''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
"If, as I hope, the answer is the latter than UKIP will have to acquire an economic policy more cogent and radically different from those of LibLabCon Westminster bubble than the one being touted by Patrick O'Flynn. (Yes, O'Flynn read economics at Cambridge - but so too did John Maynard Keynes and look where that landed us).
The solution is staring the party in the face. No one understands the economic problems facing Britain better than Douglas Carswell. By happy coincidence, he happens to be UKIP's first elected MP."
''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
"why is Patrick O'Flynn, the economics spokesman for Britain's most libertarian mainstream party UKIP, flirting with the kind of wealth taxes and turnover taxes you'd more usually associate with the Greens or the Socialist Workers' Party?"
This is indeed a longer term problem for UKIP. Are they lefties or righties? We all know where they stand on the EU, man-in-the-street's concerns, etc. But will they cut spending or raise it? Cut tax or raise it? In favour of free schools or centralised marxism? If they morph into a lefty statist anti-EU party Dave will dance a jig! I guess Delingploe is worried to ensure they stay on the sensible side of the left/right axis.
(Note similarity with the US Tea Party. They started righteous on spending and statism - but morphed into religious and social conservatism. The jesus-freak loonies took over. The libertarians are in despair.)
''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
"If, as I hope, the answer is the latter than UKIP will have to acquire an economic policy more cogent and radically different from those of LibLabCon Westminster bubble than the one being touted by Patrick O'Flynn. (Yes, O'Flynn read economics at Cambridge - but so too did John Maynard Keynes and look where that landed us).
The solution is staring the party in the face. No one understands the economic problems facing Britain better than Douglas Carswell. By happy coincidence, he happens to be UKIP's first elected MP."
This Delingpole bloke is hilarious. Is he bringing his act on tour? Or is he at least threatening to tour before pulling out when he realises that noone is going to see him?
Ah, so that's the answer everyone's been searching for! We've all been asking who was to blame for the bank bailouts, and now Alex Salmond has admitted the awful truth: it was entirely his fault:
The First Minister, who leaves office on Wednesday, said RBS could have avoided the international banking crisis if he had not left his former job as one of the bank’s oil economists to pursue a political career.
Sean Howlett's letter isn't quite as billed by Breitbart, but is quite interesting in the way it discusses the inconsistencies in UKIP's economic position:
Whether the average UKIP voter gives a toss has yet to be determined. Probably most of them realise they'll not win a majority so it doesn't really matter whether UKIP has an economic policy or not, let alone what it is.
I expect the Green voters of Brighton are similarly relaxed.
UKIP voters are just really really pissed off that no one is listening to them. That there is no one to vote for now that both the Tories and Labour have abandoned social conservatism. People say that the LDs are fading because of this or that policy betrayal, but its a more obvious reason than that, its because they have actually WON, the Labour Party is just a slightly more left-leaning version of the LDs, the Tories are a slightly more right-wing version of the LDs. The reason less people vote for the LDs is because their socially liberal views are caters to by both the Tories and Labour now, and both have a real chance of actually being the Major Party in a government. Meanwhile the social conservatives are out in the cold, and they are not happy about it.
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
"why is Patrick O'Flynn, the economics spokesman for Britain's most libertarian mainstream party UKIP, flirting with the kind of wealth taxes and turnover taxes you'd more usually associate with the Greens or the Socialist Workers' Party?"
This is indeed a longer term problem for UKIP. Are they lefties or righties? We all know where they stand on the EU, man-in-the-street's concerns, etc. But will they cut spending or raise it? Cut tax or raise it? In favour of free schools or centralised marxism? If they morph into a lefty statist anti-EU party Dave will dance a jig! I guess Delingploe is worried to ensure they stay on the sensible side of the left/right axis.
(Note similarity with the US Tea Party. They started righteous on spending and statism - but morphed into religious and social conservatism. The jesus-freak loonies took over. The libertarians are in despair.)
Given the party is funded by a few high rolling business types it will land on the money side - POF may be gone PDQ,
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
Am I supposed to be UKIP now?
You live and learn
What is this idea that Britain is somehow soft on terrorists that commit heinous crimes? One killer of Lee Rigby has a whole life sentence and the other has a life sentence with a minimum of 45 years. The idea that the book wouldn't be thrown at "Jihadi John" if he were captured is quite bizarre.
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
Am I supposed to be UKIP now?
You live and learn
What is this idea that Britain is somehow soft on terrorists that commit heinous crimes? One killer of Lee Rigby has a whole life sentence and the other has a life sentence with a minimum of 45 years. The idea that the book wouldn't be thrown at "Jihadi John" if he were captured is quite bizarre.
The Kipper line appears to be it's all Dave's fault that JJ and all of his relatives can't be beheaded.
"According to the latest International Monetary Fund fiscal monitor, the cyclically-adjusted deficit has come down from 10.3% of gross domestic product in 2009 to 4.1% this year, a big reduction."
Don't trust cyclical adjustments.
You can't tell where in the cycle we are until a decade later.
Are we about to enter a new recession seven years after the start of the last one - or are we still going to be recovering from the last recession for the next few years?
Gordon Brown used to adjust his borrowing golden rule for where we were in the cycle. He worked backwards from the actual borrowing to where in the cycle he needed to claim to be to justify the borrowing.
"why is Patrick O'Flynn, the economics spokesman for Britain's most libertarian mainstream party UKIP, flirting with the kind of wealth taxes and turnover taxes you'd more usually associate with the Greens or the Socialist Workers' Party?"
This is indeed a longer term problem for UKIP. Are they lefties or righties? We all know where they stand on the EU, man-in-the-street's concerns, etc. But will they cut spending or raise it? Cut tax or raise it? In favour of free schools or centralised marxism? If they morph into a lefty statist anti-EU party Dave will dance a jig! I guess Delingploe is worried to ensure they stay on the sensible side of the left/right axis.
(Note similarity with the US Tea Party. They started righteous on spending and statism - but morphed into religious and social conservatism. The jesus-freak loonies took over. The libertarians are in despair.)
Given the party is funded by a few high rolling business types it will land on the money side - POF may be gone PDQ,
They are funded by a couple of retired millionairs with even more chips on theor shoulder than Farage. But if you are right then what price their supposed votes coming from labour. 'WWC' as spouted by kippers is of course just a dog whistle for 'racist bigot'. It is a bit surprising that when Brown badmouths his own supporter he ends up with his head in his hands. When it happens to UKIP farage just laughs it off.
''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
Am I supposed to be UKIP now?
You live and learn
What is this idea that Britain is somehow soft on terrorists that commit heinous crimes? One killer of Lee Rigby has a whole life sentence and the other has a life sentence with a minimum of 45 years. The idea that the book wouldn't be thrown at "Jihadi John" if he were captured is quite bizarre.
The bigger problem would be gathering sufficient evidence that would be admissible in an English court, assuming he doesn't plead guilty. And even the two killers of Lee Rigby pleaded not guilty.
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
Am I supposed to be UKIP now?
You live and learn
What is this idea that Britain is somehow soft on terrorists that commit heinous crimes? One killer of Lee Rigby has a whole life sentence and the other has a life sentence with a minimum of 45 years. The idea that the book wouldn't be thrown at "Jihadi John" if he were captured is quite bizarre.
The bigger problem would be gathering sufficient evidence that would be admissible in an English court, assuming he doesn't plead guilty. And even the two killers of Lee Rigby pleaded not guilty.
On this occasion, video evidence would probably be of considerable assistance.
"If, as I hope, the answer is the latter than UKIP will have to acquire an economic policy more cogent and radically different from those of LibLabCon Westminster bubble than the one being touted by Patrick O'Flynn. (Yes, O'Flynn read economics at Cambridge - but so too did John Maynard Keynes and look where that landed us).
The solution is staring the party in the face. No one understands the economic problems facing Britain better than Douglas Carswell. By happy coincidence, he happens to be UKIP's first elected MP."
This Delingpole bloke is hilarious. Is he bringing his act on tour? Or is he at least threatening to tour before pulling out when he realises that noone is going to see him?
Delingpole is the worst sort of clickbait troll. He can dish it out but at even the mildest criticism (for example point out that he lying, not read the scientific paper he claims he has, empirical facts are the opposite of what he claims etc) he goes into complete and utter meltdown.
1. The "savings" from welfare "reform" are minuscule, in contrast to the human misery inflicted. 2. This government has overseen a transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top 3. Average incomes have fallen 10% in real terms over the life of this parliament 4. Government borrowing is rising. 5. Economic conditions here on in are going to worsen.
Call me old fashioned - neither a gentleman nor a lady.
He was neither - in spades. That sort of behaviour crosses my red lines. Do that and you're dead. And undiginified. We all have our own red lines - YMMV.
''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
Mr. M, as a proportion of tax, the wealthiest pay more than they have before. The rise of the personal allowance means those on low pay also pay less tax.
There has been a decline in real terms of income. Given we had (and still have) a bloody enormous deficit it's unsurprising there's been some economic pain.
I'm not sure there will be a swing to Labour. Voters of the WWC now have somewhere else to go, those concerned about the economy are unlikely to return to Labour (and those who think Brown/Balls are worth anything are probably red already), and Ed Miliband is likelier to scare voters off than entice them.
However, the Conservatives retain tremendous potential to screw themselves, and may well do so. The Rochester by-election result and aftermath will be the next opportunity for a political act of self-harm by the blues.
'WWC' as spouted by kippers is of course just a dog whistle for 'racist bigot'.
I believe you are in effect calling about a third of your countrymen (33% of voters would vote UKIP if they thought it could win in their constituency) racist bigots. Is your name Gordon Brown ?
Meanwhile, in Germany (from Andrew Neil's twitterfeed): "German gov to withdraw from its 2020 climate change goals. Economics Minister Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) abandons cut of 40% of CO2 emissions"
"Mr Farage claims to represent a different kind of politics to the mainstream political parties. There is some truth in this, but he is every bit as dependent on big powerful donors as is either David Cameron or Ed Miliband."
"The new figures from the Electoral Commission also revealed the Conservatives received more than twice as much in donations as Labour between July and September 2014.
• Conservative Party - £6,757,289 • Labour Party - £3,188,931 • Liberal Democrats - £2,752,873 • Scottish National Party (SNP) - £1,572,825 • Co-operative Party - £415,114 • UK Independence Party (UKIP) - £98,387 • Green Party - £88,250"
All joking aside - I've had three emails from Grant Shapps in 24hrs asking for foot soldier canvassing for Eastbourne and Hastings & Rye. I'm up for it if I can. The Blue Team are taking this very seriously.
Call me old fashioned - neither a gentleman nor a lady.
He was neither - in spades. That sort of behaviour crosses my red lines. Do that and you're dead. And undiginified. We all have our own red lines - YMMV.
''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
Reckless is a politician. He is playing politics.
What do you expect?
I think you mean he has crossed a blue line or a purple line rather than a red line.
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
Am I supposed to be UKIP now?
You live and learn
What is this idea that Britain is somehow soft on terrorists that commit heinous crimes? One killer of Lee Rigby has a whole life sentence and the other has a life sentence with a minimum of 45 years. The idea that the book wouldn't be thrown at "Jihadi John" if he were captured is quite bizarre.
One might think HMG's preferred response to JJ would be not wavering but droning.
I missed the thread on the R&C competition (when was it?) over recent days, I've been away, but FWIW I forecast UKIP by 9%: UKIP 43%, Con 34%, Lab 16%, Others 7%.
"Police were told a Cabinet minister and prominent MPs were abusing children 26 years ago at a block of luxury flats used by politicians but nothing was done, a senior MP revealed yesterday.
Fears of a cover-up of an Establishment paedophile ring deepened last night as an MP said he handed over evidence in 1988 of ‘abuse parties’ at Dolphin Square and other London locations, but an investigation was shelved by Scotland Yard.
Labour’s John Mann said the case was closed within three months on the orders of ‘those at the top’."
Mr. M, as a proportion of tax, the wealthiest pay more than they have before. The rise of the personal allowance means those on low pay also pay less tax.
.
The wealthy jolly well should pay more. And they certainly should not be receiving transfers from the poor. Not ever, and certainly not in these economic circumstances.
The poor pay less income tax, but more VAT and receive less pay rises, tax credits and child benefit.
Call me old fashioned - neither a gentleman nor a lady.
He was neither - in spades. That sort of behaviour crosses my red lines. Do that and you're dead. And undiginified. We all have our own red lines - YMMV.
''previously represented in this very constituency by this very same PPE man, should criticise him for it.'' They are criticising him for being a hypocrite. For dropping all the policies he previously supported like a stone out of self interest. For being now supposedly anti politics when he has been part of the system so long.
Well, at least he has the decency to subject himself to his electorate for re-approval.
What I don't get about PB Tories is the way they attack UKIP for participating in the political process to effect change, as if this is an immoral and unethical act.
What did you want Ukippers to do? Pick up a gun?
It is cultism. Look at TSE's barmy insistence that Reckless is a traitor. He just isn't; we don't vote for parties, we vote for individuals, and their duty of allegiance is to the electorate - to whom, as you point out, he has gone for validation of his move. It only looks like treachery if you fundamentally believe that we must all believe in Dave, because He came down to earth from heaven to reign in coalition over us, praise be. The political process is good only to the extent that it proclaims and magnifies His glory. Otherwise, work of the Devil.
My issue, as it always has been with Reckless, was the timing of the defection.
It was timed to inflict maximum damage on the Tory party.
Considering the whining and moaning like whores UKIP were doing when Dave recalled parliament during their conference, I'm sure the hypocrisy of Reckless and UKIP isn't lost on most.
Reckless responds: "I can see you, TSE! Can you see me? Oh, now be honest, TSE, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time. 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends.'"
Reckless is a politician. He is playing politics.
What do you expect?
I think you mean he has crossed a blue line or a purple line rather than a red line.
"Mr Farage claims to represent a different kind of politics to the mainstream political parties. There is some truth in this, but he is every bit as dependent on big powerful donors as is either David Cameron or Ed Miliband."
"The new figures from the Electoral Commission also revealed the Conservatives received more than twice as much in donations as Labour between July and September 2014.
• Conservative Party - £6,757,289 • Labour Party - £3,188,931 • Liberal Democrats - £2,752,873 • Scottish National Party (SNP) - £1,572,825 • Co-operative Party - £415,114 • UK Independence Party (UKIP) - £98,387 • Green Party - £88,250"
"Mr Farage claims to represent a different kind of politics to the mainstream political parties. There is some truth in this, but he is every bit as dependent on big powerful donors as is either David Cameron or Ed Miliband."
"The new figures from the Electoral Commission also revealed the Conservatives received more than twice as much in donations as Labour between July and September 2014.
• Conservative Party - £6,757,289 • Labour Party - £3,188,931 • Liberal Democrats - £2,752,873 • Scottish National Party (SNP) - £1,572,825 • Co-operative Party - £415,114 • UK Independence Party (UKIP) - £98,387 • Green Party - £88,250"
"Mr Farage claims to represent a different kind of politics to the mainstream political parties. There is some truth in this, but he is every bit as dependent on big powerful donors as is either David Cameron or Ed Miliband."
"The new figures from the Electoral Commission also revealed the Conservatives received more than twice as much in donations as Labour between July and September 2014.
• Conservative Party - £6,757,289 • Labour Party - £3,188,931 • Liberal Democrats - £2,752,873 • Scottish National Party (SNP) - £1,572,825 • Co-operative Party - £415,114 • UK Independence Party (UKIP) - £98,387 • Green Party - £88,250"
What happened to the £1M donation dude for the Kippers ?
He pomised that in October - those figures are for the 3rd quarter of 2014. The Lib Dem figure was boosted by a large bequest. UKIP will probably hope to raise more than them between now and the GE.
I missed the thread on the R&C competition (when was it?) over recent days, I've been away, but FWIW I forecast UKIP by 9%: UKIP 43%, Con 34%, Lab 16%, Others 7%.
I can't be arsed doing it to two decimal places.
I predicted 9% also... if we are both right I'll lend you the book!
"Mr Farage claims to represent a different kind of politics to the mainstream political parties. There is some truth in this, but he is every bit as dependent on big powerful donors as is either David Cameron or Ed Miliband."
"The new figures from the Electoral Commission also revealed the Conservatives received more than twice as much in donations as Labour between July and September 2014.
• Conservative Party - £6,757,289 • Labour Party - £3,188,931 • Liberal Democrats - £2,752,873 • Scottish National Party (SNP) - £1,572,825 • Co-operative Party - £415,114 • UK Independence Party (UKIP) - £98,387 • Green Party - £88,250"
Excitable Labour posters should be careful what they wish for. This headline news article has "Conservative election strategy" written all over it, not that it makes it any less true:
The clear message to swing voters is: we've made good progress, but there's still a long way to go. It's not safe to vote Labour yet, we need you to let us finish the job.
Strangely enough, this meshes very nicely with "long-term economic plan" (which we will be heartily sick of by 8th May, if you're not already) because Crosby wants this message brain-stamped on every swing voter in the country. That way, their pens will gravitate towards the Conservative box almost without thinking. The LTEP will be the pull, Ed Miliband will be the very strong push.
You can see how irrelevant Labour are in this debate by the superfluous waffle towards the bottom of the BBC article from Rachel Reeves, "All is not fine in the garden here.. " and "(Labour will) tackle the deficit in a "fairer" manner than the coalition."
Err. Ok.
Expect the Autumn statement (and everything else) to reinforce the same over the next 6 months.
I missed the thread on the R&C competition (when was it?) over recent days, I've been away, but FWIW I forecast UKIP by 9%: UKIP 43%, Con 34%, Lab 16%, Others 7%.
I can't be arsed doing it to two decimal places.
I predicted 9% also... if we are both right I'll lend you the book!
About 7 people predicted UKIP @ 9%
This is why it's useful to put in 2 dec places, as it differentiates your prediction.
It's my experience that if you are in a Party, those that defect FROM your Party are the aforementioned TPDs while those who defect TO your Party are heroes of virtue and principle. Twas ever thus and the activists on here react as you'd expect.
Just noticed the Populus numbers - Labour up from 29 with Mori toi 36 and the Conservatives from 32 to 35 with the duopoly on 71 with Populus and 61 with Mori. Huge variation in the numbers and huge volatility. From sliding sub-30 as many on here seemed to imagine, Labour are back above 35 while the Conservatives have also reached 35 which is a number they've not seen much of recently.
In other words, confusion heaped upon confusion but this is the world we live in and these are the hands we're given...
Nick Robinson puts it even better: "In other words his message to the country and his party is that even if things get worse, perhaps especially if things get worse, the right answer is - you've guessed it - to stick to his plan."
Mr. Royale, Brown (very boringly) hammered on the same old slogans. Unfortunately, it worked, not least because it takes a lot for political stuff to get through to a generally disinterested electorate (which may be bad for Labour as Ed Miliband being crap is something that you might well hear in general and not just on sites like this).
"Cross-dressing artist Grayson Perry is a long-time supporter of the Labour Party. His £19 eco-friendly ‘Vote Labour’ shopping bag uses an image of a ceramic lion which he donated to the party in July.
The ornament was sold for £42,000 at a star-studded Labour fundraising event attended by left-wing actors, artists and TV stars."
I missed the thread on the R&C competition (when was it?) over recent days, I've been away, but FWIW I forecast UKIP by 9%: UKIP 43%, Con 34%, Lab 16%, Others 7%.
I can't be arsed doing it to two decimal places.
I predicted 9% also... if we are both right I'll lend you the book!
I missed the thread on the R&C competition (when was it?) over recent days, I've been away, but FWIW I forecast UKIP by 9%: UKIP 43%, Con 34%, Lab 16%, Others 7%.
I can't be arsed doing it to two decimal places.
I predicted 9% also... if we are both right I'll lend you the book!
About 7 people predicted UKIP @ 9%
This is why it's useful to put in 2 dec places, as it will differentiate your prediction.
I missed the thread on the R&C competition (when was it?) over recent days, I've been away, but FWIW I forecast UKIP by 9%: UKIP 43%, Con 34%, Lab 16%, Others 7%.
I can't be arsed doing it to two decimal places.
I predicted 9% also... if we are both right I'll lend you the book!
About 7 people predicted UKIP @ 9%
This is why it's useful to put in 2 dec places, as it differentiates your prediction.
Ok. 34.34% Con and 43.43% UKIP. If I win, I will be suitably insufferable about it.
Excitable Labour posters should be careful what they wish for. This headline news article has "Conservative election strategy" written all over it, not that it makes it any less true:
The clear message to swing voters is: we've made good progress, but there's still a long way to go. It's not safe to vote Labour yet, we need you to let us finish the job.
Strangely enough, this meshes very nicely with "long-term economic plan" (which we will be heartily sick of by 8th May, if you're not already) because Crosby wants this message brain-stamped on every swing voter in the country. That way, their pens will gravitate towards the Conservative box almost without thinking. The LTEP will be the pull, Ed Miliband will be the very strong push.
You can see how irrelevant Labour are in this debate by the superfluous waffle towards the bottom of the BBC article from Rachel Reeves, "All is not fine in the garden here.. " and "(Labour will) tackle the deficit in a "fairer" manner than the coalition."
Err. Ok.
Expect the Autumn statement (and everything else) to reinforce the same over the next 6 months.
Rachel Reeves only does superfluous waffle. Truly one of the weakest of the recent intake of MPs. Why she is talked about in awed tones by Labour is just beyond me.
It's my experience that if you are in a Party, those that defect FROM your Party are the aforementioned TPDs while those who defect TO your Party are heroes of virtue and principle. Twas ever thus and the activists on here react as you'd expect.
Just noticed the Populus numbers - Labour up from 29 with Mori toi 36 and the Conservatives from 32 to 35 with the duopoly on 71 with Populus and 61 with Mori. Huge variation in the numbers and huge volatility. From sliding sub-30 as many on here seemed to imagine, Labour are back above 35 while the Conservatives have also reached 35 which is a number they've not seen much of recently.
In other words, confusion heaped upon confusion but this is the world we live in and these are the hands we're given...
Sorry, I just had a Genesis moment there...
Now, did you read the news today?
They say the danger has gone away. But I can see the fire's still alight.
Father of british muslim who has been beheading Syrian soldiers says his son should be executed
Won't Dave just stop him coming back here for two years?
Only if he will not promise to be good.
When it comes to the criminal justice system the UKIP balloon, always loosely attached to reality, becomes completely untethered and floats high on thermals of outrage without any need for supporting facts.
Am I supposed to be UKIP now?
You live and learn
What is this idea that Britain is somehow soft on terrorists that commit heinous crimes? One killer of Lee Rigby has a whole life sentence and the other has a life sentence with a minimum of 45 years. The idea that the book wouldn't be thrown at "Jihadi John" if he were captured is quite bizarre.
My original comment was partly in jest but since you jumped on the comment (and decided to pigeon hole me) .....
I don't believe I referred to Jihadi John - no way could they treat such a high profile case lightly.
"Under the counter-terrorism bill, suspected jihadis who travel to Syria will be prevented from returning to Britain for two years and only allowed to re-enter if they consent to facing trial, home detention, regular police monitoring or to going on a deradicalisation course."
A deradicalisation course..... see where I was coming from yet?
You will no doubt be aware of people having had their passports confiscated and allegedly being watched by our security service who still manage to leave the country to fight abroad - so much for monitoring then too.
News (re deradicalisation) also carried by the Beeb
"Terrorists will be required to undergo de-radicalisation programmes"
Personally I don't think that attending a deradicalisation programme would be sufficient or in line with "throwing the book" at them - we might have to differ on that one.
Note - clearly if they had committed murder I think we would expect the courts to act appropriately.
"The final spend on the great adventure was £575m – more than £2m an hour, 24 hours a day, for the duration of the games.
How come that an event over-budget at every turn, and plagued by housekeeping blunders, is now being passed off by the organisers as a triumph of Scottish financial management? Only Lord Smith of Kelvin can say, and we invite him to do. But we are not holding our breath.
Having brought the games to a successful conclusion 'well within budget', his lordship is now otherwise engaged – shaping Scotland's destiny."
Mr. Royale, Brown (very boringly) hammered on the same old slogans. Unfortunately, it worked, not least because it takes a lot for political stuff to get through to a generally disinterested electorate (which may be bad for Labour as Ed Miliband being crap is something that you might well hear in general and not just on sites like this).
So, I imagine they just learnt from Brown.
Yes, but Brown was (unlike Miliband) viewed by a solid minority of voters as the "Iron Chancellor". A (slightly fewer) number even bought his spin that he 'saved the world' in 2008.
This stuff has to have a vague anchor in popularly held perceptions for it to have any effect. Otherwise it is, just, waffle and people will be deaf to it.
Miliband seems to be caught between wanting to maintain the same 'cost of living' slogan that seemed to chime well with voters in 2011/2012, but has lost much of its reasonance since. He's now field-testing new slogans like 'zero-zero', in the vain hope it catches on, so he can spin off a modified version of the same election strategy off the back of it. That seems like a forlorn hope.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives have close to ideal electoral conditions to roll off their long-term economic plan. They have disproportionately good British economic performance to boast about, but the job isn't done and there are storm clouds on the horizon. Again.
"why is Patrick O'Flynn, the economics spokesman for Britain's most libertarian mainstream party UKIP, flirting with the kind of wealth taxes and turnover taxes you'd more usually associate with the Greens or the Socialist Workers' Party?"
This is indeed a longer term problem for UKIP. Are they lefties or righties? We all know where they stand on the EU, man-in-the-street's concerns, etc. But will they cut spending or raise it? Cut tax or raise it? In favour of free schools or centralised marxism? If they morph into a lefty statist anti-EU party Dave will dance a jig! I guess Delingploe is worried to ensure they stay on the sensible side of the left/right axis.
(Note similarity with the US Tea Party. They started righteous on spending and statism - but morphed into religious and social conservatism. The jesus-freak loonies took over. The libertarians are in despair.)
The Tea Party never moved at all: they started wanting to cut spending on poor people and maintaining spending on old, white people, and they still want to cut spending on poor people and maintain spending on old, white people.
UKIP should not become the party of right wing ideologues like Delingpole. That would be disastrous. They should decide things on an issue by issue basis, according to whether it makes sense.
How would Jihadi John --the merciless killer - get a fair trial in the UK?
Fletcher: Damn you, Senator. You promised me those men would be decently treated. Senator Lane: They were decently treated. They were decently fed and then they were decently shot. Those men are common outlaws, nothing more.
Someone needs to tell Dellingpole that '' Britain's most libertarian mainstream party'' is not ''UKIP''. If it is, then sending anti homosexual dog whistles, complaining about free movement of labour and the accents on the London Tube and calling your own supporters 'ting tongs' is a strange definition of 'libertarian' which I have not heard before.
Clearly though when Farage says 'there is no left and right anymore', Dellingpole at least believes he is lying.
Excitable Labour posters should be careful what they wish for. This headline news article has "Conservative election strategy" written all over it, not that it makes it any less true:
The clear message to swing voters is: we've made good progress, but there's still a long way to go. It's not safe to vote Labour yet, we need you to let us finish the job.
Strangely enough, this meshes very nicely with "long-term economic plan" (which we will be heartily sick of by 8th May, if you're not already) because Crosby wants this message brain-stamped on every swing voter in the country. That way, their pens will gravitate towards the Conservative box almost without thinking. The LTEP will be the pull, Ed Miliband will be the very strong push.
You can see how irrelevant Labour are in this debate by the superfluous waffle towards the bottom of the BBC article from Rachel Reeves, "All is not fine in the garden here.. " and "(Labour will) tackle the deficit in a "fairer" manner than the coalition."
Err. Ok.
Expect the Autumn statement (and everything else) to reinforce the same over the next 6 months.
Rachel Reeves only does superfluous waffle. Truly one of the weakest of the recent intake of MPs. Why she is talked about in awed tones by Labour is just beyond me.
Agree with the "meh" comments on the Ashcroft poll this week, but this sentence is interesting:
"One third of UKIP voters would rather see Labour in office, either alone or in coalition, while four in ten would prefer a Conservative overall majority."
Suggests the "Wake up with Ed" line has limited impact on this group. That's possibly the flip side of the fact that UKIP has been taking votes off Labour lately - that group of voters often does say they'd still prefer Labour to the Tories.
'WWC' as spouted by kippers is of course just a dog whistle for 'racist bigot'.
I believe you are in effect calling about a third of your countrymen (33% of voters would vote UKIP if they thought it could win in their constituency) racist bigots. Is your name Gordon Brown ?
Read what I said. Kippers use it as code. And 33% are not white working class. People who vote UKIP are just voters. Just as people who vote labour are not all socialists and people who vote tory are not all capitalists. Quite a number swing between the two. Most people are centrists and quite possibly confused and their reasons for voting would be interesting to analyse. Beards seem to play some sort of influence.
Its not unreasonable to worry about immigration. The reasons why we need to import so many workers when we have so many people not in work but on benefits is worrying. UKIP attempt to scare with their opposition and ignore the full story. And I think we all know the dog whistle intent of Farage when he talks about his next door neighbours and fellow tube travellers. People like Reckless and Carswell are not kippers of course they are tories who want to for different reasons to run their own show. As incumbents the electorate are not voting for traditional 'ting tong' kippers or thickos like Sean Howlett. Does anybody seriously think anyone would vote for him? Clearly Kipper HQ does not think anyone would vote for Hamilton. O'Flynn by the sound of it is not a tory and not a kipper either.
Excitable Labour posters should be careful what they wish for. This headline news article has "Conservative election strategy" written all over it, not that it makes it any less true:
The clear message to swing voters is: we've made good progress, but there's still a long way to go. It's not safe to vote Labour yet, we need you to let us finish the job.
Strangely enough, this meshes very nicely with "long-term economic plan" (which we will be heartily sick of by 8th May, if you're not already) because Crosby wants this message brain-stamped on every swing voter in the country. That way, their pens will gravitate towards the Conservative box almost without thinking. The LTEP will be the pull, Ed Miliband will be the very strong push.
You can see how irrelevant Labour are in this debate by the superfluous waffle towards the bottom of the BBC article from Rachel Reeves, "All is not fine in the garden here.. " and "(Labour will) tackle the deficit in a "fairer" manner than the coalition."
Err. Ok.
Expect the Autumn statement (and everything else) to reinforce the same over the next 6 months.
These thoughts appear to me to be somewhat unoriginal, having been posted by Conservative colleagues in some shape or form for the past two years. Yet the Conservative score has not yet budged. Presumably the great fear for the Conservatives is that the worst is over for Ed, and the Labour vote stabilises, and that the sentiments you present above continue to have no upward impact on Conservative fortunes?
Comments
"If, as I hope, the answer is the latter than UKIP will have to acquire an economic policy more cogent and radically different from those of LibLabCon Westminster bubble than the one being touted by Patrick O'Flynn. (Yes, O'Flynn read economics at Cambridge - but so too did John Maynard Keynes and look where that landed us).
The solution is staring the party in the face. No one understands the economic problems facing Britain better than Douglas Carswell. By happy coincidence, he happens to be UKIP's first elected MP."
Maybe he's got some odd ideas - but I suspect it's more of a control freakery personality than an ideology. I always found him delightful on Twitter.
(Note similarity with the US Tea Party. They started righteous on spending and statism - but morphed into religious and social conservatism. The jesus-freak loonies took over. The libertarians are in despair.)
The First Minister, who leaves office on Wednesday, said RBS could have avoided the international banking crisis if he had not left his former job as one of the bank’s oil economists to pursue a political career.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE
(Interesting aside, this film is almost 40 years old and everyone was concerned about exactly the same stuff)
You live and learn
You can't tell where in the cycle we are until a decade later.
Are we about to enter a new recession seven years after the start of the last one - or are we still going to be recovering from the last recession for the next few years?
Gordon Brown used to adjust his borrowing golden rule for where we were in the cycle. He worked backwards from the actual borrowing to where in the cycle he needed to claim to be to justify the borrowing.
'WWC' as spouted by kippers is of course just a dog whistle for 'racist bigot'. It is a bit surprising that when Brown badmouths his own supporter he ends up with his head in his hands. When it happens to UKIP farage just laughs it off.
What do you expect?
1. The "savings" from welfare "reform" are minuscule, in contrast to the human misery inflicted.
2. This government has overseen a transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top
3. Average incomes have fallen 10% in real terms over the life of this parliament
4. Government borrowing is rising.
5. Economic conditions here on in are going to worsen.
Swingback to Labour territory there.
gross oversimplification.
He was neither - in spades. That sort of behaviour crosses my red lines. Do that and you're dead. And undiginified. We all have our own red lines - YMMV.
There has been a decline in real terms of income. Given we had (and still have) a bloody enormous deficit it's unsurprising there's been some economic pain.
I'm not sure there will be a swing to Labour. Voters of the WWC now have somewhere else to go, those concerned about the economy are unlikely to return to Labour (and those who think Brown/Balls are worth anything are probably red already), and Ed Miliband is likelier to scare voters off than entice them.
However, the Conservatives retain tremendous potential to screw themselves, and may well do so. The Rochester by-election result and aftermath will be the next opportunity for a political act of self-harm by the blues.
"German gov to withdraw from its 2020 climate change goals. Economics Minister Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) abandons cut of 40% of CO2 emissions"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11235970/Firing-Patrick-OFlynn-would-signal-the-start-of-Ukips-slide-back-into-fringe-insignificance.html
"The new figures from the Electoral Commission also revealed the Conservatives received more than twice as much in donations as Labour between July and September 2014.
• Conservative Party - £6,757,289
• Labour Party - £3,188,931
• Liberal Democrats - £2,752,873
• Scottish National Party (SNP) - £1,572,825
• Co-operative Party - £415,114
• UK Independence Party (UKIP) - £98,387
• Green Party - £88,250"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30034887
I can't be arsed doing it to two decimal places.
Fears of a cover-up of an Establishment paedophile ring deepened last night as an MP said he handed over evidence in 1988 of ‘abuse parties’ at Dolphin Square and other London locations, but an investigation was shelved by Scotland Yard.
Labour’s John Mann said the case was closed within three months on the orders of ‘those at the top’."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2837175/MP-told-police-VIP-paedophile-ring-s-parties-26-years-Labour-s-John-Mann-claims-handed-evidence-abuse-Scotland-Yard-investigation-shelved.html
The poor pay less income tax, but more VAT and receive less pay rises, tax credits and child benefit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30075810
The clear message to swing voters is: we've made good progress, but there's still a long way to go. It's not safe to vote Labour yet, we need you to let us finish the job.
Strangely enough, this meshes very nicely with "long-term economic plan" (which we will be heartily sick of by 8th May, if you're not already) because Crosby wants this message brain-stamped on every swing voter in the country. That way, their pens will gravitate towards the Conservative box almost without thinking. The LTEP will be the pull, Ed Miliband will be the very strong push.
You can see how irrelevant Labour are in this debate by the superfluous waffle towards the bottom of the BBC article from Rachel Reeves, "All is not fine in the garden here.. " and "(Labour will) tackle the deficit in a "fairer" manner than the coalition."
Err. Ok.
Expect the Autumn statement (and everything else) to reinforce the same over the next 6 months.
About 7 people predicted UKIP @ 9%
This is why it's useful to put in 2 dec places, as it differentiates your prediction.
It's my experience that if you are in a Party, those that defect FROM your Party are the aforementioned TPDs while those who defect TO your Party are heroes of virtue and principle. Twas ever thus and the activists on here react as you'd expect.
Just noticed the Populus numbers - Labour up from 29 with Mori toi 36 and the Conservatives from 32 to 35 with the duopoly on 71 with Populus and 61 with Mori. Huge variation in the numbers and huge volatility. From sliding sub-30 as many on here seemed to imagine, Labour are back above 35 while the Conservatives have also reached 35 which is a number they've not seen much of recently.
In other words, confusion heaped upon confusion but this is the world we live in and these are the hands we're given...
Sorry, I just had a Genesis moment there...
So, I imagine they just learnt from Brown.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2837757/It-squeaky-bum-time-Labour-admits-Miliband-ally-party-bolsters-election-war-chest-selling-bizarre-19-shopping-bags.html
"Cross-dressing artist Grayson Perry is a long-time supporter of the Labour Party.
His £19 eco-friendly ‘Vote Labour’ shopping bag uses an image of a ceramic lion which he donated to the party in July.
The ornament was sold for £42,000 at a star-studded Labour fundraising event attended by left-wing actors, artists and TV stars."
They say the danger has gone away. But I can see the fire's still alight.
I don't believe I referred to Jihadi John - no way could they treat such a high profile case lightly.
In any event refer to the Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/14/uk-jihadists-citizenship-laws-human-rights
"Under the counter-terrorism bill, suspected jihadis who travel to Syria will be prevented from returning to Britain for two years and only allowed to re-enter if they consent to facing trial, home detention, regular police monitoring or to going on a deradicalisation course."
A deradicalisation course..... see where I was coming from yet?
You will no doubt be aware of people having had their passports confiscated and allegedly being watched by our security service who still manage to leave the country to fight abroad - so much for monitoring then too.
News (re deradicalisation) also carried by the Beeb
"Terrorists will be required to undergo de-radicalisation programmes"
Personally I don't think that attending a deradicalisation programme would be sufficient or in line with "throwing the book" at them - we might have to differ on that one.
Note - clearly if they had committed murder I think we would expect the courts to act appropriately.
http://www.scottishreview.net/index.shtml
"The final spend on the great adventure was £575m – more than £2m an hour, 24 hours a day, for the duration of the games.
How come that an event over-budget at every turn, and plagued by housekeeping blunders, is now being passed off by the organisers as a triumph of Scottish financial management? Only Lord Smith of Kelvin can say, and we invite him to do. But we are not holding our breath.
Having brought the games to a successful conclusion 'well within budget', his lordship is now otherwise engaged – shaping Scotland's destiny."
This stuff has to have a vague anchor in popularly held perceptions for it to have any effect. Otherwise it is, just, waffle and people will be deaf to it.
Miliband seems to be caught between wanting to maintain the same 'cost of living' slogan that seemed to chime well with voters in 2011/2012, but has lost much of its reasonance since. He's now field-testing new slogans like 'zero-zero', in the vain hope it catches on, so he can spin off a modified version of the same election strategy off the back of it. That seems like a forlorn hope.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives have close to ideal electoral conditions to roll off their long-term economic plan. They have disproportionately good British economic performance to boast about, but the job isn't done and there are storm clouds on the horizon. Again.
How would Jihadi John --the merciless killer - get a fair trial in the UK?
UKIP should not become the party of right wing ideologues like Delingpole. That would be disastrous. They should decide things on an issue by issue basis, according to whether it makes sense.
Senator Lane: They were decently treated. They were decently fed and then they were decently shot. Those men are common outlaws, nothing more.
If it is, then sending anti homosexual dog whistles, complaining about free movement of labour and the accents on the London Tube and calling your own supporters 'ting tongs' is a strange definition of 'libertarian' which I have not heard before.
Clearly though when Farage says 'there is no left and right anymore', Dellingpole at least believes he is lying.
and therefore down to methodology .
Tories still in the same broad band that they've occupied since he started polling, Labour on 30 or less for third week running.
The gap no greater than 1 for the fourth successive week.
"One third of UKIP voters would rather see Labour in office, either alone or in coalition, while four in ten would prefer a Conservative overall majority."
Suggests the "Wake up with Ed" line has limited impact on this group. That's possibly the flip side of the fact that UKIP has been taking votes off Labour lately - that group of voters often does say they'd still prefer Labour to the Tories.
Read what I said. Kippers use it as code. And 33% are not white working class. People who vote UKIP are just voters. Just as people who vote labour are not all socialists and people who vote tory are not all capitalists. Quite a number swing between the two. Most people are centrists and quite possibly confused and their reasons for voting would be interesting to analyse. Beards seem to play some sort of influence.
Its not unreasonable to worry about immigration. The reasons why we need to import so many workers when we have so many people not in work but on benefits is worrying. UKIP attempt to scare with their opposition and ignore the full story. And I think we all know the dog whistle intent of Farage when he talks about his next door neighbours and fellow tube travellers.
People like Reckless and Carswell are not kippers of course they are tories who want to for different reasons to run their own show. As incumbents the electorate are not voting for traditional 'ting tong' kippers or thickos like Sean Howlett. Does anybody seriously think anyone would vote for him? Clearly Kipper HQ does not think anyone would vote for Hamilton.
O'Flynn by the sound of it is not a tory and not a kipper either.