St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Nice day here too, with some Border lamb stew with celeriac and an Australian red for a warm winter dinner.
On the same off-topic St Andrews theme, it looks as if most Scots will be dissatisfied with the Smith Commission (especially if it loses anything getting through Westminster):
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Nice day here too, with some Border lamb stew with celeriac and an Australian red for a warm winter dinner.
On the same off-topic St Andrews theme, it looks as if most Scots will be dissatisfied with the Smith Commission (especially if it loses anything getting through Westminster):
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Give it a try - I know it sounds odd, but with the right meat, plus some olive oil, rocket, parmesan and perhaps a little garlic it can be delicious
sensible advice Charles, we must do lunch !
Indeed. But I doubt you come to the Great Wen that often. I'm passing through your neck of the woods on Friday, en route to Carlisle, but I rarely have cause to stop in that part of the world.
p.s. there was a good, albeit, depressing episode of 'On Your Farm' this morning about the difficulties of being a dairy farmer in rural Shropshire. Worth listening to if you have a moment.
love to buy you lunch if you're up this way Charles, unfortunatley am already booked this Friday - for lunch.
The train not stopping might be a bit of a challenge as well...
But let me know if you ever leave the marches
Charles I'm in Shakespeare country even you Londoners must occasionally get the urge for some culture ;-)
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Nice day here too, with some Border lamb stew with celeriac and an Australian red for a warm winter dinner.
On the same off-topic St Andrews theme, it looks as if most Scots will be dissatisfied with the Smith Commission (especially if it loses anything getting through Westminster):
Couple of things spring to mind, based on anecdotes, polls etc.
1. I think there is a strong element of "Shy Kipper" in some of these polls, but is probably more disproportionately based amongst the most disadvantaged. Your successful plumber will have no problem saying they will vote UKIP but their older / poorer peer might. Having heard left, right and centre that, if you vote UKIP, you have something wrong with you may discourage the less self-confident to express their view.
2. I still do not know why people are treating the polls - and particularly the Labour shares - as gospel. When push has come to shove i(I.e. When people vote), Labour's vote is almost invariably lower than its poll share. And the trend line for Labour is worrying - as time goes on, their performance is getting weaker (H and M, Labour-leaning Strood winning Rochester for UKIP etc.) Local by-election results say the same thing: labour is not performing.
3. Anecdotally, there is starting to be a strong Anyone But Labour momentum building in many parts of the North, where the local councils are felt to be too-PC, taking voters for granted etc. Reckon that will be a big factor next year.
Ps anyone know where I can get odds for Nigel Farage standing against Ed Miliband in Doncaster North? It would gain him huge publicity, put Labour on the back front and hamper Ed's ability to get out there.
Would be great. I think EdM will complacently assume that he can thrash Farage (I suspect, in face, he will comfortably beat but not thrash him).
But his complacency will mean he spends more time on the road and outside of Doncaster.
UKIP were out in Horsham yesterday and previous weekends. (And they're not after Labour votes)
Can't speak for the marginals, but no other parties are campaigning in Nov and Dec. And it speaks to the point down thread that UKIP are out and proud.
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Nice day here too, with some Border lamb stew with celeriac and an Australian red for a warm winter dinner.
On the same off-topic St Andrews theme, it looks as if most Scots will be dissatisfied with the Smith Commission (especially if it loses anything getting through Westminster):
UKIP were out in Horsham yesterday and previous weekends. And it speaks to the point down thread that UKIP are out and proud.
The JW's were out in my town. I don't intend that to be offensive because I see similarities. Out and proud means bugger-all when it comes to national vote shares.
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Nice day here too, with some Border lamb stew with celeriac and an Australian red for a warm winter dinner.
On the same off-topic St Andrews theme, it looks as if most Scots will be dissatisfied with the Smith Commission (especially if it loses anything getting through Westminster):
The poll was carried out before the Smith Commission reported.
Point is they want more powers, Smith is not proposing any , apart from control of road signs.
Road signs are important especially the one for independence that read dead end for independence.
Most Scots favoured that.
We shall see soon , once the cry babies realise they were hoodwinked and that they will get cuts just the same. Still they will be able to admire the roadsigns and be happy that rich parasitic Scots can laugh at them at their soirees in London. Maybe the fools will not be so easily satisfied though.
Thank you Jack W. I thought it was time that I came out of the shadows of lurking to the best place to discuss what looks like the most interesting general election ever.
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Have the haggis been breeding well this year?
Have to hope so given the great summer, should be tasty.
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel, and things were made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Any, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
That's very interesting. As a matter of ignorant curiosity---my driving force---I wonder whether the ordinate could be labelled on the right-hand side too.
I think Fraser Nelson once singled out UKIP and the SNP as causes rather than just political parties. As such they have the potential to gin up diverse and enthusiastic support.
Very good point. It is very easy for anyone to know something about these parties. Ask 100 people to name (unprompted) an important policy of either the SNP or UKIP. Then ask 100 to name an important policy of the Liberal Democrats. I bet that more people can answer the SNP or UKIP question. These parties have the ability to attract voters through very simplistic messaging, at a time when dissatisfaction among the main parties is very low. And these voters include the very low-information voters who look set to decide by default who will run our country!
What a great description. I've often described UKIP on here as "working class and lower middle class". They are people that have worked hard, played by the rules and in any fair society should be doing well in life. But instead they're being undercut by the system. Their views are considered illegitimate and they're smeared for them. Their pay is constantly undercut by immigration, yet won't be helped by a minimum wage increase. They aspire for themselves and their children to get on the housing ladder through their own hard work, yet overcrowding means prices keeps on rising out of their reach. They work long enough hours that it's not easy to a GP appointment, yet when they phone up it's very hard to get in, and when they do they have to sit in a waiting room for ages - something they don't have time for. They want their kids to do well in education, but would never be able to pay for private schools or tutors, and have to deal with much of their resources going on ESL kids needing extra help, and their children are held back by most kids in their class not speaking English well. And, without huge amounts of their own private money, they depend on the support network of an integrated local community that looks after each other, but immigration has broken this down.
The other side of this coin is encouraging for the Tories: If you assume some kippers will return to their previous parties in 2015, especially in marginal seats, that implies the Con will do better than it looks from the current polls.
"what distinguishes Ukip supporters more than anything else are their views on immigration and Europe"
The Conservatives have continued Labour's open door immigration policy, and passed more powers to the EU.
Yes. That's become clear to me. I was in denial for a long time. I repeatedly made excuses for Cameron's failures, trying to convince myself he was (deep-down) on our side.
Friday was the watershed moment for me. None of that's true. It's all a political triangulation exercise - just some smoke and mirrors designed to try and maintain his position in office for as long as possible.
There were the words; "I will get what Britain needs", the "no ifs, no buts", "I will change the face of the nation", but then there was the actions: no real terms cut to the EU budget, the £1.7bn extra EU contribution, the EAW, and now this farce on immigration.
I'm not falling for it again. It confirmed to me that the Conservatives have given up on controlling mass immigration. They prefer open-borders and remaining in the EU. They are not willing to fight for any proper concessions from the EU. I don't believe he'll fight for - or achieve - concessions on *anything else* from the EU either, if re-elected, unless it's uncontroversial and cosmetic. That probably should have been clear to me for a while, but it became irrefutable from the emergency brake and points system extensively trailed by the Conservatives over the last 2 months. Merkel said "No". Cameron said "Ok". He is weak, weak, weak.
I remember the contract David Cameron delivered me in 2010. He broke it, so now I am voting UKIP.
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
UKIP were out in Horsham yesterday and previous weekends. (And they're not after Labour votes)
Can't speak for the marginals, but no other parties are campaigning in Nov and Dec. And it speaks to the point down thread that UKIP are out and proud.
And a fat lot of good it will do them. No one gives a flying f*ck. People were going about their Xmas shopping, trampling over each other to get bargains. Even at the Shell Garage on the Broadbridge Heath roundabout , people were queuing for fuel, but not as bad temperedly.
The racist nature of the party will be shown up the closer we get to the election. There have already been signs of it with some of their councillors.
Mr. G, it certainly is brighter than expected in Yorkshire.
In angry news, I see some people think the equivalent to a Scottish Parliament for England is glorified councils and ridiculous city-regions. Surprised to read Dan Hannan seems to agree, and less so that Billy Bragg also wants such nonsense (apparently it'll protect England from the evil Tories).
Edited extra bit: slightly moderated my language above.
Greater city regions are a great thing, but it makes no sense for them to have the same powers as a devomax Scottish parliament, and it means the unfairness still exists for the vast majority of England that isn't in those city regions. We need an English parliament. Federal systems work for Australia and Canada, which have pretty much our constitutional system so should work here.
Which the UK currently has a trade-deficit in. According to Al-Beeb and a bit of matriculation a barrel of Brent [mixed] sells at £66.70.
IIRC DavidL has already highlighted the risks in 2014 from QE(X) unwind from Septica. Should China stumble (simultaneously as America become on-stream in Shale exports) we could see import substitution and a tumbling of oil to £30* /barrel: Not that this should stop the people in Scotland feckin'-orf!!!
Editied to Add:
* There is obviously a typo: All bets were at £50/barrel. Apols to Junior for my drunken behaviour.
HAVE MY 2015 BETS SET: pulpie and Junior have two of three** reserved bets.
** Four if Wee-Timmy wishes to try his luck - again!
What a great description. I've often described UKIP on here as "working class and lower middle class". They are people that have worked hard, played by the rules and in any fair society should be doing well in life. But instead they're being undercut by the system. Their views are considered illegitimate and they're smeared for them. Their pay is constantly undercut by immigration, yet won't be helped by a minimum wage increase. They aspire for themselves and their children to get on the housing ladder through their own hard work, yet overcrowding means prices keeps on rising out of their reach. They work long enough hours that it's not easy to a GP appointment, yet when they phone up it's very hard to get in, and when they do they have to sit in a waiting room for ages - something they don't have time for. They want their kids to do well in education, but would never be able to pay for private schools or tutors, and have to deal with much of their resources going on ESL kids needing extra help, and their children are held back by most kids in their class not speaking English well. And, without huge amounts of their own private money, they depend on the support network of an integrated local community that looks after each other, but immigration has broken this down.
I think Fraser Nelson once singled out UKIP and the SNP as causes rather than just political parties. As such they have the potential to gin up diverse and enthusiastic support.
Very good point. It is very easy for anyone to know something about these parties. Ask 100 people to name (unprompted) an important policy of either the SNP or UKIP. Then ask 100 to name an important policy of the Liberal Democrats. I bet that more people can answer the SNP or UKIP question. These parties have the ability to attract voters through very simplistic messaging, at a time when dissatisfaction among the main parties is very low. And these voters include the very low-information voters who look set to decide by default who will run our country!
Sorry, I mean't to say dissatisfaction is high. Just realized there's no edit option!
St Andrews day - best wishes to our Scots on the board.
Do we get a Scottish thread today ?
Are there any traditional 'St Andrew's Day' recipes?
turnips ?
Yuck. I may have to start a St Andrews Day Pringles tradition.
why not try a carpaccio of fillet of scottish beef ?
Scottish beef does sound promising, but having looked up carpaccio, I think I might try steak with pepper sauce.
Dave, We will be having a nice sirloin with a Diane sauce with a nice bottle of red, lovely. You could have a nice steak pie , but that is more of Ne'erday. Good time of year this , will soon be steak pie and then haggis season.
Nice day here too, with some Border lamb stew with celeriac and an Australian red for a warm winter dinner.
On the same off-topic St Andrews theme, it looks as if most Scots will be dissatisfied with the Smith Commission (especially if it loses anything getting through Westminster):
What a great description. I've often described UKIP on here as "working class and lower middle class". They are people that have worked hard, played by the rules and in any fair society should be doing well in life. But instead they're being undercut by the system. Their views are considered illegitimate and they're smeared for them. Their pay is constantly undercut by immigration, yet won't be helped by a minimum wage increase. They aspire for themselves and their children to get on the housing ladder through their own hard work, yet overcrowding means prices keeps on rising out of their reach. They work long enough hours that it's not easy to a GP appointment, yet when they phone up it's very hard to get in, and when they do they have to sit in a waiting room for ages - something they don't have time for. They want their kids to do well in education, but would never be able to pay for private schools or tutors, and have to deal with much of their resources going on ESL kids needing extra help, and their children are held back by most kids in their class not speaking English well. And, without huge amounts of their own private money, they depend on the support network of an integrated local community that looks after each other, but immigration has broken this down.
Margaret Thatcher would have understood those voters very well indeed.
I think Fraser Nelson once singled out UKIP and the SNP as causes rather than just political parties. As such they have the potential to gin up diverse and enthusiastic support.
Very good point. It is very easy for anyone to know something about these parties. Ask 100 people to name (unprompted) an important policy of either the SNP or UKIP. Then ask 100 to name an important policy of the Liberal Democrats. I bet that more people can answer the SNP or UKIP question. These parties have the ability to attract voters through very simplistic messaging, at a time when dissatisfaction among the main parties is very low. And these voters include the very low-information voters who look set to decide by default who will run our country!
Sorry, I mean't to say dissatisfaction is high. Just realized there's no edit option!
Hover the cursor over the top right corner of your post and you can click the gearwheel that appears. However, it doesn't remain an option for more than a few moments after you post.
I think Fraser Nelson once singled out UKIP and the SNP as causes rather than just political parties. As such they have the potential to gin up diverse and enthusiastic support.
Very good point. It is very easy for anyone to know something about these parties. Ask 100 people to name (unprompted) an important policy of either the SNP or UKIP. Then ask 100 to name an important policy of the Liberal Democrats. I bet that more people can answer the SNP or UKIP question. These parties have the ability to attract voters through very simplistic messaging, at a time when dissatisfaction among the main parties is very low. And these voters include the very low-information voters who look set to decide by default who will run our country!
Sorry, I mean't to say dissatisfaction is high. Just realized there's no edit option!
There is a five minute edit facility top right of the box hover and you will see a cog, click on it and edit appears
There are still a lot of voters for whom pro Europeanism... are key to their identity.
Under 15% of the population, if you look at the polls. And many of them have other political views that will stop them voting Lib Dem. That's why the "party of in" thing worked so well.
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
Superb: thank you! So the party with the greatest increase in vote share this year is as I suspected … the Greens. They have doubled their share to 5-7%. We often hear how UKIP are damaging the Conservatives but the Greens are damaging Lab / LibDem (probably the former most).
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
That's very interesting. As a matter of ignorant curiosity---my driving force---I wonder whether the ordinate could be labelled on the right-hand side too.
I am actually using Kingsoft Office as opposed to Excel, and cannot see a way of doing that. I can however mange grid-lines, which may help...
UKIP were out in Horsham yesterday and previous weekends. (And they're not after Labour votes)
Can't speak for the marginals, but no other parties are campaigning in Nov and Dec. And it speaks to the point down thread that UKIP are out and proud.
Be fair, Mr. Jonathon, full respect to you, but there isn't much of a Labour vote in Horsham to go after.
On the Subject of Horsham politics, my spies tell me that Sir Peter Horden's son wants to take over the seat when Francis Maude retires. Sir Peter is a bon oeuf and was a good MP for Horsham in his day, his son is not, in my view, of the same ilk. He is, not to put too fine a point on it, as big a shit as Maude. Forewarned is forearmed as they say and perhaps you could make common cause with your political enemies to keep Horden Junior from getting the nomination - the people of Horsham deserve better.
Every lasting government is won by whoever wins the lower middle class. Blair won them. Major won them. Thatcher won them. Wilson won them. Churchill won them. It's why Cameron's "lets ditch all their concerns and show that we're culturally and politically in tune with upper middle class left-leaning urban professionals" was such a failure. It played to the biases of the people they hung out with at dinner parties, but the increasing segregation of society by wealth blinded them to how out of tune with the country it was.
It seems to me that the typical UKIP voter is a 'Jo the Plumber' type of the kind who backed McCain in 2008, a non graduate, white small businessman living in the suburbs or a market town or village. They would have voted for Thatcher and Major in 1992, but switched to Blair in 1997 or the Referendum Party, supported Howard in 2005 and Cameron in 2010 but now like Nigel who 'speaks sense' unlike the rest of the metropolitan political class
Every lasting government is won by whoever wins the lower middle class. Blair won them. Major won them. Thatcher won them. Wilson won them. Churchill won them.
Yes, although I'd argue Blair only really won them once - in 1997.
What a great description. I've often described UKIP on here as "working class and lower middle class". They are people that have worked hard, played by the rules and in any fair society should be doing well in life. But instead they're being undercut by the system. Their views are considered illegitimate and they're smeared for them. Their pay is constantly undercut by immigration, yet won't be helped by a minimum wage increase. They aspire for themselves and their children to get on the housing ladder through their own hard work, yet overcrowding means prices keeps on rising out of their reach. They work long enough hours that it's not easy to a GP appointment, yet when they phone up it's very hard to get in, and when they do they have to sit in a waiting room for ages - something they don't have time for. They want their kids to do well in education, but would never be able to pay for private schools or tutors, and have to deal with much of their resources going on ESL kids needing extra help, and their children are held back by most kids in their class not speaking English well. And, without huge amounts of their own private money, they depend on the support network of an integrated local community that looks after each other, but immigration has broken this down.
Racist Socrates, that's the word you are missing.
Of course there are some.
But the majority who are merely protectionist. Concerned about their personal economic situation - they (often semi-skilled) see increasing competition from immigration.
Their concerns are very reasonable, for the most part. Of course, on an aggregate level, rational immigration is helpful for the economy. But (a) it needs to be rational and (b) transition programmes should be put in place to help those of our fellow countrymen negatively impacted.
What we have at the moment is - or people believe it is - uncontrolled immigration that is perversely subsidised from their taxes.
The belief is that the political elite would rather mix in a world of CEOs of global companies and leaders of other countries and have forgotten about the people who put them where they are. I have a lot of sympathy for their position: I just wish they had a more credible vehicle for dissent than Farage's UKIP.
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
Superb: thank you! So the party with the greatest increase in vote share this year is as I suspected … the Greens. They have doubled their share to 5-7%. We often hear how UKIP are damaging the Conservatives but the Greens are damaging Lab / LibDem (probably the former most).
Ed Miliband in office will hemorrhage votes to the Greens and UKIP.
Every lasting government is won by whoever wins the lower middle class. Blair won them. Major won them. Thatcher won them. Wilson won them. Churchill won them. /blockquote>
I agree.
Too too soon to say whether Cameron has or hasn't won them by your criteria of 'lasting government.' I happen to think he will.
"Superb: thank you! So the party with the greatest increase in vote share this year is as I suspected … the Greens. They have doubled their share to 5-7%. We often hear how UKIP are damaging the Conservatives but the Greens are damaging Lab / LibDem (probably the former most)."
Actually, over the 12 months their averaged share has risen 4 points, from 2.2 to 6.2. My immediate impression from the new chart is that there seems to be something of a LibDem/Green mirror image.
In summary, over 12 months...
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.4 The Green share has risen 4 points, from 2.2 to 6.2
Every lasting government is won by whoever wins the lower middle class. Blair won them. Major won them. Thatcher won them. Wilson won them. Churchill won them. It's why Cameron's "lets ditch all their concerns and show that we're culturally and politically in tune with upper middle class left-leaning urban professionals" was such a failure. It played to the biases of the people they hung out with at dinner parties, but the increasing segregation of society by wealth blinded them to how out of tune with the country it was.
I agree.
Too too soon to say whether Cameron has or hasn't won them by your criteria of 'lasting government.' I happen to think he will.
"Superb: thank you! So the party with the greatest increase in vote share this year is as I suspected … the Greens. They have doubled their share to 5-7%. We often hear how UKIP are damaging the Conservatives but the Greens are damaging Lab / LibDem (probably the former most)."
Actually, over the 12 months their averaged share has risen 4 points, from 2.2 to 6.2.
Blimey. Nearly a threefold increase. It would be good to see a thread or two about them and excluding them from the debates seems more pernicious than ever.
What a great description. I've often described UKIP on here as "working class and lower middle class". They are people that have worked hard, played by the rules and in any fair society should be doing well in life. But instead they're being undercut by the system. Their views are considered illegitimate and they're smeared for them. Their pay is constantly undercut by immigration, yet won't be helped by a minimum wage increase. They aspire for themselves and their children to get on the housing ladder through their own hard work, yet overcrowding means prices keeps on rising out of their reach. They work long enough hours that it's not easy to a GP appointment, yet when they phone up it's very hard to get in, and when they do they have to sit in a waiting room for ages - something they don't have time for. They want their kids to do well in education, but would never be able to pay for private schools or tutors, and have to deal with much of their resources going on ESL kids needing extra help, and their children are held back by most kids in their class not speaking English well. And, without huge amounts of their own private money, they depend on the support network of an integrated local community that looks after each other, but immigration has broken this down.
And they think that UKIP is a party that is going to stand up for the ordinary guy, because apart from immigration and Europe, they haven't a clue that the party is a libertarian party that would be very similar to the Tea Party in America.
Farage is very good at presenting the image of the ordinary guy and getting photo ops with a beer in his hand. He's very good at talking about the injustice of Europe. He looks like he is standing up for the masses against an elitist system, but let's see how good he is at coming up with a manifesto that isn't further to the right than the Conservatives, because UKIP 2015 is going to be under more scrutiny than UKIP 2010.
If he wants to play with the big boys, it isn't going to be a re-run of the European debates with Nick Clegg. He is going to have to explain and defend exactly what his party stands for, beyond Europe and immigration.
Just backed Rosberg at 4.7 for the title, hedge set for 3.
I think it'll be another two horse race. He came very, very close to winning this season. I'd be a little surprised if he didn't have the lead at some point, and think a hedge at 3 or perhaps lower is eminently likely.
Are you talking about those lower middle class voters that Audreyanne is convinced will take to the barricades to help the £2,000,000 home owners from paying more tax?
It seems to me that the typical UKIP voter is a 'Jo the Plumber' type of the kind who backed McCain in 2008, a non graduate, white small businessman living in the suburbs or a market town or village. They would have voted for Thatcher and Major in 1992, but switched to Blair in 1997 or the Referendum Party, supported Howard in 2005 and Cameron in 2010 but now like Nigel who 'speaks sense' unlike the rest of the metropolitan political class
I don't think there is ever a "typical" party voter.
Party voters are a huge and disparate coalition of core voters, who will be core voters for various reasons and a loose assemblage of others who again are attracted to a stronger or lesser extent to an individual leader(s), policy(ies) or philosophy.
It seems to me that the typical UKIP voter is a 'Jo the Plumber' type of the kind who backed McCain in 2008, a non graduate, white small businessman living in the suburbs or a market town or village. They would have voted for Thatcher and Major in 1992, but switched to Blair in 1997 or the Referendum Party, supported Howard in 2005 and Cameron in 2010 but now like Nigel who 'speaks sense' unlike the rest of the metropolitan political class
I don't think UKIP voters are "get on your bike" Tebbitians. I see documentaries about the unemployed in, say, Scunthorpe yet at the other end of the county there are lots of jobs available, being done by East Europeans.
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
Significant progress there for the Greens.
I seem to recall some analysis of the 2010-LD > Lab switchers that presented them as a distinct group. Far-left of Labour before they switched to the LDs. Are these the LDs that are switching to the Greens?
Are you talking about those lower middle class voters that Audreyanne is convinced will take to the barricades to help the £2,000,000 home owners from paying more tax?
I have never said that so don't be an ass.
What I said is that the people with homes worth £2m, and from anything upward of £1m (from fear), are the kind of people EdM should not have hacked off. A lot of them in London represent the kind of NuLab supporters who Blair wooed so successfully: left-leaning middle class professionals. Many important figures in the media, newspapers, tv, radio, editors, directors and producers, actors, writers in that London group are not exactly dancing up and down with joy about the Mansion Tax. They're a tiny proportion of the electorate with a massive influence.
Will be interesting to see in the GE how many are prepared to cut their noses off to spite their face and vote for the absolutists and let in the socialists.
Within this period the 5-poll averaged party shares have changed as follows:
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6 The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8 The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8 The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.8
You see, when you look at that it's a swap from Lab/LibDem to UKIP. I know there are mini-rises and falls from the Cons but actually Tory support has been steady. In terms of the church UKIP gains at the expense of Labour and LibDems.
It would be helpful to see Green support too as I suspect they have risen well? Probably more than any other party in the country, though we don't hear it?
I am still hoping that somebody will send me the numbers. I asked YouGov but my request was met with silence. It's just too much of a grunt opening some 1200 PDfs to extract the data.
Wikipedia have started breaking out Green support in polls. Perhaps you could just get the numbers from there?
Thanks for this information. It still proved to be quite a grunt, because merged cells made the transferred data bad to sort in Excel. Things things were then made worse by the fact that the Wiki data included two polls that I'd somehow missed, which screwed things up until I managed to sort things out.
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
That's very interesting. As a matter of ignorant curiosity---my driving force---I wonder whether the ordinate could be labelled on the right-hand side too.
I am actually using Kingsoft Office as opposed to Excel, and cannot see a way of doing that. I can however mange grid-lines, which may help...
But the majority who are merely protectionist. Concerned about their personal economic situation - they (often semi-skilled) see increasing competition from immigration.
Their concerns are very reasonable, for the most part. Of course, on an aggregate level, rational immigration is helpful for the economy. But (a) it needs to be rational and (b) transition programmes should be put in place to help those of our fellow countrymen negatively impacted.
What we have at the moment is - or people believe it is - uncontrolled immigration that is perversely subsidised from their taxes.
The belief is that the political elite would rather mix in a world of CEOs of global companies and leaders of other countries and have forgotten about the people who put them where they are. I have a lot of sympathy for their position: I just wish they had a more credible vehicle for dissent than Farage's UKIP.
"Of course, on an aggregate level, rational immigration is helpful for the economy. "
People who defend (mass not rational IMO) immigration on this basis are backing a kind of utilitarianism that they would not suffer with regard to any other issue
People of a nominally leftish profile allowing (I shall put it at it's least) the suffering of an entire section of the less well off in society on the condition that overall GDP is improved (without analysing who wins and who loses) runs counter to every other argument they make. Why do they do it?
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
Significant progress there for the Greens.
I seem to recall some analysis of the 2010-LD > Lab switchers that presented them as a distinct group. Far-left of Labour before they switched to the LDs. Are these the LDs that are switching to the Greens?
The YouGov polls show it is mainly the sub-40 age group who are voting Green with most of those being in the 18-24 range.
Socrates Indeed, many of the upper middle class leftwingers are now flirting with the Greens just as the lower middle class voted UKIP. Indeed the upper middle class Cameron flirted with generally voted for Clegg in 2010 before switching to Miliband or the Greens, the lower middle class he largely ignored in 2010 voted for him but have now switched to UKIP, which is why on immigration and the EU he is finally trying to win them back
Will be interesting to see in the GE how many are prepared to cut their noses off to spite their face and vote for the absolutists and let in the socialists.
You will always find a bloc of absolutists for the minor parties.
Liberals suffered from the "wasted vote" syndrome for decades but still retained a significant bloc of support.
The Greens and Ukip will similarly be targeted and lose support next year and fall from their present levels to around 3% and 11% respectively.
Will be interesting to see in the GE how many are prepared to cut their noses off to spite their face and vote for the absolutists and let in the socialists.
The Greens and Ukip will similarly be targeted and lose support next year and fall from their present levels to around 3% and 11% respectively.
Will you want those words deep fried, or just lightly salted?
It seems to me that the typical UKIP voter is a 'Jo the Plumber' type of the kind who backed McCain in 2008, a non graduate, white small businessman living in the suburbs or a market town or village. They would have voted for Thatcher and Major in 1992, but switched to Blair in 1997 or the Referendum Party, supported Howard in 2005 and Cameron in 2010 but now like Nigel who 'speaks sense' unlike the rest of the metropolitan political class
I don't think UKIP voters are "get on your bike" Tebbitians. I see documentaries about the unemployed in, say, Scunthorpe yet at the other end of the county there are lots of jobs available, being done by East Europeans.
I would have thought plumbers are far too busy working to be bothered about politics. I suppose plumbers might resent the fact that their speciality which in the past was notoriously difficult to pin down and secure by potential customers is now easier to get hold of at a realistic price.
Its hard to see why Tebbit, given his advice, would want to criticise say the 'Polish plumber' coming to work here or indeed anyone coming to work here who is doing work that Brits refuse to do. Immigration by temporary workers is to our advantage. What we need to do is take the opportunity to get our pown people off benefits.
In the long term the fact that we ae not in the Euro means we need to have a different approach to movement of labour as the Eurozone becomes more fiscally and politically closer.
But the majority who are merely protectionist. Concerned about their personal economic situation - they (often semi-skilled) see increasing competition from immigration.
Their concerns are very reasonable, for the most part. Of course, on an aggregate level, rational immigration is helpful for the economy. But (a) it needs to be rational and (b) transition programmes should be put in place to help those of our fellow countrymen negatively impacted.
What we have at the moment is - or people believe it is - uncontrolled immigration that is perversely subsidised from their taxes.
The belief is that the political elite would rather mix in a world of CEOs of global companies and leaders of other countries and have forgotten about the people who put them where they are. I have a lot of sympathy for their position: I just wish they had a more credible vehicle for dissent than Farage's UKIP.
"Of course, on an aggregate level, rational immigration is helpful for the economy. "
People who defend (mass not rational IMO) immigration on this basis are backing a kind of utilitarianism that they would not suffer with regard to any other issue
People of a nominally leftish profile allowing (I shall put it at it's least) the suffering of an entire section of the less well off in society on the condition that overall GDP is improved (without analysing who wins and who loses) runs counter to every other argument they make. Why do they do it?
Because they feel more in common with elites in other countries, perhaps?
I can see how that disconnect arises - I am of rural stock and make an effort to retain my roots, but living in London and operating globally it's tough to do sometimes.
Come on, Britain – it’s the 21st century. Stop this obsession with social class I have lived here for 25 years, but still I’m baffled by this fixation with background, schools and cutlery
Will be interesting to see in the GE how many are prepared to cut their noses off to spite their face and vote for the absolutists and let in the socialists.
The Greens and Ukip will similarly be targeted and lose support next year and fall from their present levels to around 3% and 11% respectively.
Will you want those words deep fried, or just lightly salted?
Roasted, basted and served with a crisp Chablis will do nicely .... and don't forget to decant the madeira.
Interesting description from Socrates of the typical UKIP voter. A bit of a caricature and the description gives them a nobility that I'm sure a lot of us would argue with but even if we accept these noble sons and daughters of toil to be what Socrates sees them to be I'd still have a problem. Why do we allow them to demand the closed shop Thatcher and her party denied to the unions? I don't remember any Tory leader going to the barricades for the miners right to keep out competition because all they wanted was to do right by their kids. I certainly don't remember any Tory making the kind of speech Cameron made the other day in support of these Honest Johns at the expense of all us consumers who have patently benefitted from the intelligent foreign labour we have recently been importing from Europe
Come on, Britain – it’s the 21st century. Stop this obsession with social class I have lived here for 25 years, but still I’m baffled by this fixation with background, schools and cutlery
JackW NOA Indeed, but they are certainly more likely to look like that than a postgraduate living in a big city and working in the public sector. Most want immigration capped whether fans of Tebbit or not
Good morning all and as we leave Autumn and head into Winter, it just feels more and more like 1982 and 1991. IF OGH's chums are correct then we are already in uncharted territory. 12-18 months ago they told us the Tories COULDN'T win unless the UKIP vote collapsed back to under 10% or 5%. We have had 2 months of the Tories being neck and neck in the polls with Labour and UKIP closer to 20% than 10%.
I still think we are looking at something closer to Tory 35% Labour 25% UKIP 20% and LibDem 15% come May. Incidentally I see we have a new Baxter prediction which would see the whole of the south of Scotland Tory from east to west.
Just backed Rosberg at 4.7 for the title, hedge set for 3.
I think it'll be another two horse race. He came very, very close to winning this season. I'd be a little surprised if he didn't have the lead at some point, and think a hedge at 3 or perhaps lower is eminently likely.
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
What this shows is the huge dissatisfaction with the main parties. To win a majority, either party will need to get back some of the support it has lost. The comfort for the Tories is that it has lost a fifth of its support to UKIP and has a chance to get some of that back.
Interesting description from Socrates of the typical UKIP voter. A bit of a caricature and the description gives them a nobility that I'm sure a lot of us would argue with but even if we accept these noble sons and daughters of toil to be what Socrates sees them to be I'd still have a problem. Why do we allow them to demand the closed shop Thatcher and her party denied to the unions? I don't remember any Tory leader going to the barricades for the miners right to keep out competition because all they wanted was to do right by their kids. I certainly don't remember any Tory making the kind of speech Cameron made the other day in support of these Honest Johns at the expense of all us consumers who have patently benefitted from the intelligent foreign labour we have recently been importing from Europe
"Why do we allow them to demand ..."
Why shouldn't people be allowed to demand anything they like?
"all us consumers who have patently benefitted from the intelligent foreign labour we have recently been importing from Europe"
Careful with "imported" in terms of people.. OGH and @SouthamObserver go crazy at the use of that word when referring to human beings.
The point you miss is that consumers haven't benefitted from the use of intelligent foreign labour.. things cost more than they used to even though the people who work for the companies are paid the same (or less)
An influx of Eastern European electricians and plumbers has meant the wages of plumbers and electricians has stagnated, but their bosses profit margins have increased big time.
The coffee in Pattisire Valerie is still expensive, despite the low rates of pay for the immigrant waitresses
So the consumer doesn't benefit, neither does the worker.
Good morning all and as we leave Autumn and head into Winter, it just feels more and more like 1982 and 1991. IF OGH's chums are correct then we are already in uncharted territory. 12-18 months ago they told us the Tories COULDN'T win unless the UKIP vote collapsed back to under 10% or 5%. We have had 2 months of the Tories being neck and neck in the polls with Labour and UKIP closer to 20% than 10%.
I still think we are looking at something closer to Tory 35% Labour 25% UKIP 20% and LibDem 15% come May. Incidentally I see we have a new Baxter prediction which would see the whole of the south of Scotland Tory from east to west.
Those numbers feel about right but I think it's possible that Labour will underscore UKIP.
Mr. G, it certainly is brighter than expected in Yorkshire.
In angry news, I see some people think the equivalent to a Scottish Parliament for England is glorified councils and ridiculous city-regions. Surprised to read Dan Hannan seems to agree, and less so that Billy Bragg also wants such nonsense (apparently it'll protect England from the evil Tories).
Edited extra bit: slightly moderated my language above.
Greater city regions are a great thing, but it makes no sense for them to have the same powers as a devomax Scottish parliament, and it means the unfairness still exists for the vast majority of England that isn't in those city regions. We need an English parliament. Federal systems work for Australia and Canada, which have pretty much our constitutional system so should work here.
Scotland does not have anything resembling Devomx, at best devoMini.
Mr. G, it certainly is brighter than expected in Yorkshire.
In angry news, I see some people think the equivalent to a Scottish Parliament for England is glorified councils and ridiculous city-regions. Surprised to read Dan Hannan seems to agree, and less so that Billy Bragg also wants such nonsense (apparently it'll protect England from the evil Tories).
Edited extra bit: slightly moderated my language above.
Greater city regions are a great thing, but it makes no sense for them to have the same powers as a devomax Scottish parliament, and it means the unfairness still exists for the vast majority of England that isn't in those city regions. We need an English parliament. Federal systems work for Australia and Canada, which have pretty much our constitutional system so should work here.
Scotland does not have anything resembling Devomx, at best devoMini.
UKIP favours a Swiss/ German federal model, which should attract you, especially now that the SNP has turned into an Erich Honecker tribute act.
The point you miss is that consumers haven't benefitted from the use of intelligent foreign labour.. things cost more than they used to even though the people who work for the companies are paid the same (or less)
An influx of Eastern European electricians and plumbers has meant the wages of plumbers and electricians has stagnated, but their bosses profit margins have increased big time.
Say we accept your claim about prices and wages, who's getting the saving when the plumbers and electricians are self-employed?
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
What this shows is the huge dissatisfaction with the main parties. To win a majority, either party will need to get back some of the support it has lost. The comfort for the Tories is that it has lost a fifth of its support to UKIP and has a chance to get some of that back.
What it shows is the toxicity of Ed Miliband killing Labour's 35% strategy. So much for hanging on to the 2010 voters and adding on the LibDems to get Ed into Downing Street. January to November, the Tories have lost 2%, Labour 8%.
The Tories have clawed back 1% of their supporters going to Labour - whilst Labour has lost another 1% to the Tories. These now show a net transfer of 2010 voters going from Labour to the Conservatives. Which is a fascinating direction of travel for the mass of Labour/Tory marginals next May.
As is the net loss of LibDem voters. It was a net 22% differential between Labour/Tories - that is now down to 16%. Still very handy for Labour, but a worrying fall off for them.
It's always seemed to me that UKIP's most fertile ground would be among was the substantial number of working class and lower middle class voters who voted Tory up to and including the I992 election. Somewhere between then and I997 the Tories lost them and have never really got them back.
The point you miss is that consumers haven't benefitted from the use of intelligent foreign labour.. things cost more than they used to even though the people who work for the companies are paid the same (or less)
An influx of Eastern European electricians and plumbers has meant the wages of plumbers and electricians has stagnated, but their bosses profit margins have increased big time.
Say we accept your claim about prices and wages, who's getting the saving when the plumbers and electricians are self-employed?
Predominantly the wealthier classes who hire these people in rather than the lower middle class people who get their mate do it if it's difficult, or do it themselves if it's basic.
If you really think a, for example, 10% reduction in wages for the working class is made up for by 10% cheaper plumbers and electricians, you have no idea about the spending habits of the poor.
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
What this shows is the huge dissatisfaction with the main parties. To win a majority, either party will need to get back some of the support it has lost. The comfort for the Tories is that it has lost a fifth of its support to UKIP and has a chance to get some of that back.
What it shows is the toxicity of Ed Miliband killing Labour's 35% strategy. So much for hanging on to the 2010 voters and adding on the LibDems to get Ed into Downing Street. January to November, the Tories have lost 2%, Labour 8%.
The Tories have clawed back 1% of their supporters going to Labour - whilst Labour has lost another 1% to the Tories. These now show a net transfer of 2010 voters going from Labour to the Conservatives. Which is a fascinating direction of travel for the mass of Labour/Tory marginals next May.
As is the net loss of LibDem voters. It was a net 22% differential between Labour/Tories - that is now down to 16%. Still very handy for Labour, but a worrying fall off for them.
What matters is not votes but seats. National vote shares are almost totally irrelevant when you've got FPTP in 650 individual seats.
So the LDs can be down to 6% in some online panel polls yet in the same week we get seat polling that points to them securing 30+ in May.
UKIP can be in late teens or low 20s yet there are precious few seats where they are ahead.
Interesting description from Socrates of the typical UKIP voter. A bit of a caricature and the description gives them a nobility that I'm sure a lot of us would argue with but even if we accept these noble sons and daughters of toil to be what Socrates sees them to be I'd still have a problem. Why do we allow them to demand the closed shop Thatcher and her party denied to the unions?
Because the British governments should take responsibility for the welfare of its own citizens over that of foreign citizens, in a way it shouldn't take responsibility for the welfare of union members over non-union members.
What a great description. I've often described UKIP on here as "working class and lower middle class". They are people that have worked hard, played by the rules and in any fair society should be doing well in life. But instead they're being undercut by the system. Their views are considered illegitimate and they're smeared for them. Their pay is constantly undercut by immigration, yet won't be helped by a minimum wage increase. They aspire for themselves and their children to get on the housing ladder through their own hard work, yet overcrowding means prices keeps on rising out of their reach. They work long enough hours that it's not easy to a GP appointment, yet when they phone up it's very hard to get in, and when they do they have to sit in a waiting room for ages - something they don't have time for. They want their kids to do well in education, but would never be able to pay for private schools or tutors, and have to deal with much of their resources going on ESL kids needing extra help, and their children are held back by most kids in their class not speaking English well. And, without huge amounts of their own private money, they depend on the support network of an integrated local community that looks after each other, but immigration has broken this down.
Racist Socrates, that's the word you are missing.
Thanks again for displaying the sheer contempt of regular British people held by people of your background.
The point you miss is that consumers haven't benefitted from the use of intelligent foreign labour.. things cost more than they used to even though the people who work for the companies are paid the same (or less)
An influx of Eastern European electricians and plumbers has meant the wages of plumbers and electricians has stagnated, but their bosses profit margins have increased big time.
Say we accept your claim about prices and wages, who's getting the saving when the plumbers and electricians are self-employed?
Predominantly the wealthier classes who hire these people in rather than the lower middle class people who get their mate do it if it's difficult, or do it themselves if it's basic.
If you really think a, for example, 10% reduction in wages for the working class is made up for by 10% cheaper plumbers and electricians, you have no idea about the spending habits of the poor.
That's not what I said, although I'd like to see actual analysis before saying who was getting the biggest benefit (relative to income) - it's not something you can reliably tell from your gut.
Roger's thought was that if your story was right then consumers were getting a saving, and why should protectionism stop them getting that when it didn't with the miners? Isam then responded that consumers weren't getting a saving because of some unspecified market failure which resulted in the whole saving going to the plumbers' and electricians' bosses, rather than either the workers or the consumers. But if that's right, then regardless of the income profile of the consumers, who's getting the money when the worker is his or her own boss?
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
What this shows is the huge dissatisfaction with the main parties. To win a majority, either party will need to get back some of the support it has lost. The comfort for the Tories is that it has lost a fifth of its support to UKIP and has a chance to get some of that back.
What it shows is the toxicity of Ed Miliband killing Labour's 35% strategy. So much for hanging on to the 2010 voters and adding on the LibDems to get Ed into Downing Street. January to November, the Tories have lost 2%, Labour 8%.
The Tories have clawed back 1% of their supporters going to Labour - whilst Labour has lost another 1% to the Tories. These now show a net transfer of 2010 voters going from Labour to the Conservatives. Which is a fascinating direction of travel for the mass of Labour/Tory marginals next May.
As is the net loss of LibDem voters. It was a net 22% differential between Labour/Tories - that is now down to 16%. Still very handy for Labour, but a worrying fall off for them.
What matters is not votes but seats. National vote shares are almost totally irrelevant when you've got FPTP in 650 individual seats.
So the LDs can be down to 6% in some online panel polls yet in the same week we get seat polling that points to them securing 30+ in May.
UKIP can be in late teens or low 20s yet there are precious few seats where they are ahead.
OGH Obviously unless the Tories lead in votes they will not lead in seats, the LDs are clearly going to lose seats reflecting their loss of votes, even if incumbency may save the furniture
The point you miss is that consumers haven't benefitted from the use of intelligent foreign labour.. things cost more than they used to even though the people who work for the companies are paid the same (or less)
An influx of Eastern European electricians and plumbers has meant the wages of plumbers and electricians has stagnated, but their bosses profit margins have increased big time.
Say we accept your claim about prices and wages, who's getting the saving when the plumbers and electricians are self-employed?
Predominantly the wealthier classes who hire these people in rather than the lower middle class people who get their mate do it if it's difficult, or do it themselves if it's basic.
If you really think a, for example, 10% reduction in wages for the working class is made up for by 10% cheaper plumbers and electricians, you have no idea about the spending habits of the poor.
You must surely accept, though, that if there are fewer plumbers and electricians those who are left can charge more and also cherry pick/prioritise the work they do to the detriment of whoever the consumer is - and logically they would do the high-end, best-paid work. Most of those on the lowest incomes live in rental accommodation of one kind or another - they rely on their landlords (councils, housing associations, private) for the upkeep of their homes. The more landlords have to pay, the higher the rents, no?
Interesting description from Socrates of the typical UKIP voter. A bit of a caricature and the description gives them a nobility that I'm sure a lot of us would argue with but even if we accept these noble sons and daughters of toil to be what Socrates sees them to be I'd still have a problem. Why do we allow them to demand the closed shop Thatcher and her party denied to the unions? I don't remember any Tory leader going to the barricades for the miners right to keep out competition because all they wanted was to do right by their kids. I certainly don't remember any Tory making the kind of speech Cameron made the other day in support of these Honest Johns at the expense of all us consumers who have patently benefitted from the intelligent foreign labour we have recently been importing from Europe
But Roger chappies like you should be giving thanks at the altar of Mrs T. You can now bore the tits off everyone about Co2 AND emote about miners at the same time though in reality you don't give a shit about the communiies.
MalcolmG Many of the richest expat Scots, Sir Sean Connery, Alan Cumming, Andy Murray, Sir Brian Cox etc were all Yes supporters
Not many London establishment lackeys among that list
A lot of greedy hypocrites though. I'll exclude Andy Murray (though I'm not a fan - personality of a brick), because he has opened a hotel, helping his community, but the rest want everyone else to cover themselves in wode and charge south whilst they watch from the Bahamas.
SO The economy is now growing, I agree Thatcher did make some mistakes, and one was not getting replacement industry for ex mining communities, though she did promote industrial parks and investment from the likes of Nissan and Toyota which has brought some jobs. However, the general trend to a service sector rather than mass manufacturing/primary industry economy would have occurred regardless of Thatcher
Mr. G, it certainly is brighter than expected in Yorkshire.
In angry news, I see some people think the equivalent to a Scottish Parliament for England is glorified councils and ridiculous city-regions. Surprised to read Dan Hannan seems to agree, and less so that Billy Bragg also wants such nonsense (apparently it'll protect England from the evil Tories). Edited extra bit: slightly moderated my language above.
Greater city regions are a great thing, but it makes no sense for them to have the same powers as a devomax Scottish parliament, and it means the unfairness still exists for the vast majority of England that isn't in those city regions. We need an English parliament. Federal systems work for Australia and Canada, which have pretty much our constitutional system so should work here.
Scotland does not have anything resembling Devomx, at best devoMini.
UKIP favours a Swiss/ German federal model, which should attract you, especially now that the SNP has turned into an Erich Honecker tribute act.
Leaving aside the complicated tax allocations of the German Lander the Germans have a tax equalisation process whereby poor Länder receive adjustment payments which are funded by the wealthy states. Some of the smaller in size city states demand and receive proportionately more (you can see why say Manchester is so keen on devolution). The starting point for the financial equalisation a mong the Länder is the financial capacity per inhabitant of the various Länder. On top of all that there are supplementary federal grants which the federal government makes to the 'poor' Länder to complement financial equalisation.
Good luck to UKIP in sorting that out.... ' ''The lawsuit before the court is an act of political self-defense," said Volker Bouffier, the premier of the German state Hessen. Between 1995 and 2007, Bouffier's state of 6 million was the loser in Germany's federal equalization system. Over that period of time, Hessen's state coffers were depleted by a net sum of 35.4 billion euros ($46.1 billion)' ' "It can't be that 10 percent of our budget ends up in other states, which then pay for things we ourselves can't afford," ' http://www.dw.de/german-states-oppose-stupid-wealth-transfers/a-16640386 ...never mind drawing up the totally arbitry regions (not least when the choice of a region's boundary dictates, as we see above, who pays how much to who.
Is it such a clever kipper idea?? Especially when it balkanises England. Or is it really just a typical gimmick which solves nothing, improves nothing and creates other problems. It all sounds a bit like socialists spending other people's money to me. But then again Farage's policy ideas never seem to last too long.
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76) Cons to LAB: 3 (5) Cons to LD: 1 (1) Cons to UKIP: 19 (17) Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85) LAB to Cons: 5 (4) LAB to LD: 1 (2) LAB to UKIP: 8 (5) LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35) LD to Cons: 13 (12) LD to LAB: 29 (34) LD to UKIP: 13 (9) LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
What this shows is the huge dissatisfaction with the main parties. To win a majority, either party will need to get back some of the support it has lost. The comfort for the Tories is that it has lost a fifth of its support to UKIP and has a chance to get some of that back.
What it shows is the toxicity of Ed Miliband killing Labour's 35% strategy. So much for hanging on to the 2010 voters and adding on the LibDems to get Ed into Downing Street. January to November, the Tories have lost 2%, Labour 8%.
The Tories have clawed back 1% of their supporters going to Labour - whilst Labour has lost another 1% to the Tories. These now show a net transfer of 2010 voters going from Labour to the Conservatives. Which is a fascinating direction of travel for the mass of Labour/Tory marginals next May.
As is the net loss of LibDem voters. It was a net 22% differential between Labour/Tories - that is now down to 16%. Still very handy for Labour, but a worrying fall off for them.
What matters is not votes but seats. National vote shares are almost totally irrelevant when you've got FPTP in 650 individual seats.
So the LDs can be down to 6% in some online panel polls yet in the same week we get seat polling that points to them securing 30+ in May.
UKIP can be in late teens or low 20s yet there are precious few seats where they are ahead.
A crucial point made by OGH and something PBers should remind themselves of regularly as the general election looms.
Kippers should be especially wary of the Alliance performance in 1983 - 25% returned only 23 MP's of which few were non incumbents. Hundreds of second places but few bums on the benches.
Comments
Most Scots favoured that.
I thought you lived oop North somewhere?
I think we should consider following China's Nepal example, and encourage english councils to relocate english people to Scotland instead.
But his complacency will mean he spends more time on the road and outside of Doncaster.
Great for the Tories
Can't speak for the marginals, but no other parties are campaigning in Nov and Dec. And it speaks to the point down thread that UKIP are out and proud.
Just try looking for L'avenue de la grande armee in flemish! (I drive down to see my cousins in Chimay occasionally)
Anyway, drum roll, I am delighted to present an averaged chart of the YouGov polls for the last 12 months, which includes the Greens...
http://www.mediafire.com/view/l8rd7atd257yprk/YouGov polls 12 months to 30 November inc Green 2014.jpg#
And with that, it is now time to walk the dogs!
Friday was the watershed moment for me. None of that's true. It's all a political triangulation exercise - just some smoke and mirrors designed to try and maintain his position in office for as long as possible.
There were the words; "I will get what Britain needs", the "no ifs, no buts", "I will change the face of the nation", but then there was the actions: no real terms cut to the EU budget, the £1.7bn extra EU contribution, the EAW, and now this farce on immigration.
I'm not falling for it again. It confirmed to me that the Conservatives have given up on controlling mass immigration. They prefer open-borders and remaining in the EU. They are not willing to fight for any proper concessions from the EU. I don't believe he'll fight for - or achieve - concessions on *anything else* from the EU either, if re-elected, unless it's uncontroversial and cosmetic. That probably should have been clear to me for a while, but it became irrefutable from the emergency brake and points system extensively trailed by the Conservatives over the last 2 months. Merkel said "No". Cameron said "Ok". He is weak, weak, weak.
I remember the contract David Cameron delivered me in 2010. He broke it, so now I am voting UKIP.
The racist nature of the party will be shown up the closer we get to the election. There have already been signs of it with some of their councillors.
How we laughed!
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/183884/#Comment_183884 Editied to Add:
* There is obviously a typo: All bets were at £50/barrel. Apols to Junior for my drunken behaviour.
HAVE MY 2015 BETS SET: pulpie and Junior have two of three** reserved bets.
** Four if Wee-Timmy wishes to try his luck - again!
I also noticed this paean of praise, of sorts, for Mr Cameron:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/30/david-cameron-sold-scotland-down-river
Anyway, have a nice day. I'm off out for some DIY, if the weather looks as if it will hold for long enough.
http://www.mediafire.com/view/d6xqc13gsauhphm/YouGov polls 12 months to 30 November inc Gridlines.jpg#
On the Subject of Horsham politics, my spies tell me that Sir Peter Horden's son wants to take over the seat when Francis Maude retires. Sir Peter is a bon oeuf and was a good MP for Horsham in his day, his son is not, in my view, of the same ilk. He is, not to put too fine a point on it, as big a shit as Maude. Forewarned is forearmed as they say and perhaps you could make common cause with your political enemies to keep Horden Junior from getting the nomination - the people of Horsham deserve better.
Every lasting government is won by whoever wins the lower middle class. Blair won them. Major won them. Thatcher won them. Wilson won them. Churchill won them. It's why Cameron's "lets ditch all their concerns and show that we're culturally and politically in tune with upper middle class left-leaning urban professionals" was such a failure. It played to the biases of the people they hung out with at dinner parties, but the increasing segregation of society by wealth blinded them to how out of tune with the country it was.
Interesting graph, especially looking from June 2013 to now.
Cameron doesn't know them. Miliband doesn't understand them. Clegg sneers at them.
But the majority who are merely protectionist. Concerned about their personal economic situation - they (often semi-skilled) see increasing competition from immigration.
Their concerns are very reasonable, for the most part. Of course, on an aggregate level, rational immigration is helpful for the economy. But (a) it needs to be rational and (b) transition programmes should be put in place to help those of our fellow countrymen negatively impacted.
What we have at the moment is - or people believe it is - uncontrolled immigration that is perversely subsidised from their taxes.
The belief is that the political elite would rather mix in a world of CEOs of global companies and leaders of other countries and have forgotten about the people who put them where they are. I have a lot of sympathy for their position: I just wish they had a more credible vehicle for dissent than Farage's UKIP.
In summary, over 12 months...
The Tory share has fallen 0.2 points from 31.8 to 31.6
The Labour share has fallen 5.8 points from 38.6 to 32.8
The LibDem share has fallen 2.8 points from 9.6 to 6.8
The UKIP share has risen 3.2 points from 13.2 to 16.4
The Green share has risen 4 points, from 2.2 to 6.2
http://www.mediafire.com/view/d6xqc13gsauhphm/YouGov polls 12 months to 30 November inc Gridlines.jpg#
I agree.
Too too soon to say whether Cameron has or hasn't won them by your criteria of 'lasting government.' I happen to think he will.
Blimey. Nearly a threefold increase. It would be good to see a thread or two about them and excluding them from the debates seems more pernicious than ever.
Farage is very good at presenting the image of the ordinary guy and getting photo ops with a beer in his hand. He's very good at talking about the injustice of Europe. He looks like he is standing up for the masses against an elitist system, but let's see how good he is at coming up with a manifesto that isn't further to the right than the Conservatives, because UKIP 2015 is going to be under more scrutiny than UKIP 2010.
If he wants to play with the big boys, it isn't going to be a re-run of the European debates with Nick Clegg. He is going to have to explain and defend exactly what his party stands for, beyond Europe and immigration.
Have just calculated the Medians for the 2010sVIs.
Results are for November 2014 (with January 2014 in brackets).
Cons Retention: 74 (76)
Cons to LAB: 3 (5)
Cons to LD: 1 (1)
Cons to UKIP: 19 (17)
Cons to Green: 1 (0)
LAB Retention: 77 (85)
LAB to Cons: 5 (4)
LAB to LD: 1 (2)
LAB to UKIP: 8 (5)
LAB to Green: 4 (1)
LD Retention: 27 (35)
LD to Cons: 13 (12)
LD to LAB: 29 (34)
LD to UKIP: 13 (9)
LD to Green: 13 (5)
Scottish Subsample VI - not 2010
SNP: 41 for November & October
LAB: 25 (27 in October).
Labour Lead: GB
6 in January, 1 in November
I think it'll be another two horse race. He came very, very close to winning this season. I'd be a little surprised if he didn't have the lead at some point, and think a hedge at 3 or perhaps lower is eminently likely.
Party voters are a huge and disparate coalition of core voters, who will be core voters for various reasons and a loose assemblage of others who again are attracted to a stronger or lesser extent to an individual leader(s), policy(ies) or philosophy.
Not too many posts on your first outing now .... PB can be addictive !!
I seem to recall some analysis of the 2010-LD > Lab switchers that presented them as a distinct group. Far-left of Labour before they switched to the LDs. Are these the LDs that are switching to the Greens?
What I said is that the people with homes worth £2m, and from anything upward of £1m (from fear), are the kind of people EdM should not have hacked off. A lot of them in London represent the kind of NuLab supporters who Blair wooed so successfully: left-leaning middle class professionals. Many important figures in the media, newspapers, tv, radio, editors, directors and producers, actors, writers in that London group are not exactly dancing up and down with joy about the Mansion Tax. They're a tiny proportion of the electorate with a massive influence.
People who defend (mass not rational IMO) immigration on this basis are backing a kind of utilitarianism that they would not suffer with regard to any other issue
People of a nominally leftish profile allowing (I shall put it at it's least) the suffering of an entire section of the less well off in society on the condition that overall GDP is improved (without analysing who wins and who loses) runs counter to every other argument they make. Why do they do it?
Liberals suffered from the "wasted vote" syndrome for decades but still retained a significant bloc of support.
The Greens and Ukip will similarly be targeted and lose support next year and fall from their present levels to around 3% and 11% respectively.
Its hard to see why Tebbit, given his advice, would want to criticise say the 'Polish plumber' coming to work here or indeed anyone coming to work here who is doing work that Brits refuse to do. Immigration by temporary workers is to our advantage. What we need to do is take the opportunity to get our pown people off benefits.
In the long term the fact that we ae not in the Euro means we need to have a different approach to movement of labour as the Eurozone becomes more fiscally and politically closer.
I can see how that disconnect arises - I am of rural stock and make an effort to retain my roots, but living in London and operating globally it's tough to do sometimes.
Fair play to the Guardian .
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/26/britain-stop-obsession-social-class?CMP=fb_gu
Come on, Britain – it’s the 21st century. Stop this obsession with social class
I have lived here for 25 years, but still I’m baffled by this fixation with background, schools and cutlery
Chortle ....
I still think we are looking at something closer to Tory 35% Labour 25% UKIP 20% and LibDem 15% come May. Incidentally I see we have a new Baxter prediction which would see the whole of the south of Scotland Tory from east to west.
Why shouldn't people be allowed to demand anything they like?
"all us consumers who have patently benefitted from the intelligent foreign labour we have recently been importing from Europe"
Careful with "imported" in terms of people.. OGH and @SouthamObserver go crazy at the use of that word when referring to human beings.
The point you miss is that consumers haven't benefitted from the use of intelligent foreign labour.. things cost more than they used to even though the people who work for the companies are paid the same (or less)
An influx of Eastern European electricians and plumbers has meant the wages of plumbers and electricians has stagnated, but their bosses profit margins have increased big time.
The coffee in Pattisire Valerie is still expensive, despite the low rates of pay for the immigrant waitresses
So the consumer doesn't benefit, neither does the worker.
Mr. W, if you're having trouble getting down(force) you just need more front end grip.
The Tories have clawed back 1% of their supporters going to Labour - whilst Labour has lost another 1% to the Tories. These now show a net transfer of 2010 voters going from Labour to the Conservatives. Which is a fascinating direction of travel for the mass of Labour/Tory marginals next May.
As is the net loss of LibDem voters. It was a net 22% differential between Labour/Tories - that is now down to 16%. Still very handy for Labour, but a worrying fall off for them.
If you really think a, for example, 10% reduction in wages for the working class is made up for by 10% cheaper plumbers and electricians, you have no idea about the spending habits of the poor.
So the LDs can be down to 6% in some online panel polls yet in the same week we get seat polling that points to them securing 30+ in May.
UKIP can be in late teens or low 20s yet there are precious few seats where they are ahead.
Roger's thought was that if your story was right then consumers were getting a saving, and why should protectionism stop them getting that when it didn't with the miners? Isam then responded that consumers weren't getting a saving because of some unspecified market failure which resulted in the whole saving going to the plumbers' and electricians' bosses, rather than either the workers or the consumers. But if that's right, then regardless of the income profile of the consumers, who's getting the money when the worker is his or her own boss?
http://www.mediafire.com/view/l8rd7atd257yprk/YouGov polls 12 months to 30 November inc Green 2014.jpg#
How many mines did Blair open ?
On top of all that there are supplementary federal grants which the federal government makes to the 'poor' Länder to complement financial equalisation.
Good luck to UKIP in sorting that out....
' ''The lawsuit before the court is an act of political self-defense," said Volker Bouffier, the premier of the German state Hessen. Between 1995 and 2007, Bouffier's state of 6 million was the loser in Germany's federal equalization system. Over that period of time, Hessen's state coffers were depleted by a net sum of 35.4 billion euros ($46.1 billion)'
' "It can't be that 10 percent of our budget ends up in other states, which then pay for things we ourselves can't afford," '
http://www.dw.de/german-states-oppose-stupid-wealth-transfers/a-16640386
...never mind drawing up the totally arbitry regions (not least when the choice of a region's boundary dictates, as we see above, who pays how much to who.
Is it such a clever kipper idea?? Especially when it balkanises England.
Or is it really just a typical gimmick which solves nothing, improves nothing and creates other problems.
It all sounds a bit like socialists spending other people's money to me. But then again Farage's policy ideas never seem to last too long.
Kippers should be especially wary of the Alliance performance in 1983 - 25% returned only 23 MP's of which few were non incumbents. Hundreds of second places but few bums on the benches.