Np, Mr. Scout. I do sympathise somewhat with Miliband. I'm not photogenic myself, but on the rare occasions anyone takes one I tend to look more serial killer than Mr. Bean, so it's worse for him [and, of course, I'm not the Leader of the Opposition].
There is a serious point about how much weight we should give appearance, awkwardness and so on. Blair was very smooth and articulate, quick-witted and well-mannered. He was also an utter ****.
Still, Miliband would be faring better if he didn't have policies which were discredited in the 4th century.
Looking closely at the blow-up of the coin in Milibands hand it may not be a 2p piece, it might be a token such as one buys for a a car-wash (there seems to be a suggestion of a groove across the centre). If that is the case then the financial value of Miliband's generosity changes completely. In stead of giving the beggar 2p he might actually have given her the means to get her car washed, possibly worth several pounds.
The bacon butty event I ignored, it was silly and who hasn't occasionally looked stupid when eating hot finger food. This one, however, shows Miliband in an unplanned interaction with a poor person on the street a much more revealing situation as far as his character goes. Even though he must have known the cameras were on him he comes across as, well, a nasty piece of work who doesn't give a shit.
Still photos can be carefully selected. You may remember Blair's fixed rictus grin and power walk stance, so that any press shot would show him smiling. That both looked absurd on television might have been why they were eventually ditched. But pause any film or television programme and it is easy to find stills of great actors or sportsmen looking stupid.
My guess FWIW is that he went to give her some money and then discovered to his horror that he only had 2p in his pocket. Embarrassment all round. No wonder he was reluctant to look at her.
Does this make him a bad person? Not at all. Does it support the theory that thinking ahead is beyond him? Circumstantially.
We have to wait a little longer: Survation. @Survation 4m4 minutes ago Stay tuned: we'll tweet latest voting intention from Survation/Unite Rochester & Strood by-election poll at 6.30pm
My guess FWIW is that he went to give her some money and then discovered to his horror that he only had 2p in his pocket. Embarrassment all round. No wonder he was reluctant to look at her.
Does this make him a bad person? Not at all. Does it support the theory that thinking ahead is beyond him? Circumstantially.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
Looking closely at the blow-up of the coin in Milibands hand it may not be a 2p piece, it might be a token such as one buys for a a car-wash (there seems to be a suggestion of a groove across the centre). If that is the case then the financial value of Miliband's generosity changes completely. In stead of giving the beggar 2p he might actually have given her the means to get her car washed, possibly worth several pounds.
The bacon butty event I ignored, it was silly and who hasn't occasionally looked stupid when eating hot finger food. This one, however, shows Miliband in an unplanned interaction with a poor person on the street a much more revealing situation as far as his character goes. Even though he must have known the cameras were on him he comes across as, well, a nasty piece of work who doesn't give a shit.
Do you really think that?!
Honestly these awkward photo's probably reveal less than nothing about him
They may not show him in the most flattering light but, like candid camera, they may show more of him like he actually is. Each to their own. Look at the photo and, ignoring personalities and poiltics, describe to yourself what you see.
Yes, he looks awkward but I would say he has probably given money to a beggar or eaten a sandwich a hundred times and not looked awkward, and that's why those photo's don't get shown and these do..
Really who cares? I think it is quite wrong to infer some sleight on his character from this.
My guess FWIW is that he went to give her some money and then discovered to his horror that he only had 2p in his pocket. Embarrassment all round. No wonder he was reluctant to look at her.
Does this make him a bad person? Not at all. Does it support the theory that thinking ahead is beyond him? Circumstantially.
Backs up the "ivory tower" meme.
I never give money to beggars - ever.
I am extremely reluctant to because so many of them are simply being used by some extremely unpleasant people who treat them brutally. There has been a series of Romanian/Gypsy women in Edinburgh over the last year. They sit very formally, sometimes on their knees and they don't move from their position for hours. I was going to say that it beggars belief that they do this of their own accord but puns like that are to be deprecated. We really should not tolerate this kind of exploitation.
Looking closely at the blow-up of the coin in Milibands hand it may not be a 2p piece, it might be a token such as one buys for a a car-wash (there seems to be a suggestion of a groove across the centre). If that is the case then the financial value of Miliband's generosity changes completely. In stead of giving the beggar 2p he might actually have given her the means to get her car washed, possibly worth several pounds.
The bacon butty event I ignored, it was silly and who hasn't occasionally looked stupid when eating hot finger food. This one, however, shows Miliband in an unplanned interaction with a poor person on the street a much more revealing situation as far as his character goes. Even though he must have known the cameras were on him he comes across as, well, a nasty piece of work who doesn't give a shit.
Still photos can be carefully selected. You may remember Blair's fixed rictus grin and power walk stance, so that any press shot would show him smiling. That both looked absurd on television might have been why they were eventually ditched. But pause any film or television programme and it is easy to find stills of great actors or sportsmen looking stupid.
Yup, and I mentioned such a possibility in a previous post (even though it is difficult to see the choreography of the encounter that gave us the photo but would show Miliband in such a good light).
Milliband seems to have made a complete political ass of himself, not the first time and probably not the last. There really isn't much point in arguing over it (even the Labour spin that the 2p was only the tip of the ice-burg of what he gave doesn't help, or ring true).
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
Labour didn't get their vote to the voting booth. It was all postal votes. Presumably powered by "community leaders".
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
tbf, I give to a couple of locals on the way home from work and it has never occurred to me to smile or engage them in conversation. A nod maybe but generally I'm concentrating on landing a pound coin in a hat without breaking stride. Of course, I'm not hoping to be Prime Minister.
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
Afternoon all and on the Rochester poll, will either OGH or TSE be offering a realistic assessment on the numbers produced given the "accuracy" of Survation polls in recent by-elections?
Mr. Carnyx, that seems a bit weird, more wanting one in 5 years than within 10.
Also, 'once in a lifetime' was not a secret during the two years and more of campaigning. I pity Scots that might be subjected to another vote after they gave their opinion. Repeatedly asking the people a question until they give the 'right' answer is a despicable Brussels tactic that ought not be copied.
My guess FWIW is that he went to give her some money and then discovered to his horror that he only had 2p in his pocket. Embarrassment all round. No wonder he was reluctant to look at her.
Does this make him a bad person? Not at all. Does it support the theory that thinking ahead is beyond him? Circumstantially.
They have a rather strange post where they miss the point that uniform national swing doesn't really work when you have as severe a drop in support as Labour displayed in the IPSOS Mori poll.
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
Or failing to sing the Welsh National Anthem properly. They don't seem to like that game any more for some reason.
Given a second chance, I'd definitely want to revisit this piece now to consider how UKIP fit into this.
Yes, very good article and I would agree with it. There was a VERY noticeable difference between the results in the major/core cities (I take the point that the distinction between towns and cities can be arbitrary so I'll go with your definition of core city), and towns and smaller "cities" with similar demographics. Labour obviously boomed in London while they were up by 20% in Liverpool and Manchester, up by 15% in Birmingham and Bristol - at the same time as they were barely stumbling up by 5% on their dismal 2009 performance in some of the working-class towns in the Midlands and South (which unfortunately for them are where some of the key marginals are located). And strong Labour increases usually coincided with mediocre UKIP performances, again even in parts of cities which were very white/working-class,
I have a theory for this that, in big cities, even for people whose own lives are poor, the situation just doesn't feel as hopeless. A lot of people who live in working-class towns are really angry about things that might seem quite "trivial". When I was doing some leafletting/canvassing in my town up until a year ago (a safeish Labour seat in Cheshire), while most UKIP voters definitely were angry about immigration, another thing that really bugged them was how all the shops in the town centre were boarded up, which they saw as a sign that the government was just leaving them to rot away and didn't care about them. Maybe the fact that in cities, even if you live in a very poor neighbourhood, the fact that there'll usually be some signs of life within walking distance means the situation doesn't seem as terminally hopeless.
The problem for Labour is that there's not much left for them to win in core cities. Performing strongly there means piling up even bigger majorities in seats they already hold.
Yes, I completely agree. I think Labour will underperform the uniform swing next year because they'll be "wasting" votes with bigger majorities in some of their safe city seats. I'm not sure how much I trust Ashcroft's marginals polling given how much his weekly polls bounce around.
There is now a shot of Ed looking awkward from the beggar's side of the pavement.
His PR team should be given their P45s, unless they are trying to undermine him. I have said before he does seem to get undone by photo ops. Even his twiter feed photos fail to put him in even a half decent light.
They have a rather strange post where they miss the point that uniform national swing doesn't really work when you have as severe a drop in support as Labour displayed in the IPSOS Mori poll.
They have the map up predicting the SNP are going to stay on 6 seats too.
Mr. Carnyx, that seems a bit weird, more wanting one in 5 years than within 10.
Also, 'once in a lifetime' was not a secret during the two years and more of campaigning. I pity Scots that might be subjected to another vote after they gave their opinion. Repeatedly asking the people a question until they give the 'right' answer is a despicable Brussels tactic that ought not be copied.
Two thirds - the 'two' was left off the URL!
In this case, if the voters want it, what is the problem?
They have a rather strange post where they miss the point that uniform national swing doesn't really work when you have as severe a drop in support as Labour displayed in the IPSOS Mori poll.
I have a bad cold so can't get my head properly around it but they seem to be using the Strong Transition Model where voters are grouped into strong and weak supporters.
My impartial forecast for the new Rochester poll: not good for the Tories. The main reason is the fact they've selected a less-than-impressive candidate.
Rumour I heard (from a totally unreliable source, i.e. a stockbroker) was that Labour was coming up strong in Rochester, and he expected them to come second, ahead of the Tories.
The South Yorkshire result was was a win for decency against a campaign from Ukip which was indecent.Further,after the Tories announcing they are quite happy for women and children to drown in the Med,the Labour candidate in Rochester could kick-box for decency in Rochester and Strood.Both Ukip and Tory fit the nasty party bill.
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
The Pint of Guinness was fair game as it was a schoolboy ricket, but I agree re Osborne at the funeral
59% hold extreme views on Taxes, while 49% hold extreme views on the rest of the issues, also:
"In a separate study, Ahler and Broockman sought to determine whether voters adopted extreme positions in surveys because there were no consequences, whereas in the real world of governing, these same voters might prefer their elected officials to take more moderate stands. This proved not to be the case"
This explains the rise of left wing populism in scotland and right wing populism in england, people actually want it.
I do think that's a valid argument, and one I would normally adhere to (indeed, I did for the first referendum when the SNP got a majority in Holyrood).
But there are stronger arguments against: 1) the vote was on the basis of being once in a lifetime 2) repeatedly asking the question is a despicable tactic to try and nag the electorate into agreeing to something they've declined 3) the uncertainty would damage both the Scottish and wider UK economies 4) if we're playing the 'most voters want this' game then we should also leave the EU and bring back hanging
Now, if there's sod all further devolution that may well add to the scales for another referendum being a sound idea. But if there is deeper devolution, I'd maintain that a second one so soon after the first would be illegitimate (in a moral sense).
Edited extra bit: Mr. JS/1000, if that's true it'd be significantly bad news for Cameron.
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
Did they? Pasties on stations and daughters in pubs, perhaps, and even the Bullingdon shot if you go back far enough, but Guinness?
My impartial forecast for the new Rochester poll: not good for the Tories. The main reason is the fact they've selected a less-than-impressive candidate.
They didn't select the candidate though - it was an open primary. Something I'm against as I've said before.
The South Yorkshire result was was a win for decency against a campaign from Ukip which was indecent.Further,after the Tories announcing they are quite happy for women and children to drown in the Med,the Labour candidate in Rochester could kick-box for decency in Rochester and Strood.Both Ukip and Tory fit the nasty party bill.
You're the party of winning seats by making the white folks angry.
The South Yorkshire result was was a win for decency against a campaign from Ukip which was indecent.Further,after the Tories announcing they are quite happy for women and children to drown in the Med,the Labour candidate in Rochester could kick-box for decency in Rochester and Strood.Both Ukip and Tory fit the nasty party bill.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
My impartial forecast for the new Rochester poll: not good for the Tories. The main reason is the fact they've selected a less-than-impressive candidate.
They didn't select the candidate though - it was an open primary. Something I'm against as I've said before.
It wasn't very "open" though. They refused to announce the full figures for each candidate.
My impartial forecast for the new Rochester poll: not good for the Tories. The main reason is the fact they've selected a less-than-impressive candidate.
They didn't select the candidate though - it was an open primary. Something I'm against as I've said before.
They selected the 2 candidates for the primary, which "surprise" were identical. So the primary made no difference in selecting the candidate.
Rumour I heard (from a totally unreliable source, i.e. a stockbroker) was that Labour was coming up strong in Rochester, and he expected them to come second, ahead of the Tories.
They were only 6% behind the Tories in the first Survation poll.
The Sun had a report a few days ago that said internal polling showed 50% of Labour voters are going to vote UKIP though.
Rumour I heard (from a totally unreliable source, i.e. a stockbroker) was that Labour was coming up strong in Rochester, and he expected them to come second, ahead of the Tories.
The Labour candidate seems more impressive than the Tory IMO.
It's perfectly possible the gap between Con and Lab will be smaller than that between UKIP and Con.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
Labour didn't get their vote to the voting booth. It was all postal votes. Presumably powered by "community leaders".
There is now a shot of Ed looking awkward from the beggar's side of the pavement.
His PR team should be given their P45s, unless they are trying to undermine him. I have said before he does seem to get undone by photo ops. Even his twiter feed photos fail to put him in even a half decent light.
Mr. Spyn, Remember the Labour PR team gave us this splendid photo of the then PM:
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
19 LD votes were enough and 19 votes is also a lost deposit.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
Labour didn't get their vote to the voting booth. It was all postal votes. Presumably powered by "community leaders".
The South Yorkshire result was was a win for decency against a campaign from Ukip which was indecent.Further,after the Tories announcing they are quite happy for women and children to drown in the Med,the Labour candidate in Rochester could kick-box for decency in Rochester and Strood.Both Ukip and Tory fit the nasty party bill.
Yes, maybe if no one mentions nasty things happening, they will just go away
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
19 LD votes were enough and 19 votes is also a lost deposit.
Labour just over 50%, UKIP 32%. Please explain where the 19 votes fits in.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them
Wrong tense.
Oh what price are we offering Lib Dems in Hallam? Odds against?!
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
19 LD votes were enough and 19 votes is also a lost deposit.
Labour just over 50%, UKIP 32%. Please explain where the 19 votes fits in.
19 votes more than the 50% required to avoid a second round.
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
Did they? Pasties on stations and daughters in pubs, perhaps, and even the Bullingdon shot if you go back far enough, but Guinness?
Some here expelled so much fluid over 'that pint', it's a miracle they weren't hospitalised with dehydration.
“a politician who thinks that a good photo is the most important thing” not to vote for him.
“Because I don’t,” he added. “I believe that people would quite like somebody to stand up and say there is more to politics than the photo-op. And that culture diminishes our politics.”
59% hold extreme views on Taxes, while 49% hold extreme views on the rest of the issues, also:
"In a separate study, Ahler and Broockman sought to determine whether voters adopted extreme positions in surveys because there were no consequences, whereas in the real world of governing, these same voters might prefer their elected officials to take more moderate stands. This proved not to be the case"
This explains the rise of left wing populism in scotland and right wing populism in england, people actually want it.
Social conservatism/economic socialism is the way forward. The political elites stubbornly clinging to the "centre ground" theory that they've staked their careers on will be the last to accept it, obviously.
Rumour I heard (from a totally unreliable source, i.e. a stockbroker) was that Labour was coming up strong in Rochester, and he expected them to come second, ahead of the Tories.
The Sun wrote the other day that almost half of 2010 Labour voters will vote UKIP. How can they lose half of their votes and go up?
If Labour beats the Tories for 2nd place then Rochester will definitely remain in UKIP hands in May, the remaining Tories will be forced to vote tactically UKIP because of FPTP. Also the Tories coming 3rd in Rochester will definitely mean a no confidence vote for Cameron alright.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
Labour didn't get their vote to the voting booth. It was all postal votes. Presumably powered by "community leaders".
59% hold extreme views on Taxes, while 49% hold extreme views on the rest of the issues, also:
"In a separate study, Ahler and Broockman sought to determine whether voters adopted extreme positions in surveys because there were no consequences, whereas in the real world of governing, these same voters might prefer their elected officials to take more moderate stands. This proved not to be the case"
This explains the rise of left wing populism in scotland and right wing populism in england, people actually want it.
Social conservatism/economic socialism is the way forward. The political elites stubbornly clinging to the "centre ground" theory that they've staked their careers on will be the last to accept it, obviously.
"Social conservatism/economic socialism" That was the Labour's party position till 1979.
59% hold extreme views on Taxes, while 49% hold extreme views on the rest of the issues, also:
"In a separate study, Ahler and Broockman sought to determine whether voters adopted extreme positions in surveys because there were no consequences, whereas in the real world of governing, these same voters might prefer their elected officials to take more moderate stands. This proved not to be the case"
This explains the rise of left wing populism in scotland and right wing populism in england, people actually want it.
Social conservatism/economic socialism is the way forward. The political elites stubbornly clinging to the "centre ground" theory that they've staked their careers on will be the last to accept it, obviously.
Do you have one example, just one, where 'economic socialism' has been successful in the medium to long term?
The South Yorkshire result was was a win for decency against a campaign from Ukip which was indecent.Further,after the Tories announcing they are quite happy for women and children to drown in the Med,the Labour candidate in Rochester could kick-box for decency in Rochester and Strood.Both Ukip and Tory fit the nasty party bill.
Yes, maybe if no one mentions nasty things happening, they will just go away
And ludicrously hypothetical crimes count more than real ones.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
19 LD votes were enough and 19 votes is also a lost deposit.
Ok thanks. Of course that implies you think that UKIP would have got a large enough majority of 2nd preferences to overcome Labours 18% lead. In any case ISAM disagrees with you: "They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them" (LibDems)
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them
Wrong tense.
Oh what price are we offering Lib Dems in Hallam? Odds against?!
Oh I'm heavily on Nick Clegg in Sheffield Hallam. He has two things that he has to do for me: fight the next election as leader and keep his seat. If he does those two things, his place in my political pantheon will be assured.
Outside Hallam, the Lib Dems in Sheffield will be moving from "least concern" to "critically endangered".
“a politician who thinks that a good photo is the most important thing” not to vote for him.
“Because I don’t,” he added. “I believe that people would quite like somebody to stand up and say there is more to politics than the photo-op. And that culture diminishes our politics.”
If someone were to stand up and say "there is more to politics than the photo-op", I would consider that point far more important than any other in my consideration of who might run the country best and they would definitely win my vote.
Unless, of course, they looked like a gurning moron while they said it.
I do think that's a valid argument, and one I would normally adhere to (indeed, I did for the first referendum when the SNP got a majority in Holyrood).
But there are stronger arguments against: 1) the vote was on the basis of being once in a lifetime 2) repeatedly asking the question is a despicable tactic to try and nag the electorate into agreeing to something they've declined 3) the uncertainty would damage both the Scottish and wider UK economies 4) if we're playing the 'most voters want this' game then we should also leave the EU and bring back hanging
Now, if there's sod all further devolution that may well add to the scales for another referendum being a sound idea. But if there is deeper devolution, I'd maintain that a second one so soon after the first would be illegitimate (in a moral sense).
Edited extra bit: Mr. JS/1000, if that's true it'd be significantly bad news for Cameron.
Hmm. Interesting.
On 1. There was never any formal designation about time periods before the next referendum, but then if the voters want it ... in any case, such agreements evaporate the moment Parliament at Westminster is dissolved.
On 2. It seems to me that nobody is actually wanting to ask the question (or to ask if the question should be asked) except (in a negative sense) the No side, who are positively demanding the opposite. And to do that is perhaps unwise as it invites the sort of natural journalistic response we are seeing now from STV (which I admit surprises me so soon). The SNP position, of keeping options open and waiting to see what happens, is both reasonable and consistent with democracy, as well as being sensible from their own point of view.
On 3: Noted. But it would be a lot quicker next time.
On 4: On the voters wanting it, well, for instance, lots of Scots want to stay IN the EU, which is part of the whole issue. A bit fraudulent of Mr Cameron to promise hell and damnation if the Scots leave the EU, and then the Tories go all Brexitish.
A great deal will depend on whether the Scots get proper devomax in a credible time period. How much more, or less, likely that now is after Mr Cameron and now Mr Miliband have had a go at the issue I do not know. It will also depend on the composition of the next Westminster parliament, wich is now even more in the air.
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
Did they? Pasties on stations and daughters in pubs, perhaps, and even the Bullingdon shot if you go back far enough, but Guinness?
Some here expelled so much fluid over 'that pint', it's a miracle they weren't hospitalised with dehydration.
The South Yorkshire result was was a win for decency against a campaign from Ukip which was indecent.Further,after the Tories announcing they are quite happy for women and children to drown in the Med,the Labour candidate in Rochester could kick-box for decency in Rochester and Strood.Both Ukip and Tory fit the nasty party bill.
There are few local authorities with nastier records than Rotherham and Doncaster, over the years.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them
Wrong tense.
Oh what price are we offering Lib Dems in Hallam? Odds against?!
Oh I'm heavily on Nick Clegg in Sheffield Hallam. He has two things that he has to do for me: fight the next election as leader and keep his seat. If he does those two things, his place in my political pantheon will be assured.
Outside Hallam, the Lib Dems in Sheffield will be moving from "least concern" to "critically endangered".
Possibly so, but there is no doubt that the lack of a Lib Dem candidate in the SYPCC helped Labour no end. It is 1.01 that it would have gone to 2nd preferences had the LDs stood
59% hold extreme views on Taxes, while 49% hold extreme views on the rest of the issues, also:
"In a separate study, Ahler and Broockman sought to determine whether voters adopted extreme positions in surveys because there were no consequences, whereas in the real world of governing, these same voters might prefer their elected officials to take more moderate stands. This proved not to be the case"
This explains the rise of left wing populism in scotland and right wing populism in england, people actually want it.
Social conservatism/economic socialism is the way forward. The political elites stubbornly clinging to the "centre ground" theory that they've staked their careers on will be the last to accept it, obviously.
Do you have one example, just one, where 'economic socialism' has been successful in the medium to long term?
My and my family's life is an example. If post-war socialism hadn't helped my parents go from council houses to the middle class then God knows where I'd be.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
19 LD votes were enough and 19 votes is also a lost deposit.
Ok thanks. Of course that implies you think that UKIP would have got a large enough majority of 2nd preferences to overcome Labours 18% lead. In any case ISAM disagrees with you: "They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them" (LibDems)
How times have changed. It seems like only yesterday that the PBKinnocks were massaging themselves silly over photos of Dave and his pint of Guinness, or Osborne weeping at a funeral.
Did they? Pasties on stations and daughters in pubs, perhaps, and even the Bullingdon shot if you go back far enough, but Guinness?
Some here expelled so much fluid over 'that pint', it's a miracle they weren't hospitalised with dehydration.
Don't forget Dave's visit to Morrisons.
tim shrieking his little head off over Dave at the fish counter.
To use the vernacular Ukip have just had their rear ends kicked in South Yorkshire, contrary to expectations. I suspect they will perform somewhat better in Rochester in the borough of Medway
UKIP did increase their share of the vote by 20%,
UKIPs failure was to get the protest vote out. Labour got their postal votes out and didn't need to do anymore.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
The lesson is that the Lib Dem vote in Sheffield won it for them
So there's lots of Lib Dems? I thought people said they didn't stand because they would lose their deposit.
19 LD votes were enough and 19 votes is also a lost deposit.
Ok thanks. Of course that implies you think that UKIP would have got a large enough majority of 2nd preferences to overcome Labours 18% lead. In any case ISAM disagrees with you: "They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them" (LibDems)
We don't know how many LD are left since 2010.
OK, but ISAM blamed them for UKIP's failure in the Police Commisioner election.
Comments
There is a serious point about how much weight we should give appearance, awkwardness and so on. Blair was very smooth and articulate, quick-witted and well-mannered. He was also an utter ****.
Still, Miliband would be faring better if he didn't have policies which were discredited in the 4th century.
http://order-order.com/2014/10/31/5-ways-this-photo-op-could-have-gone-any-worse/
Bad enough being mentioned once in one day on Guido, but twice...
Does this make him a bad person? Not at all. Does it support the theory that thinking ahead is beyond him? Circumstantially.
Survation. @Survation 4m4 minutes ago
Stay tuned: we'll tweet latest voting intention from Survation/Unite Rochester & Strood by-election poll at 6.30pm
I never give money to beggars - ever.
And that is the lesson for today. Its easy to saw you will vote UKIP its another matter actually getting to the voting booth and putting the cross in their box.
Really who cares? I think it is quite wrong to infer some sleight on his character from this.
Milliband seems to have made a complete political ass of himself, not the first time and probably not the last. There really isn't much point in arguing over it (even the Labour spin that the 2p was only the tip of the ice-burg of what he gave doesn't help, or ring true).
may2015.com
Analysis, polls etc etc
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/297867-stv-poll-third-of-scots-support-second-referendum-within-ten-years/
and 58% want one within 5 years.
Also, 'once in a lifetime' was not a secret during the two years and more of campaigning. I pity Scots that might be subjected to another vote after they gave their opinion. Repeatedly asking the people a question until they give the 'right' answer is a despicable Brussels tactic that ought not be copied.
His PR team should be given their P45s, unless they are trying to undermine him. I have said before he does seem to get undone by photo ops. Even his twiter feed photos fail to put him in even a half decent light.
"Others 11"
Well that's good for a laugh.
Oh, Ed. No.
In this case, if the voters want it, what is the problem?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/29/opinion/nothing-in-moderation.html?ref=opinion&_r=1
59% hold extreme views on Taxes, while 49% hold extreme views on the rest of the issues, also:
"In a separate study, Ahler and Broockman sought to determine whether voters adopted extreme positions in surveys because there were no consequences, whereas in the real world of governing, these same voters might prefer their elected officials to take more moderate stands. This proved not to be the case"
This explains the rise of left wing populism in scotland and right wing populism in england, people actually want it.
I do think that's a valid argument, and one I would normally adhere to (indeed, I did for the first referendum when the SNP got a majority in Holyrood).
But there are stronger arguments against:
1) the vote was on the basis of being once in a lifetime
2) repeatedly asking the question is a despicable tactic to try and nag the electorate into agreeing to something they've declined
3) the uncertainty would damage both the Scottish and wider UK economies
4) if we're playing the 'most voters want this' game then we should also leave the EU and bring back hanging
Now, if there's sod all further devolution that may well add to the scales for another referendum being a sound idea. But if there is deeper devolution, I'd maintain that a second one so soon after the first would be illegitimate (in a moral sense).
Edited extra bit: Mr. JS/1000, if that's true it'd be significantly bad news for Cameron.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ed-miliband-no-photo-opps-labour-leader-takes-biggest-photo-opp-of-the-year-thus-far-9831681.html
His press team are crap. Sack them, and hire new people unless Labour want to lose in May 2015.
So the primary made no difference in selecting the candidate.
The Sun had a report a few days ago that said internal polling showed 50% of Labour voters are going to vote UKIP though.
It's perfectly possible the gap between Con and Lab will be smaller than that between UKIP and Con.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6048337/Ed-Miliband-shows-caring-side-with-donation-to-beggar.html
looking up to the great man.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRw&url=http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/2769863/Browns-night-in-Afghan-warzone.html&ei=1L5TVOjnKcLe7Abt3oGIDg&bvm=bv.78677474,d.ZGU&psig=AFQjCNGjdZ1BPwqrnazhMHSvBsnGNIfl7A&ust=1414860889828483
Clacton
CON understated by 4.6%,
LAB overstated by 1.8%
UKIP overstated by 4.3%
Newark – 1st poll
CON understated by 9%,
LAB overstated by 9.3%
UKIP overstated by 2.1%
Newark – 2nd poll
CON understated by 3%,
LAB overstated by 4.3%
UKIP overstated by 1.1
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/31/why-did-ukip-lose-south-yorkshire-police-crime-commissioner-byelection
Wonder if they'll ask him about the tuppence...
Please explain where the 19 votes fits in.
Abuse inquiry: Fiona Woolf steps down as chairwoman
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29855265
Which reminds me of the old joke from Young Frankenstein.
http://www.youtube.com/watch
?v=gQQtgx4iG8E
“a politician who thinks that a good photo is the most important thing” not to vote for him.
“Because I don’t,” he added. “I believe that people would quite like somebody to stand up and say there is more to politics than the photo-op. And that culture diminishes our politics.”
How can they lose half of their votes and go up?
If Labour beats the Tories for 2nd place then Rochester will definitely remain in UKIP hands in May, the remaining Tories will be forced to vote tactically UKIP because of FPTP.
Also the Tories coming 3rd in Rochester will definitely mean a no confidence vote for Cameron alright.
That was the Labour's party position till 1979.
And wtf does "could kick-box for decency" mean?
In any case ISAM disagrees with you:
"They got 53% in Sheffield Hallam & 41% in Sheffield Central in 2010 while coming 1st or 2nd in every Sheffield seat, so yes there are lots of them" (LibDems)
Outside Hallam, the Lib Dems in Sheffield will be moving from "least concern" to "critically endangered".
If you don't want the preview to appear, just strip the "http://" part off the front. E.g...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQQtgx4iG8E
Unless, of course, they looked like a gurning moron while they said it.
I think the chances for UKIP there are at least as good as Rotherham, which you can back at 1-3 for Labour (And I have done so)
On 1. There was never any formal designation about time periods before the next referendum, but then if the voters want it ... in any case, such agreements evaporate the moment Parliament at Westminster is dissolved.
On 2. It seems to me that nobody is actually wanting to ask the question (or to ask if the question should be asked) except (in a negative sense) the No side, who are positively demanding the opposite. And to do that is perhaps unwise as it invites the sort of natural journalistic response we are seeing now from STV (which I admit surprises me so soon). The SNP position, of keeping options open and waiting to see what happens, is both reasonable and consistent with democracy, as well as being sensible from their own point of view.
On 3: Noted. But it would be a lot quicker next time.
On 4: On the voters wanting it, well, for instance, lots of Scots want to stay IN the EU, which is part of the whole issue. A bit fraudulent of Mr Cameron to promise hell and damnation if the Scots leave the EU, and then the Tories go all Brexitish.
A great deal will depend on whether the Scots get proper devomax in a credible time period. How much more, or less, likely that now is after Mr Cameron and now Mr Miliband have had a go at the issue I do not know. It will also depend on the composition of the next Westminster parliament, wich is now even more in the air.
Which give mere moments ago you could get 17.5 means either a mug has just punted or...
No doubt this will be knocked off the agenda by the PBTory/SamCoates/Guido scoop "man gives money to homeless person".
Those people had no one other than Labour to go to on that four-person shortlist.