates.
Ah...opening the file with Adobe Reader avoids the problem! But it's laborious - I have to download it with Firefox or Explorer, put it somewhere, and then go to Reader to open it. Any advice?
Tried that, thanks! That safely unzips the file - so it's NOT a Zip problem. But when I try to open the resulting file (which is listed as a "Firefox HTML document" rather than a PDF document) by double-clicking it, it goers into its frenzied "multiple tabs of Firefox" routine.
If I download it with Explorer instead of Firefox, it STILL identifies it as a Firefox HTML document (perhaps because Firefox is my default browser), and opening it goes into the same loop.
Comments
(p.s. No idea what the chirruping is about and actually I can't be bothered to check)
1953 would be far enough.
In loco parentis - my dad's an engine driver
Non compos mentis - not gardening minded
Caesar adsum iam forti
Pompey ad erat
Caesar sic in omnibus
Pompey sic in at
But if by chance the alchemy of FPTP transmutes Miliband into office, the second option can only occur after a card vote at an annual party conference...
But I agree with the posts down thread that the big political story of the weekend is Johann Lamont's resignation and her fury with Ed Miliband. It is likely that her resignation will have more impact than anything she achieved as leader.
The problems Labour now have in Scotland are profound and those pointing to swings of more than 10% required before a significant number of seats change hands are missing the point. It can happen. It did in 2011. Those same Labour heartland seats where the Labour vote was weighed not counted fell one after another to the SNP.
Scottish Labour is desperately short of talent but they are not stupid and they know how to win elections. They know that Ed's apparent plan of sleepwalking into Downing Street saying as little as possible just will not face the SNP challenge in Scotland. They are fed up with having nothing to say, no vision to sell.
We are about to see the devolution of the Scottish party, a bit like the CDU. They will break away and will not commit themselves to UK policy or non policy any more. Scottish Tories should take note. This is what is required to survive in the post referendum Scotland.
In looking for SNP gains I would suggest that you first look for areas that voted Yes or were at least close. Then look for seats where the Unionist vote is split by either the Tories or, historically, the Lib Dems playing a role. A spilt unionist vote and a strong Yes vote equals an SNP gain.
And Ed? Well it is late in the day but his position has never been weaker.
Seriously you need to have chips on both shoulders to believe I'm posh.
As any PBer who has ever heard me speak will attest, to call me posh causes all sorts of epistemological problems.
(boom boom)
The win part is no value but the place part is a steal. Most of the time you'll simply break-even on this bet but the upside is worth the downside risk .
May I remind all PBers that the prognosis for UKIP success has ever been dire.
May 2013 after local successes: PB opinion: not to worry they'll fall back to their 3%; they'll never win a seat at westminster.
May 2014 after winning EU: PB opinion: not to worry thats the EU not like FPTP they'll fall back to 9%. Not a chance of a seat.
Oct 2014 after Clacton and Heyward. PB opinion they may get a 3/4 seats but they'll probably fall back before then.
To my half Kipper, you of little faith @Richard Tyndall, I bet you £100 evens now that UKIP get more than 12 seats at the GE 2015 if it's called in May and more than 8 even if it's called next week.
There is nothing wrong with standing in every seat in the kingdom if they can manage it, as well as concentrating on 100 seats if they can manage that too. I thing that Farage is doing a great job at present and is seeing that the UKIP surge is maintained and extended in every way. RT doesn't like Nigel - is it personal in some way - and true, he laughs a lot, but he sees what I see, that for UKIP this is a chance for success that may not come ever again if the party doesn't grab it now.
There comes a tide in the affairs of men and political parties etc......
It behove UKIP to ride this tide.
I believe you are a Tory though, so 1 out of 3. Must try harder.
'To me the SNP lost all credibility in 2012 when it made ludicrous predictions and claims ahead of the locals. Remember how they were going to take Glasgow? LAB won city back with an overall majority.'
Yes,but that was in 2012 with the over-the-top expectations after 2011,also Ed was still very much in his honeymoon period.
What really surprised me was how close the SNP came to winning the referendum and then after losing it had a massive surge in membership.
Labour's policy of command and control from Westminster evidenced by the Lamont fiasco is a gift to the SNP and their claim that they are the 'only' party that represents Scottish interests
I think it's such turbulent times in both England & Scotland & with 5/6 party politics almost anything can happen.
Unfortunately I don't bet with money I don't have so I will decline as my limited resources are already tied up in a bet with Richard N. Make it a tenner and I will be happy to take you up on it though.
http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/conservative-face-electoral-destruction.html
Tim commented.. 'Sounds about right, and that'll be enough to kill Dave off"
Such a Shrewdie ...
Caithness, Sutherland + Easter Ross LibDem to SNP
Inverness etc LibDem to SNP
Argyll LibDem to SNP or Tory
Gordon LibDem to SNP
West Aberdeen LibDem to Tory or SNP
Aberdeen South Lab to SNP or Tory
Dundee West Lab to SNP
Stirling Lab to SNP or Tory
Ochil Lab to SNP
Edin S Lab to SNP or Tory
Edin W LibDem to Tory or SNP
Edin SW (without Darling) Lab to SNP or Tory
Edin N and Leith Lab to SNP
Glas N Lab to SNP
Glas E Lab to SNP
Glas Govan Lab to SNP
Dunbartonshire E LibDem to SNP or Lab
Dunbartonshire W Lab to SNP
Ayrshire N and Arran Lab to SNP
Ayr, Carrick etc Lab to SNP or Tory
Dumfries and Galloway Lab to Tory
East Renfrewshire (without Murphy) Lab to Tory or SNP
NE Fife LibDem to SNP or Tory
Berwickshire, Roxburgh LibDem to Tory or SNP
Some of these might seem silly and they are only a list of seats which for various reasons could change hands. Currently there are 6 Scottish Labour held seats where Baxter has the Tories within 7% and one, Edinburgh South where he shows the Tories taking the seat. He also has them taking 2 LibDem seats and 3 others where they are within 5%. I am not for a second suggesting the Tories will take more than 2-3 seats in total but it does show how everything is to play for in Scotland and if the level of anger and betrayal directed by the 45 to SLAB continues, we could see a repeat of 2011 where the SNP swept away Labour constituency MSPs in seats they had never come close before.
The election of the SNP deputy leader takes on increased significance. Stewart Hosie is the only candidate who is a Westminster MP.
How did that turn out?
I just look down on thickos.
How did that turn out?
It might have done had Roger Helmer heeded my advice and dumped gas drilling through the aquifer for a coal policy. In Newark can you imagine the extra job potential? As it was, an independent candidate took 5% of the vote, and UKIP was left out of the running.
I suggest people read Catullus 16.
It will help you understand Latin better and I will help educate you when I return from holiday in a week's time or so.
https://twitter.com/newsundayherald/status/526128823738576896/photo/1
No blackouts this winter, Davey pledges
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/11188132/No-blackouts-this-winter-Davey-pledges.html
Without real Scottish polls, it's difficult to assess party strengths in Scotland - obviously for those parties who share party ID across GB, the Scottish crossbreak is just as unreliable as for any other geographic area. For the SNP the opposite is true. Both Populus & YG (though they confuse things slightly by including Plaid) weight on the SNP share of GP party ID, and these people aren't spread over other areas.
Whether the clearly identified SNP rise in FPTP will give them a big enough lead over Lab to cross the "tipping point" is not clear. It could also be that there is no national tipping point in Scotland. It could be (we don't know) that the SNP gain from Lab is concentrated in seats that would allow fewer or more Lab seats to fall.
The Oban N & Lorn by-election suggested that while the vote shares of Con, Lab, Ind all dropped 4-5% since July, with the SNP gaining, the remaining core voters of Unionist parties were even more "anyone but SNP" than before - so I wouldn't rule out Easterross's idea of a Tory resurgence, though they are likely to suffer from losing votes to UKIP.
Yes, Andy, although they're toning it down for obvious reasons, and mentioning coal more now. Yet they should go a step further and drop fracking/shale gas.
There is an anti-gas drilling vote which is growing by the day, and many seats will be affected by anti-frack campaigning. The Greens will pick up this constituency as the only party in the running to oppose fracking. UKIP could get a big lift in 120 Conservative seats by going anti-fracking. It's hard to fathom why they don't just go for it.
The thing is that most of the very "Yes" areas are ones where Labour's firewall is the strongest and where it would require absolutely mammoth swings to fall. The more middle-class Labour seats where they have thinner majorities were also more anti-independence, so you'd expect Labour to hold up better. There's only really Falkirk, Ochil and Dundee West that look like feasible Labour losses next year.
O/T Just been to see Fury, a very powerful film, the best war movie I have seen since 'Saving Private Ryan'
The Greens will pick up the anti-fracking vote, in some cases from voters who would run a mile from most Green policies.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkqa4Yduikc
Caithness, Sutherland + Easter Ross LibDem to SNP: Very unlikely
Inverness etc LibDem to SNP: Better than evens.
Argyll LibDem to SNP or Tory: SNP see local by election this week.
Gordon LibDem to SNP: Very likely, tories big outsiders as the SNP goes left.
West Aberdeen LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory but tight.
Aberdeen South Lab to SNP or Tory: Probably Labour hold, SNP not strong in Aberdeen
Dundee West Lab to SNP: Very likely
Stirling Lab to SNP or Tory: probable SNP, Tory no chance.
Ochil Lab to SNP: Good chance of SNP gain. Unionist split.
Edin S Lab to SNP or Tory: probably Labour, unionist vote split but No territory.
Edin W LibDem to Tory or SNP: ditto.
Edin SW (without Darling) Lab to SNP or Tory: Lab hold.
Edin N and Leith Lab to SNP: Labour hold.
Glas N Lab to SNP: Only in a meltdown, unionist vote not split
Glas E Lab to SNP: ditto
Glas Govan Lab to SNP:ditto
Dunbartonshire E LibDem to SNP or Lab: Labour
Dunbartonshire W Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown
Ayrshire N and Arran Lab to SNP: probable Labour unless meltdown.
Ayr, Carrick etc Lab to SNP or Tory: SNP again likely to gain from split unionist vote.
Dumfries and Galloway Lab to Tory: think this is a good chance for the tories.
East Renfrewshire (without Murphy) Lab to Tory or SNP: Risk of split unionist vote again helping SNP
NE Fife LibDem to SNP or Tory: probable SNP
Berwickshire, Roxburgh LibDem to Tory or SNP: Probably tory, Borders very No.
The Labour-Falkirk controversy explained
04-07-13
The Labour Party is a poisonous collection of chippy, tribal cretins, none of whom are capable of running a bath.
This is especially true in Scotland.
Falkirk is in Scotland.
I'm not saying that in numeric terms this is going to make a big difference in these (mostly very safe Tory) seats, but those who do care about it care very strongly.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/10/owen-patersons-speech-on-abandoning-the-2050-climate-change-targets-full-text/
That said its difficult to know what official Tory Policy on Energy is as they didn't seem to have an Energy Spokesman at their conference (well not one who spoke anyway). Even more bizarre they didn't seem to have a business spokesman either......
http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/
Unlike Martin Day, I promise not to utter the dreaded word T*x*, either in the singular or the low multiple plural.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/major-police-incident-in-edinburgh-city-centre-1-3584102
Police are attending an incident in the centre of Edinburgh, amid reports that an armed man is on a roof.
Tomorrow's game at Wembley starts at 13.30 GMT, 9.30 EDT (6.30 PDT!). This is deliberate. The cover story is so that the team can fly home that night. The real story is so that the league can see what the TV ratings are for the game at that time, both in the UK and US.
Wembley NFL games are already among the highest in merchandise sales in regular season games, over $1 million every game.
The NFL is serious about having a London based team. They have already talked with Wembley about availability and upgrading the playing surface, and the favorite candidate to relocate is the Jacksonville Jaguars.
There are 3 games there this year - tomorrow and November 9 when America's Team hits town. There will be 4 games next year.
"The incident on the Royal Mile this evening is not an armed incident, and there is no risk to the public."
People won't care if UKIP trade a policy here and there. It's almost expected in the pre-election horse-trade. They went for the luxury goods 25% VAT rate at Doncaster, but dropped it a few days later, for example. That didn't affect their support. Right now UKIP could adopt or drop any policy and their support would still grow. When you're on a roll, you're on a roll. Now is the moment to seize big opportunities.
As an aside, why would the FA need help paying Wembley bills? A place that size should be able to be filled with everything from motocross to concerts frequently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQOYqzGHiDY
http://kb.winzip.com/kb/entry/155/
or here
http://kb.winzip.com/kb/entry/156/
If I download it with Explorer instead of Firefox, it STILL identifies it as a Firefox HTML document (perhaps because Firefox is my default browser), and opening it goes into the same loop.
They have a huge lot of functions there of all sorts. I suspect Wembley is woefully under-utilized, as the FA seems to have no business sense at all based on the TV contracts it negotiates.
I think Rod's links might help too.