As a Scottish Tory, I find this poll terrifying, rather than amusing. I'd rather have muppet Miliband as PM of a Britain I was part of than living in an independent Scotland (which these figures would surely lead to - either by SNP declaration of independence or, more likely, another referendum which they'd probably win). That said, I just can't see these figures being replicated at next year's GE. I'd be interested to see Mike's take on the methodology etc, as I just can't see the SNP getting 52% of popular vote or Labour and the Tories doing as badly as 23 and 10 respectively.
Hello there, nice to have another Scot - though we remain (ironically, today) short of Scottish Labour posters.
I'd be surprised too - I expect about 15-18, maybe even 20, for the Tories (impact of indyref). It's SLAB and the LDs who will however do badly because so many of their voters went for yes and because of their getting so publicly in bed with the Tories over the last two years, in Labour's case after spending decades going on about Mrs Thatcher and the evil Tories. A bit like James VI and I suddenly declaring for Satanism, really, and about as useful for their credibility in normal Westminster politics where Labour is supposed to oppose the Tories.
I'm seeing reports of Mr Murphy hugging Dame Annabella Goldie [previous Scottish Tory leader] at the Clydebank indyref count. No idea if they are true - I had a look for photos on the net - but the reports date from indyref time and if it is true it sums the issue up very nicely.
PB has never had a regular SLAB poster.
Your comment on Goldie is pathetic she has her views on Scotland not ebola.
Twattish.
Actually I rather liked Auntie Bella - not least because she was actually willing to work with the opposition for what she and her party believed in.
still a pathetic comment
Whether or not the original story is literally true - and I am not convinced it is - there were enough shots of SLAB and Tories cheering together at the indyref result for it to sum up a very, very big problem for SLAB: that they have not only abandoned one of their key raison's d'etre but publicly gone for the opposite. A Labour voter doesn't need to have voted Yes to be very unhappy with the Tory affiliation of SLAB, though for sure it helps.
Re Exeter (which I know well) Electoral Calculus hugely underestimates the impact of losing Topsham and St. Loyes. These wards would have given the Tories a lead of c. 2,500 in 2010, making it very tight.
That said, Exeter is more pro-Labour than you'd expect a prosperous Southern city, surrounded by a sea of blue, to be.
All those MetOffice Civil Serpents.
Exeter University probably skews the city leftwards, but not much, as Exeter students are well to the Right of students generally (University lecturers, however, are as left-wing as anywhere). The County Council is located there, so there's a public sector presence, and as you say, the Met Office.
But, in general, the city's economy is private-sector dominated, based on financial services, retailing, insurance, law, tourism, with several large business parks. It's a very nice city, with some real gems of architecture, like the Cathedral and Square, Guildhall, Rougemont Castle and Gardens, ancient churches dedicated to saints you've never heard of, medieval walls, Georgian and Regency Terraces, and the Quayside. And that's after bombing and redevelopment took their toll. Pre-War, it was like Edinburgh on a smaller scale.
If I had to make a guess, I'd say White, working class voters here have stayed loyal to Labour, in a way that's unusual in the South these days (there's no big ethnic minority population).
Do you really think so? Stayed there with my (health warning: retired) Dad last year. He'd lived there in the 50s and thought it was a 'bit of a dump'. Downmarket, run down and a bit grubby.
We both agreed Bristol was much nicer. I commented on how much appeared ruined by the bombing from WWII.
He was completely bewildered, and annoyed, that it was Labour. He said, "absolutely never used to be, in Devon of all places. Things must have changed."
Norman Tebbit: "I found that a good number of sensible, experienced people at Westminster have begun to wonder if there would be calls from the media, the CBI and TUC for a "Grand Coalition" in the European style, formed by the two major parties – which are in disagreement about almost every major policy for managing the country. I doubt if that could work.
In the past there would have been a dissolution of parliament and another election, possibly with new party leaders.
Under the fixed-term parliaments legislation that might not be impossible, but it would certainly not be easy or straightforward."
Can anyone summarise in a sentence what the SNP stand for?
They seem to have won votes from left right and centre by being all things to all men, plus charismatic leadership - just like Tony Blair did.
My question was pondering why parties without any philsophy bother to gain power at all since they have no particular objective - other than being in power.
UKIP may be nowhere in Scotland, but this is good news for their chances in England. It bumps up their % considerably. Fighting a war on two fronts is futile. As Germany once found out....
UKIP are not nowhere in Scotland. They gained a Scotland MEP at the last EU election compared with two for SNP.
As a Scottish Tory, I find this poll terrifying, rather than amusing. I'd rather have muppet Miliband as PM of a Britain I was part of than living in an independent Scotland (which these figures would surely lead to - either by SNP declaration of independence or, more likely, another referendum which they'd probably win). That said, I just can't see these figures being replicated at next year's GE. I'd be interested to see Mike's take on the methodology etc, as I just can't see the SNP getting 52% of popular vote or Labour and the Tories doing as badly as 23 and 10 respectively.
Hello there, nice to have another Scot - though we remain (ironically, today) short of Scottish Labour posters.
I'd be surprised too - I expect about 15-18, maybe even 20, for the Tories (impact of indyref). It's SLAB and the LDs who will however do badly because so many of their voters went for yes and because of their getting so publicly in bed with the Tories over the last two years, in Labour's case after spending decades going on about Mrs Thatcher and the evil Tories. A bit like James VI and I suddenly declaring for Satanism, really, and about as useful for their credibility in normal Westminster politics where Labour is supposed to oppose the Tories.
I'm seeing reports of Mr Murphy hugging Dame Annabella Goldie [previous Scottish Tory leader] at the Clydebank indyref count. No idea if they are true - I had a look for photos on the net - but the reports date from indyref time and if it is true it sums the issue up very nicely.
PB has never had a regular SLAB poster.
Your comment on Goldie is pathetic she has her views on Scotland not ebola.
Twattish.
Actually I rather liked Auntie Bella - not least because she was actually willing to work with the opposition for what she and her party believed in.
still a pathetic comment
Whether or not the original story is literally true - and I am not convinced it is - there were enough shots of SLAB and Tories cheering together at the indyref result for it to sum up a very, very big problem for SLAB: that they have not only abandoned one of their key raison's d'etre but publicly gone for the opposite. A Labour voter doesn't need to have voted Yes to be very unhappy with the Tory affiliation of SLAB, though for sure it helps.
yes SLAB has salted their own earth with stupid gimmicking and long may they suffer. But to imply Scotland doesn't need a balance of views is daft.
Can anyone summarise in a sentence what the SNP stand for?
They seem to have won votes from left right and centre by being all things to all men, plus charismatic leadership - just like Tony Blair did.
My question was pondering why parties without any philsophy bother to gain power at all since they have no particular objective - other than being in power.
Plato, you hit the nail on the head with that post. While everyone has been focussing on Dundee and Glasgow where the Yes vote was strongest in the Independence Referendum, they are forgetting all the areas and reasons why the No vote was far stronger elsewhere.
They have, which is why I would treat this poll with caution in the continued aftermath of the Indy Referendum. Lets see what the polls say in 4/5 months time, especially after the dust has settled from the Nicola Sturgeon Coronation and Scottish Labour have elected their new Leader. Its also worth noting that this poll will focus minds within Scottish Labour party when it comes to choosing that next Leader, and it might just give Jim Murphy the big boost he needs now that Unite have made it clear that they intend to campaign to make sure the right man doesn't get the job....
Can anyone summarise in a sentence what the SNP stand for?
They seem to have won votes from left right and centre by being all things to all men, plus charismatic leadership - just like Tony Blair did.
My question was pondering why parties without any philsophy bother to gain power at all since they have no particular objective - other than being in power.
It's surely a question that is equally applicable to the Tories (we thought we'd be rather good at it), Labour (we'd do what the Tories would have done but nicer) and the Lib Dems (no comment necessary).
Re Exeter (which I know well) Electoral Calculus hugely underestimates the impact of losing Topsham and St. Loyes. These wards would have given the Tories a lead of c. 2,500 in 2010, making it very tight.
That said, Exeter is more pro-Labour than you'd expect a prosperous Southern city, surrounded by a sea of blue, to be.
All those MetOffice Civil Serpents.
Exeter University probably skews the city leftwards, but not much, as Exeter students are well to the Right of students generally (University lecturers, however, are as left-wing as anywhere). The County Council is located there, so there's a public sector presence, and as you say, the Met Office.
But, in general, the city's economy is private-sector dominated, based on financial services, retailing, insurance, law, tourism, with several large business parks. It's a very nice city, with some real gems of architecture, like the Cathedral and Square, Guildhall, Rougemont Castle and Gardens, ancient churches dedicated to saints you've never heard of, medieval walls, Georgian and Regency Terraces, and the Quayside. And that's after bombing and redevelopment took their toll. Pre-War, it was like Edinburgh on a smaller scale.
If I had to make a guess, I'd say White, working class voters here have stayed loyal to Labour, in a way that's unusual in the South these days (there's no big ethnic minority population).
Do you really think so? Stayed there with my (health warning: retired) Dad last year. He'd lived there in the 50s and thought it was a 'bit of a dump'. Downmarket, run down and a bit grubby.
We both agreed Bristol was much nicer. I commented on how much appeared ruined by the bombing from WWII.
He was completely bewildered, and annoyed, that it was Labour. He said, "absolutely never used to be, in Devon of all places. Things must have changed."
That's not my impression at all.
Bristol is actually well to the Left of Exeter, but its far bigger size sustains a Conservative marginal seat.
Norman Tebbit: "I found that a good number of sensible, experienced people at Westminster have begun to wonder if there would be calls from the media, the CBI and TUC for a "Grand Coalition" in the European style, formed by the two major parties – which are in disagreement about almost every major policy for managing the country. I doubt if that could work.
In the past there would have been a dissolution of parliament and another election, possibly with new party leaders.
Under the fixed-term parliaments legislation that might not be impossible, but it would certainly not be easy or straightforward."
Taking some but not full account of this IpsosMORI poll and factoring in also my thinking that the LibDems will lose between 20-25 seats, that UKIP will win a handful and that Labour will win fewer votes but probably a score more seats than the Tories, I came up with the following result: Labour .......... 290 Con ............... 270 LibDem ........... 34 SNP ................. 30 N.I. ................. 18 UKIP .................. 5 Plaid ................. 2 Greens .............. 1
Total ............ 650
So where would we go from there? The only two possible scenarios that would work in terms of forming a sustainable coalition are Lab+LibDem or Lab+SNP. My mind was made up by Ladbrokes' seemingly generous odds of 25/1 against the latter, compared with only 5/1 against the former. Although as things stand a pact between Labour and the SNP would certainly involve some very tough negotiations and a great deal of heads having to be knocked together, I reckon that the probability of only 3.85% implied by such odds is way too low. Perhaps my £16 bet to win £400 concentrated Shadsy's mind somewhat, resulting in the odds being trimmed back to 20/1 subsequently. That's still good value imho, but do your own research.
Taking some but not full account of this IpsosMORI poll and factoring in also my thinking that the LibDems will lose between 20-25 seats, that UKIP will win a handful and that Labour will win fewer votes but probably a score more seats than the Tories, I came up with the following result: Labour .......... 290 Con .............. 270 LibDem .......... 34 SNP ................ 30 N.I. ................ 18 UKIP ................ 5 Plaid ................ 2 Greens ............ 1
Total ............ 650
So where would we go from there. The only two possible scenarios that would work in terms of forming a workable coalition are Lab+LibDem or Lab+SNP. My mind was made up by Ladbrokes' seemingly generous odds of 25/1 against the latter, compared with only 5/1 against the former. Although as things stand a pact between Labour and the SNP would certainly involve some very tough negotiations and a great deal of heads having to be knocked together, I reckon that the probability of only 3.85% implied by such odds is way too low. Perhaps my £16 bet to win £400 concentrated Shadsy's mind somewhat, resulting in the odds being trimmed back to 20/1 subsequently. That's still good value imho, but do your own research.
Ladbrokes higher/lower LD seats was suggesting <32. They've now reset it from 27.5.
Can anyone summarise in a sentence what the SNP stand for?
They seem to have won votes from left right and centre by being all things to all men, plus charismatic leadership - just like Tony Blair did.
My question was pondering why parties without any philsophy bother to gain power at all since they have no particular objective - other than being in power.
Neither can I, like Jim Murphy, Ruth Davidson in particular had a very good Indy Referendum. And the Scots Tory performance in the Euro's wasn't too shoddy either when you consider that UKIP vote that garnered them an MEP up here.
The other thing I'd note is that it's a disgrace if Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland get stable government for domestic affairs, while the English have to go through all sorts of inaction and instability over domestic governance because of Scottish and Welsh votes. We need an English parliament.
Another vindication for Ed's We Are Not The Tories Save The NHS Take The Heartlands For Granted strategy then. He really is so unbelievably useless there are no words adequate to convey it.
The other thing I'd note is that it's a disgrace if Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland get stable government for domestic affairs, while the English have to go through all sorts of inaction and instability over domestic governance because of Scottish and Welsh votes. We need an English parliament.
I really can't get why you wouldn't want to be told what to do by the DUP.
Another vindication for Ed's We Are Not The Tories Save The NHS Take The Heartlands For Granted strategy then. He really is so unbelievably useless there are no words adequate to convey it.
The problem with the "we're not the Tories " plan is neither are lots of other parties.
Norman Tebbit: "I found that a good number of sensible, experienced people at Westminster have begun to wonder if there would be calls from the media, the CBI and TUC for a "Grand Coalition" in the European style, formed by the two major parties – which are in disagreement about almost every major policy for managing the country. I doubt if that could work.
In the past there would have been a dissolution of parliament and another election, possibly with new party leaders.
Under the fixed-term parliaments legislation that might not be impossible, but it would certainly not be easy or straightforward."
On the second point, not for the first time, Tebbit is being a prat. The idea that the government would choose to go to the polls now with out the FTPA, when one of the parties in government is seeing the momentum swing its way and the other needs something to turn up, is fanciful and wholly against historical precedent.
On the former, yes, there will undoubtedly be calls for a grand coalition. It won't happen and it shouldn't happen, though Farage and Sturgeon would be keen.
Taking some but not full account of this IpsosMORI poll and factoring in also my thinking that the LibDems will lose between 20-25 seats, that UKIP will win a handful and that Labour will win fewer votes but probably a score more seats than the Tories, I came up with the following result: Labour .......... 290 Con .............. 270 LibDem .......... 34 SNP ................ 30 N.I. ................ 18 UKIP ................ 5 Plaid ................ 2 Greens ............ 1
Total ............ 650
So where would we go from there. The only two possible scenarios that would work in terms of forming a workable coalition are Lab+LibDem or Lab+SNP. My mind was made up by Ladbrokes' seemingly generous odds of 25/1 against the latter, compared with only 5/1 against the former. Although as things stand a pact between Labour and the SNP would certainly involve some very tough negotiations and a great deal of heads having to be knocked together, I reckon that the probability of only 3.85% implied by such odds is way too low. Perhaps my £16 bet to win £400 concentrated Shadsy's mind somewhat, resulting in the odds being trimmed back to 20/1 subsequently. That's still good value imho, but do your own research.
Ladbrokes higher/lower LD seats was suggesting <32. They've now reset it from 27.5.
The other thing I'd note is that it's a disgrace if Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland get stable government for domestic affairs, while the English have to go through all sorts of inaction and instability over domestic governance because of Scottish and Welsh votes. We need an English parliament.
I really can't get why you wouldn't want to be told what to do by the DUP.
Neil's a member.
Jim Shannon is bad enough when he just preaches, imagine if we had to listen to him!
Another vindication for Ed's We Are Not The Tories Save The NHS Take The Heartlands For Granted strategy then. He really is so unbelievably useless there are no words adequate to convey it.
The problem with the "we're not the Tories " plan is neither are lots of other parties.
Yup.
As well as the fact "we're not the Tories, but we'll keep their policies" also doesn't exactly make sense. They're basically asking people to go through the upheaval of changing government and "risks" of Labour, just so they get to wake up to the lovely smiling faces of Eds Miliband and Balls everyday, without even any upsides to make it worthwhile.
Another vindication for Ed's We Are Not The Tories Save The NHS Take The Heartlands For Granted strategy then. He really is so unbelievably useless there are no words adequate to convey it.
The problem with the "we're not the Tories " plan is neither are lots of other parties.
And UKIP have those badges of honour from the Tories:
Another vindication for Ed's We Are Not The Tories Save The NHS Take The Heartlands For Granted strategy then. He really is so unbelievably useless there are no words adequate to convey it.
Don't worry. There's still time for things to get worse.
Dreadful polling for the unionist parties, and Labour in particular. I can see Sturgeon's brand of left-nationalism catching on in Scotland. I wouldn't rule out another referendum within the decade. And she could be a winner, due to her possible engaging of women voters. I suspect she learns from her mistakes rather well.
Another vindication for Ed's We Are Not The Tories Save The NHS Take The Heartlands For Granted strategy then. He really is so unbelievably useless there are no words adequate to convey it.
The problem with the "we're not the Tories " plan is neither are lots of other parties.
And UKIP have those badges of honour from the Tories:
Fixed election terms are basically incompatible with parliamentary democracy. Mad idea from the start.
I agree with you, to a point. However the do have the advantage of stopping the government calling a poll at a time when it is most advantageous to itself. But it can get somewhat boring after 4.5 years when basically the government is done, the coalition is in spirit broken and we are simply waiting for May.
"Intriguing US blind item from Blind Gossip 'This acting celebrity is known to be a strong supporter of the Democratic Party and has consistently put their money where their mouth is over the years. When Barack Obama was running in 2008, they were among his most vocal supporters. You may have noticed that they have quieted down significantly. That’s because while they are still a Democrat, they are privately telling close family and friends that "Obama fucking betrayed me......that they "can’t wait until he leaves office and takes his entire fucking pack of liars with him"; and that "Obama is the worst fucking President EVER.""
I can honestly say I've never read anything less intriguing. On here we've had anecdotes from hairdressers window cleaners taxi drivers Thai hookers Soho 'lefties' blokes we met in polling stations etc etc but this is the first time we've had an anecdote from someone not even described!
On behalf of anecdote lovers everywhere be ashamed. Be very ashamed!!
Social security is already devolved to NI, is their issue that they want to hand it back to Westminster? (Would take a lot of pressure off SF I suppose but SF dont have any votes in Westminster.)
Fixed election terms are basically incompatible with parliamentary democracy. Mad idea from the start.
Rubbish. I don't usually describe other posters comment like this, but for one thing other countries seem to manage perfectly well with them, and secondly why should a PM be able to pick an election date to suit him. (Or her, of course!)
Based on this poll clearly Labour's inherent electoral advantage is heavily undermined. Anyone any idea by how much? Would it mean that the Tories would only need a couple of points lead in the national polls to have a chance of securing a majority?
Norman Tebbit: "I found that a good number of sensible, experienced people at Westminster have begun to wonder if there would be calls from the media, the CBI and TUC for a "Grand Coalition" in the European style, formed by the two major parties – which are in disagreement about almost every major policy for managing the country. I doubt if that could work.
In the past there would have been a dissolution of parliament and another election, possibly with new party leaders.
Under the fixed-term parliaments legislation that might not be impossible, but it would certainly not be easy or straightforward."
On the second point, not for the first time, Tebbit is being a prat. The idea that the government would choose to go to the polls now with out the FTPA, when one of the parties in government is seeing the momentum swing its way and the other needs something to turn up, is fanciful and wholly against historical precedent.
On the former, yes, there will undoubtedly be calls for a grand coalition. It won't happen and it shouldn't happen, though Farage and Sturgeon would be keen.
I think you are misunderstanding Lord Tebbit. The whole article is about the situation after the 2015 result. He's not suggesting a dissolution now.
Based on this poll clearly Labour's inherent electoral advantage is heavily undermined. Anyone any idea by how much? Would it mean that the Tories would only need a couple of points lead in the national polls to have a chance of securing a majority?
Presumably their chances of a majority are unchanged, because the seats will be picked up instead by the Scottish Nationalists, not the Conservatives. What it should increase is their chances of being largest party.
Social security is already devolved to NI, is their issue that they want to hand it back to Westminster? (Would take a lot of pressure off SF I suppose but SF dont have any votes in Westminster.)
Mr Senior told us yesterday the the LDs insure against lost deposits in the general election. Do the Greens do that?
Having read down the thread at JWisemann and SeanF's posts, I would wonder whether they would trade positions, given the chance. Would Labour trade their position with the Tories? What about vice versa? Neither party is doing well but the analysis seems to be that the Conservatives are doing rather better, despite being behind in the national polling.
Social security is already devolved to NI, is their issue that they want to hand it back to Westminster? (Would take a lot of pressure off SF I suppose but SF dont have any votes in Westminster.)
Mr Senior told us yesterday the the LDs insure against lost deposits in the general election. Do the Greens do that?
That's an approach which makes a lot more sense when you don't expect to lose many. The premium would be massively higher next time - wouldn't shock me if they can't find anyone willing to lay it at a price they're willing to pay.
I see another specious myth has crashed and burned (that UKIPs advance has made the country more pro-European) and all it took was a bill for £1.7 billion.
I have been wondering for a while now if a certain Democratic party supporting celebrity, who also just happens to be a recently wed charmer is now seriously contemplating a new career in politics?
Intriguing US blind item from Blind Gossip 'This acting celebrity is known to be a strong supporter of the Democratic Party and has consistently put their money where their mouth is over the years. When Barack Obama was running in 2008, they were among his most vocal supporters. You may have noticed that they have quieted down significantly. Their financial contributions have slowed to a trickle, too. That’s because while they are still a Democrat, they are privately telling close family and friends that "Obama fucking betrayed me" (No, we don’t know what that’s all about); that they "can’t wait until he leaves office and takes his entire fucking pack of liars with him"; and that "Obama is the worst fucking President EVER." http://blindgossip.com/?p=66324
Comments
We both agreed Bristol was much nicer. I commented on how much appeared ruined by the bombing from WWII.
He was completely bewildered, and annoyed, that it was Labour. He said, "absolutely never used to be, in Devon of all places. Things must have changed."
"I found that a good number of sensible, experienced people at Westminster have begun to wonder if there would be calls from the media, the CBI and TUC for a "Grand Coalition" in the European style, formed by the two major parties – which are in disagreement about almost every major policy for managing the country. I doubt if that could work.
In the past there would have been a dissolution of parliament and another election, possibly with new party leaders.
Under the fixed-term parliaments legislation that might not be impossible, but it would certainly not be easy or straightforward."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/normantebbit/100289822/could-britain-be-governed-by-a-european-style-grand-coalition-i-doubt-it/
the SNP stand for creme de menthe cocktails and ladyboy massage parlours.
Always amazed me how they signed up to fronting the Tories in Scotland in indyref. I think this is the key issue wich some PBers are forgetting.
Bristol is actually well to the Left of Exeter, but its far bigger size sustains a Conservative marginal seat.
you guys wear skirts.
nuff said
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DMN7GwO6dVs
But nothing is more likely to result in the ultimate electoral destruction of the two main Westminster parties.
Taking some but not full account of this IpsosMORI poll and factoring in also my thinking that the LibDems will lose between 20-25 seats, that UKIP will win a handful and that Labour will win fewer votes but probably a score more seats than the Tories, I came up with the following result:
Labour .......... 290
Con ............... 270
LibDem ........... 34
SNP ................. 30
N.I. ................. 18
UKIP .................. 5
Plaid ................. 2
Greens .............. 1
Total ............ 650
So where would we go from there? The only two possible scenarios that would work in terms of forming a sustainable coalition are Lab+LibDem or Lab+SNP. My mind was made up by Ladbrokes' seemingly generous odds of 25/1 against the latter, compared with only 5/1 against the former.
Although as things stand a pact between Labour and the SNP would certainly involve some very tough negotiations and a great deal of heads having to be knocked together, I reckon that the probability of only 3.85% implied by such odds is way too low.
Perhaps my £16 bet to win £400 concentrated Shadsy's mind somewhat, resulting in the odds being trimmed back to 20/1 subsequently.
That's still good value imho, but do your own research.
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/British/Next-General-Election/Politics-N-1z141maZ1z141m1Z1z141ng/
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9354842/rand-paul-is-like-nigel-farage-except-he-might-win/
Neil's a member.
On the former, yes, there will undoubtedly be calls for a grand coalition. It won't happen and it shouldn't happen, though Farage and Sturgeon would be keen.
Mr. Socrates, quite, the need for an English Parliament has not gone away.
As well as the fact "we're not the Tories, but we'll keep their policies" also doesn't exactly make sense. They're basically asking people to go through the upheaval of changing government and "risks" of Labour, just so they get to wake up to the lovely smiling faces of Eds Miliband and Balls everyday, without even any upsides to make it worthwhile.
I think it may be more used by these young people.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tadger
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29840100
Fruitcakes (1st class)
Swivel-eyed loons (2nd class)
Ed Miliband has been given nothing so distinguished by the Tories
So the SNP is suddenly polling much better because their core policy has been ruled out by a plebiscite?
Imagine how well they could have done if they had dropped it earlier?
Or is it more popular because Salmond has been evicted from Toad Hall?
But it can get somewhat boring after 4.5 years when basically the government is done, the coalition is in spirit broken and we are simply waiting for May.
"Intriguing US blind item from Blind Gossip 'This acting celebrity is known to be a strong supporter of the Democratic Party and has consistently put their money where their mouth is over the years. When Barack Obama was running in 2008, they were among his most vocal supporters. You may have noticed that they have quieted down significantly. That’s because while they are still a Democrat, they are privately telling close family and friends that "Obama fucking betrayed me......that they "can’t wait until he leaves office and takes his entire fucking pack of liars with him"; and that "Obama is the worst fucking President EVER.""
I can honestly say I've never read anything less intriguing. On here we've had anecdotes from hairdressers window cleaners taxi drivers Thai hookers Soho 'lefties' blokes we met in polling stations etc etc but this is the first time we've had an anecdote from someone not even described!
On behalf of anecdote lovers everywhere be ashamed. Be very ashamed!!
Unlike Labour the SNP can protect Scottish interests without looking over their shoulder.
GLasgow East 2-7 Lab
9-4 SNP
Glasgow NE (Where Labour has almost as large a majority % as East Ham)
1-20 Labour
6-1 SNP.
Based on this poll clearly Labour's inherent electoral advantage is heavily undermined. Anyone any idea by how much? Would it mean that the Tories would only need a couple of points lead in the national polls to have a chance of securing a majority?
Or I'm misunderstanding you. :-)
What a shame...
Blue curacao is one of my teenage vices - along with Galliano.
Voters shift sharply against EU membership
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/10/30/voters-shift-sharply-against-eu-membership/
Looking at the regional splits on both the EU (with Scotland) and Immigration issues London is now seriously out of step
As waiters have (irritatingly) taken to saying these days "Enjoy!"