They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville.
If they were they would have been named - the Exaro website is clear both are still alive.
While these cases of historic abuse certainly need to be investigated, I do think much more recent abuse - on apparently orders of magnitude greater scale - deserve even more attention......
I think if this is as serious as it sounds they should both be properly investigated with equal vigour.
Just seen Interstellar, visually stunning, yet like most Christopher Nolan films I came out more confused than I was at the beginning
I've yet to see Interstellar, but early last year I did a little Chris Nolan marathon. I watched his first feature, Following, then Insomnia, Memento, The Prestige, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Inception and The Dark Knight Rises.
I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I love Inception!
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville.
If they were they would have been named - the Exaro website is clear both are still alive.
While these cases of historic abuse certainly need to be investigated, I do think much more recent abuse - on apparently orders of magnitude greater scale - deserve even more attention......
I think if this is as serious as it sounds they should both be properly investigated with equal vigour.
And yet they're both being investigated with equal lack of vigour.
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
Oddly enough, that is the first Scottish sub-sample I have seen recently that hints at normal politics being resumed up here in the aftermath of the Indy Referendum.
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
She is. She's seriously going after Labour's vote in Scotland by making Ed an offer she knows he'll refuse.......
Oddly enough, that is the first Scottish sub-sample I have seen recently that hints at normal politics being resumed up here in the aftermath of the Indy Referendum.
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
The obsession of Welsh and Scottish nationalist politicians to dictate how the English are governed never ceases to amaze me.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
It actually says the other MP was a Conservative minister
I've got a feeling though that both of these MPs were dead before Jimmy Saville.
If they were they would have been named - the Exaro website is clear both are still alive.
While these cases of historic abuse certainly need to be investigated, I do think much more recent abuse - on apparently orders of magnitude greater scale - deserve even more attention......
I think if this is as serious as it sounds they should both be properly investigated with equal vigour.
And yet they're both being investigated with equal lack of vigour.
I thought that the police are investigating a potential homicide. Sounds a fairly serious investigation to me.
In Leics our PCC is investigating 25 years of child abuse allegations following the Rotherham report.
At least in some quarters the issue is being taken seriously.
The problem is not unique to the UK if you read this account:
"A British surgeon who was due to stand trial for assault has fled the country and become a senior leader of the Taliban in Pakistan.
Mirza Tariq Ali, 39, who practised in the NHS, evaded the UK authorities despite having his passport taken from him while awaiting trial at the Old Bailey."
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
As I said at the time, the s**t is seriously going to hit the fan. The location of Dolphin Square will be familiar for anyone who has followed this story, and is a very big thing to have come out. Political party destroyingly-big.
I'm familiar with the location, having lived in pimlico and worked at 30 millbank (though not in any kind of politics related job), but no idea of what story you mean
Sunil If you liked Inception you will like Interstellar, the end was just as confusing
Well that is a deliberately ambiguous ending to force the audience to ask if Cobb (Leonardo di Caprio) was dreaming that he was reunited with his kids - or not!
Interstellar is a great film while you're watching it, but you forget most of it a few hours after watching IMO, apart from the special effects. Good, but nothing like 2001 A Space Odyssey for example, which you do remember.
"A new book has branded Thailand one of the world’s most dangerous tourist destinations.
Australian author John Stapleton suggests that widespread police corruption, violence and crime are all blighting a country once commonly referred to as the ‘Land of Smiles’.
In his book Thailand: Deadly Destination, Mr Stapleton attempts to expose the reputation of Thailand as a welcoming country, claiming a boom in tourism since the 1960s has created a hatred of foreigners and a ‘murderous indifference’ to the millions of tourists who flock to the country’s white-sand beaches, picturesque countryside and thriving nightlife each year."
Sunil/AndyJS Indeed, but Nolan is clearly in the Kubrick mould and it keeps you interested
The best quasi-Kubrick film of the year so far is Jonathan Glazer's Under The Skin IMO, starring Scarlet Johannson. I was so impressed by it I went to see it five times.
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
"A British surgeon who was due to stand trial for assault has fled the country and become a senior leader of the Taliban in Pakistan.
Mirza Tariq Ali, 39, who practised in the NHS, evaded the UK authorities despite having his passport taken from him while awaiting trial at the Old Bailey."
How does he get to show up there and walk right into a senior leader position? Do the Taliban have some kind of qualification passporting scheme where a certain pay-grade in the NHS and a number of years served as a junior doctor is considered equivalent to x years of terrorism experience?
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
I think the focus on the party, rather than the profession and access to power is problematic - especially given it is unlikely that politicians from only one party were involved.
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
So you think that every single politician within any political party should be fair game for collective speculation of having carried out horrific crimes until such time as social media or the press produce a list or a name which fits the witch hunters profile? And you think my sympathy for those that might then be mistakenly identified in this rather unfair witch hunt is some how misplaced! I would rather you back up my desire to see specific individuals being arrested and brought to justice by being convicted on the back of hard evidence to corroborate their crimes rather than just trial by smears and innuendo online?!
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
I think that the law regarding what information may or may not be released into the public domain about alleged perpetrators should be observed, with no special privileges because the person concerned happens to be a politician. My discomfort lies in the fact that stories like this were kept out of the public domain for so long, not that they are being reported now. I find it hard to fathom the opposite view.
So you think that every single politician within any political party should be fair game for collective speculation of having carried out horrific crimes until such time as social media or the press produce a list or a name which fits the witch hunters profile? And you think my sympathy for those that might then be mistakenly identified in this rather unfair witch hunt is some how misplaced! I would rather you back up my desire to see specific individuals being arrested and brought to justice by being convicted on the back of hard evidence to corroborate their crimes rather than just trial by smears and innuendo online?!
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
I think the focus on the party, rather than the profession and access to power is problematic - especially given it is unlikely that politicians from only one party were involved.
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
That is not a view that you in any way conveyed in that totally unfair and very flippant remark you made in response to my post on this subject. I doubt that you even bothered to read, never mind digest the very relevant points I r
I think that the law regarding what information may or may not be released into the public domain about alleged perpetrators should be observed, with no special privileges because the person concerned happens to be a politician. My discomfort lies in the fact that stories like this were kept out of the public domain for so long, not that they are being reported now. I find it hard to fathom the opposite view.
So you think that every single politician within any political party should be fair game for collective speculation of having carried out horrific crimes until such time as social media or the press produce a list or a name which fits the witch hunters profile? And you think my sympathy for those that might then be mistakenly identified in this rather unfair witch hunt is some how misplaced! I would rather you back up my desire to see specific individuals being arrested and brought to justice by being convicted on the back of hard evidence to corroborate their crimes rather than just trial by smears and innuendo online?!
As with the story in the Mirror a week or two ago, is no one else extremely uncomfortable at the way this is being reported in certain newspapers? And more importantly, isn't there a real risk that it could spark another witch hunt like the one that led to an innocent former Conservative politician being unfairly outed on social media?!
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
@Luckyguy1983 Edit window now playing up. That is not a view that you in any way conveyed in that totally unfair and very flippant remark you made in response to my post on this subject. I doubt that you even bothered to read, never mind digest the very relevant points I made in my original post!
The first page of the ComRes data gives their last six poll results. 3 for IoS/SM and 3 for the Indy.
The results of the 3 for the IoS/SM [ 16/11, 19/10, 28/09 ] is virtually identical . THe other 3 are not a million miles apart, except the 28/10 for the Indy, which had Labour at 30%.
The comparison with the first of these polls [ 02/09 for the Indy ] gives:
Crazy leading sub-set questions. However, the main poll is a helpful reminder how little attention people pay to media chatter. Even the UKIP storm on Friday has now been factored in. People's attentions are turning to Christmas. It's a good time to lose a by election.
"A new book has branded Thailand one of the world’s most dangerous tourist destinations.
Australian author John Stapleton suggests that widespread police corruption, violence and crime are all blighting a country once commonly referred to as the ‘Land of Smiles’.
In his book Thailand: Deadly Destination, Mr Stapleton attempts to expose the reputation of Thailand as a welcoming country, claiming a boom in tourism since the 1960s has created a hatred of foreigners and a ‘murderous indifference’ to the millions of tourists who flock to the country’s white-sand beaches, picturesque countryside and thriving nightlife each year."
Some interesting YouGov supplementaries, including that when the current party leaders are named, the Tories move from a 2 point deficit to a 3 point lead at Con 33, Lab 30.
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Some interesting YouGov supplementaries, including that when the current party leaders are named, the Tories move from a 2 point deficit to a 3 point lead at Con 33, Lab 30.
It's slightly shocking that both our 'parties of government' are in the low thirties.
Crazy leading sub-set questions. However, the main poll is a helpful reminder how little attention people pay to media chatter. Even the UKIP storm on Friday has now been factored in. People's attentions are turning to Christmas. It's a good time to lose a by election.
With a third of current-Con supporters willing to vote UKIP, are you not worried by a repeat of the Canadian Conservatives collapse?
The YouGov issue questions show there's no faith in the competence of Con/Lab.
"A new book has branded Thailand one of the world’s most dangerous tourist destinations.
Australian author John Stapleton suggests that widespread police corruption, violence and crime are all blighting a country once commonly referred to as the ‘Land of Smiles’.
In his book Thailand: Deadly Destination, Mr Stapleton attempts to expose the reputation of Thailand as a welcoming country, claiming a boom in tourism since the 1960s has created a hatred of foreigners and a ‘murderous indifference’ to the millions of tourists who flock to the country’s white-sand beaches, picturesque countryside and thriving nightlife each year."
I'm glad someone has had the courage to say this. Having lived in Asia for some time there is a lot of truth in Stapleton's observations.
In the course of at least a month in Thailand every year for the past 10, I’ve never, ever, experienced a "hatred of foreigners". Police corruption yes and on one occasion theft (but it could have happened to any of us where it did, Thai or European). Otherwise, my wife and I have always felt Bangkok to be a safe place to wander about, and we’ve rarely experienced anything but smiles. And not just when we’re buying something!
So only 20% can imagine Ed as Prime Minister. But what value is that as a question? I would have answered yes - but what I imagine is him being the worst PM in a century or more. Is that what they wanted?
Poorly framed question. They should have taken the lead from a certain JackW:
Yes or No: Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
Economy - Ed - 22%
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
Economy - Ed - 22%
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
They're both adrift on immigration, which is still the number 1 issue for voters.
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
Economy - Ed - 22%
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
When both the possible candidates for election are on less than 33%, the bar for being "electable" is a lot lower. Maybe none of them are electable, but one of them is going to win...
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
Economy - Ed - 22%
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
They're both adrift on immigration, which is still the number 1 issue for voters.
But Cameron is still 7% head, which on your thinking that this is the number 1 issue for voters, negates Ed's leads on the NHS. So if you net off economy/NHS/immigration, Cameron is 21 points ahead on those 3 issues combined. On all five issues above combined, Cameron is 38 points ahead....
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
Economy - Ed - 22%
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
They're both adrift on immigration, which is still the number 1 issue for voters.
But Cameron is still 7% head, which on your thinking that this is the number 1 issue for voters, negates Ed's leads on the NHS. So if you net off economy/NHS/immigration, Cameron is 21% ahead on those 3 issues combined. On all five issues above combined, Cameron is 38 points ahead....
If immigration drives the voting intention, they won't be voting for either Cameron or Miliband.
Luckyguy1983/fitalass If you believe what you read on the Internet all 3 main parties have had a few MPs involved in abuse
Which is I suspect one reason why SNP & UKIP [edit - and Green] mid term surges are not diminishing and the "main three parties is one establishment party" meme is biting, particularly with C2, D , E.
It is interesting though (and not from a scandal point of view) that UKIP seem to be the main anti establishment beneficiaries in Wales, I would have expected PC to be doing well too. Maybe there just are not enough opinion polls with the detail. Could PC be looking at a doubling of their seats to six, which would be another factor to consider if there is an inconclusive result in May?
Luckyguy1983/fitalass If you believe what you read on the Internet all 3 main parties have had a few MPs involved in abuse
Which is I suspect one reason why SNP & UKIP mid term surges are not diminishing and the "main three parties is one establishment party" meme is biting, particularly with C2, D , E.
It is interesting though (and not from a scandal point of view) that UKIP seem to be the main anti establishment beneficiaries in Wales, I would have expected PC to be doing well too. Maybe there just are not enough opinion polls with the detail. Could PC be looking at a doubling of their seats to six, which would be another factor to consider if there is an inconclusive result in May?
Plaid have been in coalition with Labour in recent years in the Welsh Assembly, so they might be seen as establishment rather than a change.
EDIT The Elections in Wales blog suggests Plaid support is localised to NW Wales.
So overall Obamacare has provided more than ten million with healthcare they didn't have before, provided quality almost at the rate of existing healthcare and coverage that's just as good, at cheaper cost to the consumer - and all at a negative cost to the federal budget. What a fantastic achievement.
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy: Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31% Immigration: Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42% NHS: Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33% Education: Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33% Defence: Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
Economy - Ed - 22%
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
They're both adrift on immigration, which is still the number 1 issue for voters.
But Cameron is still 7% head, which on your thinking that this is the number 1 issue for voters, negates Ed's leads on the NHS. So if you net off economy/NHS/immigration, Cameron is 21 points ahead on those 3 issues combined. On all five issues above combined, Cameron is 38 points ahead....
If either of the big two parties allow themselves to be content with being slightly better than the other one, then it will be the seeds of their own destruction.
"A British surgeon who was due to stand trial for assault has fled the country and become a senior leader of the Taliban in Pakistan.
Mirza Tariq Ali, 39, who practised in the NHS, evaded the UK authorities despite having his passport taken from him while awaiting trial at the Old Bailey."
How does he get to show up there and walk right into a senior leader position? Do the Taliban have some kind of qualification passporting scheme where a certain pay-grade in the NHS and a number of years served as a junior doctor is considered equivalent to x years of terrorism experience?
They have a points system for skilled immigration.
They say their source saw a Tory MP strangle a boy, and "another MP" watched two men kill a boy.
Whilst both are obviously disgraceful crimes, why wouldn't they have identified the party of the other MP?
It's not, I'm sure, hard to work out
As I said at the time, the s**t is seriously going to hit the fan. The location of Dolphin Square will be familiar for anyone who has followed this story, and is a very big thing to have come out. Political party destroyingly-big.
I'm familiar with the location, having lived in pimlico and worked at 30 millbank (though not in any kind of politics related job), but no idea of what story you mean
Previous allegations aired by alleged victims involving living and active politicians have mentioned the same address. The fact that a murder investigation now involving the same location is taking place and the location has been named suggests to me that this investigation has reached a tipping point whereby it can no longer be hushed up and that therefore things are soon to get very interesting. I will obviously mention no names out of respect for the site.
Should such serious revelations come out of this, it will be disastrous for the government if they don't have a national investigation into the other major child sexual exploitation scandal. The public are bound to ask "Is the complicity of previous governments in covering up child abuse related to the fact that the current one is not doing anything about investigating tens of thousands of child rapes now?"
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
The obsession of Welsh and Scottish nationalist politicians to dictate how the English are governed never ceases to amaze me.
How does your twisted mind get to that conclusion , just because she does not want nuclear weapons in Scotland. How is that dictating how England is governed. For normal humans it is seen as looking after Scottish interests.
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
The obsession of Welsh and Scottish nationalist politicians to dictate how the English are governed never ceases to amaze me.
How does your twisted mind get to that conclusion , just because she does not want nuclear weapons in Scotland. How is that dictating how England is governed. For normal humans it is seen as looking after Scottish interests.
I assume she means abandoning austerity measures in England.
Not much change, really. Next election might prove handy, if the polling remains as is, for discovering how important leaders and how important parties are when it comes to voting.
The peaks and troughs of blue and purple lines tend to mirror each other, which points towards regular Tory/UKIP bed-hopping. However, over this 12-month period the averaged party shares have actually changed as follows...
The Tory share has risen 0.2 points from 32 to 32.2 The Labour share has fallen 5.4 points from 39.8 to 33.4 The LibDem share has fallen 2.6 points from 9.6 to 7 The UKIP share has risen 4 points from 12 to 16
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
MP Eric Joyce who headbutted colleague in Commons bar bust-up stocked up on Apple computers at tax payers' expense before quitting
Politician claimed an astonishing £185,635 in expenses last year Among charges were 'replacement laptops' and Apple accessories Mr Joyce was thrown out of Labour party following 2012 Commons brawl The 54-year-old has sat as an Independent MP for Falkirk since the scandal Agreed not to seek re-election but will be able to keep expensed items
In the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice tomorrow, before the Honourable Mr Justice Mitting:
For trial: TLJ/14/0554 Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd TLJ/14/0554 Rowland v Mitchell
Given Warby J's decision ([2014] EWHC 3590 (QB), at [65]-[73]) to admit a lot of evidence adduced by NGN and Rowland impugning Mitchell's character, we can expect this to be a particularly bitter set of proceedings. Although tomorrow's proceedings are on the jury list, Warby J ordered both actions to be tried by a judge alone in July ([2014] EWHC 2615 (QB), at [2]).
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Do you believe that there are no SNP voters who would prefer to vote Tory, but back the SNP in their constituency to try to ensure that Labour get beaten? Or do you accept they exist, but refuse to believe that anything Sturgeon could do would prevent them voting tactically?
"Darling is now having a rethink. “When the facts change,” he says, “you change your mind.” And his colleagues in Labour may want to change their mind about how useful it is to bash the rich, rather than worry about the poor. I submitted a Freedom of Information request asking about the best-paid 0.01 per cent, the ones we’re led to believe pay no tax. They earn 1.4 per cent of salary paid in Britain yet stump up 4.2 per cent of all income tax. That is to say, the top 3,000 pay more than the lowest-paid nine million taxpayers put together. Not a figure you’re likely to hear in a Miliband speech any time soon. "
MP Eric Joyce who headbutted colleague in Commons bar bust-up stocked up on Apple computers at tax payers' expense before quitting
Politician claimed an astonishing £185,635 in expenses last year Among charges were 'replacement laptops' and Apple accessories Mr Joyce was thrown out of Labour party following 2012 Commons brawl The 54-year-old has sat as an Independent MP for Falkirk since the scandal Agreed not to seek re-election but will be able to keep expensed items
Less than Murphy claims, he could show Eric how to do it.
"A British surgeon who was due to stand trial for assault has fled the country and become a senior leader of the Taliban in Pakistan.
Mirza Tariq Ali, 39, who practised in the NHS, evaded the UK authorities despite having his passport taken from him while awaiting trial at the Old Bailey."
How does he get to show up there and walk right into a senior leader position? Do the Taliban have some kind of qualification passporting scheme where a certain pay-grade in the NHS and a number of years served as a junior doctor is considered equivalent to x years of terrorism experience?
They have a points system for skilled immigration.
He had some years seniority in the Pakistani military, so presumably this time counts as service in related organisations. Maybe it was a TUPE arrangement?
Leanne Wood has placed PC in Wales far to the left of Labour, not including her republican agenda. It is highly likely that PC will not gain any seats and could lose one and be restricted to their Gwynedd heartland. So she is trying to hang onto the coat tails of her 'sister' leader of the SNP.
Under Salmond the SNP did not vote on English issues at Westminster, but under his successor that situation could change. So will the SNP be moving to the left as well and so risk losing its supporters from the centre and the right?
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Do you believe that there are no SNP voters who would prefer to vote Tory, but back the SNP in their constituency to try to ensure that Labour get beaten? Or do you accept they exist, but refuse to believe that anything Sturgeon could do would prevent them voting tactically?
SNP voters vote for the SNP , they are highly unlikely to never ever likely to vote Tory. PS: Especially given the puppets running the regional office, who have London hands up their jacksies operating them.
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Do you believe that there are no SNP voters who would prefer to vote Tory, but back the SNP in their constituency to try to ensure that Labour get beaten? Or do you accept they exist, but refuse to believe that anything Sturgeon could do would prevent them voting tactically?
SNP voters vote for the SNP , they are highly unlikely to never ever likely to vote Tory.
So nobody ever votes for the SNP tactically? Ok then...
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Time will tell, although it's worth noting that your record on predicting Scottish political developments is dismal.
The peaks and troughs of blue and purple lines tend to mirror each other, which points towards regular Tory/UKIP bed-hopping. However, over this 12-month period the averaged party shares have actually changed as follows...
The Tory share has risen 0.2 points from 32 to 32.2 The Labour share has fallen 5.4 points from 39.8 to 33.4 The LibDem share has fallen 2.6 points from 9.6 to 7 The UKIP share has risen 4 points from 12 to 16
One of the peculiar factors about these graphs is that they don't show Tory-UKIP bed hopping at all. As you have indicated, the Tory share has remained consistent (a very slight rise). What the graphs show is a mirror rise of UKIP's share to Labour's falling share . It looks even starker on your sixth month one. As UKIP have risen, so have Labour fallen. And yet the polling breakdown is supposed to tell us that Conservatives are losing to UKIP 2:1 over Labour.
Crazy leading sub-set questions. However, the main poll is a helpful reminder how little attention people pay to media chatter. Even the UKIP storm on Friday has now been factored in. People's attentions are turning to Christmas. It's a good time to lose a by election.
Are you not worried by a repeat of the Canadian Conservatives collapse?
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Do you believe that there are no SNP voters who would prefer to vote Tory, but back the SNP in their constituency to try to ensure that Labour get beaten? Or do you accept they exist, but refuse to believe that anything Sturgeon could do would prevent them voting tactically?
SNP voters vote for the SNP , they are highly unlikely to never ever likely to vote Tory.
So nobody ever votes for the SNP tactically? Ok then...
Who knows , I am not a world expert on tactical voting, I am sure some Tories may well do. You were talking about SNP voters who I believe are much more unlikely to vote tactically.
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Time will tell, although it's worth noting that your record on predicting Scottish political developments is dismal.
Only a knobhead would ever think Tories or UKIP will be big in Scotland at any point in the near to long term, if ever.
If Tories vote tactically for the SNP then they become, for the purpose of that election count, SNP voters. They were the SNP voters I was referring to, and those that I presumed would come under the "tartan Tories" grouping.
"Darling is now having a rethink. “When the facts change,” he says, “you change your mind.” And his colleagues in Labour may want to change their mind about how useful it is to bash the rich, rather than worry about the poor. I submitted a Freedom of Information request asking about the best-paid 0.01 per cent, the ones we’re led to believe pay no tax. They earn 1.4 per cent of salary paid in Britain yet stump up 4.2 per cent of all income tax. That is to say, the top 3,000 pay more than the lowest-paid nine million taxpayers put together. Not a figure you’re likely to hear in a Miliband speech any time soon. "
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power. SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
The Tartan Tory wing of the SNP is being violently alienated by Sturgeon, surely the Tories and UKIP will boom in Scotland during her primacy.
Ha Ha Ha , barking as ever
Time will tell, although it's worth noting that your record on predicting Scottish political developments is dismal.
Only a knobhead would ever think Tories or UKIP will be big in Scotland at any point in the near to long term, if ever.
You're on the record as saying Coburn had no chance in the euro elections. You were wrong, as is your wont.
"Darling is now having a rethink. “When the facts change,” he says, “you change your mind.” And his colleagues in Labour may want to change their mind about how useful it is to bash the rich, rather than worry about the poor. I submitted a Freedom of Information request asking about the best-paid 0.01 per cent, the ones we’re led to believe pay no tax. They earn 1.4 per cent of salary paid in Britain yet stump up 4.2 per cent of all income tax. That is to say, the top 3,000 pay more than the lowest-paid nine million taxpayers put together. Not a figure you’re likely to hear in a Miliband speech any time soon. "
If Tories vote tactically for the SNP then they become, for the purpose of that election count, SNP voters. They were the SNP voters I was referring to, and those that I presumed would come under the "tartan Tories" grouping.
What are these "tartan Tories", if not that?
Are they natural conservatives who also desperately want independence?
In which case they're like the natural Labour voters switching to UKIP, wanting less immigration and us out of the EU, while disagreeing with UKIP on everything else?
If Tories vote tactically for the SNP then they become, for the purpose of that election count, SNP voters. They were the SNP voters I was referring to, and those that I presumed would come under the "tartan Tories" grouping.
What are these "tartan Tories", if not that?
Are they natural conservatives who also desperately want independence?
In which case they're like the natural Labour voters switching to UKIP, wanting less immigration and us out of the EU, while disagreeing with UKIP on everything else?
And if this is right, are you saying that no natural conservatives, who vote SNP to get out of the UK, could possibly abandon the SNP if Sturgeon drags them further left than Salmond did?
If Tories vote tactically for the SNP then they become, for the purpose of that election count, SNP voters. They were the SNP voters I was referring to, and those that I presumed would come under the "tartan Tories" grouping.
What are these "tartan Tories", if not that?
"tartan Tories" is just an insult , it does not relate to real people. Labour used it to try and denegrate the SNP and hide their uselessness. As we see nowadays they are not doing it very successfully.
"Darling is now having a rethink. “When the facts change,” he says, “you change your mind.” And his colleagues in Labour may want to change their mind about how useful it is to bash the rich, rather than worry about the poor. I submitted a Freedom of Information request asking about the best-paid 0.01 per cent, the ones we’re led to believe pay no tax. They earn 1.4 per cent of salary paid in Britain yet stump up 4.2 per cent of all income tax. That is to say, the top 3,000 pay more than the lowest-paid nine million taxpayers put together. Not a figure you’re likely to hear in a Miliband speech any time soon. "
I interviewed Alistair Darling, the former chancellor, for the documentary, who suggested the blame could lie with Labour’s tax credits. They were intended to augment low pay, he said, but ended up “subsidising lower wages in a way that was never intended”. So companies can get away paying less because they know that the Government will chip in.
It echoes what some of us have been saying on here: in-work benefits distort the market by subsidising bad employers.
If Tories vote tactically for the SNP then they become, for the purpose of that election count, SNP voters. They were the SNP voters I was referring to, and those that I presumed would come under the "tartan Tories" grouping.
What are these "tartan Tories", if not that?
Are they natural conservatives who also desperately want independence?
In which case they're like the natural Labour voters switching to UKIP, wanting less immigration and us out of the EU, while disagreeing with UKIP on everything else?
And if this is right, are you saying that no natural conservatives, who vote SNP to get out of the UK, could possibly abandon the SNP if Sturgeon drags them further left than Salmond did?
Afraid I don't spend as much time thinking deeply about it as you obviously do. As they are at present the Tories are insignificant in Scotland and will remain so as long as they are London puppets. Labour are nasty , greedy self seeking liars and people have finally found that it is in their interests to vote for people who care about Scotland rather than just vote against the Tories.
Comments
I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I love Inception!
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
'Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters'
And I thought for a while she was a serious politician.
'Previous allegations aired by alleged victims involving living and active politicians have mentioned the same address.'
Common knowledge that politicians have the majority of the flats in this block due to its proximity to parliament.
'She is. She's seriously going after Labour's vote in Scotland by making Ed an offer she knows he'll refuse.......'
I think he will do better than that and simply ignore her.
In Leics our PCC is investigating 25 years of child abuse allegations following the Rotherham report.
At least in some quarters the issue is being taken seriously.
The problem is not unique to the UK if you read this account:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/aug/18/loverboy-child-prostitution-netherlands
Mirza Tariq Ali, 39, who practised in the NHS, evaded the UK authorities despite having his passport taken from him while awaiting trial at the Old Bailey."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11233736/NHS-doctor-flees-UK-to-join-Taliban.html
Australian author John Stapleton suggests that widespread police corruption, violence and crime are all blighting a country once commonly referred to as the ‘Land of Smiles’.
In his book Thailand: Deadly Destination, Mr Stapleton attempts to expose the reputation of Thailand as a welcoming country, claiming a boom in tourism since the 1960s has created a hatred of foreigners and a ‘murderous indifference’ to the millions of tourists who flock to the country’s white-sand beaches, picturesque countryside and thriving nightlife each year."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-2833369/Thailand-one-dangerous-tourist-destinations-Earth-Ex-pat-investigation-lifts-lid-dark-Land-Smiles.html
Poor journalism and attempts to make political capital out of this kind of crime have already led to one innocent man being put through an horrific ordeal. But by reporting the story in this way, there is a real whiff yet again that some have an agenda to smear a whole party rather than get to the truth of possible horrific crimes perpetrated by specific individuals.
That is not a view that you in any way conveyed in that totally unfair and very flippant remark you made in response to my post on this subject. I doubt that you even bothered to read, never mind digest the very relevant points I made in my original post!
The results of the 3 for the IoS/SM [ 16/11, 19/10, 28/09 ] is virtually identical . THe other 3 are not a million miles apart, except the 28/10 for the Indy, which had Labour at 30%.
The comparison with the first of these polls [ 02/09 for the Indy ] gives:
Con +2
Lab -1
LD -2
UKIP +2
Others -1
As tim would have put it: it's all MoE.
Whilst sample size is only 125 [ and comes with a warning ] SNP 49 Lab 23.
Net: Eng & Wales [ sample size: 1132 ] Lab 36, Con 32, UKIP 20, LD 8, Greens 3
So Labour would win big in E & W. Particularly, North East / North West and London. Also, presumably, Wales !
SNP: 45%, 43%
Lab: 28%, 27%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Scotland
"Who would you trust more to handle the following issues, David Cameron or Ed Miliband?"
Economy:
Cameron 41%, Miliband 19%, Neither of them 31%
Immigration:
Cameron 27%, Miliband 20%, Neither of them 42%
NHS:
Cameron 24%, Miliband 32%, Neither of them 33%
Education:
Cameron 28%, Miliband 27%, Neither of them 33%
Defence:
Cameron 33%, Miliband 17%, Neither of them 35%
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/6pqhue0bmr/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-141114.pdf
Looks like 'neither of them' is a clear winner. Low turnout ahead.
The YouGov issue questions show there's no faith in the competence of Con/Lab.
The named leader questions are good for the Tories and awful for Ed, and that's with a sample that is more UKIP inclined than normal for You gov.
Poorly framed question. They should have taken the lead from a certain JackW:
Yes or No: Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
NHS - Ed +8%
There is the answer to what happens next May: Labour bangs on about the NHS, but it is too far adrift on the economy to be electable. Because someone has to be elected.
Would have been interesting to see Farage included though.....
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3468/EconomistIpsos-MORI-October-2014-Issues-Index.aspx
It is interesting though (and not from a scandal point of view) that UKIP seem to be the main anti establishment beneficiaries in Wales, I would have expected PC to be doing well too. Maybe there just are not enough opinion polls with the detail. Could PC be looking at a doubling of their seats to six, which would be another factor to consider if there is an inconclusive result in May?
EDIT
The Elections in Wales blog suggests Plaid support is localised to NW Wales.
http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2014/09/08/the-electoral-state-of-the-parties-3-plaid-cymru-2/
Rating the quality as good/excellent:
- Obamacare: 74%
- All with health insurance: 81%
Rating the coverage as good/excellent:
- Obamcare: 71%
- All with health insurance: 72%
Satisfied with the cost:
- Obamacare: 75%
- All with health insurance: 61%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/179396/newly-insured-exchanges-give-coverage-good-marks.aspx
So overall Obamacare has provided more than ten million with healthcare they didn't have before, provided quality almost at the rate of existing healthcare and coverage that's just as good, at cheaper cost to the consumer - and all at a negative cost to the federal budget. What a fantastic achievement.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30067490
Not much change, really. Next election might prove handy, if the polling remains as is, for discovering how important leaders and how important parties are when it comes to voting.
http://www.mediafire.com/view/wdjmkap3wabhbwt/YouGov polls 12 months to 16 November 2014.jpg#
The peaks and troughs of blue and purple lines tend to mirror each other, which points towards regular Tory/UKIP bed-hopping. However, over this 12-month period the averaged party shares have actually changed as follows...
The Tory share has risen 0.2 points from 32 to 32.2
The Labour share has fallen 5.4 points from 39.8 to 33.4
The LibDem share has fallen 2.6 points from 9.6 to 7
The UKIP share has risen 4 points from 12 to 16
SNP name their price: abandon Trident to put Miliband in Downing Street
Nicola Sturgeon, the new nationalist leader, says she will put Ed Miliband in No 10 if he abandons austerity measures and removes Britain's nuclear arsenal from Scottish waters
Last night I posted the above and replies indicated that it would not happen, the offer would be likely ignored etc which surprised me, because would it? This would be after an election and Parliament is now hung, Eds crowd have been shouting about the "vicious cuts" for nearly 5 years and there is deep unhappiness amongst Labour MPs and the Labour movement as a whole about Trident. Do not forget Kinnock stated one of the first orders he would give after winning No 10 was to bring all Polaris subs back to base and keep them there. (It is that IMHO that sealed his fate more than a Sheffield rally speech ending). Ed is more left than the left and I can see this potential offer being seriously considered even happening.
A few days ago I joked about this but here it is, a possibility becoming a firm offer. It is also a nightmare scenario but of course with Miliband and Labour it is all about power and any route will do so long as they achieve power.
SNP shoring up a Labour vote in Scotland also with MPs from Wales, while refusing EV4EL is not going to go down well with the English. However after the election when deals are struck it would be too late. We would then not get a referendum as both SNP and Labour want (closer) ties with the EU.
In my view this puts Ed into No 10 and such a coalition partially neutralises the loss of Labour seats in Scotland. There are a number of other parties that dislike Trident / austerity including some Lib Dems and certainly the resurgent Greens. Miliband and Labour may well appear to rebuff now but if the SNP requirements are the price of No 10 then what would he do so post election?
12 months down the line though reality will bite but the damage would have by then been done.
Nicola will become the bogeywoman in the english press which of course serves her needs perfectly.
Ed is just a useful idiot
MP Eric Joyce who headbutted colleague in Commons bar bust-up stocked up on Apple computers at tax payers' expense before quitting
Politician claimed an astonishing £185,635 in expenses last year
Among charges were 'replacement laptops' and Apple accessories
Mr Joyce was thrown out of Labour party following 2012 Commons brawl
The 54-year-old has sat as an Independent MP for Falkirk since the scandal
Agreed not to seek re-election but will be able to keep expensed items
"Darling is now having a rethink. “When the facts change,” he says, “you change your mind.” And his colleagues in Labour may want to change their mind about how useful it is to bash the rich, rather than worry about the poor. I submitted a Freedom of Information request asking about the best-paid 0.01 per cent, the ones we’re led to believe pay no tax. They earn 1.4 per cent of salary paid in Britain yet stump up 4.2 per cent of all income tax. That is to say, the top 3,000 pay more than the lowest-paid nine million taxpayers put together. Not a figure you’re likely to hear in a Miliband speech any time soon. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11232501/Bashing-the-rich-isnt-going-to-save-the-British-dream.html
Under Salmond the SNP did not vote on English issues at Westminster, but under his successor that situation could change. So will the SNP be moving to the left as well and so risk losing its supporters from the centre and the right?
PS: Especially given the puppets running the regional office, who have London hands up their jacksies operating them.
What are these "tartan Tories", if not that?
In any case, Nelson has begged the question, because the "best paid" are presumably on PAYE, so could hardly be paying no tax.
Labour numbers continue to sink, and supplementaries imply that Ed could lose London for Labour.
In which case they're like the natural Labour voters switching to UKIP, wanting less immigration and us out of the EU, while disagreeing with UKIP on everything else?
Peter Kassig US aid worker reported beheaded by IS and video released
Sad news yet again.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11232501/Bashing-the-rich-isnt-going-to-save-the-British-dream.html
I interviewed Alistair Darling, the former chancellor, for the documentary, who suggested the blame could lie with Labour’s tax credits. They were intended to augment low pay, he said, but ended up “subsidising lower wages in a way that was never intended”. So companies can get away paying less because they know that the Government will chip in.
It echoes what some of us have been saying on here: in-work benefits distort the market by subsidising bad employers.