Weekly canvass anecdotes from the front, all with the usual caveats. One safe Tory ward, one low-turnout WWC ward.
- As in previous weeks, most people seem to have firmly decided on Lab, Con or UKIP, or "never vote", with "we'll have to see" responses unusually rare.
- We think there was a slight uptick in people talking about immigration this week, though they seemed to be UKIP-leaning when they did. Cameron's speech wasn't mentioned but has perhaps raised the salience of the issue. A floating voter, UKIP in the Euros, said embarrassedly that her workplace was mostly Polish and "It's making me racist, and I don't want to be."
- In our local by-election in a safe Tory ward triggered by UKIP, UKIP haven't managed to put out a leaflet timed to go out with the postal votes (we failed to do that too at the 2010 GE, squirm). Labour has put one out to believed supporters, the Tories, who have an inadequate ground game to identify supporters, have sent a generic "Dear resident" letter to everyone.
- Lots of UKIP activity in the constituency, but I don't sense an experienced hand at work. Their main leaflet so far is A4 folded with three sides entirely packed with text in, I think. 10-point Courier font. There's a much more effective A5 one with a bar chart from the Euros - only UKIP can beat Labour here seems to be the message.
- I had one former Tory telling me he was voting UKIP this time, "That'll show you!" "It will indeed," I murmured courteously. He looked a bit disappointed. Note to self: practice looking horrified.
-
What news on your LibDem opponent? Last we heard there was still no selection.
Weekly canvass anecdotes from the front, all with the usual caveats. One safe Tory ward, one low-turnout WWC ward.
- As in previous weeks, most people seem to have firmly decided on Lab, Con or UKIP, or "never vote", with "we'll have to see" responses unusually rare.
- We think there was a slight uptick in people talking about immigration this week, though they seemed to be UKIP-leaning when they did. Cameron's speech wasn't mentioned but has perhaps raised the salience of the issue. A floating voter, UKIP in the Euros, said embarrassedly that her workplace was mostly Polish and "It's making me racist, and I don't want to be."
- In our local by-election in a safe Tory ward triggered by UKIP, UKIP haven't managed to put out a leaflet timed to go out with the postal votes (we failed to do that too at the 2010 GE, squirm). Labour has put one out to believed supporters, the Tories, who have an inadequate ground game to identify supporters, have sent a generic "Dear resident" letter to everyone.
- Lots of UKIP activity in the constituency, but I don't sense an experienced hand at work. Their main leaflet so far is A4 folded with three sides entirely packed with text in, I think. 10-point Courier font. There's a much more effective A5 one with a bar chart from the Euros - only UKIP can beat Labour here seems to be the message.
- I had one former Tory telling me he was voting UKIP this time, "That'll show you!" "It will indeed," I murmured courteously. He looked a bit disappointed. Note to self: practice looking horrified.
-
Reading between the lines, UKIP are making huge inroads into your core vote. The panic is tangible.
Dream on !!!!
Based on the well established fact that Everything Mark Senior Says Is Wrong you've cheered me up with that, cheers.
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Re: 7% for the LDs. The recent batch of mainly Con/Lab marginals still had the LDs typically getting 7% in seats where they were a distant 3rd at GE2010. That is way too high for the LDs if their national vote comes out under 12%. They need no hoper seats (circa 500) to average under 7% and a large 200+ number of lost deposits. That is to provide room for 40%+ wins in 40 or so seats.
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
I'm getting quite worried about you -I'd hoped you'd have rallied after a good lie down in a darkened room after yesterday's meltdown, but it would appear not. The way you instantly assumed my enquiry into your nationality was a hostile one despite no indication that it was shows a really negative mindset -as does your tasteless overuse of the word 'ting tong'.
A rather nasty and unnecessary post even if your foreward is completely accurate.
As opposed to this:
'Omg - when is this maniac gonna take a break?'
Which was you posting about another poster yesterday! Um, ok.
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
Under Cameron and Osborne: More people on welfare, and more welfare payments to people in work. A proper conservative government wouldn't pay people who already have jobs.
Well that rather depends on your choices.
C+O have talked of the importance of making work pay, i.e. that workers are better off than those on benefits. So if you want to ensure that gap somehow you have two options:
1. Have the minimum wage high enough to ensure (compared to benefit level) that no full time jobs pay as little as benefits. (Not a big Conservative thing usually).
2. Keep benefits for those in work to raise them up above non-working benefits claimants.
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
I'm getting quite worried about you -I'd hoped you'd have rallied after a good lie down in a darkened room after yesterday's meltdown, but it would appear not. The way you instantly assumed my enquiry into your nationality was a hostile one despite no indication that it was shows a really negative mindset -as does your tasteless overuse of the word 'ting tong'.
A rather nasty and unnecessary post even if your foreward is completely accurate.
As opposed to this:
'Omg - when is this maniac gonna take a break?'
Which was you posting about another poster yesterday! Um, ok.
Lol - I really got to you - keep searching over old posts loser.
< The change is that the LibDem vote has very largely gone to UKIP. in 2010, LibDems got 37.4%, UKIP 5.1%. They have pretty much swapped over. That must be depressing for the LibDems, when you think their political outlook is at about a 180 degree variance to UKIP.
No, not depressed about it at all. I don't know what activity is going on in F&C - I suspect the focus of LD activity is going to be in St Ives and Truro to ensure these seats are held. F&C wasn't gained of course in 1997 but in 2005 by Julia Goldsworthy if memory serves. Candy Atherton took the seat for Labour in 1997 and it had been Conservative before that so one of those swing seats that's often hard to read.
The LDs are going to get a lot of poor results next year - in 500 or more constituencies, the vote will be squeezed and apart from poor thirds and fourths, there will be plenty of poor fifths, sixths and who knows even a seventh or so.
None of that matters and as Ashcroft showed earlier in the week, in the seats that do matter, the Party is doing surprisingly well. That is NOT a matter for complacency or confidence - there's a huge amount to do but the very real prospect of retaining a reasonable Parliamentary presence is there and every seat the Party wins increases its influence especially if (as seems likely) neither of the duopoly parties can achieve a majority.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
If the choice is between 7% and 7 seats, and 7% and 25 seats, you are probably the only person who thinks that the former is better for the LibDems.
My view is that it's best to avoid being reduced to 7%.
That's not an option available to the LibDems.
The only question is whether the Conservative Party moves right to recapture ukip votes, and therefore creates space for them again, or not.
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
Under Cameron and Osborne: More people on welfare, and more welfare payments to people in work. A proper conservative government wouldn't pay people who already have jobs.
Well that rather depends on your choices.
C+O have talked of the importance of making work pay, i.e. that workers are better off than those on benefits. So if you want to ensure that gap somehow you have two options:
1. Have the minimum wage high enough to ensure (compared to benefit level) that no full time jobs pay as little as benefits. (Not a big Conservative thing usually).
2. Keep benefits for those in work to raise them up above non-working benefits claimants.
You seem to have forgotten:
3. Reduce out of work benefits to a level that will encourage those who can work but won't to make a little more effort
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
Under Cameron and Osborne: More people on welfare, and more welfare payments to people in work. A proper conservative government wouldn't pay people who already have jobs.
Well that rather depends on your choices.
C+O have talked of the importance of making work pay, i.e. that workers are better off than those on benefits. So if you want to ensure that gap somehow you have two options:
1. Have the minimum wage high enough to ensure (compared to benefit level) that no full time jobs pay as little as benefits. (Not a big Conservative thing usually).
2. Keep benefits for those in work to raise them up above non-working benefits claimants.
3. Eliminate benefits and the minimum wage (or reduce them)
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
Under Cameron and Osborne: More people on welfare, and more welfare payments to people in work. A proper conservative government wouldn't pay people who already have jobs.
Well that rather depends on your choices.
C+O have talked of the importance of making work pay, i.e. that workers are better off than those on benefits. So if you want to ensure that gap somehow you have two options:
1. Have the minimum wage high enough to ensure (compared to benefit level) that no full time jobs pay as little as benefits. (Not a big Conservative thing usually).
2. Keep benefits for those in work to raise them up above non-working benefits claimants.
You seem to have forgotten:
3. Reduce out of work benefits to a level that will encourage those who can work but won't to make a little more effort
< The change is that the LibDem vote has very largely gone to UKIP. in 2010, LibDems got 37.4%, UKIP 5.1%. They have pretty much swapped over. That must be depressing for the LibDems, when you think their political outlook is at about a 180 degree variance to UKIP.
No, not depressed about it at all. I don't know what activity is going on in F&C - I suspect the focus of LD activity is going to be in St Ives and Truro to ensure these seats are held. F&C wasn't gained of course in 1997 but in 2005 by Julia Goldsworthy if memory serves. Candy Atherton took the seat for Labour in 1997 and it had been Conservative before that so one of those swing seats that's often hard to read.
The LDs are going to get a lot of poor results next year - in 500 or more constituencies, the vote will be squeezed and apart from poor thirds and fourths, there will be plenty of poor fifths, sixths and who knows even a seventh or so.
None of that matters and as Ashcroft showed earlier in the week, in the seats that do matter, the Party is doing surprisingly well. That is NOT a matter for complacency or confidence - there's a huge amount to do but the very real prospect of retaining a reasonable Parliamentary presence is there and every seat the Party wins increases its influence especially if (as seems likely) neither of the duopoly parties can achieve a majority.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
If the choice is between 7% and 7 seats, and 7% and 25 seats, you are probably the only person who thinks that the former is better for the LibDems.
My view is that it's best to avoid being reduced to 7%.
That's not an option available to the LibDems.
The only question is whether the Conservative Party moves right to recapture ukip votes, and therefore creates space for them again, or not.
Hey, we can definitely avoid being reduced to 7%.
Double figures might be optimistic but there's always 8 and 9 to look forward to.
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
I'm getting quite worried about you -I'd hoped you'd have rallied after a good lie down in a darkened room after yesterday's meltdown, but it would appear not. The way you instantly assumed my enquiry into your nationality was a hostile one despite no indication that it was shows a really negative mindset -as does your tasteless overuse of the word 'ting tong'.
A rather nasty and unnecessary post even if your foreward is completely accurate.
As opposed to this:
'Omg - when is this maniac gonna take a break?'
Which was you posting about another poster yesterday! Um, ok.
Lol - I really got to you - keep searching over old posts loser.
Oh dear dear dear -where are we getting these people from?
One minute a caring and concerned critique of my post (I really can't see anything nasty in it, but oh well), the next the mask slips and into full on schizoid mode! Care in the community has much to answer for.
< The change is that the LibDem vote has very largely gone to UKIP. in 2010, LibDems got 37.4%, UKIP 5.1%. They have pretty much swapped over. That must be depressing for the LibDems, when you think their political outlook is at about a 180 degree variance to UKIP.
No, not depressed about it at all. I don't know what activity is going on in F&C - I suspect the focus of LD activity is going to be in St Ives and Truro to ensure these seats are held. F&C wasn't gained of course in 1997 but in 2005 by Julia Goldsworthy if memory serves. Candy Atherton took the seat for Labour in 1997 and it had been Conservative before that so one of those swing seats that's often hard to read.
The LDs are going to get a lot of poor results next year - in 500 or more constituencies, the vote will be squeezed and apart from poor thirds and fourths, there will be plenty of poor fifths, sixths and who knows even a seventh or so.
None of that matters and as Ashcroft showed earlier in the week, in the seats that do matter, the Party is doing surprisingly well. That is NOT a matter for complacency or confidence - there's a huge amount to do but the very real prospect of retaining a reasonable Parliamentary presence is there and every seat the Party wins increases its influence especially if (as seems likely) neither of the duopoly parties can achieve a majority.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
If the choice is between 7% and 7 seats, and 7% and 25 seats, you are probably the only person who thinks that the former is better for the LibDems.
My view is that it's best to avoid being reduced to 7%.
That's not an option available to the LibDems.
The only question is whether the Conservative Party moves right to recapture ukip votes, and therefore creates space for them again, or not.
The bulk of the LD activists and MPs prefer the left to the centre.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
What news on your LibDem opponent? Last we heard there was still no selection.
No change. I understand that they've got a couple of people who've expressed interest in general terms but they're unlikely to select before January. Unusually, we have a Lab-LibDem coalition in Broxtowe, which the current MP has made a point of attacking vehemently for years.
NickPalmer, your canvass reports are always welcome. But you find a situation that is not in line with how the polling has moved over the past year+ We have had from you a common line that "voters opinions are made up" for at least a year. However in that time Labour has seen their support drop by 1/5th. So either:- 1. Broxtowe is out of line with the national moves. 2. People are telling untruths to you.
No, I've reported encountering some Lab-UKIP switching, and consequently I'd expect the lead to be down a bit from 12 (on the thinking of your constituency question) if Ashcroft repeats his poll. But the seat is a bit unusual - the Ashcroft poll showed Labour's lead particularly strong in the AB demographic, and that in turn is unusually large.
Nick - I always appreciate reading these canvassing reports. I was out on the doorstep this afternoon too. I was worried people would be switching into Christmas mood but no sign of it yet. People really pleased to see me.
When do you stop door-stepping for Christmas?
Dec 14, I think - 20/21st would be pushing our luck. What sort of impressions are you getting on the doorstep (and where)?
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
We got served our asses on a plate by Tony Blair, who was able to build a coalition of voters from much of the natural Tory base.
< The change is that the LibDem vote has very largely gone to UKIP. in 2010, LibDems got 37.4%, UKIP 5.1%. They have pretty much swapped over. That must be depressing for the LibDems, when you think their political outlook is at about a 180 degree variance to UKIP.
No, not depressed about it at all. I don't know what activity is going on in F&C - I suspect the focus of LD activity is going to be in St Ives and Truro to ensure these seats are held. F&C wasn't gained of course in 1997 but in 2005 by Julia Goldsworthy if memory serves. Candy Atherton took the seat for Labour in 1997 and it had been Conservative before that so one of those swing seats that's often hard to read.
The LDs are going to get a lot of poor results next year - in 500 or more constituencies, the vote will be squeezed and apart from poor thirds and fourths, there will be plenty of poor fifths, sixths and who knows even a seventh or so.
None of that matters and as Ashcroft showed earlier in the week, in the seats that do matter, the Party is doing surprisingly well. That is NOT a matter for complacency or confidence - there's a huge amount to do but the very real prospect of retaining a reasonable Parliamentary presence is there and every seat the Party wins increases its influence especially if (as seems likely) neither of the duopoly parties can achieve a majority.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
If the choice is between 7% and 7 seats, and 7% and 25 seats, you are probably the only person who thinks that the former is better for the LibDems.
My view is that it's best to avoid being reduced to 7%.
The only question is whether the Conservative Party moves right to recapture ukip votes, and therefore creates space for them again, or not.
I don't see that matters.
The not Lab/Con position is currently being filled by SNP/Plaid/UKIP/Greens and LD. Those are the parties that the LDs will be competing with in the next parliament.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
We got served our asses on a plate by Tony Blair, who was able to build a coalition of voters from much of the natural Tory base.
Surely some at least of the UKIP vote is from those who didn't vote in 2010, 2005, and 2001. They'll be replaced, to some degree, by former LD voters too fastidious to vote Labour, but who are ashamed at the LD participation in the Conservatives often cruel policies.
I'd vote Plaid, but there won't be a candidate here!
Weekly canvass anecdotes from the front, all with the usual caveats. One safe Tory ward, one low-turnout WWC ward.
- As in previous weeks, most people seem to have firmly decided on Lab, Con or UKIP, or "never vote", with "we'll have to see" responses unusually rare.
- We think there was a slight uptick in people talking about immigration this week, though they seemed to be UKIP-leaning when they did. Cameron's speech wasn't mentioned but has perhaps raised the salience of the issue. A floating voter, UKIP in the Euros, said embarrassedly that her workplace was mostly Polish and "It's making me racist, and I don't want to be."
- In our local by-election in a safe Tory ward triggered by UKIP, UKIP haven't managed to put out a leaflet timed to go out with the postal votes (we failed to do that too at the 2010 GE, squirm). Labour has put one out to believed supporters, the Tories, who have an inadequate ground game to identify supporters, have sent a generic "Dear resident" letter to everyone.
- Lots of UKIP activity in the constituency, but I don't sense an experienced hand at work. Their main leaflet so far is A4 folded with three sides entirely packed with text in, I think. 10-point Courier font. There's a much more effective A5 one with a bar chart from the Euros - only UKIP can beat Labour here seems to be the message.
- I had one former Tory telling me he was voting UKIP this time, "That'll show you!" "It will indeed," I murmured courteously. He looked a bit disappointed. Note to self: practice looking horrified.
-
Reading between the lines, UKIP are making huge inroads into your core vote. The panic is tangible.
Dream on !!!!
Based on the well established fact that Everything Mark Senior Says Is Wrong you've cheered me up with that, cheers.
Too true. He suggested I was in favour of a dictatorship on the last thread, have no idea why.
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is he not advising people to vote UKIP?
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is he not advising people to vote UKIP?
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
UKIP is not associated with the BNP, as you're well aware.
Some ex-BNP voters vote UKIP, as well as for other parties. I think one Labour councillor in Burnley was originally elected for the BNP.
The areas of greatest UKIP strength, down the East Coast, and Devon and Cornwall weren't good for the BNP, although there's an overlap in South Yorkshire.
Weekly canvass anecdotes from the front, all with the usual caveats. One safe Tory ward, one low-turnout WWC ward.
- As in previous weeks, most people seem to have firmly decided on Lab, Con or UKIP, or "never vote", with "we'll have to see" responses unusually rare.
- We think there was a slight uptick in people talking about immigration this week, though they seemed to be UKIP-leaning when they did. Cameron's speech wasn't mentioned but has perhaps raised the salience of the issue. A floating voter, UKIP in the Euros, said embarrassedly that her workplace was mostly Polish and "It's making me racist, and I don't want to be."
- In our local by-election in a safe Tory ward triggered by UKIP, UKIP haven't managed to put out a leaflet timed to go out with the postal votes (we failed to do that too at the 2010 GE, squirm). Labour has put one out to believed supporters, the Tories, who have an inadequate ground game to identify supporters, have sent a generic "Dear resident" letter to everyone.
- Lots of UKIP activity in the constituency, but I don't sense an experienced hand at work. Their main leaflet so far is A4 folded with three sides entirely packed with text in, I think. 10-point Courier font. There's a much more effective A5 one with a bar chart from the Euros - only UKIP can beat Labour here seems to be the message.
- I had one former Tory telling me he was voting UKIP this time, "That'll show you!" "It will indeed," I murmured courteously. He looked a bit disappointed. Note to self: practice looking horrified.
-
Did you tell these voters that you are in favour of immigrants getting priority over local people for social housing if their "needs" are higher.
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
Under Cameron and Osborne: More people on welfare, and more welfare payments to people in work. A proper conservative government wouldn't pay people who already have jobs.
Oh dear. Another person who thinks we have a Conservative Government and on a Political Betting Site:-)
I blame the education system as they clearly can read we have a Coalition .. or maybe they have been buried for the past four years :-)
Blame education. What did you expect after Tony's infamous "Education x3" speech? Some people actually believe Labour improves education you know.
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is he not advising people to vote UKIP?
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
This was your quote: 'Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.'
I have quite easily shown it to be a made up smear. Sorry about that, but you should do some simple fact checking when something seems wrong -why would the BNP, who deny being racist, endorse someone else for having "racist policies"?
As for your new question, yes, he is tweeting (with the caveat that UKIP isn't a truly anti-immigration party) that in people should vote UKIP in some circumstances. I don't deny facts, just inflated smears.
1) HRC seems to be down on previous 2) How many have actually heard of the Rep challenger. Most would have heard of HRC. (This is magnified for UK audiences) 3) Don't look like great numbers for HRC
'Just noticed that Shadsy has taken his next Con to UKIP defector market down. Wonder if there's anything in that?'
When CarswelL defected we were told by UKIP that a further 10 Tory MP's were going to defect, after the Reckless result I guess they are more interested in keeping their jobs than having their 10 minutes of fame..
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is he not advising people to vote UKIP?
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
UKIP is not associated with the BNP, as you're well aware.
Some ex-BNP voters vote UKIP, as well as for other parties. I think one Labour councillor in Burnley was originally elected for the BNP.
The areas of greatest UKIP strength, down the East Coast, and Devon and Cornwall weren't good for the BNP, although there's an overlap in South Yorkshire.
You want credibility on divorcing yourself from the Far Right? Then have Farage stand up and say that he does not want a single vote from ANYONE who has ever voted for the National Front or the BNP, thank you very much.
Until then I will take it he is more than happy to have the BNP vote shuffle across to UKIP....
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
We got served our asses on a plate by Tony Blair, who was able to build a coalition of voters from much of the natural Tory base.
A coalition which Ed seems intent on dismantling.
I am proud to say I never voted for that fraud. I was not even part of the 70% who gave positive approval ratings in late 1997.
That story really doesn't ring true. Watson is 86, was 79 when he claims to have been "ostracised". He apparently "only has his academic income", whatever that means. You would have thought a Nobel Prize winner, having spent a lifetime gainfully employed in academia, would have been comfortably off by then, with good pensions and living off the proceeds. What this probably means is "I made some poor investment decisions".
I know there have been some demographic changes, but have Labour ever come anywhere near in Hallam?
No, but their % in 2010 was higher than they got in the 1997 landslide.
Like most seats in the big cities, it's been trending Lab's way, especially as it has a very high level of public-sector employment.
Public sector employment. The other way Labour rigged the electorate. I guess turkeys don't vote for Xmas. How many millions were added to the public roll between 1997 and 2010? What % were nurses, teachers, cops? What % were non-jobs? What % were jobs to feed the PC monster?
Cameron has done nothing to disturb the left's political apparatus. Nothing. Not so much as stopped advertising in The Guardian for civil service jobs. It is clear to me that he would prefer a Labour Government to a proper Conservative one.
Yes shocking indictment of Cameron. Since 2010, 1 in 6 civil service jobs lost. Since 2010, half a million public sector jobs gone. 1.1 million public sector jobs to disappear by 2019. £2.6 billion savings in abolishing and reforming QUANGOs
What a total lack.
If you ask me its an absloute disgrace that Cameron did not give in to the recent NHS strike protesting about their pay restraint. Sooner we get a proper Conservative govt the better. You had better watch out they do not put a tax on stupidity though.
I'm getting quite worried about you -I'd hoped you'd have rallied after a good lie down in a darkened room after yesterday's meltdown, but it would appear not. The way you instantly assumed my enquiry into your nationality was a hostile one despite no indication that it was shows a really negative mindset -as does your tasteless overuse of the word 'ting tong'.
A rather nasty and unnecessary post even if your foreward is completely accurate.
As opposed to this:
'Omg - when is this maniac gonna take a break?'
Which was you posting about another poster yesterday! Um, ok.
Lol - I really got to you - keep searching over old posts loser.
Oh dear dear dear -where are we getting these people from?
One minute a caring and concerned critique of my post (I really can't see anything nasty in it, but oh well), the next the mask slips and into full on schizoid mode! Care in the community has much to answer for.
Weekly canvass anecdotes from the front, all with the usual caveats. One safe Tory ward, one low-turnout WWC ward.
- As in previous weeks, most people seem to have firmly decided on Lab, Con or UKIP, or "never vote", with "we'll have to see" responses unusually rare.
- We think there was a slight uptick in people talking about immigration this week, though they seemed to be UKIP-leaning when they did. Cameron's speech wasn't mentioned but has perhaps raised the salience of the issue. A floating voter, UKIP in the Euros, said embarrassedly that her workplace was mostly Polish and "It's making me racist, and I don't want to be."
- In our local by-election in a safe Tory ward triggered by UKIP, UKIP haven't managed to put out a leaflet timed to go out with the postal votes (we failed to do that too at the 2010 GE, squirm). Labour has put one out to believed supporters, the Tories, who have an inadequate ground game to identify supporters, have sent a generic "Dear resident" letter to everyone.
- Lots of UKIP activity in the constituency, but I don't sense an experienced hand at work. Their main leaflet so far is A4 folded with three sides entirely packed with text in, I think. 10-point Courier font. There's a much more effective A5 one with a bar chart from the Euros - only UKIP can beat Labour here seems to be the message.
- I had one former Tory telling me he was voting UKIP this time, "That'll show you!" "It will indeed," I murmured courteously. He looked a bit disappointed. Note to self: practice looking horrified.
-
Reading between the lines, UKIP are making huge inroads into your core vote. The panic is tangible.
Dream on !!!!
Based on the well established fact that Everything Mark Senior Says Is Wrong you've cheered me up with that, cheers.
Too true. He suggested I was in favour of a dictatorship on the last thread, have no idea why.
Well based on my forecasts on here from Cheadle by election in 2005 through to S Yorks PCC election not long ago , everything I say is not wrong . Ask your colleague Timmo whether my forecast of the Lib Dem success in Sutton LBC elections was more accurate than his local knowledge .
You want credibility on divorcing yourself from the Far Right? Then have Farage stand up and say that he does not want a single vote from ANYONE who has ever voted for the National Front or the BNP, thank you very much.
Until then I will take it he is more than happy to have the BNP vote shuffle across to UKIP....
UKIP thinks the voter is sovereign. It doesn't think parties own the voter, unlike certain other parties I could mention
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is he not advising people to vote UKIP?
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
The areas of greatest UKIP strength, down the East Coast, and Devon and Cornwall weren't good for the BNP, although there's an overlap in South Yorkshire.
You want credibility on divorcing yourself from the Far Right? Then have Farage stand up and say that he does not want a single vote from ANYONE who has ever voted for the National Front or the BNP, thank you very much.
Until then I will take it he is more than happy to have the BNP vote shuffle across to UKIP....
An interesting approach
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is he not advising people to vote UKIP?
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
UKIP is not associated with the BNP, as you're well aware.
Some ex-BNP voters vote UKIP, as well as for other parties. I think one Labour councillor in Burnley was originally elected for the BNP.
The areas of greatest UKIP strength, down the East Coast, and Devon and Cornwall weren't good for the BNP, although there's an overlap in South Yorkshire.
You want credibility on divorcing yourself from the Far Right? Then have Farage stand up and say that he does not want a single vote from ANYONE who has ever voted for the National Front or the BNP, thank you very much.
Until then I will take it he is more than happy to have the BNP vote shuffle across to UKIP....
What a silly comment. Politicians want people to vote for them. You think Labour or Conservatives would say they don't want votes from people who've ever voted NF or BNP?
Forget votes. Roy Painter, was the Director of the NF, and was happily welcomed back into the Conservative Party, becoming a constituency Chairman.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
We got served our asses on a plate by Tony Blair, who was able to build a coalition of voters from much of the natural Tory base.
A coalition which Ed seems intent on dismantling.
I am proud to say I never voted for that fraud. I was not even part of the 70% who gave positive approval ratings in late 1997.
Nick - I always appreciate reading these canvassing reports. I was out on the doorstep this afternoon too. I was worried people would be switching into Christmas mood but no sign of it yet. People really pleased to see me.
When do you stop door-stepping for Christmas?
Dec 14, I think - 20/21st would be pushing our luck. What sort of impressions are you getting on the doorstep (and where)?
It's a Tory part of a safe Labour constituency. I was mainly focusing on local issues given nature of parliamentary seat. Very little doorstep activity takes place in our neck of the woods, so I am usually welcomed by those of all persuasions.
I was a little concerned that people would be tuning out for Christmas, but given your comments and today's reactions, I'll probably plan another session next Saturday. It's that or Christmas shopping with the other half!
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
We got served our asses on a plate by Tony Blair, who was able to build a coalition of voters from much of the natural Tory base.
A coalition which Ed seems intent on dismantling.
I am proud to say I never voted for that fraud. I was not even part of the 70% who gave positive approval ratings in late 1997.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
Doesn't bother me. People are entitled to vote for who they want to, not for me, or anyone else, to get involved
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
We got served our asses on a plate by Tony Blair, who was able to build a coalition of voters from much of the natural Tory base.
A coalition which Ed seems intent on dismantling.
I am proud to say I never voted for that fraud. I was not even part of the 70% who gave positive approval ratings in late 1997.
I can say the same.
I voted Labour in 1997, and 2001. It seemed like a good idea at the time!
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
Mr Sarkozy has already started talking about repatriating powers from the EU, so whether or not Ms Le Pen wins, she is moving the debate to more of an anti-EU position.
Re: 7% for the LDs. The recent batch of mainly Con/Lab marginals still had the LDs typically getting 7% in seats where they were a distant 3rd at GE2010. That is way too high for the LDs if their national vote comes out under 12%. They need no hoper seats (circa 500) to average under 7% and a large 200+ number of lost deposits. That is to provide room for 40%+ wins in 40 or so seats.
Well the constituency polling leaves little room for the LD, they wont get 40 seats, but around 28 seats. A similar performance to the Liberal party in 1931.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
Mr Sarkozy has already started talking about repatriating powers from the EU, so whether or not Ms Le Pen wins, she is moving the debate to more of an anti-EU position.
The man has already held office and was judged so unsuitable that he lost to Hollande. France electing Berlusconies will not make it any better, but as the Spectator might say "it's a race between the palace & jail" for Sarkozy. And he is not the only one in the center-right to have been chased by the police, Alain Juppe has actually gone to jail for corruption.
Griffin urging a vote for UKIP's "racist policies" to kick Cameron.
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
Not that it's terribly relevant one way or the other, but I suspect that Griffin is trying to say that UKIP's policies are racist against white people.
Er....why would Griffin be urging people to vote UKIP then?
Since Griffin's entire schtick is that white people are discriminated against, the quote struck me as rather odd. So with a little digging:
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
Is Nick Griffin, probably the highest profile racist in the land, advising people to vote UKIP - or is
The areas of greatest UKIP strength, down the East Coast, and Devon and Cornwall weren't good for the BNP, although there's an overlap in South Yorkshire.
You want credibility on divorcing yourself from the Far Right? Then have Farage stand up and say that he does not want a single vote from ANYONE who has ever voted for the National Front or the BNP, thank you very much.
Until then I will take it he is more than happy to have the BNP vote shuffle across to UKIP....
An interesting approach
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
Denis Healey was once a member of the Communist Party. Tory Councillor Maria Gatland was once a member of PIRA. People can change and repudiate their past views.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
In Griffin's case, he's probably fully aware of the embarrassment his endorsement will cause UKIP, and is revelling in it.
I do recall him also recommending his supporters cast their 2nd preference vote for Boris Johnson as London Mayor in 2008 even though he was a "wet Tory".
The Guardianistas got suitably overexcited about that too.
Weekly canvass anecdotes from the front, all with the usual caveats. One safe Tory ward, one low-turnout WWC ward.
- As in previous weeks, most people seem to have firmly decided on Lab, Con or UKIP, or "never vote", with "we'll have to see" responses unusually rare.
- We think there was a slight uptick in people talking about immigration this week, though they seemed to be UKIP-leaning when they did. Cameron's speech wasn't mentioned but has perhaps raised the salience of the issue. A floating voter, UKIP in the Euros, said embarrassedly that her workplace was mostly Polish and "It's making me racist, and I don't want to be."
- In our local by-election in a safe Tory ward triggered by UKIP, UKIP haven't managed to put out a leaflet timed to go out with the postal votes (we failed to do that too at the 2010 GE, squirm). Labour has put one out to believed supporters, the Tories, who have an inadequate ground game to identify supporters, have sent a generic "Dear resident" letter to everyone.
- Lots of UKIP activity in the constituency, but I don't sense an experienced hand at work. Their main leaflet so far is A4 folded with three sides entirely packed with text in, I think. 10-point Courier font. There's a much more effective A5 one with a bar chart from the Euros - only UKIP can beat Labour here seems to be the message.
- I had one former Tory telling me he was voting UKIP this time, "That'll show you!" "It will indeed," I murmured courteously. He looked a bit disappointed. Note to self: practice looking horrified.
-
Reading between the lines, UKIP are making huge inroads into your core vote. The panic is tangible.
Dream on !!!!
Based on the well established fact that Everything Mark Senior Says Is Wrong you've cheered me up with that, cheers.
Too true. He suggested I was in favour of a dictatorship on the last thread, have no idea why.
Well based on my forecasts on here from Cheadle by election in 2005 through to S Yorks PCC election not long ago , everything I say is not wrong . Ask your colleague Timmo whether my forecast of the Lib Dem success in Sutton LBC elections was more accurate than his local knowledge .
"My colleague Timmo"? You have surely lost it, Senior. Not sure what you have lost, it might just be the correct attributions.
Mr Sarkozy has already started talking about repatriating powers from the EU, so whether or not Ms Le Pen wins, she is moving the debate to more of an anti-EU position.
The man has already held office and was judged so unsuitable that he lost to Hollande. France electing Berlusconies will not make it any better, but as the Spectator might say "it's a race between the palace & jail" for Sarkozy. And he is not the only one in the center-right to have been chased by the police, Alain Juppe has actually gone to jail for corruption.
During one of Mr Chirac's scandals, I got the impression that french politicians/presidents actually have legitimate access to unaccounted cash slush funds.
On french politics Le Pen has time oh her side (all 2.5 years), the french economy is not getting any better, the socialists have imploded and the center is battered by corruption and splinters. She needs to do the following steps of course in the opinion polls: Step 1, Getting into the second round (check) Step 2, Beating the current president in the second round (check) Step 3, Beating all other possible candidates in the second round (getting there, she is continuously reducing the margin)
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
I finally saw the true light of David Cameron's Conservatives and felt I had no choice but to change my vote to UKIP.
Do you think this sort of 'UKIP = BNP light' nonsense is in any way convincing to other disillusioned Tories who are also considering a similar switch?
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
That's so true. It's a terminally moribund party.
Rofl - How often do posters on here get over-excited by a few bad polls or even, in the case of the Tories a few years out of office. If you had any real sense of the history of the party you would know you're talking b******s. The reason it has endured longer than the rest is because of it's ability to evolve.
England’s regions – including Tory shires – have joined forces to demand an end to austerity and a radical constitutional settlement that will give them the money and power to run their own affairs.
The leaders of 119 English councils – of which 65 are controlled by Labour, 40 by the Conservatives and 10 by the Liberal Democrats – say in a letter to the Observer that the English people will not accept Scottish devolution unless it is matched by an equal redistribution of power south of the border.
They also call on George Osborne to give them the ability and cash to run their own affairs, so that they are no longer at the mercy of financial decisions and diktats by a distant Whitehall.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
I finally saw the true light of David Cameron's Conservatives and felt I had no choice but to change my vote to UKIP.
Do you think this sort of 'UKIP = BNP light' nonsense is in any way convincing to other disillusioned Tories who are also considering a similar switch?
I think the correct phrase should be BNP lite not light ... and yes.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
How about the bad smell from Conservative members who refer to Muslims as 'ragheads' ?
And didn't the Conservative activist Martin Day have a record of racist rants on PB ?
Or perhaps we could all stop pointing fingers and wailing "wassist" and instead discuss issues ?
Its not surprising that many of the best PBers have left as this site has descended into a smearfest.
If the Conservative Party is terminally moribund how come it got 37% of the vote at the last GE, a higher percentage than Blair got in 2005. Something does not compute.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
Well, considering Nick Griffin was nearly imprisoned for exposing child rape in the North of England, perhaps he sees a party strongly against child abuse, unlike the other main parties.
Let's face it guys, the potency of crying "racist" at anyone you disagree with is much diminished after Rotherham.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
No, he's stirring shit, and trying to give the impression he's an important political player.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
I finally saw the true light of David Cameron's Conservatives and felt I had no choice but to change my vote to UKIP.
Do you think this sort of 'UKIP = BNP light' nonsense is in any way convincing to other disillusioned Tories who are also considering a similar switch?
I think the correct phrase should be BNP lite not light ... and yes.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
Denis Healey was once a member of the Communist Party. Tory Councillor Maria Gatland was once a member of PIRA. People can change and repudiate their past views.
And our very own NPXMP.
Seems Marxists can be rehabilitated. Anti-Bolsheviks can't, can you imagine were NPXMP an ex Nazi?
Aided and abetted by the complicit media. Gulags were necessary for the great dream and all that tosh.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
According to your logic, Labour are supposed to tell ex-communists, ex-Respect, ex-Socialist Labour Party supporters that they don't want their votes.
It's an idea, I suppose.
You're being disingenuous. Nick Griffin is not an ordinary voter who may [or not] have seen the true light of UKIP. And you know it.
I finally saw the true light of David Cameron's Conservatives and felt I had no choice but to change my vote to UKIP.
Do you think this sort of 'UKIP = BNP light' nonsense is in any way convincing to other disillusioned Tories who are also considering a similar switch?
I think the correct phrase should be BNP lite not light ... and yes.
In that case, expect further defectors.
I think further defectors are possible but not as a result of Nick Griffin's endorsement. I would be amazed if the UKIP leadership do anything but deplore his support. They are not quite that stupid.
I think it matters enormously. A party that crashes to votes of under 5% in 500 constituencies runs the risk of going the same way as the Liberals after 1929. Every successive election sees more seats being lost, as MPs retire, and other parties can pour resources into the remaining seats.
The Conservatives lost 2,000 Councillors in a single night in 1995 as well as half the Parliamentary strength in 1997 but recovered on both counts.
I don't think the Conservatives have ever recovered from 1997. They spent a decade bumbling along ~31%. Failed to get a majority when Labour were reduced to 29%, and now seem to be on for a <30% result in 2015.</p>
1997 and 2001 shattered the Conservatives' intellectual self-confidence.
That's so true. It's a terminally moribund party.
Rofl - How often do posters on here get over-excited by a few bad polls or even, in the case of the Tories a few years out of office. If you had any real sense of the history of the party you would know you're talking b******s. The reason it has endured longer than the rest is because of it's ability to evolve.
That's a telling response. Are you actually rolling on the floor laughing about that, or are you actually secretly a little bit worried that might be true but, because you can't substantiate why it isn't, you're resorting to throwing your toys out of the pram instead?
"The British National party has called on its supporters to give their second-preference votes in the London mayoral election to the Conservative candidate, Boris Johnson."
Suits TSE right for playing the endorsement game. If being endorsed by Nick Griffin is a political crime (as per TSE) what does that say about Boris Johnson?
Lesson that TSE needs to learn: You can't control who endorses you. Even you could be endorsed by Nick Griffin one day.
If the Conservative Party is terminally moribund how come it got 37% of the vote at the last GE, a higher percentage than Blair got in 2005. Something does not compute.
Its not terminally moribund but it is permanently diminished.
But then so is just about everything else which is 'traditional' and group based as society becomes steadily more atomised.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
If you want the bad smell to stop following your party around, then yes.
How about the bad smell from Conservative members who refer to Muslims as 'ragheads' ?
And didn't the Conservative activist Martin Day have a record of racist rants on PB ?
Or perhaps we could all stop pointing fingers and wailing "wassist" and instead discuss issues ?
Its not surprising that many of the best PBers have left as this site has descended into a smearfest.
Imagine the kind of smell that emanates when one calls policemen f**king Plebs.
"The British National party has called on its supporters to give their second-preference votes in the London mayoral election to the Conservative candidate, Boris Johnson."
Suits TSE right for playing the endorsement game. If being endorsed by Nick Griffin is a political crime (as per TSE) what does that say about Boris Johnson?
Lesson that TSE needs to learn: You can't control who endorses you. Even you could be endorsed by Nick Griffin one day.
Note Boris Johnson's immediate repudiation of the BNP endorsement.
"I utterly and unreservedly condemn the BNP and have no desire whatsoever to receive a single second-preference vote from a BNP supporter," he said. "I hope as many Londoners as possible turn out on May 1 to prevent the election of a BNP candidate."
How long, if at all, Farage repudiates the endorsement?
Nuclear quotation bomb on the Nick Griffin UKIP issue: Today: Nick Griffin @nickjgriffinbnp Follow @BullshineBilly I will hold nose & vote Ukip because it will help break up the Westminster system. & hold Cameron's feet to referendum fire.
Comments
I suspect Cameron will be the happier over that little endorsement....
'Omg - when is this maniac gonna take a break?'
Which was you posting about another poster yesterday! Um, ok.
C+O have talked of the importance of making work pay, i.e. that workers are better off than those on benefits. So if you want to ensure that gap somehow you have two options:
1. Have the minimum wage high enough to ensure (compared to benefit level) that no full time jobs pay as little as benefits. (Not a big Conservative thing usually).
2. Keep benefits for those in work to raise them up above non-working benefits claimants.
The only question is whether the Conservative Party moves right to recapture ukip votes, and therefore creates space for them again, or not.
3. Reduce out of work benefits to a level that will encourage those who can work but won't to make a little more effort
Double figures might be optimistic but there's always 8 and 9 to look forward to.
One minute a caring and concerned critique of my post (I really can't see anything nasty in it, but oh well), the next the mask slips and into full on schizoid mode! Care in the community has much to answer for.
Clinton 44 Romney 45
Clinton 43 Christie 42
Clinton 46 Paul 41
Clinton 46 Huckabee 41
Clinton 46 Jeb Bush 41
Clinton 46 Ryan 42
Clinton 48 Cruz 37
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2116
A coalition which Ed seems intent on dismantling.
The not Lab/Con position is currently being filled by SNP/Plaid/UKIP/Greens and LD. Those are the parties that the LDs will be competing with in the next parliament.
They'll be replaced, to some degree, by former LD voters too fastidious to vote Labour, but who are ashamed at the LD participation in the Conservatives often cruel policies.
I'd vote Plaid, but there won't be a candidate here!
Horrific story, a new dark ages we live in.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll_scot.html
My current prediction of SNP 34%, Labour 31%, Tories 18% and Lib Dems 6%, would result in:
Labour 28 seats (-13)
SNP 26 seats (+20)
Tories 3 seats (+2)
Lib Dems 2 seats (-9)
That 'racist policies' tweeted quote is two words, drawn from this part of the buzzfeed article:
'After losing his seat as an MEP in May, Griffin told Sky News he was defeated because the BNP’s former supporters had “voted for UKIP’s racist policies instead”.'
Here's the original video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3vittPOLxI
That quote doesn't exist -it's a totally misleading paraphrase of what Griffin said, which as you can see, is a big critique of UKIP NOT being anti-immigration enough.
So you were right, he wasn't saying UKIP were racist against white people, because he never said it in the first place. Just a completely made up smear against UKIP, to try puff Griffin's rather limited tweeting on this topic into something more damaging. Predictably pathetic.
But it gives me an excuse to post this, the Nick Griffin cookery video.
http://tinyurl.com/BNPequalsUKIPforPussies
UKIP likes to make a big thing about not being associated with former members of the BNP. Out of necessity, admittedly. Because I think we all know, the foundation stones of its vote will come from former BNP voters.
My official prediction for next year. It will be the hardest election to predict for a generation.
Some ex-BNP voters vote UKIP, as well as for other parties. I think one Labour councillor in Burnley was originally elected for the BNP.
The areas of greatest UKIP strength, down the East Coast, and Devon and Cornwall weren't good for the BNP, although there's an overlap in South Yorkshire.
Interesting bedfellows UKIP are attracting.
Did you tell these voters that you are in favour of immigrants getting priority over local people for social housing if their "needs" are higher.
Or did you forget.
Blame education. What did you expect after Tony's infamous "Education x3" speech? Some people actually believe Labour improves education you know.
I have quite easily shown it to be a made up smear. Sorry about that, but you should do some simple fact checking when something seems wrong -why would the BNP, who deny being racist, endorse someone else for having "racist policies"?
As for your new question, yes, he is tweeting (with the caveat that UKIP isn't a truly anti-immigration party) that in people should vote UKIP in some circumstances. I don't deny facts, just inflated smears.
1) HRC seems to be down on previous
2) How many have actually heard of the Rep challenger. Most would have heard of HRC. (This is magnified for UK audiences)
3) Don't look like great numbers for HRC
'Just noticed that Shadsy has taken his next Con to UKIP defector market down. Wonder if there's anything in that?'
When CarswelL defected we were told by UKIP that a further 10 Tory MP's were going to defect, after the Reckless result I guess they are more interested in keeping their jobs than having their 10 minutes of fame..
Until then I will take it he is more than happy to have the BNP vote shuffle across to UKIP....
I am proud to say I never voted for that fraud. I was not even part of the 70% who gave positive approval ratings in late 1997.
Why are you surprised. Politics now trumps science. And racism is the worst crime ever. Worse than kiddie fiddling, rape and murder. Apparently.
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
Muslim "community leaders" routinely endorse Labour despite their links with international jihadism but no one seems to worry.
I guess the only difference is that Britain First members will not blow themselves up on public transport.
Stop your whining. Its just the market mechanism in action.
Mr Sarkozy is apparently both a leading candidate for president, and helping police with their enquiries.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9384062/is-nicolas-sarkozy-headed-back-to-the-elysee-or-to-jail/
It's a Tory part of a safe Labour constituency. I was mainly focusing on local issues given nature of parliamentary seat. Very little doorstep activity takes place in our neck of the woods, so I am usually welcomed by those of all persuasions.
I was a little concerned that people would be tuning out for Christmas, but given your comments and today's reactions, I'll probably plan another session next Saturday. It's that or Christmas shopping with the other half!
It's an idea, I suppose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_Presidential_election,_2017
Mr Sarkozy has already started talking about repatriating powers from the EU, so whether or not Ms Le Pen wins, she is moving the debate to more of an anti-EU position.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11194901/BNP-splinter-group-praises-Mark-Reckless-and-says-Ukip-is-singing-from-same-hymn-sheet.html
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/nick-griffin-is-now-voting-for-ukip
France electing Berlusconies will not make it any better, but as the Spectator might say "it's a race between the palace & jail" for Sarkozy.
And he is not the only one in the center-right to have been chased by the police, Alain Juppe has actually gone to jail for corruption.
I do recall him also recommending his supporters cast their 2nd preference vote for Boris Johnson as London Mayor in 2008 even though he was a "wet Tory".
The Guardianistas got suitably overexcited about that too.
She needs to do the following steps of course in the opinion polls:
Step 1, Getting into the second round (check)
Step 2, Beating the current president in the second round (check)
Step 3, Beating all other possible candidates in the second round (getting there, she is continuously reducing the margin)
Do you think this sort of 'UKIP = BNP light' nonsense is in any way convincing to other disillusioned Tories who are also considering a similar switch?
England’s regions – including Tory shires – have joined forces to demand an end to austerity and a radical constitutional settlement that will give them the money and power to run their own affairs.
The leaders of 119 English councils – of which 65 are controlled by Labour, 40 by the Conservatives and 10 by the Liberal Democrats – say in a letter to the Observer that the English people will not accept Scottish devolution unless it is matched by an equal redistribution of power south of the border.
They also call on George Osborne to give them the ability and cash to run their own affairs, so that they are no longer at the mercy of financial decisions and diktats by a distant Whitehall.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/29/regions-letter-end-austerity-more-powers-devolution
And didn't the Conservative activist Martin Day have a record of racist rants on PB ?
Or perhaps we could all stop pointing fingers and wailing "wassist" and instead discuss issues ?
Its not surprising that many of the best PBers have left as this site has descended into a smearfest.
Let's face it guys, the potency of crying "racist" at anyone you disagree with is much diminished after Rotherham.
An interesting approach
We are supposed to show understanding and empathy to help rehabilitate hardened criminals, but someone who voted for a political party that you don't like should be ostracised permanently
Denis Healey was once a member of the Communist Party. Tory Councillor Maria Gatland was once a member of PIRA. People can change and repudiate their past views.
And our very own NPXMP.
Seems Marxists can be rehabilitated. Anti-Bolsheviks can't, can you imagine were NPXMP an ex Nazi?
Aided and abetted by the complicit media. Gulags were necessary for the great dream and all that tosh.
Israeli cricket umpire dies after being hit by ball
Hillel Oscar, former captain of Israel's national team, has been killed by a ball while umpiring a cricket match in Israel
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/11263064/Israeli-cricket-umpire-dies-after-being-hit-by-ball.html
Which party are paedophiles most likely to vote for in the next election?
Well, you started it.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/apr/02/london08.london
"The British National party has called on its supporters to give their second-preference votes in the London mayoral election to the Conservative candidate, Boris Johnson."
Suits TSE right for playing the endorsement game.
If being endorsed by Nick Griffin is a political crime (as per TSE) what does that say about Boris Johnson?
Lesson that TSE needs to learn: You can't control who endorses you. Even you could be endorsed by Nick Griffin one day.
But then so is just about everything else which is 'traditional' and group based as society becomes steadily more atomised.
"I utterly and unreservedly condemn the BNP and have no desire whatsoever to receive a single second-preference vote from a BNP supporter," he said. "I hope as many Londoners as possible turn out on May 1 to prevent the election of a BNP candidate."
How long, if at all, Farage repudiates the endorsement?
Today:
Nick Griffin @nickjgriffinbnp
Follow
@BullshineBilly I will hold nose & vote Ukip because it will help break up the Westminster system. & hold Cameron's feet to referendum fire.
2008:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/apr/02/london08.london
"Our suggestion … is that you hold your nose and cast it in favour of the Conservative candidate, Boris Johnson.