politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the LDs hold on to as many seats as the latest polling s

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the LDs hold on to as many seats as the latest polling suggests then Clegg should thank NO2AV

Just looking through the latest constituency polling from Lord Ashcroft and one thing is apparent – the LDs look set to hang on to so many of their CON facing marginals because the AV referendum in 2011 produced a NO victory.

Read the full story here

Indigo

First ?

Indigo

"‘If we cannot put our relationship with the EU on a better footing, then of course I rule nothing out.’"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word

CarlottaVance

Up to a point Lord Copper. How many Lab second preferences would have seen the Lib Dems safely over the line? I don't see why one party of government is expected to take a seat off the other party of government. If voters don't like the government, they don't like the government.

RodCrosby

Acknowledging your sources once in a while would be appreciated, I'm sure...

UKIP and FPTP are the amulets which will save the LDs from meltdown.

Another 'major' party to bang on about the unfairness of the electoral system after 2015 is a bonus, also...

Indigo

Cameron's "crackdown" on migration already looking dubious on the legal front, or will required treaty changes unlikely to be agreed by all member states. Poland has already objected to changes to WFTC and CTC that would exclude immigrants for 4 years, an issue that apparently required treaty change to bring into effect.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852457/At-Cameron-acts-migrants-Crackdown-range-benefits-EU-allow-it.html

Table summarising of issues from that article here http://goo.gl/JNR2VI

Indigo

Be interesting to see how this goes in Switzerland given its relationship with the EU.

http://news.sky.com/story/1381807/switzerland-faces-vote-on-immigration-cap

"Switzerland will decide on Sunday whether to curb immigration into the landlocked country, in a referendum proposed by an environmental group."

Indigo

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

surbiton

Latest SSS

Scottish Seats Surbitonised

Based on the weighted average of the last 8 Yougov Scottish sub samples [ yes ! I know ],

SSS gives us :

SNP 43 [ 47] 42%

LAB 12 [9 ] 26%

CON 2 [ 1 ] 17.63%

LD 2 [ 2 ] 4.88%

Since the weekend , the SNP weighted average has gone down 1.71% [ giving their first and only 39% for a long time ], Labour, ironically, up by the same percentage, Tories up 2.63% !!

audreyanne

"Look set to retain."

Five months out? Oh Mike.

audreyanne

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

anotherDave

Open Primaries.

If/when UKIP get control of a council, I wonder if they will adopt Mr Carswell's suggestion of letting political parties piggy-back candidate primary elections onto scheduled elections (with the parties picking up the additional costs)?

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-10-13c.166.0&s=open+primaries+speaker:11621#g166.2

Alanbrooke

audreyanne said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

but one could say Osborne is a haemorrhoid on the body politic and incompetent to boot, and yet he keeps his job. Cameron isn't really that smart after all.

anotherDave

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Alanbrooke

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

anotherDave

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.

audreyanne

Alanbrooke said:

audreyanne said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

but one could say Osborne is a haemorrhoid on the body politic and incompetent to boot, and yet he keeps his job. Cameron isn't really that smart after all.


You could say the moon is made of cheese, but that's why Cameron is PM, Osborne is Chancellor and you are … not.

Alanbrooke

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much they're spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.

anotherDave

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much their spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.and very, very unpopular with british voters.

Expect to see it in the small print, p.92.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/

Alanbrooke

audreyanne said:

Alanbrooke said:

audreyanne said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

but one could say Osborne is a haemorrhoid on the body politic and incompetent to boot, and yet he keeps his job. Cameron isn't really that smart after all.

You could say the moon is made of cheese, but that's why Cameron is PM, Osborne is Chancellor and you are … not.

In office but not in power as someone once said.

Alanbrooke

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much their spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.

and very, very unpopular with british voters.

Expect to see it in the small print, p.92.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/


well there's always immigration, Dave's going large on it today.

Stuart_Dickson

The cash continues to pile on SNP MAJ at the next Scottish general election (5 May 2016).

(price one month ago in brackets; Ladbrokes)

SNP majority 4/5 (2/1)
No overall majority 11/8 (4/6)
Labour majority 6/1 (4/1)

Alanbrooke

Stuart_Dickson said:

The cash continues to pile on SNP MAJ at the next Scottish general election (5 May 2016).

(price one month ago in brackets; Ladbrokes)

SNP majority 4/5 (2/1)
No overall majority 11/8 (4/6)
Labour majority 6/1 (4/1)

it's probably all the extra spending power people have from lower petrol prices.

anotherDave

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much their spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.

and very, very unpopular with british voters.

Expect to see it in the small print, p.92.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/

well there's always immigration, Dave's going large on it today.In government the Conservatives have continued Labour's open door immigration policy. Whatever Mr Cameron's rhetoric.

Casino_Royale

O/T - if this is the best Cameron can do, he may as well forget making a speech today. Announcing a few extra curbs on the benefit migrants can claim just isn't going to cut the mustard:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30224493

It says Cameron hopes it'll be a "game changer". It won't, and it's pathetic. No cap and no emergency break. No serious controls. It'll be just a lot of insincere windy rhetoric about how he shares people's concerns, and maybe a bit of EU bashing. It's pantomime politics with no real substance.

Not good enough.

Stuart_Dickson

Shadsy has a sense of humour: he has priced up the SNP in the Berwick-upon-Tweed constituency! The SNP don't nominate candidates for seats in England, and have no intention of doing so.

Best prices - Berwick-upon-Tweed (note: Alan Beith MP, LD, is retiring)

Con 8/13 (Lad)
LD 11/8 (Hills)
UKIP 66/1 (PP)
SNP 100/1 (Lad)
Lab 100/1 (Lad)

Result - Berwick-upon-Tweed 2010:

LD (Alan Beith MP) 16,806
Con 14,116
Lab 5,061
UKIP 1,243
BNP 1,213

Alanbrooke

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2852453/Ms-U-Turn-brands-Gove-ideological-warrior-bid-woo-teachers.html

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much their spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.

and very, very unpopular with british voters.

Expect to see it in the small print, p.92.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/

well there's always immigration, Dave's going large on it today.

In government the Conservatives have continued Labour's open door immigration policy. Whatever Mr Cameron's rhetoric.

LOL I don't think it's just immigration they've continued Labour's policies, borrowing, civil liberties, banks, state interference ...... plus ca change.

Indigo

audreyanne said:

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

Yes, its not the nasty party any more its the anodyne Pointless Party, much better to have not have any real points of view, and give contentless speeches full of undeliverable promises, much less likely to offend anyone that way, or achieve much of note. Dont give me people who care about education nonsense, I'm a teacher and educational psychologist, my mother was a teacher for 40 years, I care about education.

Adopted boy from a modest family replaced by upper middle class privately educated lawyer.. the Conservative Party continues to surprise us.

Casino_Royale said:

and maybe a bit of EU bashing

No, none of that, just a arched eyebrow and indirect hint that could be taken to be EU bashing were you so inclined, but could be read many other ways as well.

"then of course I rule nothing out.’"

What the hell does that mean ?

david_herdson

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

logical_song

Unintended consequences are sometimes quite amusing.
The Tories offered an AV rather than an STV referendum to the LibDems in the coalition talks because they saw it as the lesser of the two evils with regard to their party advantage.
They then fought hard against AV, again for party advantage. So they got what they wanted and it turns out it's not to their party's advantage.
I don't think that it is in the country's interest to have many MPs elected on low percentages or to potentially have one party gaining most seats while a different one has most votes.
MPs should give us what's best for the country - and it may actually turn out well for them too.

OblitusSumMe

Yesterday I heard that rare thing - a group of old ladies on the back seat of the bus discussing AV. They really didn't like FPTP.

It came up in their conversation because one of them intends to "vote Conservative to stop UKIP". From what I could gather from politely eavesdropping, this was akin to having a limb amputated for the purpose of preventing infection spreading. FPTP as equivalent to a world without antibiotics, if you like.

Not your usual group of old ladies on the bus, then.

My hairdresser earlier in the week was a bit more mainstream - which nowadays means more likely to vote UKIP, given her views on immigration and capital punishment.

OblitusSumMe

Have I missed the phone ComRes? Are they holding it over to the start of December so that they end up skipping a month, by doing the poll every ~five weeks?

foxinsoxuk

Indigo said:

audreyanne said:

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

Yes, its not the nasty party any more its the anodyne Pointless Party, much better to have not have any real points of view, and give contentless speeches full of undeliverable promises, much less likely to offend anyone that way, or achieve much of note. Dont give me people who care about education nonsense, I'm a teacher and educational psychologist, my mother was a teacher for 40 years, I care about education.

Adopted boy from a modest family replaced by upper middle class privately educated lawyer.. the Conservative Party continues to surprise us.

Casino_Royale said:

and maybe a bit of EU bashing

No, none of that, just a arched eyebrow and indirect hint that could be taken to be EU bashing were you so inclined, but could be read many other ways as well.

"then of course I rule nothing out.’"

What the hell does that mean ?

Gove is conspicuous for his loyalty. He is no traitorous pig-dog!

He was replaced when his reforms needed a more gentle approach. I am sure that we will see him in another front bench role, quite possibly next leader. Tories like loyalty and someone who puts the party above ego.

AJK

Yes, as David Herdson, and others have said before, the 'stupid' Party needs to realise that STV or Mixed member (NZ style) would be to its advantage.

JackW

AJK said:

Yes, as David Herdson, and others have said before, the 'stupid' Party needs to realise that STV or Mixed member (NZ style) would be to its advantage.

Those PBers favouring STV may find themselves as the contents of a world famous pie or 28 days exile to ConHome .... sensible offenders will clearly prefer the former.

Casino_Royale

david_herdson said:

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

Isn't that the truth? The relentless Guardiansta love-in refused to have anything to do with UKIP and the Conservative and therefore, forgetting they alone did not command a majority of the electorate, guaranteed their defeat.

Totally idiotic.

anotherDave

OblitusSumMe said:

Have I missed the phone ComRes? Are they holding it over to the start of December so that they end up skipping a month, by doing the poll every ~five weeks?

Their marginals poll for ITV was done at the right time.

I wonder if perhaps The Independent have held it back for a few days to avoid clashing with the ITV and Ashcroft polls? If so, I'd expect to see it today/tomorrow.

Casino_Royale

Indigo said:

audreyanne said:

Gove was an as*hole. He was a pain in the butt for people who care about education, loathed by significant numbers of people and highly toxic. He was a reminder of the nasty party, a part of Conservatism to whom No.10 quite rightly gave the boot.

One of Cameron's best moves. The man's smart. Cameron, not Gove.

Yes, its not the nasty party any more its the anodyne Pointless Party, much better to have not have any real points of view, and give contentless speeches full of undeliverable promises, much less likely to offend anyone that way, or achieve much of note. Dont give me people who care about education nonsense, I'm a teacher and educational psychologist, my mother was a teacher for 40 years, I care about education.

Adopted boy from a modest family replaced by upper middle class privately educated lawyer.. the Conservative Party continues to surprise us.

Casino_Royale said:

and maybe a bit of EU bashing

No, none of that, just a arched eyebrow and indirect hint that could be taken to be EU bashing were you so inclined, but could be read many other ways as well.

"then of course I rule nothing out.’"

What the hell does that mean ?

"Angela, can we have a cap on EU migration please?"

"No."

"Uh, ok. Can we have an emergency brake then, just for a year or two?"

"No."

"Oh, well, um.. How about we restrict benefits for a bit? Please help. I'm getting a lot of political pressure at home; you know I'd rather not have to do this."

"Don't care, up to you. We're thinking of doing something similar. Nothing in the EU treaties about a right to claim benefits anywhere."

"Yay, great! Thanks Angela. I'll dress it up and announce it as my own. Nice doing business with you. Of course, I may have to say a few nasty things about the EU too, but that's all for effect, nothing personal, do hope you understand."

That's the sophiscated version of our renegotiation 'strategy'.

Indigo

Casino_Royale said:

"Don't care, up to you. We're thinking of doing something similar. Nothing in the EU treaties about a right to claim benefits anywhere."

"Yay, great! Thanks Angela. I'll dress it up and announce it as my own. Nice doing business with you. Of course, I may have to say a few nasty things about the EU too, but that's all for effect, nothing personal, do hope you understand."

That's the sophiscated version of our renegotiation 'strategy'.

The first paragraph sadly isn't true. This blog goes into it at some length and its looks like a nightmare, and next to impossible without treaty amendments - which require unanimity, which will be hard to get when several members benefit strongly from UK benefits being sent home to families in their countries.

http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/amending-eu-free-movement-law-what-are.html

However, the CJEU has said (in the Collins case) that, pursuant to the Treaties, job-seekers cannot be refused equal treatment as regards benefits which are intended to facilitate access to employment. And in the Vatsouras case, it expressly distinguished this type of benefit from ‘social assistance’ benefits which job-seekers are not entitled to pursuant to the citizens’ Directive

Since the right to workers’ equal treatment is expressly set out in the Treaties, then removing in-work benefits for workers – the core of the Open Europe proposal – would be manifestly contrary to the Treaties, and would require a Treaty amendment.

CarlottaVance

Stuart_Dickson said:

Shadsy has a sense of humour: he has priced up the SNP in the Berwick-upon-Tweed constituency! The SNP don't nominate candidates for seats in England, and have no intention of doing so.

Best prices - Berwick-upon-Tweed (note: Alan Beith MP, LD, is retiring)

Con 8/13 (Lad)
LD 11/8 (Hills)
UKIP 66/1 (PP)
SNP 100/1 (Lad)
Lab 100/1 (Lad)

Result - Berwick-upon-Tweed 2010:

LD (Alan Beith MP) 16,806
Con 14,116
Lab 5,061
UKIP 1,243
BNP 1,213

SNP MSP Christine Grahame has explained why she would consider standing for the party over the border in Berwick-Upon-Tweed at the next general election.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-30217248

Millsy

It's in these sort of seats (with large LD majorities over the Tories) where there is little point in voting Tory - so the Ukip vote will be a lot higher than elsewhere (and the Tory vote more evenly spread across the country than in 2010)

Socrates

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

Millsy

"Don't blame me, I voted for AV"

TGOHF

Any Kippers outraged about "Black" Friday yet ?

tlg86

If we had AV I would vote UKIP and not use my second preference. Whether the Tories, Labour of the Lib Dems in power really doesn't bother me.

Scrapheap_as_was

A kipper? On pb? I don't think so.

felix

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

I'm shocked - kipper sympathisers disappointed by a Cameron speech on immigration/EU. In other news.....

Indigo

TGOHF said:

Any Kippers outraged about "Black" Friday yet ?

This whole UKIP is racist angle is getting a little boring, and its not making people any more likely to swing back to the Tories. If anything its making me as a Tory more likely to vote UKIP.

As someone who had to jump through hoops to get my immigrant wife into the UK, while people from the EU just walked in the door I would say the current immigration policies are racist. A policy which lets people in on merit, irrespective of where they come from would be much fairer, maybe its the Tories and Labour which are the racist parties ?

To quote Farage today:

I have a feeling, however, that I’m not alone in feeling sick of being lied to. For the avoidance of doubt though: I want to see sensible levels of immigration, not no immigration. I want us to treat the world equally and fairly, not have a discriminatory attitude towards Europe and against places like India, Australia, Canada, Africa, and so on.

I want Britain to prosper, and immigration can be a part of that. But not on this scale, and certainly not this quickly.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/i-saw-the-immigration-lies-a-mile-off--and-now-nobody-can-deny-it-9888641.html

JohnLoony

(OT) On Tuesday 24th July 2001, Jeffrey Archer wrote in his prison diary that a lot of the prisoners couldn't wait for Max Clifford to be banged up

surbiton

Casino_Royale said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

Isn't that the truth? The relentless Guardiansta love-in refused to have anything to do with UKIP and the Conservative and therefore, forgetting they alone did not command a majority of the electorate, guaranteed their defeat.

Totally idiotic.

Suddenly, Tories rushing to the PR door. What a sight ! But Tories, thoroughly unprincipled !

Indigo

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

Isn't that the truth? The relentless Guardiansta love-in refused to have anything to do with UKIP and the Conservative and therefore, forgetting they alone did not command a majority of the electorate, guaranteed their defeat.

Totally idiotic.

Suddenly, Tories rushing to the PR door. What a sight ! But Tories, thoroughly unprincipled !

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1383633/AV-referendum-Who-does-Tony-Blair-support.html Ed-Yes, Tony-No, Labour couldnt even decide on a position to run from.

SouthamObserver

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

This is just such an obvious tack to the right to woo back Tory UKIPers that it is almost impossible to see it working from a political perspective. Only the most credulous of fools is going to believe that there is any sincere conviction in what he is saying. It is all about expediency and trying to make an issue go away. He is dancing to Nigel's tune ad looking far, far weaker as a result.

Easterross

Sorry Mike but what a totally misleading header for a thread.

2010 was not the LibDem highwater mark. They had a net loss of seats. Charles Kennedy in 2005 was their most successful leader since the 1930s.

The poll suggests they are going to save lots of seats? On which planet?

Yesterday's poll was not of marginal seats. It was LibDem seats with majorities over 9% or 5500 votes.

The analysis I did of the June and September Ashcroft polls plus yesterday showed that of the 31 LibDem seats covered, they could look to hold 14 and are at risk of losing 12 to the Tories and 5 to Labour. Add to that 8 or 9 of their Scottish seats which are likely to go and that takes LibDem losses to around 25, virtually 50% of their parliamentary party.

TGOHF

Scrapheap_as_was said:

A kipper? On pb? I don't think so.

Yes they must be anmoyed that gamblers have immigrated onto their site..

Casino_Royale

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

He just isn't very good at politics.

Indigo

SouthamObserver said:

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

Its worse than that, he probably can't actually do anything about it, which is why he didnt try before, and why he will probably come away looking stupid now, but he is hoping he can kick the can the other side of the election. Most of what he wants to do needs treaty changes, so he is going to be told to go to hell by other european governments, but they might be nice to him and not say that until after the election.

Casino_Royale

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

Isn't that the truth? The relentless Guardiansta love-in refused to have anything to do with UKIP and the Conservative and therefore, forgetting they alone did not command a majority of the electorate, guaranteed their defeat.

Totally idiotic.

Suddenly, Tories rushing to the PR door. What a sight ! But Tories, thoroughly unprincipled !

What's that supposed to mean? I was commenting on the strategic ineptitude of the YES to AV campaign.

You responded by writing a lot of incoherent stuff about "Tories". I'm not sure what your point is.

SouthamObserver

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

Isn't that the truth? The relentless Guardiansta love-in refused to have anything to do with UKIP and the Conservative and therefore, forgetting they alone did not command a majority of the electorate, guaranteed their defeat.

Totally idiotic.

Suddenly, Tories rushing to the PR door. What a sight ! But Tories, thoroughly unprincipled !

I like the way that it is now all down to dreadful lefties that the AV vote failed. Nothing to do with the Tories who funded the campaign opposing it. As usual with our Tory chums, it is all someone else's fault.

Casino_Royale

felix said:

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

I'm shocked - kipper sympathisers disappointed by a Cameron speech on immigration/EU. In other news.....

I'm not a kipper, but patronising and dismissive comments like that might well lead to me becoming one.

Respect: a very difficult thing for some people to understand.

Casino_Royale

Indigo said:

Casino_Royale said:

"Don't care, up to you. We're thinking of doing something similar. Nothing in the EU treaties about a right to claim benefits anywhere."

"Yay, great! Thanks Angela. I'll dress it up and announce it as my own. Nice doing business with you. Of course, I may have to say a few nasty things about the EU too, but that's all for effect, nothing personal, do hope you understand."

That's the sophiscated version of our renegotiation 'strategy'.

The first paragraph sadly isn't true. This blog goes into it at some length and its looks like a nightmare, and next to impossible without treaty amendments - which require unanimity, which will be hard to get when several members benefit strongly from UK benefits being sent home to families in their countries.

http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/amending-eu-free-movement-law-what-are.html

However, the CJEU has said (in the Collins case) that, pursuant to the Treaties, job-seekers cannot be refused equal treatment as regards benefits which are intended to facilitate access to employment. And in the Vatsouras case, it expressly distinguished this type of benefit from ‘social assistance’ benefits which job-seekers are not entitled to pursuant to the citizens’ Directive

Since the right to workers’ equal treatment is expressly set out in the Treaties, then removing in-work benefits for workers – the core of the Open Europe proposal – would be manifestly contrary to the Treaties, and would require a Treaty amendment.

Thanks. I'll take a look.

Indigo

SouthamObserver said:

surbiton said:

Casino_Royale said:

david_herdson said:

On topic, some of us did foresee this in 2011. I did plan on voting Yes, until that campaign finally pushed me into the No camp, firstly with its relentless anti-Conservative message and secondly with the fact that as it was going to lose anyway, it was better that it lost by as much as possible to reduce post-poll acrimony.

Still, AV was and is a miserable little compromise. PR now!

Isn't that the truth? The relentless Guardiansta love-in refused to have anything to do with UKIP and the Conservative and therefore, forgetting they alone did not command a majority of the electorate, guaranteed their defeat.

Totally idiotic.

Suddenly, Tories rushing to the PR door. What a sight ! But Tories, thoroughly unprincipled !

I like the way that it is now all down to dreadful lefties that the AV vote failed. Nothing to do with the Tories who funded the campaign opposing it. As usual with our Tory chums, it is all someone else's fault.

It was about the LDs not wanting to involve anyone who wasn't right-on enough for them.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ralph-scott-and-joe-cox/lessons-to-be-learned-from-yes-to-av-campaign-failure

A crucial failing on this front is not getting Labour involved in the campaign from the very start. While Labour tribalists felt uneasy working for anything that would benefit the Lib Dems, the Yes campaign appeared similarly uneasy to really reach out to Labour activists and get them onside

The campaign was also clearly reluctant to have any involvement with UKIP, who could have delivered voters that no-one else on the campaign could. That Nigel Farage was only asked in the last two weeks is indicative of an unwillingness to get hands dirty and to recognise the awful cliché that sometimes in politics, the enemy of your enemy is your friend.

As you sow...

Freggles

TGOHF said:

Any Kippers outraged about "Black" Friday yet ?

Coming over here from America, flogging us cheap TVs...

malcolmg

Alanbrooke said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

The cash continues to pile on SNP MAJ at the next Scottish general election (5 May 2016).

(price one month ago in brackets; Ladbrokes)

SNP majority 4/5 (2/1)
No overall majority 11/8 (4/6)
Labour majority 6/1 (4/1)

it's probably all the extra spending power people have from lower petrol prices.

Will get worse now that we see the sum of powers being transferred is limited to control of road signs, sure people will be delighted how close that is to home rule.

Financier

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

Its worse than that, he probably can't actually do anything about it, which is why he didnt try before, and why he will probably come away looking stupid now, but he is hoping he can kick the can the other side of the election. Most of what he wants to do needs treaty changes, so he is going to be told to go to hell by other european governments, but they might be nice to him and not say that until after the election.

No, he can just ignore the EU (like France does) and do what is best for the UK - that is what he is paid to do.

Financier

SouthamObserver said:

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

This is just such an obvious tack to the right to woo back Tory UKIPers that it is almost impossible to see it working from a political perspective. Only the most credulous of fools is going to believe that there is any sincere conviction in what he is saying. It is all about expediency and trying to make an issue go away. He is dancing to Nigel's tune ad looking far, far weaker as a result.

So what should he do to appear far stronger - how would you combat immigration problems?

JohnLoony

(Throm Frevious Pread)

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Romford, Greater London is in Essex

No it isn't, it's in Greater London. It hasn't been in Essex since 1964.

Fat_Steve said:

I'm interested in the "Social Democrat defence" in the first seat. Is that the surviving rump of the old SDP ? Haven't heard from them for a while.

Yes it is. The last statistics I knew about (a few years ago) was that the surviving-surviving-continuing-continuity-Owenite-SDP had 47 members, 40 of whom were in Bridlington.

Indigo

Financier said:

SouthamObserver said:

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

This is just such an obvious tack to the right to woo back Tory UKIPers that it is almost impossible to see it working from a political perspective. Only the most credulous of fools is going to believe that there is any sincere conviction in what he is saying. It is all about expediency and trying to make an issue go away. He is dancing to Nigel's tune ad looking far, far weaker as a result.

So what should he do to appear far stronger - how would you combat immigration problems?

Right now, today (LDs permitting) he could put in a variation of the Canadian/Australia points based system for non-EU migrants, he doesn't need EU approval for that. At the very least he should put it to the vote and let the public see the LDs and/or Labour vote it down.

TheScreamingEagles

TGOHF said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

A kipper? On pb? I don't think so.

Yes they must be anmoyed that gamblers have immigrated onto their site..

They probably think PB is a mosque.

TheScreamingEagles

On topic. Yay a thread on AV

Alistair

Gove's reforms were massively over budget, plagued by accusations of cronyism and resulted in a massive centralisation of education provision.

They are a hard sell for a message of saving money, transparency and local power.

Financier

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Alanbrooke said:

anotherDave said:

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.

I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?

That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much their spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.

and very, very unpopular with british voters.

Expect to see it in the small print, p.92.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/

well there's always immigration, Dave's going large on it today.

In government the Conservatives have continued Labour's open door immigration policy. Whatever Mr Cameron's rhetoric.

LOL I don't think it's just immigration they've continued Labour's policies, borrowing, civil liberties, banks, state interference ...... plus ca change.

@Alanbrooke

Once again you ignore that HMG is a coalition and it is apparent that you have never witnessed Clegg's rants about bringing the coalition down if Cameron did what was needed to be done on public sector cuts, immigration, EU etc etc.

So what would be your proposals for the autumn statement as you are happy to oppose the CoE.?

Easterross

Why on earth should we Tories agree to AV. It was a dog's breakfast. If we must adopt some form of PR, yet again Westminster should look to Holyrood. We have the FPTP constituency MSPs and the 8 regions which each return regional MSPs. That way the % vote achieved by parties across the country is reflected in the MSPs they get elected but people also still have a local MSP to take problems to.

We could reduce Westminster to 400 MPs. 200 constituencies of which roughly 16 would be in Scotland and 10 in Wales with 5 from Northern Ireland and then 200 regional MPs. After all we elected regional MEPs this spring using such constituencies.

Financier

Indigo said:

Financier said:

SouthamObserver said:

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

This is just such an obvious tack to the right to woo back Tory UKIPers that it is almost impossible to see it working from a political perspective. Only the most credulous of fools is going to believe that there is any sincere conviction in what he is saying. It is all about expediency and trying to make an issue go away. He is dancing to Nigel's tune ad looking far, far weaker as a result.

So what should he do to appear far stronger - how would you combat immigration problems?

Right now, today (LDs permitting) he could put in a variation of the Canadian/Australia points based system for non-EU migrants, he doesn't need EU approval for that. At the very least he should put it to the vote and let the public see the LDs and/or Labour vote it down.

It could well come to a vote before the GE and have your wishes of seeing LDs and Labour vote it down - somehow I feel that both these parties will support it as they are both too scared of being seen to be against the wish of the electorate.

[Deleted User]

To quote Farage today:

I have a feeling, however, that I’m not alone in feeling sick of being lied to. For the avoidance of doubt though: I want to see sensible levels of immigration, not no immigration. I want us to treat the world equally and fairly, not have a discriminatory attitude towards Europe and against places like India, Australia, Canada, Africa, and so on.

I want Britain to prosper, and immigration can be a part of that. But not on this scale, and certainly not this quickly

He articulates my thoughts perfectly. Yes to immigration. But at a speed and scale and quality we can absorb. Maybe Dave is belatedly coming round to this point of view - it's the only sustainable one on offer.

I also pretty much detest the EU as I want the UK to be independent / fully governed from London not from Brussels - for me it's a simple 'demos' thing. I believe in the UK as an independent nation state (however shockingly non-PC that may be to some these days) and that we should run our own affairs. The EU is becoming an anti-democratic superstate where voters cannot actually remove those who govern them.

Crikey! Maybe I'm going to vote kipper in May. With all the attendant EICIPM implications.

felix

Casino_Royale said:

felix said:

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

I'm shocked - kipper sympathisers disappointed by a Cameron speech on immigration/EU. In other news.....

I'm not a kipper, but patronising and dismissive comments like that might well lead to me becoming one.

Respect: a very difficult thing for some people to understand.

Not so difficult as Realism. Cameron did not create the problem he is trying to tackle and oppositions exist to promote unrealistic hyperbole about what can be achieved in the real world.

Financier

Easterross said:

Why on earth should we Tories agree to AV. It was a dog's breakfast. If we must adopt some form of PR, yet again Westminster should look to Holyrood. We have the FPTP constituency MSPs and the 8 regions which each return regional MSPs. That way the % vote achieved by parties across the country is reflected in the MSPs they get elected but people also still have a local MSP to take problems to.

We could reduce Westminster to 400 MPs. 200 constituencies of which roughly 16 would be in Scotland and 10 in Wales with 5 from Northern Ireland and then 200 regional MPs. After all we elected regional MEPs this spring using such constituencies.

Yes and they are mainly anonymous by the absence of their presence.

Indigo

Alistair said:

Gove's reforms were massively over budget, plagued by accusations of cronyism and resulted in a massive centralisation of education provision.

Its always hard to sell anything new, and there will always be accusations of all sorts of things from the people that feel they are losing from the deal.

"It ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. " - Machiavelli

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

FPT: Mr. Anorak, I'd heard that, but good to have the abolition of double points confirmed.

If the Lib Dems back English votes for English laws it could help them significantly. Only caught the back end of a BBC report on this last night, but once again the state broadcaster failed to even mention [in the part I saw] the English Parliament, the most rational and popular option. It's a disgraceful omission that speaks of political interest, not objective reporting.

The income tax issue will play large at the election.

felix

class="Quote" rel="anotherDave">

Indigo said:

Many Tories I am sure see Gove's reforms as one of the high points of their term in government, so why the hell did they kick him and out replace him with Morgan who is backing away from them as fast as she can.

Underlining her new approach, she said: ‘Too often education policy is portrayed as a war between rival camps of true believers, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth
.
'The best example of that? The thousands of teachers across the country who have quietly put our changes to the education system into action.’

I must have missed that bit, the teaching unions have bitched about just about every single one of his reforms, and went on strike about some of them, "quietly" my @rse. This is about Cameron sacrificing good work in the cause of getting conflicts with the government off the front pages in the hopes that it might scrape him and extra percent or two at the polls. The heir to Blair indeed, Thatcher will be spinning in her grave at the lack of conviction showed by the current leadership.I don't envy the Conservatives election team tasked with the challenge of finding some positive reasons for voting Conservative from their recent record in government.

Dave says he'll make a really good PM. isn't that enough ?That does seem to be all they've got at the moment: "Ed Miliband is scary, Vote Dave!"

I'd like to see a Conservatives vote share market. I think <30% is likely.</p>

Maybe they'll lead on how much their spending overseas on aid. Big success and the right thing to do.and very, very unpopular with british voters.

Expect to see it in the small print, p.92.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/


well there's always immigration, Dave's going large on it today.In government the Conservatives have continued Labour's open door immigration policy. Whatever Mr Cameron's rhetoric.

LOL I don't think it's just immigration they've continued Labour's policies, borrowing, civil liberties, banks, state interference ...... plus ca change.

@Alanbrooke

Once again you ignore that HMG is a coalition and it is apparent that you have never witnessed Clegg's rants about bringing the coalition down if Cameron did what was needed to be done on public sector cuts, immigration, EU etc etc.

So what would be your proposals for the autumn statement as you are happy to oppose the CoE.?

You're wasting your breath. Carping from the side is so much more fun sadly. Result: Ed M as PM!

Indigo

Financier said:

Once again you ignore that HMG is a coalition and it is apparent that you have never witnessed Clegg's rants about bringing the coalition down if Cameron did what was needed to be done on public sector cuts, immigration, EU etc etc.

Call Clegg's bluff to be honest. Clegg enjoys the ministerial cars and red boxes as much as any politician, and the public would probably look dimly on such posturing anyway.. what was his majority in Sheffield Hallam again ?

Easterross

Financier I assume you are talking about MEPs. On the other hand Regional MSPs in Scotland are very vocal and have as prominent a role as constituency MSPs.

CarlottaVance

PC Richardson displaying great common sense on Plebgate on R4 - would that his "superiors" had had half as much.....

Sean_F

Casino_Royale said:

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

He just isn't very good at politics.

Cameron vs Milliband is like Alien vs Predator.

Whoever wins, we lose.

Luckyguy1983

Financier said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Does Cameron not see just how ridiculous all this makes him look? If he had really been worried about the issue of EU immigrants claiming in-work benefits he could have done something about it a long time ago, or at least put it in the last Tory manifesto. But he didn't. Instead, he made absurd promises about reducing immigration that it was never in his power to keep.

Its worse than that, he probably can't actually do anything about it, which is why he didnt try before, and why he will probably come away looking stupid now, but he is hoping he can kick the can the other side of the election. Most of what he wants to do needs treaty changes, so he is going to be told to go to hell by other european governments, but they might be nice to him and not say that until after the election.

No, he can just ignore the EU (like France does) and do what is best for the UK - that is what he is paid to do.

With a view like that, there's one party for you...

Indigo

Financier said:

No, he can just ignore the EU (like France does) and do what is best for the UK - that is what he is paid to do.

Can he? With the EU laws integrated into the British legal system if he tried to ignore the EU, someone would mount a judicial review and it would be struck down. The French courts seems much more amenable to letting their government do what it wants.

CarlottaVance

Easterross said:

Financier I assume you are talking about MEPs. On the other hand Regional MSPs in Scotland are very vocal and have as prominent a role as constituency MSPs.

If it's already working well in one part of the UK, why not adopt it in Westminster? I trust Westminster has got over its phobia of coalitions, and Scotlanf has proved that "impossible" majority government's aren't.

Luckyguy1983

Patrick said:

To quote Farage today:

I have a feeling, however, that I’m not alone in feeling sick of being lied to. For the avoidance of doubt though: I want to see sensible levels of immigration, not no immigration. I want us to treat the world equally and fairly, not have a discriminatory attitude towards Europe and against places like India, Australia, Canada, Africa, and so on.

I want Britain to prosper, and immigration can be a part of that. But not on this scale, and certainly not this quickly

He articulates my thoughts perfectly. Yes to immigration. But at a speed and scale and quality we can absorb. Maybe Dave is belatedly coming round to this point of view - it's the only sustainable one on offer.

I also pretty much detest the EU as I want the UK to be independent / fully governed from London not from Brussels - for me it's a simple 'demos' thing. I believe in the UK as an independent nation state (however shockingly non-PC that may be to some these days) and that we should run our own affairs. The EU is becoming an anti-democratic superstate where voters cannot actually remove those who govern them.

Crikey! Maybe I'm going to vote kipper in May. With all the attendant EICIPM implications.

Whoohoo!

Luckyguy1983

Luckyguy1983 said:

Patrick said:

To quote Farage today:

I have a feeling, however, that I’m not alone in feeling sick of being lied to. For the avoidance of doubt though: I want to see sensible levels of immigration, not no immigration. I want us to treat the world equally and fairly, not have a discriminatory attitude towards Europe and against places like India, Australia, Canada, Africa, and so on.

I want Britain to prosper, and immigration can be a part of that. But not on this scale, and certainly not this quickly

He articulates my thoughts perfectly. Yes to immigration. But at a speed and scale and quality we can absorb. Maybe Dave is belatedly coming round to this point of view - it's the only sustainable one on offer.

I also pretty much detest the EU as I want the UK to be independent / fully governed from London not from Brussels - for me it's a simple 'demos' thing. I believe in the UK as an independent nation state (however shockingly non-PC that may be to some these days) and that we should run our own affairs. The EU is becoming an anti-democratic superstate where voters cannot actually remove those who govern them.

Crikey! Maybe I'm going to vote kipper in May. With all the attendant EICIPM implications.

Whoohoo!

That wasn't sarcasm by the way -genuinely delighted.

[Deleted User]

Morris_Dancer said:

once again the state broadcaster failed to even mention [in the part I saw] the English Parliament, the most rational and popular option. It's a disgraceful omission that speaks of political interest, not objective reporting.

If the LibDems support EVFEL then the coalition can vote it through next month and defy Labour to oppose it (knowing they'll lose anyway). I agree this will do much to help the yellows in England.

More importantly, EVFEL leads to an English PArliament sooner rather than later. EVFEL is only a blocking mechanism. It would stop eg Labour passing lefty laws that don't command an English MP majority. Fair dinkum. But it offers no active ability to govern England. So it would put a (probably Labour) UK PM in an impossible position. Potentially unable to legislate on health/education/policing/etc. With a devomax Scotland as a given, that means the only route out of impasse is an English Parliament within a fully federal UK. Which we should all welcome with open arms.

TheScreamingEagles

This thread reminds us why Kippers are so chicken of Dave's referendum.

As with the Indyref, in the AV referendum Dave smashed his opponents.

The Kippers know Dave will defeat them and make it a hat trick, so that's why the Kippers are so keen to put Ed into Downing Street and thus no in/out referendum.

Indigo

Patrick said:

More importantly, EVFEL leads to an English PArliament sooner rather than later. EVFEL is only a blocking mechanism. It would stop eg Labour passing lefty laws that don't command an English MP majority. Fair dinkum. But it offers no active ability to govern England. So it would put a (probably Labour) UK PM in an impossible position. Potentially unable to legislate on health/education/policing/etc. With a devomax Scotland as a given, that means the only route out of impasse is an English Parliament within a fully federal UK. Which we should all welcome with open arms.

There is always a suspicion that a Labour government with a UK majority but no England majority would use his Scottish votes to amend or repeal EV4EL early in a parliament and use the 5 years before the next election to try and spin his way out of it, or allow the public to forget.

TOPPING

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

And the beauty of it is that whatever he does or doesn't do and however weak he shows himself in deed or act guess what?

You can vote us out of the EU in 2017.

Result!

You just need to make sure that the right party is in office that will give you that option.

Indigo

TheScreamingEagles said:

This thread reminds us why Kippers are so chicken of Dave's referendum.

As with the Indyref, in the AV Dave smashed his opponents.

The Kippers know Dave will defeat them and make it a hat trick, so that's why the Kippers are so keen to put Ed into Downing Street and thus no in/out referendum.

The reality is the EU won't actually give Dave what they promise him. Even the modest changes he announced today need treaty changes, and already Poland for example is objecting. By 2017 nothing will have been ratified, it will just be an agreement in principle. That ratification involves referenda in several EU countries. There will inevitably come a point when one of those countries throws it out "Sorry chaps, I tried my best, but it didn't pass in Europe". But the referenda will be a done deal by then and Dave will be keen to move on. Nig will stand in 2020 on a "it was bullshit, lets leave" ticket.

[Deleted User]

Indigo said:

Patrick said:

More importantly, EVFEL leads to an English PArliament sooner rather than later. EVFEL is only a blocking mechanism. It would stop eg Labour passing lefty laws that don't command an English MP majority. Fair dinkum. But it offers no active ability to govern England. So it would put a (probably Labour) UK PM in an impossible position. Potentially unable to legislate on health/education/policing/etc. With a devomax Scotland as a given, that means the only route out of impasse is an English Parliament within a fully federal UK. Which we should all welcome with open arms.

There is always a suspicion that a Labour government with a UK majority but no England majority would use his Scottish votes to amend or repeal EV4EL early in a parliament and use the 5 years before the next election to try and spin his way out of it, or allow the public to forget.

Is it really repealable? Is Scottish devolution repealable? In theory yes. In practice no. If Labour did this the civil unrest would make the miners' strike look like a vicarage tea party. And the following GE result would see them out - and EVFEL / EP back in again for good.

I think Dave and Nick realise this. Devolution started a train of events we can't now avoid and remain as a United Kingdom. Just as the endpoint for the Eurozone is superstate or split, the endpoint for the UK is now federation or split. Neither the EU choice or the UK choice give me any qualms. For the UK I'm happy with a federation and I can easily enough accept a split as I no longer feels the Scots will happily just be another part of a truly United Kingdom. The referendum was won (for now) - but the deed is done.

peter_from_putney

Based on the current polling averages, with Con 32%, Lab 33%, LibDems 8% and UKIP 16%, Stephen Fisher's latest 2015 GE seats projection (showing changes over the past week) is as follows:

Con .............. 298 (-7 seats)
Lab ............... 293 (+5 seats)
Lib Dems ........ 28 (+2 seats)
Others ............ 31 (unchanged)

Total ............ 650 seats

Ninoinoz

Casino_Royale said:

Socrates said:

I see the "ban on benefits" has moved to "a ban on some benefits" to "a delay for a few years in some benefits" over night.


Cameron is just weak. The latest EU migration data shows a tougher approach is needed, but instead he moves to a less restrictive approach than his office suggested just a few months ago. And not just a bit less restrictive - a lot weaker than the weaker of the two previous options. And he's painting it as him being a tough guy. This is why people no longer trust politicians. Weak, weak, weak.

He just isn't very good at politics.

Shocking, isn't it?

Studied politics at university, was a SPAD but doesn't have a clue how to build a coalition of voters.

David Cameron MP: member for Bullingdonshire.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Patrick, whilst Clegg realises it he wants to carve England into shitty little city-regions. England's one land, and the collusion of leftist politicians and the state broadcaster to try and airbrush out the most obvious and popular means of English devolution is a disgrace.

NickPalmer

Indigo said:

Be interesting to see how this goes in Switzerland given its relationship with the EU.

http://news.sky.com/story/1381807/switzerland-faces-vote-on-immigration-cap

"Switzerland will decide on Sunday whether to curb immigration into the landlocked country, in a referendum proposed by an environmental group."

The proposal is expected to be heavily defeated. Two other proposals (to close tax loopholes for expats and increase gold reserves) are expected to pass.

http://www.blick.ch/news/politik/erste-srg-umfrage-58-prozent-sagen-nein-zur-ecopop-initiative-id3221924.html

felix

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/11257943/Twitter-misrepresents-the-real-world-computer-scientists-warn.html

A very important message for all the political parties and not a few posters on here!

Ninoinoz

TheScreamingEagles said:

This thread reminds us why Kippers are so chicken of Dave's referendum.

As with the Indyref, in the AV referendum Dave smashed his opponents.

The Kippers know Dave will defeat them and make it a hat trick, so that's why the Kippers are so keen to put Ed into Downing Street and thus no in/out referendum.

Wow! Governments win referenda.

Any more piercing insights, TSE?

BTW, since Hagia Sophia in Istanbul was turned from a church into a mosque, I'd shut up about Westminster Cathedral if I were you.

DavidL

Am I alone in finding the pictures of these people literally fighting in stores for a large and cheap TV quite sad and not a little repulsive? I am not religious but the consumerism of western society is an illness.

Anyway off to Newcastle for our annual shopping trip. Joy.