Labour can't be mad enough to for the hat-trick of disastrous errors, can they? So far they've made two massive blunder: (a) to have chosen Ed in the first place, and (b) not to have ditched him when it was obvious he'd be a disaster, i.e. about three years ago.
Going for (c): Ditching him a few months before a GE, would be suicidal.
Their best policy is to hope for the best, and if by some misfortune they find themselves in the nightmare scenario of actually being in government under Ed, ditch him then before the Labour brand is irrevocably tarnished.
I’m not sure; there’de be a lot of Press time for the new leader and, if the new Leader was personable and without too much baggage, it would be generally favourable .... pictures with smiling spouse, patting dog etc.
On the likelihood, you have to remember that there's a massive gulf between a few MPs openly questioning Ed's leadership, and a coup actually occurring. The former is hardly a surprise; the latter needs a concerted, unified, and very well-executed plot by a group of senior Shadow Ministers several of whom see themselves as the leader-in-waiting. Ain't gonna happen.
Changing the leader is all well and good, but what part of the political strategy would a putsch modify?
I really don't think that it is Miliband who is personally the problem. The problem is that Labour hasn't found a political strategy that combines being sensible with money while offering an alternative to Osborne's austerity. All they have at the moment is fiddling around the edges, but a £100bn budget deficit requires something bolder and more imaginative.
However, perhaps at this stage they are simply interested in damage limitation for GE2015 and trying to win the election in 2020. Seems a bit lame, really. What have these rebellious MPs been doing for the last four years? Sleeping?
Labour can't be mad enough to for the hat-trick of disastrous errors, can they? So far they've made two massive blunder: (a) to have chosen Ed in the first place, and (b) not to have ditched him when it was obvious he'd be a disaster, i.e. about three years ago.
Going for (c): Ditching him a few months before a GE, would be suicidal.
Their best policy is to hope for the best, and if by some misfortune they find themselves in the nightmare scenario of actually being in government under Ed, ditch him then before the Labour brand is irrevocably tarnished.
It wasn't just the disastrous speech that finished EdM, it was the Mansion Tax. The policy is the greatest political suicide since 1983.
With one of the stupidest and most ill-conceived policies ever devised he alienated a swathe of vital backers who live in London. The media have been at his throat ever since, and not just the media, but others who Tony Blair spent years woo-ing to the Labour soft-left cause: from people in film, actors, writers … movers and shakers who have a social conscience but don't want to think their homes might go.
He's an utter f-ing berk.
It wasn't the mansion tax - it was the having nothing else but the mansion tax.
The blank piece of paper has become the touchpaper to burn down his leadership.
But the Mansion Tax infuriated and scared people who matter: not just the proprietors, but editors, sub-editors of newspapers and television programmes, film directors, senior producers, actors, theatre managers, literary agents and writers … a huge swathe of people who are vital to keep onside if you want to win. You don't threaten people in London who work hard, but who are soft-left with a conscience, that they might have to give up their homes, which is how it looked.
What on earth was he thinking?
The people you're talking about simply don't exist. Virtually any middle-class person who is in the least bit inclined to vote Labour would ideologically be in favour of high taxes.
Of all the many problems that have doomed Labour/Ed, the mansion tax is not in the top 20.
I've certainly known a lot of high income Labour voters that believe in high taxes, but view "high" as ~40%, and protested the 50% rate under Gordon Brown. "I believe in paying for the NHS, but put up taxes too much and you'll scare off the wealthy" is the sort of line they would give.
“There’s no shame in voting Ukip,” a building worker told me. “We want Ukip. He’ll sort all this immigration out
Still believe in shy UKIP?
1. Some UKIP voters are not shy -> all UKIP voters are not shy.
2. Some trees are evergreen -> all trees are evergreen.
You do realise that your argument can be stated as 1. above and that it is exactly as valid as 2., do you?
That's not the argument. It's whether when properly prompted the polls systematically understate UKIP because some of their voters are shy to admit to it, I have yet to see any evidence - but this is like INDYREF revisited - those "with faith" need no data - and contrary data is irrelevant....
I don't have "faith", and the only evidence to test shyness, is actual outcomes. (You can't poll for it). So it remains and will remain a more or less plausible hypothesis unless and until we can compare say R&S result with the latest prompted poll.
Clacton didn't show any "shy UKIP" - the two bye-election polls showed UKIP ON 56 & 64 - they got 59.7.
What evidence do you have for shy UKIP?
When you decided you were going to use Clacton as an example didn't you think about an election held on the same day and consider checking if that proved or disproved your theory?
UKIP argued that their support grew over the Heywood campaign and had it been longer they would have won - no evidence of "shy UKIP" there.
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
Perhaps someone might emerge with a knife whilst Ed is on the road from Northampton, or something might break in time for news at 6. Fighting like Ferrets in a sack, can't be over that reshuffle either.
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
That would be one hell of a party political broadcast.
Labour can't be mad enough to for the hat-trick of disastrous errors, can they? So far they've made two massive blunder: (a) to have chosen Ed in the first place, and (b) not to have ditched him when it was obvious he'd be a disaster, i.e. about three years ago.
Going for (c): Ditching him a few months before a GE, would be suicidal.
Their best policy is to hope for the best, and if by some misfortune they find themselves in the nightmare scenario of actually being in government under Ed, ditch him then before the Labour brand is irrevocably tarnished.
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
Only because most of them don't believe that ghosts are a danger to their economic success. That's not true of the Euro. AfD are a very moderate group.
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
That would be one hell of a party political broadcast.
Who you gonna call (to make that party political broadcast)
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
That would be one hell of a party political broadcast.
Both parties campaigning on a "Something strange in your neighbourhood?" platform.
“There’s no shame in voting Ukip,” a building worker told me. “We want Ukip. He’ll sort all this immigration out
Still believe in shy UKIP?
1. Some UKIP voters are not shy -> all UKIP voters are not shy.
2. Some trees are evergreen -> all trees are evergreen.
You do realise that your argument can be stated as 1. above and that it is exactly as valid as 2., do you?
That's not the argument. It's whether when properly prompted the polls systematically understate UKIP because some of their voters are shy to admit to it, I have yet to see any evidence - but this is like INDYREF revisited - those "with faith" need no data - and contrary data is irrelevant....
I don't have "faith", and the only evidence to test shyness, is actual outcomes. (You can't poll for it). So it remains and will remain a more or less plausible hypothesis unless and until we can compare say R&S result with the latest prompted poll.
Clacton didn't show any "shy UKIP" - the two bye-election polls showed UKIP ON 56 & 64 - they got 59.7.
What evidence do you have for shy UKIP?
When you decided you were going to use Clacton as an example didn't you think about an election held on the same day and consider checking if that proved or disproved your theory?
UKIP argued that their support grew over the Heywood campaign and had it been longer they would have won - no evidence of "shy UKIP" there.
What evidence do you have?
Well you disagree, but I still say that the massive jump when prompted is evidence of shy kippers
If someone is reluctant to say something unless prompted, it is often down to shyness or reluctance
If you can cite Clacton as evidence of there not being shy kippers while dismissing the Heywood and Middleton election where they beat the poll by 9% then I don't think anything will convince you.. you have made your mind up
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
That would be one hell of a party political broadcast.
Who you gonna call (to make that party political broadcast)
“There’s no shame in voting Ukip,” a building worker told me. “We want Ukip. He’ll sort all this immigration out
Still believe in shy UKIP?
1. Some UKIP voters are not shy -> all UKIP voters are not shy.
2. Some trees are evergreen -> all trees are evergreen.
You do realise that your argument can be stated as 1. above and that it is exactly as valid as 2., do you?
That's not the argument. It's whether when properly prompted the polls systematically understate UKIP because some of their voters are shy to admit to it, I have yet to see any evidence - but this is like INDYREF revisited - those "with faith" need no data - and contrary data is irrelevant....
I don't have "faith", and the only evidence to test shyness, is actual outcomes. (You can't poll for it). So it remains and will remain a more or less plausible hypothesis unless and until we can compare say R&S result with the latest prompted poll.
Clacton didn't show any "shy UKIP" - the two bye-election polls showed UKIP ON 56 & 64 - they got 59.7.
What evidence do you have for shy UKIP?
When you decided you were going to use Clacton as an example didn't you think about an election held on the same day and consider checking if that proved or disproved your theory?
UKIP argued that their support grew over the Heywood campaign and had it been longer they would have won - no evidence of "shy UKIP" there.
What evidence do you have?
Well you disagree, but I still say that the massive jump when prompted is evidence of shy kippers
If someone is reluctant to say something unless prompted, it is often down to shyness or reluctance
If you can cite Clacton as evidence of there not being shy kippers while dismissing the Heywood and Middleton election where they beat the poll by 9% then I don't think anything will convince you.. you have made your mind up
So have I so shall we leave it?
What about the Euros? Of the 19 polls conducted in May, 12 overestimated UKIP support, 7 underestimated it. No evidence of "shy UKIP" there......
'Perhaps the only solution is if they do “a Michael Howard” who by common agreement in 2003 was the only contender when IDS lost a confidence vote.'
As I've already explained, the rules don't permit such a scenario.
i) There is no provision for a "confidence vote." Either the leader must be directly challenged before an annual conference with the challenger having the requisite number of nominations, or he stays in place until he resigns or dies.
ii) in the event of resignation, Harman automatically gets the job (as she did in 2010). Then the NEC must decide whether to leave it at that, or open up a fresh leadership election.
iii) If they go for an election, the only way it could be a coronation is if all MPs, MEPs, CLPs and Unions magically coalesce around one nominee. Remember, this is the Labour party...
In theory Ed would be easier to remove than either Brown or Blair because he has no Labour powerbase. Against that, though, there is no obvious successor. The one man who could virtually guarantee a strong, sustainable poll bounce is not interested in the job.
Margie B @margielondon 1m1 minute ago LBC radio wants to hear from anybody who supports Ed Miliband (now live) http://www.lbc.co.uk/ < good luck with that. #SaveEd
1) The term herd or nits is not acceptable on here
2) Ninoinoz - You've been told the topics off limits to you - Please adhere to that
3) MalcolmG - You've been warned about swearing at other posters, you know the consequences of if you don't adhere to that
4) Socrates - Appropriate action has been taken against Hugh
Moderation is going to be light today, anyone who can't post here unsupervised will be smote by the ban hammer on our return.
Who did I swear at , queer world you live in if "To**er" is swearing. Time you got out and about a bit more.
Any chance you can publish your Etiquette list so that one may know when one is in fact unwittingly swearing. I seem to live in a less sheltered world than PB.
“There’s no shame in voting Ukip,” a building worker told me. “We want Ukip. He’ll sort all this immigration out
Still believe in shy UKIP?
1. Some UKIP voters are not shy -> all UKIP voters are not shy.
2. Some trees are evergreen -> all trees are evergreen.
You do realise that your argument can be stated as 1. above and that it is exactly as valid as 2., do you?
That's not the argument. It's whether when properly prompted the polls systematically understate UKIP because some of their voters are shy to admit to it, I have yet to see any evidence - but this is like INDYREF revisited - those "with faith" need no data - and contrary data is irrelevant....
I don't have "faith", and the only evidence to test shyness, is actual outcomes. (You can't poll for it). So it remains and will remain a more or less plausible hypothesis unless and until we can compare say R&S result with the latest prompted poll.
Clacton didn't show any "shy UKIP" - the two bye-election polls showed UKIP ON 56 & 64 - they got 59.7.
What evidence do you have for shy UKIP?
When you decided you were going to use Clacton as an example didn't you think about an election held on the same day and consider checking if that proved or disproved your theory?
UKIP argued that their support grew over the Heywood campaign and had it been longer they would have won - no evidence of "shy UKIP" there.
What evidence do you have?
Well you disagree, but I still say that the massive jump when prompted is evidence of shy kippers
If someone is reluctant to say something unless prompted, it is often down to shyness or reluctance
If you can cite Clacton as evidence of there not being shy kippers while dismissing the Heywood and Middleton election where they beat the poll by 9% then I don't think anything will convince you.. you have made your mind up
So have I so shall we leave it?
What about the Euros? Of the 19 polls conducted in May, 12 overestimated UKIP support, 7 underestimated it. No evidence of "shy UKIP" there......
AIFE
Do you want to argue all day? I am not convinced by your arguments, and you aren't by mine, so I ham happy to agree to disagree, I don't care enough to be bothered
"Ed Miliband is facing open calls from his own MPs to stand down amid growing concerns that he will cost his party the General Election.
Two MPs are understood to have told David Watts, the chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, that they believe it is time for Mr Miliband to go.
One MP said: "We are down to 29 per cent in the polls and that could go down further. He is less popular than Nick Clegg and he will cost us votes at the General Election."
The flip side of this, of course, is the Tory backbenchers having the sense not to send in 46 letters demanding a leadership election on Cameron. If I were him, I'd be charming their socks off right now.
Cameron needs to navigate the EAW vote, the EU "bill", his EU immigration reform proposal, and Rochester. If he get to Christmas unscathed, he'll be fine, and the Tories have a good chance of winning next May.
@Socrates -further to your poppy plan -I actually think your idea of bringing the poppies to Edinburgh Castle has real legs. I might suggest it to some people up here and see if anyone agrees.
I think it would be great to have different parts of the country get a chance to see it. It would also show how the soldiers came from all corners of this land (and beyond). Getting it covered on the news every year when it started somewhere fresh would be a great way of making sure we don't forget the Fallen and what they sacrificed as the last survivors pass on.
It's quite politically well timed too -it would raise Edinburgh's profile but at the same time be quite all embracing at a time when narrow nationalist sentiment is riding high.
Like most good ideas -it probably won't happen. But who knows?
So your motivation is political rather than commemorative? And narrowly nationalist, therefore, in the unionist sense of nationalism?
Commemorative -a happy by-product being that it commemorates our ancestor's joint sacrifice in the cause of freedom.
I'm sure there was absolutely no political motivation in the massive Bannockburn commemorations in the year of the referendum was there?
On topic if Labour didn't ditch Brown when their polling was lower than snake testicles, then they won't ditch Ed when he's leading in the polls
Brown was a big clunking fist, and everybody was frightened of him. Can you imagine being scared of ed miliband?
Ed is ruthless.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Ed, for lack of a better word, is good. Ed is right, Ed works. Ed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the (R)evolutionary spirit. Ed, in all of his forms; Ed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Ed, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK. Thank you very much.
It wasn't just the disastrous speech that finished EdM, it was the Mansion Tax. The policy is the greatest political suicide since 1983.
With one of the stupidest and most ill-conceived policies ever devised he alienated a swathe of vital backers who live in London. The media have been at his throat ever since, and not just the media, but others who Tony Blair spent years woo-ing to the Labour soft-left cause: from people in film, actors, writers … movers and shakers who have a social conscience but don't want to think their homes might go.
He's an utter f-ing berk.
It wasn't the mansion tax - it was the having nothing else but the mansion tax.
The blank piece of paper has become the touchpaper to burn down his leadership.
But the Mansion Tax infuriated and scared people who matter: not just the proprietors, but editors, sub-editors of newspapers and television programmes, film directors, senior producers, actors, theatre managers, literary agents and writers … a huge swathe of people who are vital to keep onside if you want to win. You don't threaten people in London who work hard, but who are soft-left with a conscience, that they might have to give up their homes, which is how it looked.
What on earth was he thinking?
The people you're talking about simply don't exist. Virtually any middle-class person who is in the least bit inclined to vote Labour would ideologically be in favour of high taxes.
Of all the many problems that have doomed Labour/Ed, the mansion tax is not in the top 20.
I've certainly known a lot of high income Labour voters that believe in high taxes, but view "high" as ~40%, and protested the 50% rate under Gordon Brown. "I believe in paying for the NHS, but put up taxes too much and you'll scare off the wealthy" is the sort of line they would give.
A rare moment when I agree with you Socrates.
I've spent too long in this game to concede this one. I'll do so sometimes and on some things, but NuLab were very much as you state here.
Re. the poll link: the point is that the current betting is not commensurate with the opinion polls. Odds are tilted more to the Conservatives than is justified on a straight poll reading. Do I really have to spell that out? Sigh.
To whoever asked about my wins, my largest have actually been non political although I won very happily at 16/1 a few years ago on a political bet. Don't want to go into too many details on that one. Two big wins on Arsenal which I tend to keep quiet about amongst my Spurs brothers. I try not to bet on things I like or want because I don't trust myself to be impartial enough for sound judgement. More anon. Got to dash.
On topic if Labour didn't ditch Brown when their polling was lower than snake testicles, then they won't ditch Ed when he's leading in the polls
Brown was a big clunking fist, and everybody was frightened of him. Can you imagine being scared of ed miliband?
Ed is ruthless.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
I disagree. Brown was ruthless too; he was just patient as well.
The difference is that people respected Brown which gave him supporters, including many ardent ones (that some were default, as anti-Blairite, is beside the point), and that gave him power. Miliband doesn't have that. Political power is essentially an illusion and based almost solely on what people believe, and what they are willing to do. At the moment, Ed's power is largely negative: the power to stop things happening (including his own removal); he cannot actively lead until he regains respect. The problem is that he will find it difficult to regain respect unless he is visibly seen to be leading.
On topic if Labour didn't ditch Brown when their polling was lower than snake testicles, then they won't ditch Ed when he's leading in the polls
Brown was a big clunking fist, and everybody was frightened of him. Can you imagine being scared of ed miliband?
Ed is ruthless.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Ed, for lack of a better word, is good. Ed is right, Ed works. Ed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the (R)evolutionary spirit. Ed, in all of his forms; Ed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Ed, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK. Thank you very much.
If Ed was a pop band he'd be Aqua to Dave's Backstreet Boys.
On topic if Labour didn't ditch Brown when their polling was lower than snake testicles, then they won't ditch Ed when he's leading in the polls
Brown was a big clunking fist, and everybody was frightened of him. Can you imagine being scared of ed miliband?
Ed is ruthless.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
I disagree. Brown was ruthless too; he was just patient as well.
The difference is that people respected Brown which gave him supporters, including many ardent ones (that some were default, as anti-Blairite, is beside the point), and that gave him power. Miliband doesn't have that. Political power is essentially an illusion and based almost solely on what people believe, and what they are willing to do. At the moment, Ed's power is largely negative: the power to stop things happening (including his own removal); he cannot actively lead until he regains respect. The problem is that he will find it difficult to regain respect unless he is visibly seen to be leading.
This is true.
It is all amusing to remember that at one point Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor of all time.
1) The term herd or nits is not acceptable on here
2) Ninoinoz - You've been told the topics off limits to you - Please adhere to that
3) MalcolmG - You've been warned about swearing at other posters, you know the consequences of if you don't adhere to that
4) Socrates - Appropriate action has been taken against Hugh
Moderation is going to be light today, anyone who can't post here unsupervised will be smote by the ban hammer on our return.
Who did I swear at , queer world you live in if "To**er" is swearing. Time you got out and about a bit more.
Any chance you can publish your Etiquette list so that one may know when one is in fact unwittingly swearing. I seem to live in a less sheltered world than PB.
Stop whinging Turnip.
Presumably you were one of the big jessies crying like a wee bairn, when the 'nasty' firework people tried to burn an effigy of Eck yesterday.
On topic, no they won't replace him and he won't stand down. It's not simply that Cooper, Balls, Burnham, Johnson and the other leaders would have to agree to act in unison; so would the unions and the dissenters from the Blairite right and (more relevantly) the dissenting left, who also would have to refrain from putting forward a candidate were Miliband to be forced out.
Calls for Miliband to 'up his game' are simply that: calls to up his game. There might be despair mixed in but there's no great threat.
One other major risk in indulging in in-fighting at this stage: it gives the Tories, Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP the opportunity to take two months' worth of free hits at whichever part of Labour's vote they're targetting, while Team Red has no opportunity to respond because they have no policies and nothing to promise.
while Team Red has no opportunity to respond because they have no policies and nothing to promise.
But that is the case now. Atleast some infighting might force some policies to materialise at some point before the election, which is a lot better than them being "unified" behind their current vacuous non-stances on everything that matters.
On topic if Labour didn't ditch Brown when their polling was lower than snake testicles, then they won't ditch Ed when he's leading in the polls
Brown was a big clunking fist, and everybody was frightened of him. Can you imagine being scared of ed miliband?
Ed is ruthless.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
I disagree. Brown was ruthless too; he was just patient as well.
The difference is that people respected Brown which gave him supporters, including many ardent ones (that some were default, as anti-Blairite, is beside the point), and that gave him power. Miliband doesn't have that. Political power is essentially an illusion and based almost solely on what people believe, and what they are willing to do. At the moment, Ed's power is largely negative: the power to stop things happening (including his own removal); he cannot actively lead until he regains respect. The problem is that he will find it difficult to regain respect unless he is visibly seen to be leading.
This is true.
It is all amusing to remember that at one point Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor of all time.
Didn't one of those "best PM" surverys recently give Brown a higher rating than Cameron?
If the AfD started getting 24%, that would shake up German politics.
Sure, but lots of the 24% who don't like the Euro will have other priorities. 20% of British voters believe in ghosts, but that doesn't mean that Ghostbusters is going to beat UKIP in the election.
Only because most of them don't believe that ghosts are a danger to their economic success. That's not true of the Euro. AfD are a very moderate group.
They're currently on 7-8%. It's probably reasonable to assume that a quarter of the 24% do think the Euro is a risk to their success, and then they get some more votes for other reasons. The rest of the 24% are dubious about the Euro if you ask them, but it's not a party-switching issue for them.
But my original point was that German voters are OVERWHELMINGLY pro-Euro. From time to time people here say that Germany might abandon the Euro under some circumstances. It's a misreading of German politics.
Two MPs are understood to have told David Watts, the chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, that they believe it is time for Mr Miliband to go.
One MP said: "We are down to 29 per cent in the polls and that could go down further. He is less popular than Nick Clegg and he will cost us votes at the General Election.
"We are hearing it on the doorstep. People are saying 'you are doing an alright job but we don't like your leader'. He is costing me votes."
@DavidGauke: Labour MPs not rushing to back Ed Miliband this pm but the union barons are. They put him there & they'll keep him there. Hopefully. #SaveEd
One other major risk in indulging in in-fighting at this stage: it gives the Tories, Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP the opportunity to take two months' worth of free hits at whichever part of Labour's vote they're targetting, while Team Red has no opportunity to respond because they have no policies and nothing to promise.
No policies and nothing to promise - that's different to how things are under Team Ed how exactly?
On topic if Labour didn't ditch Brown when their polling was lower than snake testicles, then they won't ditch Ed when he's leading in the polls
Brown was a big clunking fist, and everybody was frightened of him. Can you imagine being scared of ed miliband?
Ed is ruthless.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
I disagree. Brown was ruthless too; he was just patient as well.
The difference is that people respected Brown which gave him supporters, including many ardent ones (that some were default, as anti-Blairite, is beside the point), and that gave him power. Miliband doesn't have that. Political power is essentially an illusion and based almost solely on what people believe, and what they are willing to do. At the moment, Ed's power is largely negative: the power to stop things happening (including his own removal); he cannot actively lead until he regains respect. The problem is that he will find it difficult to regain respect unless he is visibly seen to be leading.
This is true.
It is all amusing to remember that at one point Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor of all time.
Didn't one of those "best PM" surverys recently give Brown a higher rating than Cameron?
And that’s surprising? Brown only alienated those close to him. Cameron’s being rude to the neighbours. Not for any advantage to the country, but just to make it sound good at home.
1) The term herd or nits is not acceptable on here
2) Ninoinoz - You've been told the topics off limits to you - Please adhere to that
3) MalcolmG - You've been warned about swearing at other posters, you know the consequences of if you don't adhere to that
4) Socrates - Appropriate action has been taken against Hugh
Moderation is going to be light today, anyone who can't post here unsupervised will be smote by the ban hammer on our return.
Who did I swear at , queer world you live in if "To**er" is swearing. Time you got out and about a bit more.
Any chance you can publish your Etiquette list so that one may know when one is in fact unwittingly swearing. I seem to live in a less sheltered world than PB.
Stop whinging Turnip.
Presumably you were one of the big jessies crying like a wee bairn, when the 'nasty' firework people tried to burn an effigy of Eck yesterday.
Back under your rock you half witted cretinous bag of vomit
I really want to like him, and think his delivery/style is good, but find his dialogue really boring after a while, and then realise I haven't laughed once
The Watcher is the funniest PBer IMO, should be a kipper.. second is undoubtedly "The Corniche Camel"...
1) The term herd or nits is not acceptable on here
2) Ninoinoz - You've been told the topics off limits to you - Please adhere to that
3) MalcolmG - You've been warned about swearing at other posters, you know the consequences of if you don't adhere to that
4) Socrates - Appropriate action has been taken against Hugh
Moderation is going to be light today, anyone who can't post here unsupervised will be smote by the ban hammer on our return.
Who did I swear at , queer world you live in if "To**er" is swearing. Time you got out and about a bit more.
Any chance you can publish your Etiquette list so that one may know when one is in fact unwittingly swearing. I seem to live in a less sheltered world than PB.
Stop whinging Turnip.
Presumably you were one of the big jessies crying like a wee bairn, when the 'nasty' firework people tried to burn an effigy of Eck yesterday.
Back under your rock you half witted cretinous bag of vomit
With sweet talk like that, you must have been a big hitter with the Glasgow ladies back in the day.
Is that the line that won over Mrs G? (After you'd clubbed her)
I really want to like him, and think his delivery/style is good, but find his dialogue really boring after a while, and then realise I haven't laughed once
The Watcher is the funniest PBer IMO, should be a kipper.. second is undoubtedly "The Corniche Camel"...
Tissue Price's comment earlier about both UKIP and a Ghostbusters party campaigning on a "Something strange in your neighbourhood?" platform made me burst out laughing in the office.
My god, this is a toe-curlingly bad performance from EdM. Repeating the same slogans to four questions within a minute. He comes across as an utter weirdo (again). In times gone by I suspect the BBC would have cut this to show just one of the answer, but now, with blood in the water...
First chunk of the Panelbase poll commissioned by Wings: pretty much confirms past reports of VI on Westminster, and opinion re indyref (though more SLAB and Tory friendly than some).
Clearly this is not good for Miliband but I doubt it will come to anything. I also doubt there are as many overtly calling for his resignation as there are letters calling for Cameron's being held by the 1922 committee.
As for the contenders Burnham is risible , the Nick Clegg of the Labour Party, Cooper is credible but hardly someone who would make one sit up and listen, Umanna? Not even George Osborne can sneer down his nose as well as Chuckie. Johnson? a doormat to be walked over. Which only leaves the other Ed and despite all his shortcomings he is probably the best Labour has to offer. Seriously though can anyone see Ed Balls in 10 Downing Street? Its even more bizarre than the idea of Ed Miliband crossing the threshold
First chunk of the Panelbase poll commissioned by Wings: pretty much confirms past reports of VI on Westminster, and opinion re indyref (though more SLAB and Tory friendly than some).
A good meme for the Tories to push now is that Ed Miliband is only staying in his job because that is who the unions want there. Not the MPs. Not the members. Just the union paymasters. And it shows how Ed as a Labour Prime Minister would be owned by the unions.
It may be toss, but it will be toss that resonates.
Then if Ed does go, Cameron can say "Unite pulled the rug out from under him...even they had had enough." But they can continue to run the line through to May if he stays.
@tnewtondunn: Ed Mili on a leadership challenge: "I don't accept that this matter arises". Hm. Never a great idea to talk fluent gobbledygook in a crisis.
My god, this is a toe-curlingly bad performance from EdM. Repeating the same slogans to four questions within a minute. He comes across as an utter weirdo (again). In times gone by I suspect the BBC would have cut this to show just one of the answer, but now, with blood in the water...
My god, this is a toe-curlingly bad performance from EdM. Repeating the same slogans to four questions within a minute. He comes across as an utter weirdo (again). In times gone by I suspect the BBC would have cut this to show just one of the answer, but now, with blood in the water...
First chunk of the Panelbase poll commissioned by Wings: pretty much confirms past reports of VI on Westminster, and opinion re indyref (though more SLAB and Tory friendly than some).
More to come later: I'm particularly interested in seeing the opinions re SLAB leaders.
So we have three polls from the same time all showing large to epic SNP leads. We can take it with some confidence that was indeed the position last week.
What we really need is another Scotland-only poll in a couple of weeks' time to see whether that lead is sustained. If it is, those Scottish constituency prices will look extremely tempting again.
Comments
I’m not sure; there’de be a lot of Press time for the new leader and, if the new Leader was personable and without too much baggage, it would be generally favourable .... pictures with smiling spouse, patting dog etc.
The giddy heights of a morale boosting 1% lead with YouGov are well and truly over.
I really don't think that it is Miliband who is personally the problem. The problem is that Labour hasn't found a political strategy that combines being sensible with money while offering an alternative to Osborne's austerity. All they have at the moment is fiddling around the edges, but a £100bn budget deficit requires something bolder and more imaginative.
However, perhaps at this stage they are simply interested in damage limitation for GE2015 and trying to win the election in 2020. Seems a bit lame, really. What have these rebellious MPs been doing for the last four years? Sleeping?
What evidence do you have?
@benatipsosmori: @bbclaurak i havent been able to find anyone outside the very inner circle who is a fan - inc shadow cabinet
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11213653/Labour-MPs-say-Ed-Miliband-must-go.html
Perhaps someone might emerge with a knife whilst Ed is on the road from Northampton, or something might break in time for news at 6. Fighting like Ferrets in a sack, can't be over that reshuffle either.
Miliband backed to get the chop; Burnham leadership odds tumble. http://wp.me/p4Dp6d-mG
If someone is reluctant to say something unless prompted, it is often down to shyness or reluctance
If you can cite Clacton as evidence of there not being shy kippers while dismissing the Heywood and Middleton election where they beat the poll by 9% then I don't think anything will convince you.. you have made your mind up
So have I so shall we leave it?
Please don't ditch Ed.
It would be greatest strategic blunder since the Minbari surrendered at the Battle of the Line on the cusp of victory.
Love the Tory Party.
Yvette (iPhone tried to autocorrect to 'über the'!!) Cooper 50/1 to be PM, 7/2 fav next Lab leader
I wonder if Shadsy's in the middle of updating it?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDR1NHZVS0ozZkpaYVlPV2d4WHR5ZXc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
It's now nearly right but not quite:
The 2-3 Nov YouGov was 33/34 not 32/33.
Don't know if anyone can fix it.
As I've already explained, the rules don't permit such a scenario.
i) There is no provision for a "confidence vote." Either the leader must be directly challenged before an annual conference with the challenger having the requisite number of nominations, or he stays in place until he resigns or dies.
ii) in the event of resignation, Harman automatically gets the job (as she did in 2010). Then the NEC must decide whether to leave it at that, or open up a fresh leadership election.
iii) If they go for an election, the only way it could be a coronation is if all MPs, MEPs, CLPs and Unions magically coalesce around one nominee. Remember, this is the Labour party...
I am not wrong. I am demlnstrably correct - as the link you have just posted shows!
A few years ago it was discussed on here how Government fortunes are linked to petrol prices.
Well they've come down a lot in recent weeks (and may well fall further) - seems plausible this may be having an effect on voting intentions.
Neil Henderson @hendopolis · 6 mins6 minutes ago
STANDARD: Poppies campaign - Cameron steps in #tomorrowspaperstoday
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/530379163698753537/photo/1
PBModerator said:
Site Notice
1) The term herd or nits is not acceptable on here
2) Ninoinoz - You've been told the topics off limits to you - Please adhere to that
3) MalcolmG - You've been warned about swearing at other posters, you know the consequences of if you don't adhere to that
4) Socrates - Appropriate action has been taken against Hugh
Moderation is going to be light today, anyone who can't post here unsupervised will be smote by the ban hammer on our return.
Who did I swear at , queer world you live in if "To**er" is swearing. Time you got out and about a bit more.
Any chance you can publish your Etiquette list so that one may know when one is in fact unwittingly swearing. I seem to live in a less sheltered world than PB.
Do you want to argue all day? I am not convinced by your arguments, and you aren't by mine, so I ham happy to agree to disagree, I don't care enough to be bothered
Two MPs are understood to have told David Watts, the chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, that they believe it is time for Mr Miliband to go.
One MP said: "We are down to 29 per cent in the polls and that could go down further. He is less popular than Nick Clegg and he will cost us votes at the General Election."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11213653/Labour-MPs-say-Ed-Miliband-must-go.html
Cameron needs to navigate the EAW vote, the EU "bill", his EU immigration reform proposal, and Rochester. If he get to Christmas unscathed, he'll be fine, and the Tories have a good chance of winning next May.
Brown was a coward and waited years to become leader.
Whereas Ed stabbed his brother in the front to become leader.
Apparently whoever does it reads this so hopefully they will fix it.
I'm sure there was absolutely no political motivation in the massive Bannockburn commemorations in the year of the referendum was there?
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/nov/05/stewart-lee-the-imaginary-liberal-comedy-cabal-will-crush-the-ukips-into-dust
He's surprisingly funny on this occasion.
Blair could invade countries quite easily but he never got rid of Brown from number 11
I've spent too long in this game to concede this one. I'll do so sometimes and on some things, but NuLab were very much as you state here.
Re. the poll link: the point is that the current betting is not commensurate with the opinion polls. Odds are tilted more to the Conservatives than is justified on a straight poll reading. Do I really have to spell that out? Sigh.
To whoever asked about my wins, my largest have actually been non political although I won very happily at 16/1 a few years ago on a political bet. Don't want to go into too many details on that one. Two big wins on Arsenal which I tend to keep quiet about amongst my Spurs brothers. I try not to bet on things I like or want because I don't trust myself to be impartial enough for sound judgement. More anon. Got to dash.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/14/11/06/0435252/terrorists-used-false-dmca-claims-to-get-personal-data-of-anti-islamic-youtuber
It's about time our governments realise that personal data needs to be private.
The difference is that people respected Brown which gave him supporters, including many ardent ones (that some were default, as anti-Blairite, is beside the point), and that gave him power. Miliband doesn't have that. Political power is essentially an illusion and based almost solely on what people believe, and what they are willing to do. At the moment, Ed's power is largely negative: the power to stop things happening (including his own removal); he cannot actively lead until he regains respect. The problem is that he will find it difficult to regain respect unless he is visibly seen to be leading.
From a betting view, this is exciting and we need Yvette installed IMMEDIATELY. As that will recoup all my pig-dog traitor losses.... maybe.
Still can't remember how much and with whom I put the bet....
It is all amusing to remember that at one point Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor of all time.
Presumably you were one of the big jessies crying like a wee bairn, when the 'nasty' firework people tried to burn an effigy of Eck yesterday.
@GlynLey: @MShapland "Now is not the time to have a leadership election, whilst negotiations are still ongoing." #RobotMiliband
Calls for Miliband to 'up his game' are simply that: calls to up his game. There might be despair mixed in but there's no great threat.
One other major risk in indulging in in-fighting at this stage: it gives the Tories, Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP the opportunity to take two months' worth of free hits at whichever part of Labour's vote they're targetting, while Team Red has no opportunity to respond because they have no policies and nothing to promise.
You said "as everyone who has studied politics knows". That statement is demonstrably wrong.
But my original point was that German voters are OVERWHELMINGLY pro-Euro. From time to time people here say that Germany might abandon the Euro under some circumstances. It's a misreading of German politics.
Two MPs are understood to have told David Watts, the chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, that they believe it is time for Mr Miliband to go.
One MP said: "We are down to 29 per cent in the polls and that could go down further. He is less popular than Nick Clegg and he will cost us votes at the General Election.
"We are hearing it on the doorstep. People are saying 'you are doing an alright job but we don't like your leader'. He is costing me votes."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11212072/Russian-actor-and-Putin-critic-found-dead-in-Moscow.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/05/eu-facing-questions-dismissal-prosecutor-alleged-corruption
Nowhere on the BBC....
The Watcher is the funniest PBer IMO, should be a kipper.. second is undoubtedly "The Corniche Camel"...
Is that the line that won over Mrs G? (After you'd clubbed her)
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/scotland/boom-lewes-did-blow-up-an-alex-salmond-effigy-1.668480
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29935172
http://wingsoverscotland.com/labours-twilight/
More to come later: I'm particularly interested in seeing the opinions re SLAB leaders.
As for the contenders Burnham is risible , the Nick Clegg of the Labour Party, Cooper is credible but hardly someone who would make one sit up and listen, Umanna? Not even George Osborne can sneer down his nose as well as Chuckie. Johnson? a doormat to be walked over. Which only leaves the other Ed and despite all his shortcomings he is probably the best Labour has to offer. Seriously though can anyone see Ed Balls in 10 Downing Street? Its even more bizarre than the idea of Ed Miliband crossing the threshold
It may be toss, but it will be toss that resonates.
Then if Ed does go, Cameron can say "Unite pulled the rug out from under him...even they had had enough." But they can continue to run the line through to May if he stays.
The words to put a chill down Ed's spine:
"Ed - I've got Len on the line for you...."
Always kick a man when he is down. Still, quite a remarkable achievement for a Labour leader.
And people wonder why there's a UKIP...
http://www.chiltonwilliamson.com/articles/wwwtw_synthetic_syntheses.html
http://www.vdare.com/articles/anarcho-tyranny-where-multiculturalism-leads
What we really need is another Scotland-only poll in a couple of weeks' time to see whether that lead is sustained. If it is, those Scottish constituency prices will look extremely tempting again.