So you've thought long and hard about and come down on the side the massively favours rich people to distort our democracy to their advantage? Why am I not surprised.
Until the mechanics of how elections are "bought and sold" via campaign expenditure are explained, the arguments for control remain entirely speculative. Goldwater in 1964 spent $7.8 million more than Johnson. It didn't do him much good with the electorate. The supporters of control often resort to nothing than more cod Marxist or Marcusian nonsense about the "manufacture of consent", or in this case "the distortion of democracy".
Mr. Eagles, I'm significantly unimpressed by that move on election spending.
Oh it's fine, it's not the Tories' fault that people want to donate money to them and the other parties haven't got a pot to piss in.
Money = Free Speech
Theoretically it does have major betting implications.
Do you really want to get into the situation they have in the States where elections come down to who has the most money to spend?
It's pretty clear the Tories are the party of the rich, and want to make it easier to distort elections towards the rich even further. I didn't think they could add another issue I'd detest them for, but they've managed to do it. It doesn't matter whether it's the intelligence services, the media magnates, the European Union or wealthy donors, the Tories will always come down on the side of the rich and powerful.
Ridiculously wealthy donors such as Paul Sykes and Stuart Wheeler? Or media baron and billionaire Richard Desmond? Oh wait, they're UKIP backers so that's alright.
I can't see how Kerry Smith can stay as UKIP's PPC after that, they'd be more or less writing off their chances in the seat if they don't replace him. If they get a proper candidate in, people will have forgotten about all these shenanigans by the time of the election. I don't see why the choice is just Hamilton or Smith, they have plenty of Essex councillors.
Good chance to put Hamilton in I'd say. I don't think he'll win, but if he wants it that much, and UKIP have been damaged in the seat already by this oaf, why not give him a shot?
The problem is, right or wrong, fair or not, Hamilton has become the poster child for 1990s sleaze / cash for questions (who remembers Ian Greer or Tim Smith, for instance, who arguably behaved far worse)
Yes. I always feel a little sorry for him. He is chasing redemption, and you can't blame him for that.
The Ukip activist picked last week to fight a key Parliamentary seat made homophobic, racist and obscene comments and accused Nigel Farage of corruption, it was revealed last night.
In tape-recorded phone calls leaked to The Mail on Sunday, Kerry Smith, chosen to fight Ukip target seat of Basildon South in Essex:
So you've thought long and hard about and come down on the side the massively favours rich people to distort our democracy to their advantage? Why am I not surprised.
Until the mechanics of how elections are "bought and sold" via campaign expenditure are explained, the arguments for control remain entirely speculative. Goldwater in 1964 spent $7.8 million more than Johnson. It didn't do him much good with the electorate. The supporters of control often resort to nothing than more cod Marxist or Marcusian nonsense about the "manufacture of consent", or in this case "the distortion of democracy".
There's a huge wealth of literature out there on this that explains it in detail. Firstly, just because a correlation isn't 100% doesn't mean the effect isn't there. Secondly, both candidates in the 1964 election benefitted from money being put behind them early in the primary process. Thirdly, the biggest effect of campaign finance is at the congressional level.
Mr. Eagles, I'm significantly unimpressed by that move on election spending.
Oh it's fine, it's not the Tories' fault that people want to donate money to them and the other parties haven't got a pot to piss in.
Money = Free Speech
Theoretically it does have major betting implications.
Do you really want to get into the situation they have in the States where elections come down to who has the most money to spend?
It's pretty clear the Tories are the party of the rich, and want to make it easier to distort elections towards the rich even further. I didn't think they could add another issue I'd detest them for, but they've managed to do it. It doesn't matter whether it's the intelligence services, the media magnates, the European Union or wealthy donors, the Tories will always come down on the side of the rich and powerful.
Ridiculously wealthy donors such as Paul Sykes and Stuart Wheeler? Or media baron and billionaire Richard Desmond? Oh wait, they're UKIP backers so that's alright.
It's not UKIP that are changing the rules to give the billionaires more control.
Mr. Eagles, I'm significantly unimpressed by that move on election spending.
Oh it's fine, it's not the Tories' fault that people want to donate money to them and the other parties haven't got a pot to piss in.
Money = Free Speech
Theoretically it does have major betting implications.
Do you really want to get into the situation they have in the States where elections come down to who has the most money to spend?
It's pretty clear the Tories are the party of the rich, and want to make it easier to distort elections towards the rich even further. I didn't think they could add another issue I'd detest them for, but they've managed to do it. It doesn't matter whether it's the intelligence services, the media magnates, the European Union or wealthy donors, the Tories will always come down on the side of the rich and powerful.
Ridiculously wealthy donors such as Paul Sykes and Stuart Wheeler? Or media baron and billionaire Richard Desmond? Oh wait, they're UKIP backers so that's alright.
It's not UKIP that are changing the rules to give the billionaires more control.
Isn't one of those backers stamping his feet to get his favoured candidate selected? And you whine about rich men controlling a party...
There's a huge wealth of literature out there on this that explains it in detail. Firstly, just because a correlation isn't 100% doesn't mean the effect isn't there. Secondly, both candidates in the 1964 election benefitted from money being put behind them early in the primary process. Thirdly, the biggest effect of campaign finance is at the congressional level.
Your second and third points are entirely irrelevant in a British context. As for the wealth of literature, the onus is rather on you not merely to provide it, but to justify its conclusions. The historiography on this subject is woefully unconvincing, patently ideological and usually a rationalisation for the voters departing from their "true", "objective" consciousness in favour of a "subjective", "false" consciousness. It is the stuff that appeals to academics who still think Capital contains a complete system of philosophy that renders all written before and after redundant.
Welcome to the site @franklyn, and I totally agree with your analysis of the current situation with regard the fall in oil prices in that post. This is why I suspect that the Labour party has gone very quiet on fuel poverty while suddenly needing to panic and get hysterical about A&E pressures this winter instead. As a rural dweller, I am one of many who relies on oil fuel to heat my home, and I have definitely now become a big winner when it comes to the drop in oil prices this winter. Ed Miliband was the gift that kept giving when he finally latched onto a cost of living crisis just as living costs started to drop.
If the fall in oil prices is sustained, and it seems very likely to do so, it will be a political game-changer. Saving £10 every time you fill your car up with petrol is equivalent to a £10 tax cut. It will also put downward pressure on prices for energy and a whole range of services, as well as air fares. Lower inflation will also push down prices which are linked to inflation (such as train fares). Potentially it will create a fell good factor which will enormously assist the Conservatives (and undermine Millibands "cost of living crisis"
I can't see how Kerry Smith can stay as UKIP's PPC after that, they'd be more or less writing off their chances in the seat if they don't replace him. If they get a proper candidate in, people will have forgotten about all these shenanigans by the time of the election. I don't see why the choice is just Hamilton or Smith, they have plenty of Essex councillors.
Good chance to put Hamilton in I'd say. I don't think he'll win, but if he wants it that much, and UKIP have been damaged in the seat already by this oaf, why not give him a shot?
The problem is, right or wrong, fair or not, Hamilton has become the poster child for 1990s sleaze / cash for questions (who remembers Ian Greer or Tim Smith, for instance, who arguably behaved far worse)
Yes. I always feel a little sorry for him. He is chasing redemption, and you can't blame him for that.
Wrong way to do it. He comes across as simply venal.
If he wants to dedicate himself to public service, he should follow Jack Profumo's example.
At least it will give you an idea of what I'm talking about - no mainstream Western publication is going to cover this stuff.
I read about it in either the NYT or the WSJ - forget which one I picked up at the airport. Both both are pretty mainstream.
Except the NYT and the WSJ didn't add on the ridiculous claim that the US was using the hip hop movement to "overthrow the Cuban government". USAID was building civil society in a totalitarian country, with the design of pressuring the government to reform and give people their democratic rights. That was a good thing and entirely legitimate. In the same way Luckyguy's anti-Americanism causes him to take a few talking points on the melting point of steel to believe the Americans caused 9/11, he takes efforts to by an aid organisation to build civil society and democratic pressure groups as evidence that the US is trying to overthrow the government.
This is ridiculous. You make the entirely subjective value judgement that because you favour the US, its actions to destabilise its geo-political competitors are valid. Under this two legs bad argument, there is nothing that the US could do wrong in your eyes, and everything its opponents do IS wrong. So a state funded TV channel like RT is 'Putin's propaganda', but the manifold US funded channels broadcasting against the respective Governments of their catchment areas are something entirely different. It is not my anti-Americanism distorting the facts, but your pro-Americanism. Your argument becomes increasingly absurd with every new abuse of American power that comes to light.
This comres political spectrum poll slightly differs from a yougov political spectrum poll in the summer. That had UKIP on 56, slightly to the right of the Tories on 46. Cameron was also seen as more leftwing than Farage, who was seen as even to the right of Michael Howard based on previous data. Miliband and Labour were clearly seen as leftwing, in line with comres, with Clegg and the LDs again closest to the centre, again as comres (as Blair was also perceived). https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/07/23/britains-changing-political-spectrum/
I can't see how Kerry Smith can stay as UKIP's PPC after that, they'd be more or less writing off their chances in the seat if they don't replace him. If they get a proper candidate in, people will have forgotten about all these shenanigans by the time of the election. I don't see why the choice is just Hamilton or Smith, they have plenty of Essex councillors.
Good chance to put Hamilton in I'd say. I don't think he'll win, but if he wants it that much, and UKIP have been damaged in the seat already by this oaf, why not give him a shot?
The problem is, right or wrong, fair or not, Hamilton has become the poster child for 1990s sleaze / cash for questions (who remembers Ian Greer or Tim Smith, for instance, who arguably behaved far worse)
Yes. I always feel a little sorry for him. He is chasing redemption, and you can't blame him for that.
Wrong way to do it. He comes across as simply venal.
If he wants to dedicate himself to public service, he should follow Jack Profumo's example.
Yes - he still appears as though he's 'in it for himself' rather than 'in it to help others' - claiming expenses for staying in his wife's flat in a party he knows is struggling for cash is not a good look......
The Ukip activist picked last week to fight a key Parliamentary seat made homophobic, racist and obscene comments and accused Nigel Farage of corruption, it was revealed last night.
In tape-recorded phone calls leaked to The Mail on Sunday, Kerry Smith, chosen to fight Ukip target seat of Basildon South in Essex:
LABOUR is facing a fresh crisis in Scotland as it braces itself for an exodus of left-wing members and the possible severing of links by a leading union after Jim Murphy’s election as Scottish party leader.
Reassuring to see that its not just the Tory party that does 'stupid'......Whats that old saying about the HoC 'Your opponents are in front of you, your enemies behind you...'
Welcome to the site @franklyn, and I totally agree with your analysis of the current situation with regard the fall in oil prices in that post. This is why I suspect that the Labour party has gone very quiet on fuel poverty while suddenly needing to panic and get hysterical about A&E pressures this winter instead. As a rural dweller, I am one of many who relies on oil fuel to heat my home, and I have definitely now become a big winner when it comes to the drop in oil prices this winter. Ed Miliband was the gift that kept giving when he finally latched onto a cost of living crisis just as living costs started to drop.
If the fall in oil prices is sustained, and it seems very likely to do so, it will be a political game-changer. Saving £10 every time you fill your car up with petrol is equivalent to a £10 tax cut. It will also put downward pressure on prices for energy and a whole range of services, as well as air fares. Lower inflation will also push down prices which are linked to inflation (such as train fares). Potentially it will create a fell good factor which will enormously assist the Conservatives (and undermine Millibands "cost of living crisis"
I'd go so far as to say it's possible a big drop in petrol prices could keep Cameron and Osborne in power next May. It'll certainly help to cheer up some of the most grumpy voters who are considering voting UKIP.
No! Surely not! The Nats on here met Murphy's election with calm and sober reflection.....not an unkind word among them about the traitorous Tory baby eater......
That social media were filled in the hours after yesterday’s result with maniacal SNP-supporting “cybernats” claiming that his election spelt disaster for Labour tells you a great deal. The truth, as more thoughtful Nationalists will acknowledge, is that Mr Murphy is a formidable opponent who understands their party’s potential vulnerability.
Labour will now have a leader determined to put the SNP on the spot over its failures in areas such as education. Mr Murphy will try to present the Nationalists as constitutional obsessives who are much happier whining and demanding ever more powers than getting down to the difficult work of using those that the devolved parliament already has.
I can't see how Kerry Smith can stay as UKIP's PPC after that, they'd be more or less writing off their chances in the seat if they don't replace him. If they get a proper candidate in, people will have forgotten about all these shenanigans by the time of the election. I don't see why the choice is just Hamilton or Smith, they have plenty of Essex councillors.
Good chance to put Hamilton in I'd say. I don't think he'll win, but if he wants it that much, and UKIP have been damaged in the seat already by this oaf, why not give him a shot?
The problem is, right or wrong, fair or not, Hamilton has become the poster child for 1990s sleaze / cash for questions (who remembers Ian Greer or Tim Smith, for instance, who arguably behaved far worse)
Yes. I always feel a little sorry for him. He is chasing redemption, and you can't blame him for that.
Wrong way to do it. He comes across as simply venal.
If he wants to dedicate himself to public service, he should follow Jack Profumo's example.
Yes - he still appears as though he's 'in it for himself' rather than 'in it to help others' - claiming expenses for staying in his wife's flat in a party he knows is struggling for cash is not a good look......
I must say I have been largely in the "let the voters decide" camp regarding Hamilton, if UKIP want to put him forward, and the voters elect him, then he has in effect offered himself before the highest court in a democracy as that should be the end of the matter. If on the other hand they reject him, then he deserves whatever hilarity results.... and then I read this nonsense about claiming expenses to stay as his wife's flat, the letter he received from the leadership seemed entirely appropriate:
The letter ends: "Please do bear in mind that we receive at Lexdrum House handwritten letters from pensioners enclosing a £5 or a £10 note which they have managed to save so as to send it to Ukip and hence we need to make sure that all expenses are fully explainable."
Yet he decided to describe it as a "dirty trick" designed to destabilise the hustings
@CarlottaVance, sadly Ed Miliband, Jim Murphy, Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, Len McCluskey etc don't do cohesive party bonding..... Youtube - Sister Sledge - We Are Family
LABOUR is facing a fresh crisis in Scotland as it braces itself for an exodus of left-wing members and the possible severing of links by a leading union after Jim Murphy’s election as Scottish party leader.
Reassuring to see that its not just the Tory party that does 'stupid'......Whats that old saying about the HoC 'Your opponents are in front of you, your enemies behind you...'
@CarlottaVance, sadly Ed Miliband, Jim Murphy, Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, Len McCluskey etc don't do cohesive party bonding..... Youtube - Sister Sledge - We Are Family
LABOUR is facing a fresh crisis in Scotland as it braces itself for an exodus of left-wing members and the possible severing of links by a leading union after Jim Murphy’s election as Scottish party leader.
Reassuring to see that its not just the Tory party that does 'stupid'......Whats that old saying about the HoC 'Your opponents are in front of you, your enemies behind you...'
At least Blair - for all his faults - understood the importance of winning. Which part of 'gaining power' do these people not get? "He may be a numpty - but he's our numpty" seems to easily trump talent - - I see the pygmy former leader has been graceless in Murphy's victory:
Comments
He did a spot on Freakonomics podcast in the US a few weeks ago and we very entertaining on that too.
As for being racist, an interesting point from the Mail article:
'Chinky Bird ... not even the BNP or National Front would touch it' because of her racist views.
Anti-racist? Or drunk?
Rather than saying that he was sometimes a little mean to Miliband he should have agreed: that he pitied him sometimes.
Pity is not a good emotion for putative leaders to inspire...
If he wants to dedicate himself to public service, he should follow Jack Profumo's example.
http://www.toynbeehall.org.uk/jack-profumo
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/07/23/britains-changing-political-spectrum/
http://www.scotsman.com/news/cat-boyd-left-needs-to-fightback-against-blairite-1-3633968
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1496049.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_12_14
LABOUR is facing a fresh crisis in Scotland as it braces itself for an exodus of left-wing members and the possible severing of links by a leading union after Jim Murphy’s election as Scottish party leader.
Reassuring to see that its not just the Tory party that does 'stupid'......Whats that old saying about the HoC 'Your opponents are in front of you, your enemies behind you...'
That social media were filled in the hours after yesterday’s result with maniacal SNP-supporting “cybernats” claiming that his election spelt disaster for Labour tells you a great deal. The truth, as more thoughtful Nationalists will acknowledge, is that Mr Murphy is a formidable opponent who understands their party’s potential vulnerability.
Labour will now have a leader determined to put the SNP on the spot over its failures in areas such as education. Mr Murphy will try to present the Nationalists as constitutional obsessives who are much happier whining and demanding ever more powers than getting down to the difficult work of using those that the devolved parliament already has.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11291383/If-Labour-loses-Scotland-the-Union-will-be-done-for.html
Yuck.
Youtube - Sister Sledge - We Are Family
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/johann-lamont-snubs-murphy-in-leadership-vote.26098559