Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s collapse in the polls is NOT because of a fall-off

24

Comments

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    edited November 2014
    Pulpstar said:

    @isam

    Rochester & Strood betting is going to be like the recent Pakistan - Australia test match.

    I bet you could have got tremendous "value" backing Australia on days, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 right till they were crushed by 346 runs.

    Well, I certainly thought at lunch that, although they’d lose, they’d last longer than they did!


    Closer to topic, although I note what happened in Wales, why on earth is a “Mansion Tax” proposed, instead of a couple of new Council Tax bands?
    Treasury could always recoup the extra from Kensington & Chelsea etc.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    felix said:

    Interesting. He cites the Mansion Tax. This is yet another example of why all elections come down to individuals asking themselves how they will be better or worse off (which includes services like the NHS).

    I 'feel' the media have become notably more hostile to EdM since the Mansion Tax surfaced. I said at the time he was shooting the very people he needs onside. There are a lot of important people in the media who even if they don't yet have £2m properties, don't want to think that they might get hammered.

    It's the stupidest piece of electoral suicide since Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto for unilateral nuclear disarmament.
    Ah yes. People are greedy. If that's true, it's astonishing left-wing politics in any shape or form has lasted this long...
    Oh that's easy - the essence of left-wing politics is 'do as I say, not as I do'.
    Nah, people vote based on what maximises the return to themselves. It just depends on what they value the most.

    - Pocket book voters
    - People who get a sense of superiority for voting left even if it may not be in their economic interest
    - PALS voters
    - Rebellion voters

    Personally I vote moderate Tory because I value a long term, stable, progressive and open society built around a commonality of interests. Economically I'd be a lot better off voting for a hard core, low tax party. But I reckon Cameron has the balance about right.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    isam said:



    How do you know "quite a lot of 2010 non voters turned out for ukip at the Euros?"

    Like all parties who have been around for a while, we have records of who's voted going back for 20 years. There are lots of people who didn't vote in 2010, did vote in the Euros, and canvassed as UKIP. Obviously I can't prove it, but I assume they voted UKIP.

    Incidentally, there's an interesting poll in the Times Red Box briefing. Asked who people MIGHT vote for EVER, they get Lab 39, Con 38, UKIP 20, LibDems 17. Those who say "NEVER" are Con 53, Lab 51, LibDems 70, UKIP 65. The detailed breakdown shows the expected - LDs more likely to switch to Lab, UKIP more likely to switch to Cons.

    The Con/Lab figures broadly confirm the current polls though they suggest quite a low ceiling on people who would even think about voting for them. The LibDem figure is quite good in showing a poll of considerers double their current rating, though it also shows them as the most unpopular party. UKIP appears to be near its ceiling. The poll adds:

    "Of those currently saying they would vote Conservative, 71 per cent are definites; for Labour, it's 69 per cent; for the Lib Dems 61 per cent; and for Ukip it's 70 per cent."

    https://times-deck.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/projects/7a614fd06c325499f1680b9896beedeb.html
    Would an exit poll in R & S including a "how did you vote in 2010" question not be the single most interesting poll that could be conducted between now and the GE? If there's any rich lords out there.

  • On topic, I've been working for some time on a rule of thumb that the Lib Dem defectors will break 3:1 in Labour's favour over the Conservatives (of course, some will go to the SNP, UKIP and the Greens as well, but in most seats in England & Wales this is the vital split). I haven't seen any reason to abandon this rule of thumb yet.

    Labour risk losing some of their so-called core voters to UKIP and some to the Greens, but their biggest danger is of losing some to Don't Vote.

    They aren't going to lose many to the Conservatives. Thoughtful Conservatives should fret about this.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:



    How do you know "quite a lot of 2010 non voters turned out for ukip at the Euros?"

    Like all parties who have been around for a while, we have records of who's voted going back for 20 years. There are lots of people who didn't vote in 2010, did vote in the Euros, and canvassed as UKIP. Obviously I can't prove it, but I assume they voted UKIP.

    Incidentally, there's an interesting poll in the Times Red Box briefing. Asked who people MIGHT vote for EVER, they get Lab 39, Con 38, UKIP 20, LibDems 17. Those who say "NEVER" are Con 53, Lab 51, LibDems 70, UKIP 65. The detailed breakdown shows the expected - LDs more likely to switch to Lab, UKIP more likely to switch to Cons.

    The Con/Lab figures broadly confirm the current polls though they suggest quite a low ceiling on people who would even think about voting for them. The LibDem figure is quite good in showing a poll of considerers double their current rating, though it also shows them as the most unpopular party. UKIP appears to be near its ceiling. The poll adds:

    "Of those currently saying they would vote Conservative, 71 per cent are definites; for Labour, it's 69 per cent; for the Lib Dems 61 per cent; and for Ukip it's 70 per cent."

    https://times-deck.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/projects/7a614fd06c325499f1680b9896beedeb.html
    Actually my point was that the people Mike is classifying as DNV are almost certainly not all DNV, and very likely most of them are not DNV, so we agree that DNV are less likely to vote, but Mike is still wrong
  • isam said:

    isam said:



    How do you know "quite a lot of 2010 non voters turned out for ukip at the Euros?"

    Like all parties who have been around for a while, we have records of who's voted going back for 20 years. There are lots of people who didn't vote in 2010, did vote in the Euros, and canvassed as UKIP. Obviously I can't prove it, but I assume they voted UKIP.

    Incidentally, there's an interesting poll in the Times Red Box briefing. Asked who people MIGHT vote for EVER, they get Lab 39, Con 38, UKIP 20, LibDems 17. Those who say "NEVER" are Con 53, Lab 51, LibDems 70, UKIP 65. The detailed breakdown shows the expected - LDs more likely to switch to Lab, UKIP more likely to switch to Cons.

    The Con/Lab figures broadly confirm the current polls though they suggest quite a low ceiling on people who would even think about voting for them. The LibDem figure is quite good in showing a poll of considerers double their current rating, though it also shows them as the most unpopular party. UKIP appears to be near its ceiling. The poll adds:

    "Of those currently saying they would vote Conservative, 71 per cent are definites; for Labour, it's 69 per cent; for the Lib Dems 61 per cent; and for Ukip it's 70 per cent."

    https://times-deck.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/projects/7a614fd06c325499f1680b9896beedeb.html
    Actually my point was that the people Mike is classifying as DNV are almost certainly not all DNV, and very likely most of them are not DNV, so we agree that DNV are less likely to vote, but Mike is still wrong
    Mike made two points in his original post:

    "Just 56% of the Mark Reckless support is from those who voted for parties that were on the ballot at GE10. That compares with 85.2% for the CON candidate. A complication is that 42 people told the pollster that they voted UKIP last time when, as we all know, the party did not contest the seat. Clearly some of them might have lived elsewhere but my guess is that some of their memory of what they did or did not do four years ago is based on their current voting intention."

    You have fixated on the "42 UKIP voters" problem, where I agree with you. In the first half of the paragraph, Mike was making a wider point about UKIP's support being based on non-voters, which is an altogether stronger point (though like Peter the Punter, I'm now not expecting anything other than UKIP taking this seat without any further alarm or disturbance).
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    antifrank said:

    On topic, I've been working for some time on a rule of thumb that the Lib Dem defectors will break 3:1 in Labour's favour over the Conservatives (of course, some will go to the SNP, UKIP and the Greens as well, but in most seats in England & Wales this is the vital split). I haven't seen any reason to abandon this rule of thumb yet.

    Doesn't that vary according to seat and region?

    Nuneaton stood out in the Ashcroft polls.

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Nuneaton-Full-tables-Oct-14.pdf

    More LD-Tory than LD-Lab.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Entertaining but not profitable race, yesterday. Post-race will probably be up tomorrow. Won't do an Early Thoughts for Brazil, as it starts in about four days.

    Ahem:

    "Early Thoughts from Brazil" is/maybe/will-be/should-be an eponymous brand of the 'FluffyThoughts&Me corporation (yet to be incorporated). Negotiations between London and Sao Paulo are on-going. Any attempt to usurp, denigrate or give prominence may result in useless responses.

    :investors-beware:
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited November 2014
    Felix..One would have expected the three mp's who donned the T shirts to have at least checked the "made in"..label and then the price tag...45 quid...
    How out of touch can they be...and how out of touch can their advisers be..and they want to run the country...sheesh.
  • Today's populus

    Con 34 (nc) Lab 35 (+1) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 13 (-2) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/OmOnline_Vote_03_11-2014_BPC.pdf
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    antifrank said:

    On topic, I've been working for some time on a rule of thumb that the Lib Dem defectors will break 3:1 in Labour's favour over the Conservatives (of course, some will go to the SNP, UKIP and the Greens as well, but in most seats in England & Wales this is the vital split). I haven't seen any reason to abandon this rule of thumb yet.

    Labour risk losing some of their so-called core voters to UKIP and some to the Greens, but their biggest danger is of losing some to Don't Vote.

    They aren't going to lose many to the Conservatives. Thoughtful Conservatives should fret about this.

    @antifrank

    It seems to be now much nearer to 2:1 (range 1.8;1 to 2.5:1) - YG October average was 2.35:1.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Has anyone done the analysis of recalibrating the Rochester & Strood VI back through to ICM's methodology ?
  • On topic, if it weren't these Red Liberals (who mostly joined before Ed became leader), Labour would be polling around 25%
  • chestnut said:

    antifrank said:

    On topic, I've been working for some time on a rule of thumb that the Lib Dem defectors will break 3:1 in Labour's favour over the Conservatives (of course, some will go to the SNP, UKIP and the Greens as well, but in most seats in England & Wales this is the vital split). I haven't seen any reason to abandon this rule of thumb yet.

    Doesn't that vary according to seat and region?

    Nuneaton stood out in the Ashcroft polls.

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Nuneaton-Full-tables-Oct-14.pdf

    More LD-Tory than LD-Lab.
    It will vary from constituency to constituency quite considerably. It's intended as a rule of thumb, not a law of nature. We won't get constituency polls in every seat - not even Lord Ashcroft's munificence runs that far.
  • felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

  • When the Scottish constituency markets go back up, would it be wise to back CON Gain in Edinburgh South West?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    When the Scottish constituency markets go back up, would it be wise to back CON Gain in Edinburgh South West?

    As part of a Scottish Tory Surge...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited November 2014
    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    I once paid £145 for a t-shirt (was at a Rolling Stones gig, I may have been very very drunk)

    A few of my t-shirts and hoodies cost north of £45.

    I guess this confirms my membership of the cosmopolitan metropolitan elite.
  • Mr. Eagles, you great big ponce. £145 for a t-shirt?! I shall write to the Flat Cap Elders and demand your immediate expulsion from the sacred brotherhood of Yorkshiremen.

    Bloody hell, man. Even if I were loaded I wouldn't fritter away that much on a bloody t-shirt.
  • Vote on a step towards fairness for England to come 'soon':
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29870018

    Labour and the Lib Dems remain firmly against any proposal to give us anything approximating equality with Scotland.
  • Mr. Eagles, you great big ponce. £145 for a t-shirt?! I shall write to the Flat Cap Elders and demand your immediate expulsion from the sacred brotherhood of Yorkshiremen.

    Bloody hell, man. Even if I were loaded I wouldn't fritter away that much on a bloody t-shirt.

    It was part of the Forty Licks Tour in 2003.

    It was the iconic tongue image, done very well.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    I once paid £145 for a t-shirt (was at a Rolling Stones gig, I may have been very very drunk)

    A few of my t-shirts and hoodies cost north of £45.

    I guess this confirms my membership of the cosmopolitan metropolitan elite.

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    I once paid £145 for a t-shirt (was at a Rolling Stones gig, I may have been very very drunk)

    A few of my t-shirts and hoodies cost north of £45.

    I guess this confirms my membership of the cosmopolitan metropolitan elite.
    I'd say it confirms you don't know what value is unless someone tells you
  • From some threads ago (looking for something): Mr. Jessop, if someone is reasonably offended then, in addition to just saying 'that's offensive/I am offended' they'll have some intelligent grounds for being offended and can use those grounds to make a reasoned argument.

    Offence alone is not an argument.
  • Is it worrying that last week I found out that Buckfast wasn't Scottish but from Devon.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    BTW - our political class are still taking us for mugs it seems - trashing expense records pre 2010.

    And they wonder why "politics as normal" is despised
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014
    Ah, that's why they sacked Gove and put Morgan in at Education, she is being much more effective at driving votes to UKIP, the idiocy of the Tories at the moment is really depressing for someone looking for reasons not to switch their vote.

    http://conservativewoman.co.uk/chris-mcgovern-morgans-uber-pc-agenda-spells-trouble-will-tolerate-boko-haram/

    This: http://conservativewoman.co.uk/camerons-tories-are-no-different-to-labour/ on the same site speaks volumes on the Tories problems as well.
  • Would Labour agree to a Westminster coalition with the SNP next year in exchange for another Indyref?
  • Mr. Floater, amazing it took them so long to recognise how well it worked for Blair (whose expenses were, entirely by accident, shredded).

    Mr. Eagles, attempting to justify the expenditure is only digging deeper the hole of ignominy.
  • Mr. Floater, amazing it took them so long to recognise how well it worked for Blair (whose expenses were, entirely by accident, shredded).

    Mr. Eagles, attempting to justify the expenditure is only digging deeper the hole of ignominy.

    Wait till I start talking about my shoes.
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376
    edited November 2014

    isam said:





    It's the stupidest piece of electoral suicide since Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto for unilateral nuclear disarmament.

    That's wildly overstated. I agree some in the media might feel affected […] but it's a London issue.

    Thus spake a Labour candidate ;)
    I was going to put the word 'London' in my post but assumed it didn't need spelling out.

    Despite the Beeb's half-move to Manchester, the media is massively London-centric, at least in terms of the important people that EdM should have kept on board. I'm not referring here simply to journos of print and tv variety, but filmmakers, writers, actors, soap stars … the list of once potential Labour luvvies who have been shafted by this most stupid of all policies is a long, long, one. And it will cost Labour dear. You do NOT bite the hand that feeds ...
  • Ninoinoz said:

    isam said:

    Indigo said:

    Indigo said:

    How much of "Don't Know" is shy Kipper that doesn't want to be publically associated with an unfashionable party ?

    What makes you think UKIP is unfashionable? I would have thought the reverse is true! Certainly on here UKIP supporters are lacking neither self confidence nor moral certitude.....

    I think they're popular with people who don't normally vote: the 'I don't care for that lot' brigade. This was borne out by Mike's analysis of polling in R&S yesterday. Getting those malcontents actually to vote, when they don't normally, will be a very different matter.
    Mikes analysis of R&S polling yesterday was deeply deeply flawed

    There is no reason to assume people saying they voted for Ukip in 2010, when there was no Ukip candidate, were non voters... Mike is relying on that assumption to justify his assertion that Ukips lead is 'flaky'

    I think it is certain that many such people voted in 2010 and misremembered who for, than thought they voted when they didn't even go to the polling station

    The fact that they are saying they voted Ukip, and Ukips candidate stood in 2010 for another party makes that even more likely
    Considering one of Mike's favourite hobby horses is that, in Westminster elections, people vote for individuals, not parties (LibDem wishful thinking, perhaps), it is strange that it's slipped his mind, especially in a by-election contest.
    Yes - I wonder if the false recall is one of two things:

    1) They voted for Reckless last time
    or
    2) They voted UKIP at the euros and are mixing their elections up.

    I wonder if (2) affects polling in general and not just the euros confusing people's recall, council elections may do the same?
  • If it wasnae for damn Nips,
    Being good a repeating our sips,
    The distilleries will be still on-line.

    But it cannae be fun for them,
    In Fukushima's shine,
    And EiT postings 8% sublime....

    Down in the holes,
    Of Glasgae's future depth,
    I find a stranger,
    A clown so inept!

    In the morning,
    Another day,
    The English will arise....

    But is Scotland listening,
    On it's final demise?

    We will never know...,

    Questions unanswered....

    Until they make the final cut.


    Apols: Pink-Floyd/Rodger Walters.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    I assume it doesn't include the vast amount of money given away in tax credits, since that's reduced income rather than expenditure...

  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Todays Populus

    LAB 327 CON 277 LD 19 other 27 (ukpr)

    EICIPM
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    isam said:

    isam said:



    How do you know "quite a lot of 2010 non voters turned out for ukip at the Euros?"



    "Of those currently saying they would vote Conservative, 71 per cent are definites; for Labour, it's 69 per cent; for the Lib Dems 61 per cent; and for Ukip it's 70 per cent."

    https://times-deck.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/projects/7a614fd06c325499f1680b9896beedeb.html
    Actually my point was that the people Mike is classifying as DNV are almost certainly not all DNV, and very likely most of them are not DNV, so we agree that DNV are less likely to vote, but Mike is still wrong
    Mike made two points in his original post:

    "Just 56% of the Mark Reckless support is from those who voted for parties that were on the ballot at GE10. That compares with 85.2% for the CON candidate. A complication is that 42 people told the pollster that they voted UKIP last time when, as we all know, the party did not contest the seat. Clearly some of them might have lived elsewhere but my guess is that some of their memory of what they did or did not do four years ago is based on their current voting intention."

    You have fixated on the "42 UKIP voters" problem, where I agree with you. In the first half of the paragraph, Mike was making a wider point about UKIP's support being based on non-voters, which is an altogether stronger point (though like Peter the Punter, I'm now not expecting anything other than UKIP taking this seat without any further alarm or disturbance).
    The point is that 77% of the Mark Reckless support is from those who said they voted in 2010, and therefore not flaky non voters...the 56% figure Mike quotes is very misleading.

    I don't care, it hasn't cost me any money, I said ukip in Rochester from the start and nothing I have seen here or anywhere else has made me blink... Just for future reference I personally wouldn't assume people who said they voted were DNV. You are free to ignore my advice as you wish, it's only my opinion
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited November 2014

    Todays Populus

    LAB 327 CON 277 LD 19 other 27 (ukpr)

    EICIPM

    According to that, UKIP, Greens, SNP & PC are on a combined 9 Seats.

    Really? I mean really?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Indigo said:

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    I assume it doesn't include the vast amount of money given away in tax credits, since that's reduced income rather than expenditure...

    An accounting gimmick - especially as you can receive tax credits beyond your tax bill. They absolutely should be included in spending.
  • BBC moron Mark Easton (same chap who described white flight as a sign of prosperity and good things) manages to write a piece on English devolution without including mention of an English Parliament (save once as a criticism of English votes for English laws):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29850286

    He seems keen to refer to what constitutional experts desire but accidentally forgets to refer to what the people want.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    BBC moron Mark Easton (same chap who described white flight as a sign of prosperity and good things) manages to write a piece on English devolution without including mention of an English Parliament (save once as a criticism of English votes for English laws):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29850286

    He seems keen to refer to what constitutional experts desire but accidentally forgets to refer to what the people want.

    Same old biased BBC. An English parliament is the most popular option for voters, yet he doesn't mention it as a model. Muppet.
  • Mr. Eagles, you great big ponce. £145 for a t-shirt?! I shall write to the Flat Cap Elders and demand your immediate expulsion from the sacred brotherhood of Yorkshiremen.

    Bloody hell, man. Even if I were loaded I wouldn't fritter away that much on a bloody t-shirt.

    It was part of the Forty Licks Tour in 2003.

    It was the iconic tongue image, done very well.
    That is still bloody ridiculous. I have loads of concert bought T-Shirts - Springsteen (I have a complete European Tour collection going back to the early 80s) and the Eagles the most recent ones and never had to pay more than £30.
  • TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    The last two paragraphs of that article are dismally predictable.

    Labour politicians seem to be trying to fail the Turing test. Irrespective of the topic, they trot out their small set of standard lines, time after time.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
  • Mr. Socrates, not only the most desired model, it's the direct equivalent of the Scottish Parliament. If a husband remarks to his wife that he wants a car like next door have, and she offers him a motorbike, a pogo stick and a hot air balloon, he won't be very impressed.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    The last two paragraphs of that article are dismally predictable.

    Labour politicians seem to be trying to fail the Turing test. Irrespective of the topic, they trot out their small set of standard lines, time after time.
    Labour hate this - with a passion. The sunlight on this expense will be painful for anyone who wants to protect or enhance any sort of government spending.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Todays Populus

    LAB 327 CON 277 LD 19 other 27 (ukpr)

    EICIPM

    According to that, UKIP, Greens, SNP & PC are on a combined 9 Seats.

    Really? I mean really?
    Owls is the chump who ignored the Scottish poll last week.
  • I like the idea of the tax summary statement. The Government should also add a personalised spending summary as well, so that so many of the angriest voters could see how much they are in fact cosseted.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    They should split out the welfare block into sub-parts as well, make it clear just how much money is going to the over 65s.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Manufacturing PMI up sharply

    Manufacturing PMI at three-month high of 53.2
     Growth acceleration led by domestic demand,
    as new export order decline
     Price pressures remain relatively subdued


    http://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/692e914ba9dd4c17a14e5baf0655e79e
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Alistair said:

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    They should split out the welfare block into sub-parts as well, make it clear just how much money is going to the over 65s.
    How about by ethnicity?
  • hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    Labour have gone through a bad patch with attacks being made on Ed Miliband for various reasons. e.g the conference speech errors, lack of leadership in Scotland. Perhaps Ed is not very good at the party management stuff and cannot get his team all working in the same direction. Ed cannot run the Labour party from Westminster and through a clique of people who he has worked with during his time with the Labour party. The older generation of Labour politicians with the experience seem to be moving on and some of these are those that can motivate the grassroots to get out to win an election.

    If Ed is showing these leadership weaknesses now, it is only going to get harder for him, if he became PM. Perhaps he should have a good think about whether he can cope with managing the party, as well as a government. Opposition is quite difficult at the moment, due to the coalition. In some ways, UKIP have helped, because they have split the right of centre vote. Without UKIP, it is quite possible the Tories would have a significant poll lead.

    Labour can win the 2015 election, but if they are going to do so, then they have to start working more effectively as a team and to start talking about the type of politics they would follow in government. e.g fairness to the many in dealing with UK debt; sensible robust relationship with other EU governments, without empty threats of running away; building 100,000 social housing units per year, making the United Kingdom more democratic with an elected House of Lords, more devolution away from Westminster to all parts of the UK.

    The danger for Labour is that Ed Miliband just continues to be an academic politician type, who thinks more about the process and forgets about the people he needs to achieve his plans. He is going to have to start energising his team and to get out there to explain their plans for May 2015 onwards. They will not have many in the media who are going to help them, partly because of Labour plans on media regulation. So they are going to have to think about other ways to publicise their campaign work.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited November 2014

    Mr. Socrates, not only the most desired model, it's the direct equivalent of the Scottish Parliament. If a husband remarks to his wife that he wants a car like next door have, and she offers him a motorbike, a pogo stick and a hot air balloon, he won't be very impressed.

    What I find particularly annoying is how extra powers for cities - different and more minor powers to the ones given to Scotland - is referred to as "devolution within England". It's like saying the next door neighbours have a new car, but we'd prefer just to get new covers for select parts of the car. The worst bit is when Ed Miliband refers to "the nations and regions of Britain", showing he doesn't even consider England to be a nation.

    Do Labour's plans for regional devolution even entail elected assemblies? Or is it just to qunagos?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Alistair said:

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    They should split out the welfare block into sub-parts as well, make it clear just how much money is going to the over 65s.
    State pensions are a separate block.
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376
    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Mr. Floater, amazing it took them so long to recognise how well it worked for Blair (whose expenses were, entirely by accident, shredded).

    Mr. Eagles, attempting to justify the expenditure is only digging deeper the hole of ignominy.

    The shredding of Blair's expenses show just how corrupt our establishment is.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    The last two paragraphs of that article are dismally predictable.

    Labour politicians seem to be trying to fail the Turing test. Irrespective of the topic, they trot out their small set of standard lines, time after time.
    Won't this show that EU immigrants don't claim much in benefits, and so make Cameron's tough stance / red line seem a bit pointless?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    FalseFlag said:

    Alistair said:

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    They should split out the welfare block into sub-parts as well, make it clear just how much money is going to the over 65s.
    How about by ethnicity?
    And sexuality - will ensure peak Kipper frothage.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Of course: feminism is a political ideology. Anyone can subscribe to any political ideology.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    Would Labour agree to a Westminster coalition with the SNP next year in exchange for another Indyref?

    SNP: How can a party that is (still) committed to breaking-up the UK with a straight face enter into a UK government?

    Labour: Unless it has a death wish, how can a party elevate such people to positions of authority over the whole of the UK? (remembering that, unlike the present coalition, only such larger party can suffer the subsequent displeasure of the voters, since 92% can't vote either for or against the SNP)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Lord knows... Seems a bit of a hostage to fortune to pigeon hole yourself as any kind of ist to me.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TGOHF
    " Growth acceleration led by domestic demand,
    as new export order decline"

    Another consumer "boom"? That has to be good...doesn't it?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Labour politicians seem to be trying to fail the Turing test. Irrespective of the topic, they trot out their small set of standard lines, time after time.

    Reminds me of the ELIZA programs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA) of years gone by, you say something to a press secretary and you get back the same words with "hard working families" or "tax cuts for millionaires" inserted into it, depending on which party they represent.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Don't trouble your pretty little head worrying about stuff like that..
  • Mr. Socrates, doesn't matter whether it'd be elected or quangocracy, England is not the plaything or possession of an empty-headed fool like Miliband. It's our land, not something to be carved up for the party political advantage of an occupational fratricidal union glove-puppet.

    Miss Anne, there was an odd moment on Twitter (no rarity, I know) a few weeks ago, when someone insisted, in a 'positive' way, that I was a feminist, despite my stating I wasn't. The reasoning was that I was against bigotry/anti-women prejudice and therefore was a feminist.

    That's not my view (I *am* against bigotry, but I don't think that equates to feminism and dislike having terms thrust upon me) but decided to just leave it. Oddly, the chap insisting it was so is a writer on Doctor Who, I believe.

    Of course, if I were a naughty writer I would've provoked a Twitterstorm and gotten some much needed (albeit bad) publicity. Bah.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Don't trouble your pretty little head worrying about stuff like that..
    What price audreyanne is a bloke?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Taken from Ashcroft's last set of Marginal Polls.

    Index of Labour Switchers (Lib Dem gains minus UKIP losses on 1000 samples)

    Brentford and Isleworth +42
    Enfield North +20
    Hove +20
    Brighton Kemptown +16
    Hastings and Rye +13
    Pudsey +12
    Halesowen +2
    Gloucester -1
    Nuneaton - 13
    Corby -13

    Fairly sharp geographical distinctions between London, certain bits of the south coast and then the Midlands.

    The sampling was pre-conference in the main.

    UKIP are wiping out the gains from LD switchers in the Midlands?



  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721

    isam said:





    It's the stupidest piece of electoral suicide since Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto for unilateral nuclear disarmament.

    That's wildly overstated. I agree some in the media might feel affected […] but it's a London issue.

    Thus spake a Labour candidate ;)
    I was going to put the word 'London' in my post but assumed it didn't need spelling out.

    Despite the Beeb's half-move to Manchester, the media is massively London-centric, at least in terms of the important people that EdM should have kept on board. I'm not referring here simply to journos of print and tv variety, but filmmakers, writers, actors, soap stars … the list of once potential Labour luvvies who have been shafted by this most stupid of all policies is a long, long, one. And it will cost Labour dear. You do NOT bite the hand that feeds ...
    What a surprise. The luvvies want higher taxes. Just not on them.

    How many on this board call for higher taxes and how many have actually voluntarily paid more? The Treasury will happily take you cheque. Unfortunately I suspect most lefties would be like Tony Benn and Millipede Senior given half the chance. Only the proles and little people need to worry about paying taxes.
  • Why banging on about the same damned lines can work:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    A male acquiantance of mine (friend of a son’s, actually) signed up for Women’s Studies at Uni. The lecturer tried to get him thrown off, and then, IIRC either failed him or gave him the lowest possible pass. Again IIRC it knocked his degree down from a 2:1 to a Desmond!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited November 2014
    A woman is being tested for suspected Ebola at St George's Hospital in Tooting, south London. More details soon…

    From the Guardian live ticker
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    isam said:

    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Don't trouble your pretty little head worrying about stuff like that..
    What price audreyanne is a bloke?
    What's wrong with being sexy ?
  • isam said:

    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Don't trouble your pretty little head worrying about stuff like that..
    What price audreyanne is a bloke?
    The Mrs Doubtfire avatar could be a clue.

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Total welfare in England 163,031k
    Total spent on JSA 3,692k
    Total spent on Oldies circa 130,000k

  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    Todays Populus

    LAB 327 CON 277 LD 19 other 27 (ukpr)

    EICIPM

    According to that, UKIP, Greens, SNP & PC are on a combined 9 Seats.

    Really? I mean really?
    Any poll that has Labour ahead by only 2% IN NORTH ENGLAND should be taken with a very large dose of salt. ( And Populus, unlike other pollsters still weight the UKIP vote DOWN by 45% and the Lib Dem vote UP by 30% . (they also weight UP the Tories and weigh DOWN Labour No doubt they have their reasons for doing so.))

    The lack of SNP seats is because they score Scotland as

    20 - Tories
    30 - Labour
    39 - SNP

    Values which would mean the SNP would rack up a lot of second places.
  • Miss Jones, does this mean you're an angel?

    Or two angels?!
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Total welfare in England 163,031k
    Total spent on JSA 3,692k
    Total spent on Oldies circa 130,000k

    State pension is a separate bucket, so your oldies number is wrong.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    LucyJones said:

    isam said:

    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    Can any man, really, be a feminist?
    Don't trouble your pretty little head worrying about stuff like that..
    What price audreyanne is a bloke?
    The Mrs Doubtfire avatar could be a clue.

    You don't say?!
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014

    Why banging on about the same damned lines can work:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect

    Yes I understand that, although I think there is a threshold where is merges into the pissed_off_voter_that_wants_some_blood_on_the_floors_effect ;-)

    I imagine it must interlink with the speakers credibility as well somewhere, if you think someone is talking complete b****cks, hearing it multiple times probably won't either convince you, or make you very happy.
  • isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    If a "feminist" looks like Ed Milliband, Harriet Harman or Nick Clegg.... well, excuse me if I don't want to look like one.
  • Miss Jones, does this mean you're an angel?

    Or two angels?!

    You are doing Rigsby impressions now Mr D?

  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    edited November 2014
    Socrates said:

    Mr. Socrates, not only the most desired model, it's the direct equivalent of the Scottish Parliament. If a husband remarks to his wife that he wants a car like next door have, and she offers him a motorbike, a pogo stick and a hot air balloon, he won't be very impressed.

    What I find particularly annoying is how extra powers for cities - different and more minor powers to the ones given to Scotland - is referred to as "devolution within England". It's like saying the next door neighbours have a new car, but we'd prefer just to get new covers for select parts of the car. The worst bit is when Ed Miliband refers to "the nations and regions of Britain", showing he doesn't even consider England to be a nation.

    Do Labour's plans for regional devolution even entail elected assemblies? Or is it just to qunagos?
    Labours plans will be to use their votes in the large cities to control as much of the surrounding region as possible. Witness what they did in Wales, Scotland (oops!) and County Durham.

    In Gerrymandering terms it is called 'Cracking' - However it is cracking the suburban vote, not the urban vote. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#Packing_and_cracking

    On an earlier post it was noted that 3 Labour Wards were moved into Exeter to make it a safe Labour seat. Another example.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    LucyJones said:

    isam said:

    felix said:

    Is it just me or were the worst things about t-shirtgate last week just how styleless the things were, how Clegg/Miliband/Harman were tied for how dire it made each of them look and at £45 each who in the real world pays that for a f****** t-shirt!

    Guido has a very good cartoon on this.
    http://order-order.com/2014/11/03/richs-monday-morning-view-90/

    That and Marf's have made me laugh more at cartoons than for a long time.

    Cruel but unfortunately true, I fear.
    The feminist t shirts would only really have worked properly if people you wouldn't think we're feminists wore them... Doesn't surprise me at all that Clegg and Miliband are feminists. If Vinnie Jones and 50 cent wore them it might work better
    If a "feminist" looks like Ed Milliband, Harriet Harman or Nick Clegg.... well, excuse me if I don't want to look like one.
    Yeah it seems like they're converting to the preached!
  • Miss Jones, does this mean you're an angel?

    Or two angels?!


    Well, I do have a heavenly body.... (I wish!)





  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,591
    The main problem with the Fawcett t-shirts is it confirmed my prejudice that feminists are awful people I do not wish to meet.
  • This is what a feminist looks like.
  • Mr. Eagles, you great big ponce. £145 for a t-shirt?! I shall write to the Flat Cap Elders and demand your immediate expulsion from the sacred brotherhood of Yorkshiremen.

    Bloody hell, man. Even if I were loaded I wouldn't fritter away that much on a bloody t-shirt.

    It was part of the Forty Licks Tour in 2003.

    It was the iconic tongue image, done very well.
    That is still bloody ridiculous. I have loads of concert bought T-Shirts - Springsteen (I have a complete European Tour collection going back to the early 80s) and the Eagles the most recent ones and never had to pay more than £30.
    I've got all those Springsteen shirts, plus one from Hammersmith in 1975. They are about ten sizes too small now.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited November 2014
    weejonnie said:

    Socrates said:

    Mr. Socrates, not only the most desired model, it's the direct equivalent of the Scottish Parliament. If a husband remarks to his wife that he wants a car like next door have, and she offers him a motorbike, a pogo stick and a hot air balloon, he won't be very impressed.

    What I find particularly annoying is how extra powers for cities - different and more minor powers to the ones given to Scotland - is referred to as "devolution within England". It's like saying the next door neighbours have a new car, but we'd prefer just to get new covers for select parts of the car. The worst bit is when Ed Miliband refers to "the nations and regions of Britain", showing he doesn't even consider England to be a nation.

    Do Labour's plans for regional devolution even entail elected assemblies? Or is it just to qunagos?
    Labours plans will be to use their votes in the large cities to control as much of the surrounding region as possible. Witness what they did in Wales, Scotland (oops!) and County Durham.

    In Gerrymandering terms it is called 'Cracking' - However it is cracking the suburban vote, not the urban vote. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#Packing_and_cracking

    On an earlier post it was noted that 3 Labour Wards were moved into Exeter to make it a safe Labour seat. Another example.
    The latest I've heard is that the Mayor of London might get control of suburban commuter lines. How on Earth is it right that railways in Essex and Surrey get controlled by someone that the people of Essex and Surrey don't get to vote for?

    You can also tell by the design of the regions that northern cities like Manchester and Liverpool get grouped in with the broader left-leaning regions. But in the south, where the broader region is right-leaning, London gets carved off.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    TGOHF said:

    Alistair said:

    TGOHF said:

    This should be fun

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11204213/Voters-to-get-letters-showing-how-much-of-their-money-is-spent-on-benefits.html

    Interesting that the Kippers want to row back on welfare cuts but be harsh on the the aid and the EU budget - which is at the bottom of the table.

    They should split out the welfare block into sub-parts as well, make it clear just how much money is going to the over 65s.
    State pensions are a separate block.
    There's more than just state pensions that goes to the over 65s.
  • Scotland wins again

    SCOTLAND has won the first ever Daily Mash Git of the Year award.

    The small, cold, northern European hell-hole beat off stiff competition from rival gits including Russian maniac Vladimir Putin and Anyone Who Lives in a Converted Barn.

    Professor Henry Brubaker of the Institute for Studies said: ”All sensible people would agree that Scotland has been a massive pain in the arse this year, not least to itself.

    ”’Git’ almost seems inadequate, but if we’d used anything stronger someone probably would have reported us on Facebook.

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/features/scotland-wins-git-of-the-year-2014110392379
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    This is what a feminist looks like.

    Someone who's unsure about their identity?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Socrates said:

    Total welfare in England 163,031k
    Total spent on JSA 3,692k
    Total spent on Oldies circa 130,000k

    State pension is a separate bucket, so your oldies number is wrong.
    I am using official Govt statistics not Osbournes gimmick

    State pensions, pensions credit, winter fuel allowance tv licences, attendance allowance DLA etc all included in the £163 BN "welfare budget" Oldies account for 80% of the bill JSA for 1.8% of the total "Benefit Expenditure by Country"
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    The personal tax statements are a great idea shoddily implemented for political reasons, which is no surprise for a chancellor for whom everything he touches turns to mould.

    Some of the categories highlighted are cherry picked for political reasons - the EU and aid budgets for example, which are so small as to be inconsequential in an analysis such as this.

    Leaving non state pension welfare as one lump some is tediously predictable, is blatantly intended to stoke resentment and doesn't inform at all, but instead begs further analysis.

    Then there is the issue that the statements are part baked - they ignore VAT, as if that doesn't matter (except it does, it's proportionately a large part of the low paid's outgoings) and the analysis is inconsistent with other updated breakdowns of government spending, although not that far off the differences will call the integrity of the whole exercise into question.

    And worst of all, the statement leaves out the benefit of all that government spending on the individual involved - from the provision of education and health (which should be valued at market rate), to tax credits and pension payments received. Without it 50% of the taxpayers will remain very much in the dark (intended of course) about the fact they're net recipients of this government activity.

    Fortunately, most of these statements will rightly end up in the bin. As with the coalition's early transparency exercises which lost impetus after initial publication, the light shone proves the vast majority of government expenditure goes on mundane stuff taxpayers expect it to.
  • Socrates said:

    Total welfare in England 163,031k
    Total spent on JSA 3,692k
    Total spent on Oldies circa 130,000k

    State pension is a separate bucket, so your oldies number is wrong.
    I am using official Govt statistics not Osbournes gimmick

    State pensions, pensions credit, winter fuel allowance tv licences, attendance allowance DLA etc all included in the £163 BN "welfare budget" Oldies account for 80% of the bill JSA for 1.8% of the total "Benefit Expenditure by Country"
    How much does pensions take up of the NHS budget?
  • Interesting and may I say exciting betting news: Greater Manchester will have an elected mayor.

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Total welfare in England 163,031k
    Total spent on JSA 3,692k
    Total spent on Oldies circa 130,000k

    State pension is a separate bucket, so your oldies number is wrong.
    I am using official Govt statistics not Osbournes gimmick

    State pensions, pensions credit, winter fuel allowance tv licences, attendance allowance DLA etc all included in the £163 BN "welfare budget" Oldies account for 80% of the bill JSA for 1.8% of the total "Benefit Expenditure by Country"
    So in order to counter the fact that these slips show a huge amount being spent on welfare, you are adding in an amount not included to claim that it's mostly spent on older people.

    Richard Nabavi is entirely correct that Labourites fail the Turing test these days.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited November 2014
    Simon Danczuk channels Chesterton's The Secret People in The Telegraph:

    "To many in the Metropolitan bubbles this is all quaint talk, as the working classes to them are an invisible people, an all but extinct tribe. But there’s a lot more of them than they realise and they won’t be beaten down and ignored forever."

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

    Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget,
    For we are the people of England, that never has spoken yet.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    edited November 2014
    chestnut said:

    antifrank said:

    On topic, I've been working for some time on a rule of thumb that the Lib Dem defectors will break 3:1 in Labour's favour over the Conservatives (of course, some will go to the SNP, UKIP and the Greens as well, but in most seats in England & Wales this is the vital split). I haven't seen any reason to abandon this rule of thumb yet.

    Doesn't that vary according to seat and region?

    Nuneaton stood out in the Ashcroft polls.

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Nuneaton-Full-tables-Oct-14.pdf

    More LD-Tory than LD-Lab.

    Todays Populus

    LAB 327 CON 277 LD 19 other 27 (ukpr)

    EICIPM

    According to that, UKIP, Greens, SNP & PC are on a combined 9 Seats.

    Really? I mean really?
    General statistical point, not arguing about these in particular. If you have a poll with a lot of results (whether it's a lot of subsamples or a lot of seats), one or two of them will be surprising due entirely to random distribution. It's a fundamental mistake to pick on that as showing something significant, unless it's confirmed by a further poll in the same place.
This discussion has been closed.