politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another online Scottish poll (this time from ICM) has SNP w

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another online Scottish poll (this time from ICM) has SNP with big lead on GE15 voting intentions

ICM Scotland poll for Guardian follows other firms & has big GE15 lead for SNP
CON 13%
LAB 26%
LD 6%
SNP 43%
UKIP 7%
GRN 4%.

Read the full story here

TheScreamingEagles

Scottish Labour must feel as doomed as a Carthaginian soldier under the command of Hannibal

TheScreamingEagles

This might explain why the SNP are doing well/Lab so badly

Scottish politics: who are the leaders and how are they doing?

As poll shows some party chiefs on the election campaign trail are far from well-known, Guardian writers compile a who’s who

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/26/scottish-party-leaders-who-are-they-how-are-they-doing

PClipp

And Tories are doomed too.

PClipp

Why (and how) did you change your opening remark, TSE?

surbiton

We should not forget that this level of Devomax, which actually suits the Tories also, is only taking place because of just 1 opinion poll.

TheScreamingEagles

PClipp said:

Why (and how) did you change your opening remark, TSE?

You can edit your comment within six minutes of posting it, go to your own comment, top right hand corner, and a little gear icon will appear, click on that and it will give you an edit option.

I changed my comment, as I suffered from premature typing and thus edited it.

Artist

I'm guessing those figures for Murphy are better than Johann Lamont would have got.

AlastairMeeks

I see that ICM prompted for UKIP in this poll. Is this a change in policy?

MikeK

But look at the boost for UKIP. 7% in Scotland is something to cherish and to build upon.

surbiton

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy Labour ?

AlastairMeeks

This figure for the Lib Dems is appalling and out of character for ICM's methods. Even large incumbency bounces look likely to be overwhelmed.

MikeK

surbiton said:

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy Labour ?

ICM has been acting strangely for the past few months, ever since June in fact. It's as if they are now not quite sure of themselves.

surbiton

The last ASSS [ Aggregate Sub Samples Surbitonised ] published was:

SNP 43.2%, Lab 27%, Con 17.4%, LD 4.8%, Grn 4%. Not a million miles from the ICM poll.

isam

And The Times' "Briton of the Year " is...

PClipp

Thanks, TSW. Very clever.

Edit: But not so magic now that we all know. Thanks anyway,

MikeK

Revolt on the Right ‏@RevoltonRight 5m5 minutes ago
Game-changing politician @Nigel_Farage is The Times Briton of the Year http://thetim.es/1AT5QG9 (Pic: Getty) pic.twitter.com/VIbMF7Z11l

Can someone please kindly publish this piece here on PB, as I'm not a Times payer.

MarkSenior

surbiton said:

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy Labour ?

It is an online poll and therefore subject to an unrepresentative sample . The question is as to whether the weightings and methodology correct for this .

Omnium

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scottish Labour must feel as doomed as a Carthaginian soldier under the command of Hannibal

I'm going to randomly assert that the command of Hannibal didn't particularly change their life expectancy. Perhaps even raised it. (I'll now look it up too)

If you'd said "Carthaginian Elephants", well then it would have been a different story.

Apparently though Carthaginian head-lice were the biggest casualties - over 48 billion were killed in the campaign (possibly).

surbiton

SeanT said:

Labour must, surely, be very worried now. Horrific polls for them.

Yes, but no different than any other in the last two months. I also believe the SNP are piling votes in their "safe" areas like Tories used to do in the South.

Also, because of FPTP, a 37 - 31 split in favour of the SNP, actually gives Labour 29 seats against 26 for the SNP. Murphy needs a 4% swing towards itself.

Will Tories tactically vote SNP ?

MikeK

surbiton said:

The last ASSS [ Aggregate Sub Samples Surbitonised ] published was:

SNP 43.2%, Lab 27%, Con 17.4%, LD 4.8%, Grn 4%. Not a million miles from the ICM poll.

Ahem! Your nulling of UKIP pains me. Please pay more attention to detail.

surbiton

MarkSenior said:

surbiton said:

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy Labour ?

It is an online poll and therefore subject to an unrepresentative sample . The question is as to whether the weightings and methodology correct for this .

So that means, likely SNP voters are more keen to reply to these boring surveys ?

TheScreamingEagles

antifrank said:

I see that ICM prompted for UKIP in this poll. Is this a change in policy?

For this poll, they didn't prompt in their phone poll.

surbiton

MikeK said:

surbiton said:

The last ASSS [ Aggregate Sub Samples Surbitonised ] published was:

SNP 43.2%, Lab 27%, Con 17.4%, LD 4.8%, Grn 4%. Not a million miles from the ICM poll.

Ahem! Your nulling of UKIP pains me. Please pay more attention to detail.

OK. But I don't compute them but agree their vote share is not different from the LDs and the Greens. However, their "influence" is less in Scotland , I believe.

Danny565

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

Labour must, surely, be very worried now. Horrific polls for them.

Yes, but no different than any other in the last two months. I also believe the SNP are piling votes in their "safe" areas like Tories used to do in the South.

Also, because of FPTP, a 37 - 31 split in favour of the SNP, actually gives Labour 29 seats against 26 for the SNP. Murphy needs a 4% swing towards itself.

Will Tories tactically vote SNP ?

Why do you think that? The SNP's safe seats are all (aside from Dundee) places which returned strong "No" votes. So there must surely be only so much higher they can climb in those places, meaning their increase must surely be disproportionately focussed on the Labour/"Yes" heartlands in the Central Belt.

TheScreamingEagles

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scottish Labour must feel as doomed as a Carthaginian soldier under the command of Hannibal

I'm going to randomly assert that the command of Hannibal didn't particularly change their life expectancy. Perhaps even raised it. (I'll now look it up too)

If you'd said "Carthaginian Elephants", well then it would have been a different story.

Apparently though Carthaginian head-lice were the biggest casualties - over 48 billion were killed in the campaign (possibly).

I should have said at Zama.

At Zama, 50% of the Carthaginian soldiers were killed, whilst the other 50% were captured.

TheScreamingEagles

Given Labour collapsing in Scotland, and the recent Ashcroft polling showing UKIP within a Gnats fart of taking some of Labour's seats in England, you wonder if Labour will have any resources available to take seats next year, if they're going to have defend some of their heartlands.

AndyJS

Been on the motorway near Manchester and it's in a pretty dreadful state with snow making driving almost impossible.

Toms

Murphy's a good man, but, as I see it, he must contend with fact that the SNP has now supplanted the Scottish Labour party as a way of expressing ancient resentment towards English preponderance. My lot, as did many from the Sutherland clan, simply left. I hasten to add that I am in no way anti English.

Note to tse:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I changed my comment, as I suffered from premature typing and thus edited it.

Thoughtful editing can cure most such cases, I have found.

MarqueeMark

surbiton said:

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy Labour ?

Embarrassed former Labour. "Me? Vote Labour? No, never...." Suggests they ain't coming back any time soon.

peter_from_putney

Dan Hodges in The Daily Telegraph:
"The Labour leader has neither the personality nor the policies to take the Tories down in 2015"

MarqueeMark

TheScreamingEagles said:

Given Labour collapsing in Scotland, and the recent Ashcroft polling showing UKIP within a Gnats fart of taking some of Labour's seats in England, you wonder if Labour will have any resources available to take seats next year, if they're going to have defend some of their heartlands.

A point I made some months ago.

MarqueeMark

Oh, and Jake Gyllenhaal is very impressive - in an unusual role for him - in The Nightcrawler.

surbiton

TheScreamingEagles said:

Given Labour collapsing in Scotland, and the recent Ashcroft polling showing UKIP within a Gnats fart of taking some of Labour's seats in England, you wonder if Labour will have any resources available to take seats next year, if they're going to have defend some of their heartlands.

Have you had a look at the South and East of England lately ? The Tories are losing more seats there than Labour in Scotland.

Omnium

TheScreamingEagles said:

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scottish Labour must feel as doomed as a Carthaginian soldier under the command of Hannibal

I'm going to randomly assert that the command of Hannibal didn't particularly change their life expectancy. Perhaps even raised it. (I'll now look it up too)

If you'd said "Carthaginian Elephants", well then it would have been a different story.

Apparently though Carthaginian head-lice were the biggest casualties - over 48 billion were killed in the campaign (possibly).

I should have said at Zama.

At Zama, 50% of the Carthaginian soldiers were killed, whilst the other 50% were captured.

If 50% of the Carthaginian soldiers were killed then that's an extraordinary testament to Hannibal (or Carthage). Your figures fail to account for those that 'ran away'. It seems that lots and lots of soldiers did such a thing. (On the whole I think I would too).

Really high casualty rates are probably only achieved by the likes of the Japanese in WW2 (There are of course many other examples too). It's very hard to know what to think about such things (for me anyway).

AndyJS

SNP target list:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dEpmY19JSTdHWm02WUZRWE1NY2xraFE&usp=drive_web#gid=0

Charles

surbiton said:

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy ashamed Labour ?

Fixed it for you

surbiton

Danny565 said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

Labour must, surely, be very worried now. Horrific polls for them.

Yes, but no different than any other in the last two months. I also believe the SNP are piling votes in their "safe" areas like Tories used to do in the South.

Also, because of FPTP, a 37 - 31 split in favour of the SNP, actually gives Labour 29 seats against 26 for the SNP. Murphy needs a 4% swing towards itself.

Will Tories tactically vote SNP ?

Why do you think that? The SNP's safe seats are all (aside from Dundee) places which returned strong "No" votes. So there must surely be only so much higher they can climb in those places, meaning their increase must surely be disproportionately focussed on the Labour/"Yes" heartlands in the Central Belt.

The UNS [ Scotland ] actually maximises the SNP seats tally because above 40%, they could win or are within a chance of virtually any seat in Scotland. In fact, on these ICM figures and with UNS, Labour only retains Glasgow NE and SW, Coatbridge, Dunbartonshire West, Kirkcaldy, Motherwell, Paisley & Renfrewshire South, Renfrewshire East and Rutherglen & Hamilton West.

Virtually, the entire Eastern part of the Central belt, the M8 corridor is now SNP. But a few percentages can mean big changes.

AndyJS

Went up the Shard a few days ago for the first time. Wish it wasn't £30 each, and also having to swap lifts half way up is a bit annoying. But the views are fantastic.

surbiton

What do the punters know ? Even after this poll Labour is favourite to win ALL 7 Glasgow seats.

Labour seats: 5/6 both above 25 and below 25.

Charles

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

Labour must, surely, be very worried now. Horrific polls for them.

Yes, but no different than any other in the last two months. I also believe the SNP are piling votes in their "safe" areas like Tories used to do in the South.

Also, because of FPTP, a 37 - 31 split in favour of the SNP, actually gives Labour 29 seats against 26 for the SNP. Murphy needs a 4% swing towards itself.

Will Tories tactically vote SNP ?

Given they only have 7(?) seats at the moment, piling up won't have that much of an impact

MarkHopkins

AndyJS said:

Went up the Shard a few days ago for the first time. Wish it wasn't £30 each, and also having to swap lifts half way up is a bit annoying. But the views are fantastic.

I'll wait until it comes out on DVD.

SouthamObserver

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

Sean_F

surbiton said:

What do the punters know ? Even after this poll Labour is favourite to win ALL 7 Glasgow seats.

Labour seats: 5/6 both above 25 and below 25.

I think that few people believe the SNP can really do as well on the day as polls suggest they will. It could be a flash in the pan; or a seismic shift like the Irish Nationalists in the. 1880's or Labour in the 1920's.

Sean_F

TheScreamingEagles said:

Given Labour collapsing in Scotland, and the recent Ashcroft polling showing UKIP within a Gnats fart of taking some of Labour's seats in England, you wonder if Labour will have any resources available to take seats next year, if they're going to have defend some of their heartlands.

Until recently, Labour must have assumed that what they won in 2010 was solid.

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scottish Labour must feel as doomed as a Carthaginian soldier under the command of Hannibal

Or a Tory MP in 1997?

SouthamObserver

Sean_F said:

surbiton said:

What do the punters know ? Even after this poll Labour is favourite to win ALL 7 Glasgow seats.

Labour seats: 5/6 both above 25 and below 25.

I think that few people believe the SNP can really do as well on the day as polls suggest they will. It could be a flash in the pan; or a seismic shift like the Irish Nationalists in the. 1880's or Labour in the 1920's.

With 100,000 or so members and a lot of referendum experience the SNP GOTV operation next year is likely to be a whole lot better than any other party's in Scotland. Whether its seismic or not is a different issue. At some stage politics in Scotland will return to bread and butter issues. Murphy's task is to speed that along.

Alistair

surbiton said:

Something really weird:

Table 13 of the ICM poll gives GE2010 recall percentages. Labour 24%, SNP 22%.

Actual GE2010: Labour 42%, SNP 20%.

Shy Labour ?

GE2010 voter recall is notoriously bad in Scotland due to the 2011 Holyrod election confusing poeple's memories.

SouthamObserver

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

It kills it as a political issue that may sway votes. Obviously, it will remain an issue that will have to be addressed. But with the politics less toxic, a good, long-term solution will be easier to find.

Flightpath

SeanT said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

Labour must, surely, be very worried now. Horrific polls for them.

Will Tories tactically vote SNP ?

Danny565 said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

Labour must, surely, be very worried now. Horrific polls for them.

Yes, but no different than any other in the last two months. I also believe the SNP are piling votes in their "safe" areas like Tories used to do in the South.

Also, because of FPTP, a 37 - 31 split in favour of the SNP, actually gives Labour 29 seats against 26 for the SNP. Murphy needs a 4% swing towards itself.

Will Tories tactically vote SNP ?

Why do you think that? The SNP's safe seats are all (aside from Dundee) places which returned strong "No" votes. So there must surely be only so much higher they can climb in those places, meaning their increase must surely be disproportionately focussed on the Labour/"Yes" heartlands in the Central Belt.

All the evidence I've read says the SNP surge is coming from old Labour seats in Glasgow, etc. This makes sense, because - as you say - the same constituencies also provided the bulk of the YES vote.

If I was a poor/unemployed Glaswegian I'd vote for Sturgeon over Miliband, even if I wasn't a YES voter. A large SNP contingent in Westminster is the best way to get a great devomax deal, so the Scottish government can keep dishing out the benefits, create jobs with subsidies, and so on.

Why should that poor Glaswegian vote for Miliband. How does he or she benefit?

The same Glaswegians have nothing to fear from Tories in London, as they are protected by Devolution.

The logic of Devomax is dire for Labour.

I do not see any logic at all in what you are saying. That does nor mean that poor unemployed Glaswegians will not act irrationally.
Devomax is not free money. Its an opportunity for taxes to rise in Scotland under left wing governments. The people they will be taxing are anything but poor or unemployed.

'' Recent figures show Scotland boasting its highest employment levels since records began in 1973. It has the lowest unemployment rate of the 4 UK nations. Since May 2010, when the Coalition came to power, unemployment has dropped by 40,000 – 54,000 lower than the peak in 2012 – and an extra 148,000 people are now in work. ''
I paraphrase Vince Cable - but since he endlessly complains about Tory economics he can hardly claim all that is down to him. The job creation is all part of the Westminster govts success. All an SNP devomaxed govt can do is tax that success.

isam

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

MarkHopkins

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

It kills it as a political issue that may sway votes. Obviously, it will remain an issue that will have to be addressed. But with the politics less toxic, a good, long-term solution will be easier to find.

"a good, long-term solution will be easier to find."

Will that be one that happens to completely stuff the Tories, perchance?

SouthamObserver

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

It kills it as a political issue that may sway votes. Obviously, it will remain an issue that will have to be addressed. But with the politics less toxic, a good, long-term solution will be easier to find.

"a good, long-term solution will be easier to find."

Will that be one that happens to completely stuff the Tories, perchance?

No, all the parties will need to come to an agreement otherwise there can be no long-term solution.

SouthamObserver

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

isam

SeanT said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

I tend to agree, but I was addressing Southam's hypothesis.

FWIW I don't think the SNP will "sweep" Scotland, I reckon the Nats will gain 15-20 seats, or thereabouts. Which is a huge change but not - quite - a landslide of Irish Home Rule proportions.

This will make Miliband's job harder but not impossible. Right now I still expect a Miliband NOM government, but am open to persuasion by events.

Such a unintelligent post this, but... I wonder what will happen?!

isam

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

And Ukip want labour to win! What a strange set of circumstances!

SouthamObserver

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree at would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

Is it, tho? You can argue it both ways.

Let's say Cameron gets most seats, but not quite a majority, and the SNP have 40 MPs.

Cameron could do a brisk deal with Sturgeon on a generous Devomax in return for EV4EL, passed with the aid of the SNP (a deal which f*cks Labour for a generation). In fact I am sure that is what he would do. And so outright Devomax is enacted, Cameron then calls another election, as the constitution has changed. Cameron consequently wins in England....

It's all too smooth, too good for the English Tories. And doesn't lead to a 2nd referendum.

The result that would create most friction between England and Scotland (i.e. optimal for Scottish independence) would be a weak Miliband plurality, reliant on SNP support in Westminster, a feeble Labour government forcing through cuts in English services and hikes in English taxes with mischievous SNP support, causing huge resentment and division.

The Miliband government refuses EV4EL (as it is bad for Labour) but the SNP pull the plug anyway, as Miliband becomes universally reviled, the consequent General Election is held in an atmosphere of bitter recrimination, across the Tweed, even as Holyrood has its election.... the SNP sweeps to power in Edinburgh promising to hold an immediate referendum.

Just as plausible?

The SNP has less leverage with Labour as it will never do anything to bring a Miliband government down - a repeat of 1979 is far too risky. Thus, Labour has no need to do a deal with the SNP. A Tory government builds more Scottish resentment and delivers a referendum on EU membership, which is another opportunity to heighten divisions between England and Scotland.

SouthamObserver

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

And Ukip want labour to win! What a strange set of circumstances!

UKIP want the Tories to win most seats as it gives UKIP the most opportunity to do mischief.

isam

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

And Ukip want labour to win! What a strange set of circumstances!

UKIP want the Tories to win most seats as it gives UKIP the most opportunity to do mischief.

I don't think any of us can be sure if what each party wants, but what I think is true is they both big parties have taken their natural support for granted and are hopefully going to get a shake up

Carnyx

SouthamObserver said:

Sean_F said:

surbiton said:

What do the punters know ? Even after this poll Labour is favourite to win ALL 7 Glasgow seats.

Labour seats: 5/6 both above 25 and below 25.

I think that few people believe the SNP can really do as well on the day as polls suggest they will. It could be a flash in the pan; or a seismic shift like the Irish Nationalists in the. 1880's or Labour in the 1920's.

With 100,000 or so members and a lot of referendum experience the SNP GOTV operation next year is likely to be a whole lot better than any other party's in Scotland. Whether its seismic or not is a different issue. At some stage politics in Scotland will return to bread and butter issues. Murphy's task is to speed that along.

Duly noted, but the problem I have with this is that so much of the actual Unionist (Labour + Tory) discourse in Scotland is "referendum referendum referendum" whereas the SNP are actually focussing on bread and butter - if also noting the problem areas where Westminster won't let them do the job.

There is no point saying "vote SNP get a referendum" if the SNP have downplayed that - their past decoupling of the SNP = referendum linkage has worked well enough in the past, and it is pretty clear that the SNP will not call one unless the situation changes such that the public actually want one.

There's still a major dissonance on the Unionist side; the SNP are being much more disciplined and getting on with the job. Early days yet though for both Mr Murphy and Ms Sturgeon, so we'll see.

One other point (not original to me, but worth considering also). If the only way in which Mr Murphy can win votes is to espouse leftie policies, where does that leave his Tory fans such as certain PBers, or for that matter where does it leave him with his [edit] Westminster constituency voters, and his boss Mr Miliband?

Carnyx

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree at would be a very good thing.

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

Is it, tho? You can argue it both ways.

The SNP has less leverage with Labour as it will never do anything to bring a Miliband government down - a repeat of 1979 is far too risky. Thus, Labour has no need to do a deal with the SNP. A Tory government builds more Scottish resentment and delivers a referendum on EU membership, which is another opportunity to heighten divisions between England and Scotland.

The SNP would "never do anything" to bring a Miliband government down?? What bizarre and total tripe. Why do you think that? You think the SNP likes Labour?

Imagine a Miliband government as unpopular as Hollande in France (which is really quite likely, let's face it), after that government has been forced to raise taxes, cut services.

Sturgeon would relish the opportunity to pull the plug on a reviled and very English Labour prime minister.

Nothing to do with Mr Miliband being English. He could be from Alpha Centauri for all anyone cares. Mind you, North London isn't much nearer to Earth. (Plus your sentence works far better if one puts SLABish instead.).

scotslass

Just three points

Firstly in the last two weeks we have had first YouGov then Survation and now ICM confirming what local by elections and virtually all sub samples have been telling us for weeks. The SNP is rolling over Labour and the rest in Scotland. All the tears of frustration of so many on this site will not erase half a line or a single number of this.

Secondly the voter recognition and approval figures tell the story. Sturgeon is the most popular and Salmond the most recognised and most popular politician in the country. The quite extraordinary attacks on him which often disfigure some of the contributions on this site seem to be based on resentment and fear of this fact. Just think of the difference it would make if ANY of the UK party leaders had anything like this level of popularity.

Thirdly the new SNP vote is totally coherent. These are YES voters who are proud of voting YES and have no intention of giving up on the hope of change that the referendum generated. The
SNP are also supported by those NO voters who see, quite logically, that the Smith Commision is not enough and voting SNP may now deliver maximum devolution for Scotland. That coherence is likely to stand the SNP in good stead over the next four months.

dr_spyn

Thanks Nicola.

Charles

Carnyx said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree at would be a very good thing.

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

Is it, tho? You can argue it both ways.

The SNP has less leverage with Labour as it will never do anything to bring a Miliband government down - a repeat of 1979 is far too risky. Thus, Labour has no need to do a deal with the SNP. A Tory government builds more Scottish resentment and delivers a referendum on EU membership, which is another opportunity to heighten divisions between England and Scotland.

The SNP would "never do anything" to bring a Miliband government down?? What bizarre and total tripe. Why do you think that? You think the SNP likes Labour?

Imagine a Miliband government as unpopular as Hollande in France (which is really quite likely, let's face it), after that government has been forced to raise taxes, cut services.

Sturgeon would relish the opportunity to pull the plug on a reviled and very English Labour prime minister.

Nothing to do with Mr Miliband being English. He could be from Alpha Centauri for all anyone cares. Mind you, North London isn't much nearer to Earth. (Plus your sentence works far better if one puts SLABish instead.).

Given Murphy's intent to show his independence from Miliband, what is the probability of him coming out for full Devomax? Would effectively make him leader of his own party & stuff Miliband in the process.

Revenge is a dish etc etc

Ave_it

Miliband

surbiton

scotslass said:

Just three points

Firstly in the last two weeks we have had first YouGov then Survation and now ICM confirming what local by elections and virtually all sub samples have been telling us for weeks. The SNP is rolling over Labour and the rest in Scotland. All the tears of frustration of so many on this site will not erase half a line or a single number of this.

Secondly the voter recognition and approval figures tell the story. Sturgeon is the most popular and Salmond the most recognised and most popular politician in the country. The quite extraordinary attacks on him which often disfigure some of the contributions on this site seem to be based on resentment and fear of this fact. Just think of the difference it would make if ANY of the UK party leaders had anything like this level of popularity.

Thirdly the new SNP vote is totally coherent. These are YES voters who are proud of voting YES and have no intention of giving up on the hope of change that the referendum generated. The
SNP are also supported by those NO voters who see, quite logically, that the Smith Commision is not enough and voting SNP may now deliver maximum devolution for Scotland. That coherence is likely to stand the SNP in good stead over the next four months.

Makes a lot of sense. Maybe Murphy is gradually positioning himself as a Prime Minister of independent Scotland. Once Scotland is independent the SNP coalition will not last. What has a Tartan Tory got in common with someone living in Govan ?

surbiton

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree at would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

Is it, tho? You can argue it both ways.

Let's say Cameron gets most seats, but not quite a majority, and the SNP have 40 MPs.

Cameron could do a brisk deal with Sturgeon on a generous Devomax in return for EV4EL, passed with the aid of the SNP (a deal which f*cks Labour for a generation). In fact I am sure that is what he would do. And so outright Devomax is enacted, Cameron then calls another election, as the constitution has changed. Cameron consequently wins in England....

It's all too smooth, too good for the English Tories. And doesn't lead to a 2nd referendum.

The result that would create most friction between England and Scotland (i.e. optimal for Scottish independence) would be a weak Miliband plurality, reliant on SNP support in Westminster, a feeble Labour government forcing through cuts in English services and hikes in English taxes with mischievous SNP support, causing huge resentment and division.

The Miliband government refuses EV4EL (as it is bad for Labour) but the SNP pull the plug anyway, as Miliband becomes universally reviled, the consequent General Election is held in an atmosphere of bitter recrimination, across the Tweed, even as Holyrood has its election.... the SNP sweeps to power in Edinburgh promising to hold an immediate referendum.

Just as plausible?

Ironically, a Cameron government would be the catalyst for the SNP to call for and get another referendum. The reason: the EU referendum. The SNP could easily point to the fact that the rUK could leave the EU whereas Scotland wants Independence in Europe.

Moses_

Ave_it said:

Miliband

Dan Hodges

"Mr Miliband has become neither the change candidate, nor the continuity candidate. He is Labour’s nowhere man, sitting in his nowhere land, making all his nowhere plans for nobody"

DUEMA

MikeK

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

And Ukip want labour to win! What a strange set of circumstances!

What gives you that idea, isam? Actually UKIP see all the main parties as essentially the same in outlook and policies and couldn't care a tinkers who had a majority. This attitude may change as we get only weeks away from election day. We'll see.

In addition UKIP see the SNP and the Greens as Far Left parties that would hold England in particular to ransom.

isam

MikeK said:

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

And Ukip want labour to win! What a strange set of circumstances!

What gives you that idea, isam? Actually UKIP see all the main parties as essentially the same in outlook and policies and couldn't care a tinkers who had a majority. This attitude may change as we get only weeks away from election day. We'll see.

In addition UKIP see the SNP and the Greens as Far Left parties that would hold England in particular to ransom.

Sorry I meant it's probably in Ukips best interests if labour are the largest party. Need Cameron out

anotherDave

isam said:

MikeK said:

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Hard to disagree with SeanT's analysis: why on earth would you vote Labour in Scotland in the GE when there's an alternative left-wing party with a much more credible leader and whose voice could be much more powerful in Westminster than backbench MPs likely to be crowded out by English MPs with English concerns? Labour has ignored Scotland for too long, taking it for granted while at the same time seeing it as entirely peripheral. It deserves a good kicking and looks likely to get one. What it all means is that if Labour does get most seats next year, it will be because it has won most seats in England. That kills off EV4EL as an issue and gives some breathing space for a properly thought-through UK constitutional settlement. That would be a very good thing.

The SNP sweeping Scotland, and Labour winning in England, certainly does NOT kill off EV4EL: it underlines the need for EV4EL, by showing how politically different the countries have become, within "the union".

Why should a quasi-independent, SNP-voting Scotland have a say in England's affairs - even deciding on the taxes English people pay for English services - when England has absolutely no such say in Scotland?

The clamour for EV4EL will become unanswerable, I believe. The pressure will only be intensified by a starkly different General Election result north of the border.

The SNP sweeping Scotland almost certainly means labour won't win most seats overall. It's silly to get too far into the argument about what it would mean without acknowledging that one makes the other almost impossible

Yes, this is true. An SNP sweep in Scotland makes the Tories winning most seats next year much more likely. That, of course, is what the SNP wants.

And Ukip want labour to win! What a strange set of circumstances!

What gives you that idea, isam? Actually UKIP see all the main parties as essentially the same in outlook and policies and couldn't care a tinkers who had a majority. This attitude may change as we get only weeks away from election day. We'll see.

In addition UKIP see the SNP and the Greens as Far Left parties that would hold England in particular to ransom.

Sorry I meant it's probably in Ukips best interests if labour are the largest party. Need Cameron out

There are more UKIP leaners in current-Con than current-Lab. Surely that means its better for UKIP if the Conservatives are in government rather than opposition?

old_labour

Lots of online videos here.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=shard+views&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=lPKdVOmWJISyUYPjgagH#q=shard+views&tbm=vid

MarkHopkins said:

AndyJS said:

Went up the Shard a few days ago for the first time. Wish it wasn't £30 each, and also having to swap lifts half way up is a bit annoying. But the views are fantastic.

I'll wait until it comes out on DVD.

anotherDave

The Guardian write-up mentions a repeat of the 2011 Scottish election result.

That suggests the Conservatives must be in with a chance in the border constituencies, 3 MPs?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/scotland.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_(European_Parliament_constituency)#2014

Tim_B

MarkHopkins said:

AndyJS said:

Went up the Shard a few days ago for the first time. Wish it wasn't £30 each, and also having to swap lifts half way up is a bit annoying. But the views are fantastic.

I'll wait until it comes out on DVD.

30 pounds seems a bit steep. It's only 800 feet high too. The Empire State Building 86th floor (1050 ft) is $29, and both that and the 102nd floor (1250 ft) is $46. It's open 8am to 2am.

HYUFD

Interesting that Jim Murphy has a net positive approval rating though, suggesting he is probably still the best man to loead Scottish Labour back to power

Surbiton That would only be the case if the EU referendum saw a majority for 'Out' and Scotland voted 'In'. However, on present polls the largest 'In' majorities are in Scotland and London, it is equally possible that Scotland could give 'In' its victory margin in a tight contest even if England votes 'Out'

john_zims

@scotslass

' Sturgeon is the most popular and Salmond the most recognised and most popular politician in the country.'

Not too difficult when your spending money you don't have to raise & your budget is 10% higher.

Indigo

anotherDave said:

There are more UKIP leaners in current-Con than current-Lab. Surely that means its better for UKIP if the Conservatives are in government rather than opposition?

Except that if LAB win, the Tories will erupt into a bout of infighting and fratricide, and a chunk of their MPs will peel off to UKIP in disgust. The easiest way for UKIP for get 30 MPs is to get 2 at GE2015, and pick up 28 Tories as the party implodes after losing a GE.

scotslass

john_zims

If you believe that then you should have been campaiging hard with Salmond and Sturgeon for Scottish independence.

It is a strange feature of UK politics that those who spend the most time moaning about Scotland and the Scots usually are the same people who spent the most time trying to hang onto Scotland.

I wonder why?

Indigo

scotslass said:

It is a strange feature of UK politics that those who spend the most time moaning about Scotland and the Scots usually are the same people who spent the most time trying to hang onto Scotland.

I wonder why?

Personally I think Salmond missed a trick, he should have asked for a UK wide referendum, after all the carping and complaining, I think a "b*gger off Scotland" vote would be in the bag!

Indigo

Labour supporter Nick Hewer the man who spent many years getting no-hopers ejected from The Apprentice seems worried:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2888036/A-parting-blast-Apprentice-s-REAL-star-Nick-Hewer-Sugar-s-like-400-legged-spider-Red-Ed-arrogant-no-hoper-SamCam-naughty-girl.html

His biggest worry seems to be his beloved Labour Party.

'They're a hopeless bunch. I've met Miliband and shook his hand, and from that moment I knew he was a no-hoper. Tall, arrogant, floppy, weak, wet handshake.

'So I went to William Hill the next day to put a bet on that he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party for the next election, but they weren't taking bets for that far ahead.

'I once heard he and [shadow Foreign Secretary] Dougie Alexander wanted to meet me for a drink and a chat, but no one got in touch,' he adds, clearly piqued. 'I don't think they know what they're doing.'

surbiton

scotslass said:

john_zims

If you believe that then you should have been campaiging hard with Salmond and Sturgeon for Scottish independence.

It is a strange feature of UK politics that those who spend the most time moaning about Scotland and the Scots usually are the same people who spent the most time trying to hang onto Scotland.

I wonder why?

Absolutely true !

surbiton

anotherDave said:

The Guardian write-up mentions a repeat of the 2011 Scottish election result.

That suggests the Conservatives must be in with a chance in the border constituencies, 3 MPs?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/scotland.stm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_(European_Parliament_constituency)#2014

The constituency boundaries are not the same.

surbiton

Dan Hodges = WABP = What a bitter person. No one is more wabp than the rejected one.

Glengyle

Surely the 17% lead for the SNP is better for Labour than the other recent polls. Another 5% swing as the frame of reference shifts to the UK level in a GE campaign and we are getting into roughly equal seats territory. Not great for Labour but not apocalypse. And no huge barrier to a Westminster majority.

AlastairMeeks

Back the Conservatives in Crawley, back Labour in Bury North?

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/27/greenwich-house-price-rises-london

AlastairMeeks

The Guardian also has an editorial on this poll:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/26/guardian-view-scottish-public-opinion-labour-edge

JohnLilburne

antifrank said:

The Guardian also has an editorial on this poll:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/26/guardian-view-scottish-public-opinion-labour-edge

Does any one know why they think that Cameron's post-referendum statement constituted a "truly shocking response"? Is it just because he mentioned the word England?

JohnLilburne

Indigo said:

scotslass said:

It is a strange feature of UK politics that those who spend the most time moaning about Scotland and the Scots usually are the same people who spent the most time trying to hang onto Scotland.

I wonder why?

Personally I think Salmond missed a trick, he should have asked for a UK wide referendum, after all the carping and complaining, I think a "b*gger off Scotland" vote would be in the bag!

On balance I was against independence, but was so appalled by the Vow I would have voted for it as being the better option to a post-Vow UK.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Ave It for Prime Minister!

Alistair

HYUFD said:

Interesting that Jim Murphy has a net positive approval rating though, suggesting he is probably still the best man to loead Scottish Labour back to power

Question about the poll, Does Murphy have a net positive amongst those people who recognised his picture or based on name recognition?

MikeK

Good Morning.
I have decided that Ave it's reappearance is a figment of our collective imagination.

john_zims

@scotslass

'It is a strange feature of UK politics that those who spend the most time moaning about Scotland and the Scots usually are the same people who spent the most time trying to hang onto Scotland.'

Nobody can compete with the Nats when it comes to whining.

Flightpath

Indigo said:

Labour supporter Nick Hewer the man who spent many years getting no-hopers ejected from The Apprentice seems worried:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2888036/A-parting-blast-Apprentice-s-REAL-star-Nick-Hewer-Sugar-s-like-400-legged-spider-Red-Ed-arrogant-no-hoper-SamCam-naughty-girl.html

His biggest worry seems to be his beloved Labour Party.

'They're a hopeless bunch. I've met Miliband and shook his hand, and from that moment I knew he was a no-hoper. Tall, arrogant, floppy, weak, wet handshake.

'So I went to William Hill the next day to put a bet on that he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party for the next election, but they weren't taking bets for that far ahead.

'I once heard he and [shadow Foreign Secretary] Dougie Alexander wanted to meet me for a drink and a chat, but no one got in touch,' he adds, clearly piqued. 'I don't think they know what they're doing.'

Don't you think its significant that a well off successful person like Hewer, a popular TV personality as well, can be a Labour voter? The association or juxtaposition of 'labour' with 'well meaning' - or whatever 'goody' word you choose - by people like him is why the centre ground is important.

Flightpath

Indigo said:

anotherDave said:

There are more UKIP leaners in current-Con than current-Lab. Surely that means its better for UKIP if the Conservatives are in government rather than opposition?

Except that if LAB win, the Tories will erupt into a bout of infighting and fratricide, and a chunk of their MPs will peel off to UKIP in disgust. The easiest way for UKIP for get 30 MPs is to get 2 at GE2015, and pick up 28 Tories as the party implodes after losing a GE.

You should be headlining at The Apollo.
You and Trevor Shonk. We need a new Morcambe and Wise.

taffys

You can't simultaneously win the 150 or so English seats that really matter and also hold onto power in Scotland. It ain't happening.

Indigo

Flightpath said:

Don't you think its significant that a well off successful person like Hewer, a popular TV personality as well, can be a Labour voter? The association or juxtaposition of 'labour' with 'well meaning' - or whatever 'goody' word you choose - by people like him is why the centre ground is important.

Yes, but has been said here a number of times before, the centre is necessary, but not sufficient. Blair won because he got the centre and the left, when the left started to stay at home, he lost. Thatcher/Major won because they held the right, and managed to pick up the C2 vote as well, when they stayed at home the Tories lost. The mistake both Cameron and Miliband have made is thinking the centre ground was enough, and they are both grubbing around for votes in the low 30's. If Cameron had held on to the right as well he would have been sitting pretty on around 38-40%, similarly Miliband and the left.

HYUFD

Alistair I doubt it would make much difference

HYUFD

Indigo He lost seats not the election

calum

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Interesting that Jim Murphy has a net positive approval rating though, suggesting he is probably still the best man to loead Scottish Labour back to power

Question about the poll, Does Murphy have a net positive amongst those people who recognised his picture or based on name recognition?