politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It could be that front-runner, Jim Murphy, is too divisive

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It could be that front-runner, Jim Murphy, is too divisive a figure to be Scottish LAB leader

The issue for Murphy is that he played such a high profile and sometimes controversial role in the NO IndyRef campaign. Maybe he’s a victim of the apparent mood-shift north of the border to the indpendence question.

Read the full story here

KentRising

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

AndyJS

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

How do you rate their chances in Folkestone?

HYUFD

Yes, Labour's Scottish total increased under Murphy, albeit narrowly. However, he will only win if he gets a clear majority of Labour members to back him to offset unions backing for Findlay.
The SNP's rise is mainly pressure for devomax, once devomax legislation is introduced at Westminster in January it will begin to recede

Danny565

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

I could see them coming through the middle in Gravesend, potentially.

Danny565

On topic:- I still simply don't see where all the Murphy hype is coming from. He just isn't good. Do people really listen to him and his incredibly dull/"funereal" speaking style and think they're witnessing a heavyweight titan who would have the public eating out of the palm of his hand?

HYUFD

The issue is if Murphy improves Labour's total v the SNP more than Findlay, that is the key factor

Sean_F

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

Hopefully, they'll win Dover.

Luckyguy1983

Danny565 said:

On topic:- I still simply don't see where all the Murphy hype is coming from. He just isn't good. Do people really listen to him and his incredibly dull/"funereal" speaking style and think they're witnessing a heavyweight titan who would have the public eating out of the palm of his hand?

No worse than Milliband's adenoidal waffle.

Alistair

Murphy is friends with all the right people in terms of media figures. Sunday Hetald is running the angle that the Better Together campaign was seen as an extended campaign pitch for Murphy by the senior Labour politicians involved (who all turned up for Murphy's launch)

AndyJS

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Speedy

AndyJS said:

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

How do you rate their chances in Folkestone?

Well in Folkstone a very old constituency poll had CON 35, UKIP 28, LAB 21, LD 10.
Since then of course UKIP are up in the polls while Labour and the LD are down.

Artist

Choosing one of the most high profile no campaigners to try and win votes back from the SNP doesn't seem like the best strategy. Not to mention his Blairite reputation and the fact he's a Westminster politician.

There is one big advantage to Murphy though, firstly he's one of the very few Labour politicians who is interesting enough for the media to want to cover. The danger with Findlay is that he's a bit of a non entity and that Labour could struggle to become heard.

Luckyguy1983

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

manofkent2014

FPT

I believe there were some who were outraged by the way Survation posed one of the questions in their recent Rochester poll about the TTIP negotiations and the NHS. Now here is how Yougov (whose founder is a Tory MP, whose CEO is a Tory donor and whose President is the husband of the departing Labour High Foreign Representative of the EU) address the issue of the EAW for the Sunday Times (The Times being possibly the most pro government newspaper there is):

The EU introduced the European arrest warrant in 2004. This allows member states to require other countries to hand over people they want to put on trial for criminal offences that attract prison sentences of at least a year. Britain recently opted out of a number of EU justice measures, including the arrest warrant.

Now Mr Cameron and Theresa May, the Home secretary, want Britain to opt back into the arrest warrant. They argue that it will help Britain to bring to trial suspected criminals who flee to other EU countries. Their critics say the arrest warrant system could mean Britons being sent abroad for trial for relatively minor offences.On balance, do you think Britain should or should not opt back in to the European arrest warrant?

No mention that it can mean British citizens can be deported to European countries and held in custody on the flimsiest of reasons for years without trial only to be released subsequently as detailed here by Dan Hannan.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tag/eaw/

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n965i9mzb8/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-311014.pdf

Needless to say it provided a majority of the sample wishing to keep the EAW. Such questions really should be taken with a pinch of salt. Pollsters can make them produce any result they want....

isam

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

AndyJS

Labour MP Simon Danczuk:

"Cheap immigrant labour has cost blue-collar Britain dear
The work ethic of our working-class communities has been allowed to drain away"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11202976/Cheap-immigrant-labour-has-cost-blue-collar-Britain-dear.html

Speedy

Artist said:

Choosing one of the most high profile no campaigners to try and win votes back from the SNP doesn't seem like the best strategy. Not to mention his Blairite reputation and the fact he's a Westminster politician.

There is one big advantage to Murphy though, firstly he's one of the very few Labour politicians who is interesting enough for the media to want to cover. The danger with Findlay is that he's a bit of a non entity and that Labour could struggle to become heard.

In my opinion James Kelly is ideal for the job, however he isn't standing so Labour will continue to struggle.

Danny565

Luckyguy1983 said:

Danny565 said:

On topic:- I still simply don't see where all the Murphy hype is coming from. He just isn't good. Do people really listen to him and his incredibly dull/"funereal" speaking style and think they're witnessing a heavyweight titan who would have the public eating out of the palm of his hand?

No worse than Milliband's adenoidal waffle.

Honestly I think he's a less engaging speaker even than Ed. Which is saying something.

OldKingCole

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Danny565

isam said:

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

Not Gravesend? It's one of the more working-class parts of Kent isn't it.

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Carnyx

Artist said:

Choosing one of the most high profile no campaigners to try and win votes back from the SNP doesn't seem like the best strategy. Not to mention his Blairite reputation and the fact he's a Westminster politician.

There is one big advantage to Murphy though, firstly he's one of the very few Labour politicians who is interesting enough for the media to want to cover. The danger with Findlay is that he's a bit of a non entity and that Labour could struggle to become heard.

Mr Murphy is also seen as v. right wing - at least given the nature of his constituency. Look how the DT, Speccy, and various of the more Tory amongst PBers are writing him up those days.

I don't think that Labour have any problem at all being heard in the Scottish media those days, so that 'advantage' is actually pretty non-existent.

Mr Artist and others commenting on Mr Murphy: I suggest you don't forget Sarah Boyack. I wouldn't just yet. She may well win as the compromise Keep Murphy Out candidate. AND she is already a MSP, so you know where you are or rather where she is, and without the uncertainties which Mr Murphy has in making sure he gets from MP to MSP status without any hiccups, and which the media have rather downplayed.

In that sense, unless something surprising happens, Mr M is not going to be a settled long term leader of SLAB till the results of May 2016 are out. Of course, if Lablour do badly he'd be out anyway, so I suppose it makes little ultimate difference.

Smarmeron

@Luckyguy1983
The Dutch bikers (ex marines) went to help the Kurds against IS and Assad.

Speedy

isam said:

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

I think basically almost every marginal in Kent could be on that list, under the assumption that the Tory vote is low enough for UKIP to win by sucking the anti-Tory vote.
Basically if the Tory MP got 40% or less in 2010 his seat he would be in danger.

YBarddCwsc

"I still simply don't see where all the Murphy hype is coming from."

"No worse than Milliband's adenoidal waffle"

WTF.

Jim Murphy's politics are not quite to my taste, but it is clear that he is an extraordinarily skilful politician, orders of magnitude better than Miliband.

Murphy took the safest Tory seat in Scotland (Eastwood, then East Renfrewshire) and has mad it into an absolute fortress for Labour.

Eastwood in 1992, the last election before Jim Murphy took the seat, had a Tory majority of 11,000. In 2010, it had a Labour majority of 10,000.

Those figures speak for themselves.

Compare them to Broxtowe. Jim Lester's Tory majority in 1992 was about the same as the Tory majority in Eastwood in 1992.

Nick Palmer, of course, lost Broxtowe in 2010 -- Jim Murphy increased his majority and has made his (rather similar, demographically) seat a Labour citadel.

Speedy

Carnyx said:

Artist said:

Choosing one of the most high profile no campaigners to try and win votes back from the SNP doesn't seem like the best strategy. Not to mention his Blairite reputation and the fact he's a Westminster politician.

There is one big advantage to Murphy though, firstly he's one of the very few Labour politicians who is interesting enough for the media to want to cover. The danger with Findlay is that he's a bit of a non entity and that Labour could struggle to become heard.

Mr Murphy is also seen as v. right wing - at least given the nature of his constituency. Look how the DT, Speccy, and various of the more Tory amongst PBers are writing him up those days.

I don't think that Labour have any problem at all being heard in the Scottish media those days, so that 'advantage' is actually pretty non-existent.

Mr Artist and others commenting on Mr Murphy: I suggest you don't forget Sarah Boyack. I wouldn't just yet. She may well win as the compromise Keep Murphy Out candidate. AND she is already a MSP, so you know where you are or rather where she is, and without the uncertainties which Mr Murphy has in making sure he gets from MP to MSP status without any hiccups, and which the media have rather downplayed.

In that sense, unless something surprising happens, Mr M is not going to be a settled long term leader of SLAB till the results of May 2016 are out. Of course, if Lablour do badly he'd be out anyway, so I suppose it makes little ultimate difference.

That is another negative for Murphy, he is right wing at a time when Labour have a left wing problem.

Life_ina_market_town

OldKingCole said:

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

They are certainly terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and will almost certainly have committed offences against the Crown. The far more worrying story is the implication of the First Secretary of State that the government of the day will seek to influence decisions of the police and CPS about prosecuting offenders on their return to the jurisdiction. Offenders should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If the law is too strict, it is for Parliament to change, not for the executive to attempt to exercise a suspensory power, which is wholly illegal under article I of the Bill of Rights.

Luckyguy1983

Smarmeron said:

@Luckyguy1983
The Dutch bikers (ex marines) went to help the Kurds against IS and Assad.

Factually incorrect -the Kurds in question have never been at war with Assad -but what's your point?

OldKingCole

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Peter_the_Punter

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

You need to have a look at the Euro results for Kent.

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/european-election-results-17705/

Then recompute.

KentRising

AndyJS said:

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

How do you rate their chances in Folkestone?

Folkestone & Hyth's like a lot of Kent constituencies (including Rochester): there's a large Tory base of middle class families and London commuters who you'd expect to remain blue in 2015, but there's also a large older/retired population concerned about immigration and the general direction the country's going in (including EU stuff) and a smaller but significant WWC traditionally Labour vote. Much of this latter group have tactically voted Lib Dem as the best way of catching the Tories but now they've got UKIP, who not only excite them more but also have the advantage of taking some votes from the Tories as well.

As I was saying the other day, Kent's interesting. Traditionally Tory, it went all blue in 2010 but in the PCC elections an independent beat the Tory with ease and this May UKIP won throughout the county in places that simply have no history of voting for anything other than the blues. But that was only the Euros.

An April Survation poll (sample size: 500) of Folkestone had Cons 36 UKIP 33 Lab 18 and I think that's the order you'll see the parties in in May 2015 (though not necessarily the figures). Cameron v Miliband will concentrate minds and old habits die hard.

Interestingly, the defeated Tory PCC candidate was Craig Mackinkay, a former deputy leader of UKIP - and now Farage's opponent in Thanet South.

manofkent2014

isam said:

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

Why do you consider Sittingbourne and Sheppey only an outside chance? In 2013 it was UKIP's 4th best county council result and was only 2nd to Thanet in terms of council areas in Kent in the Euros: (Council Area ~ Vote Share ~ Lead)

Thanet 46.02% 24%
Swale 43.31% 18%
Folkestone 43.28% 17%
Medway 41.88% 19%
Gravesham41.53% 18%
Dartford 40.78% 17%
Dover 39.25% 15%
Ashford 38.89% 9%
Maidstone 37% 8%
Sevenoaks 36.94% 2%
Tonbridge 35.91% 1%
Canterbury 34.38% 9%
Tunbridge Wells 30.06% -7%

PS Eltham & Erith is Greater London

Peter_the_Punter

Speedy said:

AndyJS said:

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

How do you rate their chances in Folkestone?

Well in Folkstone a very old constituency poll had CON 35, UKIP 28, LAB 21, LD 10.
Since then of course UKIP are up in the polls while Labour and the LD are down.

I make it there are six Kent seats that are more UKIP-friendly than Rochester, disregarding special by-election factors. Folkestone is one of them.

I've backed worse 3/1 shots.

AndreaParma_82

On another forum an user has estimated notionals for London constituencies based on Euro elections. UKIP was closer to Lab in Eltham (Lab 31 UKIP 27 Con 20) than in Erith & Thamesmead (Lab 39 UKIP 29 Con 15)

isam said:

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

I feel like I've wandered into the twilight zone here, but to attempt to engage on your own bizarre terms, could you explain what exactly is 'idealistic' about travelling to another country -one which you have no connection with, to take up arms, kill the 'kaffir', and force upon the population a new sharia caliphate under which the rights of women and minorities will be non existent? And that is before we even start upon the means which ISIS has employed in its unjustifiable campaign of terror. Your frankly disgusting argument is beyond parody.

GeoffM

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

OldKingCole

Life_ina_market_town said:

OldKingCole said:

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

They are certainly terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and will almost certainly have committed offences against the Crown. The far more worrying story is the implication of the First Secretary of State that the government of the day will seek to influence decisions of the police and CPS about prosecuting offenders on their return to the jurisdiction. Offenders should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If the law is too strict, it is for Parliament to change, not for the executive to attempt to exercise a suspensory power, which is wholly illegal under article I of the Bill of Rights.

While I agree with your last sentence, is it an offence for a British citzen to fight in a “foreign” war ....a fight in which this country has no dog? What is the position therefore of Brits who join the French Foreign Legion?

AndyJS

Interesting to note that just 2% of properties in Rochester are owned by the local authority, and a further 11% are housing association:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/rochesterandstrood/

Smarmeron

@Luckyguy1983
My point is that not everyone traveling to Syria or Iraq, is a murdering rapist who will come back and cause mayhem and carnage, and scare little children.
(by the same token, some might)

OldKingCole

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

Luckyguy1983

Smarmeron said:

@Luckyguy1983
My point is that not everyone traveling to Syria or Iraq, is a murdering rapist who will come back and cause mayhem and carnage, and scare little children.
(by the same token, some might)

Your point is a rather confused one. Whether they are a 'murdering rapist' or not is one thing. Every one of them has been there to kill, with no distinction made between military and civilian targets, no Geneva convention etc. Who raped, who beheaded, who kidnapped, who stole, who executed in cold blood, is something we do not know, but we can make an educated guess that all did at least some -there is no potato peeling corps.

Your second point is entirely different. Will most want to cause mayhem and carnage? Of course not -they will want to enjoy Mum's cooking and take it easy for a while. But the fact is they have been radicalised, they have thought nothing of travelling to another country to violently impose their own twisted ideology, and they have ended several lives. Their being at large is a clear and distinct threat.

Indigo

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

They may also come back determined to use the new skills and ideologies they have learned.. whose life do you suggest we use to put it to the test ?

anotherDave

Sean_F said:

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

Hopefully, they'll win Dover.

I thought Mr Elphicke was supposed to be golden in Dover?

manofkent2014

KentRising said:

AndyJS said:

KentRising said:

Regarding earlier discussions on UKIP in Kent - I think they're going to rack up quite a few second places, but won't get many wins. They might retain Rochester (if they capture it first) and Farage should prevail in Thanet South.

How do you rate their chances in Folkestone?

Folkestone & Hyth's like a lot of Kent constituencies (including Rochester): there's a large Tory base of middle class families and London commuters who you'd expect to remain blue in 2015, but there's also a large older/retired population concerned about immigration and the general direction the country's going in (including EU stuff) and a smaller but significant WWC traditionally Labour vote. Much of this latter group have tactically voted Lib Dem as the best way of catching the Tories but now they've got UKIP, who not only excite them more but also have the advantage of taking some votes from the Tories as well.

As I was saying the other day, Kent's interesting. Traditionally Tory, it went all blue in 2010 but in the PCC elections an independent beat the Tory with ease and this May UKIP won throughout the county in places that simply have no history of voting for anything other than the blues. But that was only the Euros.

An April Survation poll (sample size: 500) of Folkestone had Cons 36 UKIP 33 Lab 18 and I think that's the order you'll see the parties in in May 2015 (though not necessarily the figures). Cameron v Miliband will concentrate minds and old habits die hard.

Interestingly, the defeated Tory PCC candidate was Craig Mackinkay, a former deputy leader of UKIP - and now Farage's opponent in Thanet South.

One of the key considerations I think is how much resource each of the parties are going to put into the Kent constituencies given everything else that is going on. It would seem for example if Rochester is anything to go by that Labour will not be putting major resources into any of the Kent seats and nor will the Libdems so its fair I think to assume that most of the seats will be a battle between UKIP and the Tories. Now whilst I have no proof I would imagine that many of the Kent seats will be pretty high on the UKIP target list (especially if we are talking 100 seat target list) whereas initially anyway given the strength of Tory majorities from 2010 I doubt if any would have been in line for central support from the Tories. How many are now is another question? Yet whatever the case I doubt the Tories will be enthusiastic about redirecting resources from marginals particularly as it is increasingly clear that Labour's traction in general is slipping.

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

You have yet to explain what is idealistic about ISIS' cause. I await with baited breath.

As for what they have 'seen' -do you really think ISIS let rookies watch on the sidelines for months before actually doing anything? It's what they have *done*. Which is killed, injured and mutilated. Multiple times.

Eh_ehm_a_eh

HYUFD said:

Yes, Labour's Scottish total increased under Murphy, albeit narrowly. However, he will only win if he gets a clear majority of Labour members to back him to offset unions backing for Findlay.
The SNP's rise is mainly pressure for devomax, once devomax legislation is introduced at Westminster in January it will begin to recede

DevoMax? Haven't seen that offererd by any unionist party.
And Labour's more powers package is the weakest of all the unionist parties.

Smarmeron

@Luckyguy1983
The doctor who died in Assad's jail? The people delivering humanitarian aid?
But then again, being a Kipper, you see everything in black and white.

OldKingCole

Indigo said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

They may also come back determined to use the new skills and ideologies they have learned.. whose life do you suggest we use to put it to the test ?

I haven’t suggested that they just be allowed to come back and not be interviewed by the poice. I’m saying is that it must not be assumed that they will come back as murdering etc etc.
What do you propose; that we embitter them by chucking them into Belmarsh?
And I very much doubt, as suggested elsewhere that they "thought nothing" of going to war. I’m sure many at least thought long and hard about it.

Luckyguy1983

Smarmeron said:

@Luckyguy1983
The doctor who died in Assad's jail? The people delivering humanitarian aid?
But then again, being a Kipper, you see everything in black and white.

I think you need to read the piece again -or just the headline will suffice. There has not been, nor is there any question, of arresting aid workers or stripping them of their citizenship. We are talking about jihadists. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Sean_F

OldKingCole said:

Life_ina_market_town said:

OldKingCole said:

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

They are certainly terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and will almost certainly have committed offences against the Crown. The far more worrying story is the implication of the First Secretary of State that the government of the day will seek to influence decisions of the police and CPS about prosecuting offenders on their return to the jurisdiction. Offenders should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If the law is too strict, it is for Parliament to change, not for the executive to attempt to exercise a suspensory power, which is wholly illegal under article I of the Bill of Rights.

While I agree with your last sentence, is it an offence for a British citzen to fight in a “foreign” war ....a fight in which this country has no dog? What is the position therefore of Brits who join the French Foreign Legion?

In general, I think it would only be an offence to fight, as a member of another country's armed forces, or on that country's behalf, if one were actually fighting against this country. That would be an offence under the Treason Act 1351. Typically, mercenaries will have a clause in their contracts which exempt them from having to fight against their country of origin.

AndyJS

30% may be enough to win in Dover.

MikeK

Could Obama be impeached for this seemingly personal protection of a traitor?

http://nypost.com/2014/09/20/are-the-military-and-obama-whitewashing-bergdahls-crimes/

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

Indigo said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

They may also come back determined to use the new skills and ideologies they have learned.. whose life do you suggest we use to put it to the test ?

I haven’t suggested that they just be allowed to come back and not be interviewed by the poice. I’m saying is that it must not be assumed that they will come back as murdering etc etc.
What do you propose; that we embitter them by chucking them into Belmarsh?

Oh good Lord -is this the new reason for letting these people off -we don't want to make them angry? Do you not see an inherent contradiction in your argument?

OldKingCole

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Indigo said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

They may also come back determined to use the new skills and ideologies they have learned.. whose life do you suggest we use to put it to the test ?

I haven’t suggested that they just be allowed to come back and not be interviewed by the poice. I’m saying is that it must not be assumed that they will come back as murdering etc etc.
What do you propose; that we embitter them by chucking them into Belmarsh?

Oh good Lord -is this the new reason for letting these people off -we don't want to make them angry? Do you not see an inherent contradiction in your argument?

Do you not see the illogicality of yours?

KentRising

Yes ManofKent, with the Lib Dems and Labour so unpopular in Kent I'd be surprised if UKIP didn't become the main opposition in many seats there, perhaps including less obvious ones such as Sevenoaks. UKIP in Kent will be a broad coalition of Labour voters, those who previously protested by voting Lib Dem, unhappy Tories, and those who haven't voted before. Very broad.

Over the border in Sussex, Hastings & Rye could be interesting.

Life_ina_market_town

OldKingCole said:

While I agree with your last sentence, is it an offence for a British citzen to fight in a “foreign” war ....a fight in which this country has no dog? What is the position therefore of Brits who join the French Foreign Legion?

Those who fight for a foreign state are not terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the 2000 Act. Those who fight against a state are. Fighting for a foreign state only attracts criminal liability under the law of treason (i.e. fighting for a state with which Her Majesty is conducting an open and public war), or under the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 (which prohibits enlisting in the forces of a foreign state at war with a country with which Her Majesty is at peace).

MikeK

Another Labour MP getting a bit frit:
Fight For Our Future retweeted
Telegraph News ‏@TelegraphNews 5h5 hours ago
Labour must apologise for allowing eastern European immigrants to enter Britain freely, ex-aide to Gordon Brown says http://fw.to/IIy4d8X

logical_song

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

You have yet to explain what is idealistic about ISIS' cause. I await with baited breath.

As for what they have 'seen' -do you really think ISIS let rookies watch on the sidelines for months before actually doing anything? It's what they have *done*. Which is killed, injured and mutilated. Multiple times.

'bated' not 'baited'

SandyRentool

If Murphy wins, then it looks like he is likely to spend a year not an MP and not an MSP. Not ideal, and a very good reason to elect someone who can take the fight to the SNP both in the media and at Holyrood from day 1. Otherwise, SLAB is seen as having 3 heads: The leader at Holyrood, the (Shadow) Sec of State for Scotland, and Murphy, sat in a park somewhere with a copy of the Daily Record and a bottle of Irn Bru.

manofkent2014

Incidentally for anyone who is interested Gerald O'Brien (Chair of UKIP Sevenoaks) has become UKIP's PPC for Ashford....

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Indigo said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

They may also come back determined to use the new skills and ideologies they have learned.. whose life do you suggest we use to put it to the test ?

I haven’t suggested that they just be allowed to come back and not be interviewed by the poice. I’m saying is that it must not be assumed that they will come back as murdering etc etc.
What do you propose; that we embitter them by chucking them into Belmarsh?

Oh good Lord -is this the new reason for letting these people off -we don't want to make them angry? Do you not see an inherent contradiction in your argument?

Do you not see the illogicality of yours?

All I can see is your disturbing partiality toward the world's least humane terrorist group on record.

My argument is that ideally these people would not be permitted to return to the UK -it is apparently illegal but Canada has managed it. If they must return, they should be arrested and tried for their crimes -sadly for our overburdened justice system.

Your argument is that these are our brave boys, who thought long and hard before going on their mission of mercy, probably never did anything bad (let's not mention it if they did), and should be welcomed back after a police interview 'Are you a terrorist?' - 'No' - 'Okay then, in you come'., but don't put them in prison, because they will turn nasty. To call that illogical would be an understatement. It is grotesque.

Luckyguy1983

logical_song said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Not all hardened terrorists etc. Read the piece. Not everyone who went tp Spain in the 30’s was a hard-line Communist.

Don't be ridiculous -what do you think they went there for -to knit scarves?

Of course not. Have you never heard of the word idealist? And idealists make mistakes.

Idealists kill people in horrible ways. The word "mistakes" sounds so ... nice and harmless.

Mr Smarmeron makes my point! Those who foolishly, and perhaps for “idealistic” reasons travel to Syria and Iraq may well come back sickened by what they have seen.

You have yet to explain what is idealistic about ISIS' cause. I await with baited breath.

As for what they have 'seen' -do you really think ISIS let rookies watch on the sidelines for months before actually doing anything? It's what they have *done*. Which is killed, injured and mutilated. Multiple times.

'bated' not 'baited'

Thanks.

OldKingCole

Life_ina_market_town said:

OldKingCole said:

While I agree with your last sentence, is it an offence for a British citzen to fight in a “foreign” war ....a fight in which this country has no dog? What is the position therefore of Brits who join the French Foreign Legion?

Those who fight for a foreign state are not terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the 2000 Act. Those who fight against a state are. Fighting for a foreign state only attracts criminal liability under the law of treason (i.e. fighting for a state with which Her Majesty is conducting an open and public war), or under the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 (which prohibits enlisting in the forces of a foreign state at war with a country with which Her Majesty is at peace).

See what is meant.
The last sentence would seem to mean that anyone who fights for ISIS (if ISIS is considered a state) against either or both Iraq or Syria is commiting an offence under the 1870 Act. If however ISIS isn’t a State, then as has been said, they are caught under the 2000 Act.

Fighting in the International Brigade would not have been an offence because the IB was on the side of the legitimate Spanish Government.

Scott_P

SandyRentool said:

If Murphy wins, then it looks like he is likely to spend a year not an MP and not an MSP. Not ideal, and a very good reason to elect someone who can take the fight to the SNP both in the media and at Holyrood from day 1.

Except the war is largely fought in the media. Holyrood is irrelevant, and has been since the SNP won a majority. The speaker lets them get away with murder, all the committees are rigged.

As long as Murphy can get himself in the papers and on Newsnicht he can articulate the anti-SNP case well enough. He can even get his crates out again while Nicola is stuck in Edinburgh...

manofkent2014

MikeK said:

Another Labour MP getting a bit frit:
Fight For Our Future retweeted
Telegraph News ‏@TelegraphNews 5h5 hours ago
Labour must apologise for allowing eastern European immigrants to enter Britain freely, ex-aide to Gordon Brown says http://fw.to/IIy4d8X

I don't know why these Labour MP's think apologising is going to achieve anything. What's it going to be?

"Sorry for doing this but we're still going to let in anyone who feels like it from Europe"

They're not sorry at all.......

OldKingCole

Luckyguy 1983.
Ignoring your absurd extrapolations, I have acknowledged in another post (3.52) that, on advice from Mr LIMT, since fighting against a state is an offence under the Act of 2000, they appear, prima facie, to have committed an offence.

Whether the book should be thrown at all of them is a different matter.

GeoffM

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy 1983.
Ignoring your absurd extrapolations, I have acknowledged in another post (3.52) that, on advice from Mr LIMT, since fighting against a state is an offence under the Act of 2000, they appear, prima facie, to have committed an offence.

Whether the book should be thrown at all of them is a different matter.

That seems sensible. When someone commits an offence involving trying to kill others we should make enforcing that law optional.
What could possibly go wrong?

Eh_ehm_a_eh

Scott_P said:

SandyRentool said:

If Murphy wins, then it looks like he is likely to spend a year not an MP and not an MSP. Not ideal, and a very good reason to elect someone who can take the fight to the SNP both in the media and at Holyrood from day 1.

Except the war is largely fought in the media. Holyrood is irrelevant, and has been since the SNP won a majority. The speaker lets them get away with murder, all the committees are rigged.

As long as Murphy can get himself in the papers and on Newsnicht he can articulate the anti-SNP case well enough. He can even get his crates out again while Nicola is stuck in Edinburgh...

On his crates? What if someone throws an egg?

OldKingCole

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy 1983.
Ignoring your absurd extrapolations, I have acknowledged in another post (3.52) that, on advice from Mr LIMT, since fighting against a state is an offence under the Act of 2000, they appear, prima facie, to have committed an offence.

Whether the book should be thrown at all of them is a different matter.

That seems sensible. When someone commits an offence involving trying to kill others we should make enforcing that law optional.
What could possibly go wrong?

Another absurd extrapolater!

I am beginning to have some sympathy with Malcolm!

Shall leave the p-b for the p-u-b!

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy 1983.
Ignoring your absurd extrapolations, I have acknowledged in another post (3.52) that, on advice from Mr LIMT, since fighting against a state is an offence under the Act of 2000, they appear, prima facie, to have committed an offence.

Whether the book should be thrown at all of them is a different matter.

Yes, they've only killed, maimed, beheaded, raped, blown people up, kidnapped -Can't a poor jihadist catch a break? Wouldn't you know it there's an actual 'law' against it -bloody interfering statute book.

Luckyguy1983

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy 1983.
Ignoring your absurd extrapolations, I have acknowledged in another post (3.52) that, on advice from Mr LIMT, since fighting against a state is an offence under the Act of 2000, they appear, prima facie, to have committed an offence.

Whether the book should be thrown at all of them is a different matter.

That seems sensible. When someone commits an offence involving trying to kill others we should make enforcing that law optional.
What could possibly go wrong?

Another absurd extrapolater!

I am beginning to have some sympathy with Malcolm!

Shall leave the p-b for the p-u-b!

It's bizarre isn't it? People actually disagreeing with your hug-a-jihadi (or else) argument! What a world!

volcanopete

Scott_P said:

SandyRentool said:

If Murphy wins, then it looks like he is likely to spend a year not an MP and not an MSP. Not ideal, and a very good reason to elect someone who can take the fight to the SNP both in the media and at Holyrood from day 1.

Except the war is largely fought in the media. Holyrood is irrelevant, and has been since the SNP won a majority. The speaker lets them get away with murder, all the committees are rigged.

As long as Murphy can get himself in the papers and on Newsnicht he can articulate the anti-SNP case well enough. He can even get his crates out again while Nicola is stuck in Edinburgh...

Neal Findlay is still very much in the race following Unison's support.As an ex-brickie,turned housing officer,turned teacher,turned MSP,Findlay could have just the profile to take on the SNP.He is a member of the EIS,not affiliated to Labour the same as the NUT.As we have seen,teachers seem to be a key target group and he is in pole position to attract the individual member teacher vote.Overall the MP/MSP and trade union thirds will probably balance themselves out with the winner coming from the individual membership section

OldKingCole

Luckyguy1983 said:

OldKingCole said:

GeoffM said:

OldKingCole said:

Luckyguy 1983.
Ignoring your absurd extrapolations, I have acknowledged in another post (3.52) that, on advice from Mr LIMT, since fighting against a state is an offence under the Act of 2000, they appear, prima facie, to have committed an offence.

Whether the book should be thrown at all of them is a different matter.

That seems sensible. When someone commits an offence involving trying to kill others we should make enforcing that law optional.
What could possibly go wrong?

Another absurd extrapolater!

I am beginning to have some sympathy with Malcolm!

Shall leave the p-b for the p-u-b!

It's bizarre isn't it? People actually disagreeing with your hug-a-jihadi (or else) argument! What a world!

Tease!

See you later!

malcolmg

Murphy is crap, hated and will get thrashed

Luckyguy1983

manofkent2014 said:

MikeK said:

Another Labour MP getting a bit frit:
Fight For Our Future retweeted
Telegraph News ‏@TelegraphNews 5h5 hours ago
Labour must apologise for allowing eastern European immigrants to enter Britain freely, ex-aide to Gordon Brown says http://fw.to/IIy4d8X

I don't know why these Labour MP's think apologising is going to achieve anything. What's it going to be?

"Sorry for doing this but we're still going to let in anyone who feels like it from Europe"

They're not sorry at all.......

Are a lot of Labour figures going down this apology route then? I thought this might be a prelude to his Kipper defection?

Ishmael_X

Life_ina_market_town said:

OldKingCole said:

While I agree with your last sentence, is it an offence for a British citzen to fight in a “foreign” war ....a fight in which this country has no dog? What is the position therefore of Brits who join the French Foreign Legion?

Those who fight for a foreign state are not terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the 2000 Act. Those who fight against a state are. Fighting for a foreign state only attracts criminal liability under the law of treason (i.e. fighting for a state with which Her Majesty is conducting an open and public war), or under the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 (which prohibits enlisting in the forces of a foreign state at war with a country with which Her Majesty is at peace).

How do you fight for a state, without fighting against a state? There are no grounds at all for the distinction you seek to make. The answer to the Foreign Legion question is that it isn't terrorism as defined by TA 2000.

IS isn't a state anyway, it's a proscribed organisation.

roserees64

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

dr_spyn

Have seen a few tweets implying that Elle Magazine mixed up their Milibands, likewise The Guardian. Unless of course mashable.com has a fake screen grab. This is what embarrassingly silly feminists look like stuff. http://mashable.com/2014/10/27/david-cameron-feminism-tshirt-elle/

Sunil_Prasannan

It's that time of the week again! The Sunil on Sunday's ELBOW (Electoral Leader-Board Of the Week) for 2nd November. 9 polls with a total weighted sample of 10,880 (inc. today's YouGov).

Lab 32.9% (-0.5)
Con 32.2% (-0.1)
UKIP 16.3% (+0.4)
LD 7.5% (0.2)

Lab lead 0.7% (-0.4)

Changes from our first ELBOW on 17th August:

Lab -3.3%
Con -1.0%
UKIP +3.2%
LD -1.3%

Lab lead -2.3% (ie. was 3.0, now 0.7)

Take home: Crossover approaching! Will this be the last ELBOW to show a Lab lead?

Was it all you were hoping for?

Ishmael_X

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

A lovely thought, Rose (if I may).

ed should definitely continue to be himself. Preferably on camera. That will certainly be the best thing for the country.

Luckyguy1983

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

I agree they are bully boy tactics, but what they pick up on is not sincerity, but stunts gone wrong. If Milliband had walked past that Roma beggar, there would have been no story. If he hadn't decided to show what a man of the people he was by chowing down on a bacon sarnie, no story. He needs to stay in character -I don't think people mind a brainiac if that brainiac has a brainy plan for getting this country out of the sh*t. So where are these radical schemes he's been dreaming up whilst *not* eating bacon sandwiches or doing the family shop? All I hear is endless droning on about the NHS (just give it more money) and building more houses.

manofkent2014

As people have been talking about Kent and as I have nothing better to do on this damp Sunday afternoon I thought it interesting to summarise the Tories winning vote shares in 2010 in all of the Kent seats

Tonbridge 57.90%
Sevenoaks 56.80%
Faversham 56.20%
Tunbridge Wells 56.20%
Ashford 54.10%
Thanet North 52.70%
Sittingbourne 50.00%
Folkestone 49.40%
Rochester 49.20%
Dartford 48.80%
Gravesend 48.50%
Thanet South 48%
Maidstone 48%
Chatham 46.20%
Gillingham 46.20%
Canterbury 44.80%
Dover 44.00%

In some ways its amazing to think that any of these might be threatened but considering whats happening in Rochester and what we've seen elsewhere in elections how many of these seats will actually be under threat?

isam

AndreaParma_82 said:

On another forum an user has estimated notionals for London constituencies based on Euro elections. UKIP was closer to Lab in Eltham (Lab 31 UKIP 27 Con 20) than in Erith & Thamesmead (Lab 39 UKIP 29 Con 15)

isam said:

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

UKIPs Eltham candidate is quite an impressive fellow, Peter Whittle

manofkent2014

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

Indeed but in a similar vain it was Barabbas that the people of Jerusalem chose over Christ to save from crucifixion. Democracy and popularity are intrinsically linked. If Miliband wants his intrinsic worth recognised he should toddle off and be an academic somewhere because politics is largely a popularity contest.

Sunil_Prasannan

dr_spyn said:

Have seen a few tweets implying that Elle Magazine mixed up their Milibands, likewise The Guardian. Unless of course mashable.com has a fake screen grab. This is what embarrassingly silly feminists look like stuff. http://mashable.com/2014/10/27/david-cameron-feminism-tshirt-elle/

I want to wear a T-shirt that says "This is what a sweatshop looks like"

saddened

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

Why does he go out of his way to participate in these stupid stunts?

isam

manofkent2014 said:

isam said:

My ukip hit list (Kent)

Best chances
The thanets

Next bests
Dartford, Dover, Erith & Thamesmead, Folkestone and hythe,

Outside chances
Chatham and aylseford, Eltham, Gillingham and Rainham, sittingbourne and sheppey

Eltham and Erith are kind of London I suppose

Why do you consider Sittingbourne and Sheppey only an outside chance? In 2013 it was UKIP's 4th best county council result and was only 2nd to Thanet in terms of council areas in Kent in the Euros: (Council Area ~ Vote Share ~ Lead)

Thanet 46.02% 24%
Swale 43.31% 18%
Folkestone 43.28% 17%
Medway 41.88% 19%
Gravesham41.53% 18%
Dartford 40.78% 17%
Dover 39.25% 15%
Ashford 38.89% 9%
Maidstone 37% 8%
Sevenoaks 36.94% 2%
Tonbridge 35.91% 1%
Canterbury 34.38% 9%
Tunbridge Wells 30.06% -7%

PS Eltham & Erith is Greater London

You're probably right... I did the working out 18 months ago but as I was using 2010 results it should have been better than outside chance

welshowl

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

I would think it's fear not envy of him being in No 10 driving it. The trouble is there's now a theme " he's weird and crap", and that's hard to shift, but things like bacon sarnies and forgetting chunks of your party speech don't help him change the tune do they?

Whatever has been thrown at him as yet will be as nothing compared to if he does get there and is actually as weird and crap as some think. It'll make Francois Hollande's run look like a walk in the park.

Personally: weird as in idiosyncratic doesn't matter, crap most certainly does.

matt

malcolmg said:

Murphy is crap, hated and will get thrashed

Would you like salt with your chips?

JohnLilburne

Ishmael_X said:

Life_ina_market_town said:

OldKingCole said:

While I agree with your last sentence, is it an offence for a British citzen to fight in a “foreign” war ....a fight in which this country has no dog? What is the position therefore of Brits who join the French Foreign Legion?

Those who fight for a foreign state are not terrorists within the meaning of s. 1 of the 2000 Act. Those who fight against a state are. Fighting for a foreign state only attracts criminal liability under the law of treason (i.e. fighting for a state with which Her Majesty is conducting an open and public war), or under the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 (which prohibits enlisting in the forces of a foreign state at war with a country with which Her Majesty is at peace).

How do you fight for a state, without fighting against a state? There are no grounds at all for the distinction you seek to make. The answer to the Foreign Legion question is that it isn't terrorism as defined by TA 2000.

IS isn't a state anyway, it's a proscribed organisation.

It has most of the attributes of a state. Just because we don't like it, it doesn't stop it being one.

kle4

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

The tactics are overblown, I suspect because despite general dissatisfaction with Ed M - which the polling states is not purely an invention of his opponents - Labour are on course to win, or at least be largest party, with only a collapse in Scotland currently threatening that. Therefore, hammering Ed M is the only viable tactic that seems to be effective.

I cannot however summon up any outrage over it. It makes me more inclined to give him a break, but it's not as though his supporters' hands are clean when it comes to using trivial pictures or soundbites against Cameron and co, so the only difference is the extent of it, so sadly not responding in kind will not work, as responding in such a fashion has already been done and will be done in the future. Even if he wants to, supporters in his own ranks and the press will not hold back, so all he can do is attempt to rebut it.

I would guess he will get a boost if there are any debates. The narrative is that he is completely useless, and in truth he is just even blander than Cameron, but with a similar tendency to have the ability to make some eye catching popular statements now and then. In other words, his image is so poor, the reality of him being average will seem incredibly positive in comparison for many.

Charles

manofkent2014 said:

FPT

I believe there were some who were outraged by the way Survation posed one of the questions in their recent Rochester poll about the TTIP negotiations and the NHS. Now here is how Yougov (whose founder is a Tory MP, whose CEO is a Tory donor and whose President is the husband of the departing Labour High Foreign Representative of the EU) address the issue of the EAW for the Sunday Times (The Times being possibly the most pro government newspaper there is):

The EU introduced the European arrest warrant in 2004. This allows member states to require other countries to hand over people they want to put on trial for criminal offences that attract prison sentences of at least a year. Britain recently opted out of a number of EU justice measures, including the arrest warrant.

Now Mr Cameron and Theresa May, the Home secretary, want Britain to opt back into the arrest warrant. They argue that it will help Britain to bring to trial suspected criminals who flee to other EU countries. Their critics say the arrest warrant system could mean Britons being sent abroad for trial for relatively minor offences.On balance, do you think Britain should or should not opt back in to the European arrest warrant?

No mention that it can mean British citizens can be deported to European countries and held in custody on the flimsiest of reasons for years without trial only to be released subsequently as detailed here by Dan Hannan.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tag/eaw/

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n965i9mzb8/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-311014.pdf

Needless to say it provided a majority of the sample wishing to keep the EAW. Such questions really should be taken with a pinch of salt. Pollsters can make them produce any result they want....

While you are right that the imprisonment without bail for an extended period prior to prosecution is one of the most important issues from an UK perspective (I understand that it is normal in the continental system), the introductory statements can't cover every eventuality.

I think the phrase their critics say the arrest warrant system could mean Britons being sent abroad for trial for relatively minor offences is reasonable in the way it highlights the fact that there is an opposing view on the matter.

Floater

Luckyguy1983 said:

AndyJS said:

"Hague says Britons coming back from Iraq and Syria will be helped if they have 'good intentions'"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/02/aid-for-returning-british-jihadists-hague

Hardened terrorists/beheaders 'helped' because of their 'good intentions'. How on earth did we get here?

Was wondering that myself.

not sure that a Jihadi's definition of "good intent" would match the mainstream view.

JamesM

Afternoon all. Off topic but I wonder if the wise souls of pb.com can assist. It is that time again when my mobile contract is expired. I have been with Orange for years and years but I never use the allocations I get for minutes and data.

I am looking for about 250 minutes, 300 texts, 15 photo texts and say, 500 mb of data a month. I have had Samsung Galaxy phones recently and like smart phones, but don't care much about being modern here; hardly use it beyond the photo capacity. Would prefer 18 mth contracts. Would anyone do this for like £15 a month?

I am wary of being teased with little offers I don't really need!

SimonStClare

BBC - Poppy seller burned in aerosol attack in Manchester

The attacker “appeared to be under the influence of alcohol and was staggering, the force added.”

So that’s OK then?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-29870960

Charles

JamesM said:

Afternoon all. Off topic but I wonder if the wise souls of pb.com can assist. It is that time again when my mobile contract is expired. I have been with Orange for years and years but I never use the allocations I get for minutes and data.

I am looking for about 250 minutes, 300 texts, 15 photo texts and say, 500 mb of data a month. I have had Samsung Galaxy phones recently and like smart phones, but don't care much about being modern here; hardly use it beyond the photo capacity. Would prefer 18 mth contracts. Would anyone do this for like £15 a month?

I am wary of being teased with little offers I don't really need!

If you don't buy a handset as part of the contract, you can get great deals.

Vodafone charges me about £9 per month for a month to month contract.

malcolmg

matt said:

malcolmg said:

Murphy is crap, hated and will get thrashed

Would you like salt with your chips?

need vinegar as well

Sean_F

roserees64 said:

Am I the only one that is fed up with the bully boy tactics used against Ed Milband? Could it be that those denigrating him are doing it out of envy in that he could be the next occupant of number 10? Popularity is no measure of intrinsic worth, junk food is popular and so is cultural junk.My advice would be to continue being sincere and strong and to also not respond in kind.

A net rating of -55% speaks for itself. Almost certainly, he has cost Labour the next election.

JamesM

Thanks Charles. Sadly I'll need a handset as my current one is broken. I have always been loyal to Samsung due to a perhaps false belief it is more compatible with my tablet. I guess if a phone has a good camera and android aps that is less of a problem? I am noticing that smart phone contracts seems to be 24m minimum, but I don't like being locked in so much.

Don't mind paying something up front if the complete package is cheaper.

HYUFD

In Scotland a Murphy v Findlay contest could be close, with Findlay winning union backing and Murphy members, Murphy as leader and Findlay as deputy may be the end result