So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election, "prevailing circumstances", "would cause too much economic uncertainty at the moment", "negotiations are still in progress" etc ), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Voting UKIP gives them a chance of a UKIP MP. That is what matters. Voting Tory gets the a Europhile PM and in most cases probably a Europhile MP as well. Cameron losing offers a chance, however slim, to change the Tory party. Cameron staying means the struggle to leave the EU is all the harder. </blockquote
Richard,
A changed Tory party is no good if it is not an electable Tory Party. If the Conservatives lose there will likely be a civil war on the Right with both the Conservatives and UKIP becoming equally unelectable.
I agree that Cameron is not for OUT and almost certainly never will be. But that is not the point because in a referendum he will have one vote, just like everyone else.
OUTers really do need to give some thought to the practicalities of achieving their aim. They have first to secure a referendum, then they will have to win the campaign. Winning the campaign will require credible leadership. Credible leadership will involve selecting non-polarising personalities (definitely NOT Farage) and also achieving significant business support. They are miles away on all of these counts. UKIP would be better engaged in dealing with these fundamentals rather than denouncing David Cameron who, for all his faults, is the only politician who can get them beyond base camp.
Voting UKIP gives them a chance of a UKIP MP. That is what matters. Voting Tory gets the a Europhile PM and in most cases probably a Europhile MP as well. Cameron losing offers a chance, however slim, to change the Tory party. Cameron staying means the struggle to leave the EU is all the harder.
Cameron's only aim is to get them high enough up the mountain so he can thrown them off. He has been dragged kicking and screaming to this point and now is looking for any means to both stay in power and stay in the EU. That is the beginning and end of his ambition as far as referendum goes.
Those thinking the LibDems will do OK-ish in May aren't factoring in Clegg. He is going to be the face of the LibDem campaign - and people hate him. They won't give him a listening, however exciting the proposals his party offers. MPs in the low 20's this election, possibly a Martin Day-driven minibus the next as it returns to being the Liberals in a few stubborn bunkers.
The Jokers Wild are UKIP. I still expect the big story on the day after the election to be their disappointing performance. When it comes to the ballot box, the appealing idea of a vote to poke the established order in the eye will get top-trumped by steady-as-she-goes on the economy.
I predict that Carswell will be their only MP. And that assumes he hasn't listened to one racist rant too many from a fellow Kipper and left to sit as an independent. But if it doesn't have racist rants, what does UKIP have to attract the masses? There is an intellectual void at the heart of the party. To think that a term of Labour having no referendum is a great way to progress exit from the EU is like the Tories arguing the best way to make the case for privatisation is to have a Labour government that renationalised everything. Utter madness.
UKIP attract people who oppose EU membership, and wish to control immigration. You may thoroughly disagree with such proposals, but it's futile to deny that a constituency exists for these things.
And how exactly will that constituency get any opportunity to influence these areas until at least 2020/2030 by voting UKIP? Many of the UKIP vote will be dead way before the long game plays out.
Voting Conservative gets them a say in 2017.
It's generally better to vote for the party that agrees with you than the one that doesn't.
You're a smart guy. You must see how voting for a party that does not - cannot - deliver what its voters want is a fraud on those supporters?
It will deliver quite the opposite of its stated intention. A Miliband Govt. that works closely with Brussels, insinuating the UK ever further into the European project, will raise your supporters blood pressure a good few points - but otherwise will be the opposite direction of travel to what they want to see.
So don't play the "what's best for Britain" card about voting UKIP. It is a home to Brussels' useful idiots. It is the F*cking for Virginity Party. It brings about precisely the opposite of that which it claims to want. And that is the intellectual void at the dark heart of UKIP.
Easy on the melodrama!
What you call melodrama I call passsion for my country.
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Strange.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
Those thinking the LibDems will do OK-ish in May aren't factoring in Clegg. He is going to be the face of the LibDem campaign - and people hate him. They won't give him a listening, however exciting the proposals his party offers. MPs in the low 20's this election, possibly a Martin Day-driven minibus the next as it returns to being the Liberals in a few stubborn bunkers.
The Jokers Wild are UKIP. I still expect the big story on the day after the election to be their disappointing performance. When it comes to the ballot box, the appealing idea of a vote to poke the established order in the eye will get top-trumped by steady-as-she-goes on the economy.
I predict that Carswell will be their only MP. And that assumes he hasn't listened to one racist rant too many from a fellow Kipper and left to sit as an independent. But if it doesn't have racist rants, what does UKIP have to attract the masses? There is an intellectual void at the heart of the party. To think that a term of Labour having no referendum is a great way to progress exit from the EU is like the Tories arguing the best way to make the case for privatisation is to have a Labour government that renationalised everything. Utter madness.
UKIP attract people who oppose EU membership, and wish to control immigration. You may thoroughly disagree with such proposals, but it's futile to deny that a constituency exists for these things.
And how exactly will that constituency get any opportunity to influence these areas until at least 2020/2030 by voting UKIP? Many of the UKIP vote will be dead way before the long game plays out.
Voting Conservative gets them a say in 2017.
Voting Conservative gets them a Europhile PM determined to keep the UK in the EU at all costs.
Voting Labour gets them a Europhile PM who will not give them a vote on the EU.
Voting LibDem gets them a Europhile PM who will not give them a vote on the EU.
Voting SNP gets them a Europhile PM who will not give them a vote on the EU.
Voting Green - who knows what that gets...
And the killer for UKIP - voting UKIP has the consequence of getting them a Europhile PM who will not give them a vote
Voting Conservative gets them a vote on the EU, whatever the politics of the PM.
In plenty of seats, if the Tories vote UKIP it will stop Labour getting the seat, and edge Cameron closer towards remaining as PM.. I am not saying they should, (a couple of Tory posters on here have said theyd rather Miliband PM than vote UKIP) but its the same argument you are trying to use..
OUTers really do need to give some thought to the practicalities of achieving their aim. They have first to secure a referendum, then they will have to win the campaign. Winning the campaign will require credible leadership. Credible leadership will involve selecting non-polarising personalities (definitely NOT Farage) and also achieving significant business support. They are miles away on all of these counts. UKIP would be better engaged in dealing with these fundamentals rather than denouncing David Cameron who, for all his faults, is the only politician who can get them beyond base camp.
You make one basic error. You are ascribing the art of rational thought to UKIP supporters..
By that, I don't mean they are incapable of rational thought: they clearly are.. But most are emotionally involved with their politics and rational thought about politics means a clear and calculating view of what they want to achieve and how to achieve it..
I see no evidence of rational and detached thought in UKIP leadership except perhaps for Carswell. Most of the headlines appear to show UKIP candidates as full of irrational prejudices.... and even UKIP can't keep up winnowing them out.
Those thinking the LibDems will do OK-ish in May aren't factoring in Clegg. He is going to be the face of the LibDem campaign - and people hate him. They won't give him a listening, however exciting the proposals his party offers. MPs in the low 20's this election, possibly a Martin Day-driven minibus the next as it returns to being the Liberals in a few stubborn bunkers.
The Jokers Wild are UKIP. I still expect the big story on the day after the election to be their disappointing performance. When it comes to the ballot box, the appealing idea of a vote to poke the established order in the eye will get top-trumped by steady-as-she-goes on the economy.
I predict that Carswell will be their only MP. And that assumes he hasn't listened to one racist rant too many from a fellow Kipper and left to sit as an independent. But if it doesn't have racist rants, what does UKIP have to attract the masses? There is an intellectual void at the heart of the party. To think that a term of Labour having no referendum is a great way to progress exit from the EU is like the Tories arguing the best way to make the case for privatisation is to have a Labour government that renationalised everything. Utter madness.
UKIP attract people who oppose EU membership, and wish to control immigration. You may thoroughly disagree with such proposals, but it's futile to deny that a constituency exists for these things.
It's generally better to vote for the party that agrees with you than the one that doesn't.
You're a smart guy. You must see how voting for a party that does not - cannot - deliver what its voters want is a fraud on those supporters?
It will deliver quite the opposite of its stated intention. A Miliband Govt. that works closely with Brussels, insinuating the UK ever further into the European project, will raise your supporters blood pressure a good few points - but otherwise will be the opposite direction of travel to what they want to see.
So don't play the "what's best for Britain" card about voting UKIP. It is a home to Brussels' useful idiots. It is the F*cking for Virginity Party. It brings about precisely the opposite of that which it claims to want. And that is the intellectual void at the dark heart of UKIP.
Easy on the melodrama!
What you call melodrama I call passsion for my country.
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Strange.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
I daresay there are some old leaflets from the 70’s somewhere about why it was worth voting Liberal, when we felt we had a mountain to climb pretty well everywhere.. They could be recycled for UKIP. Or could be if UKIP believed in recycling!
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Strange.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
Possibly he sees being in the EU as an existential issue far more important that some tinkering around with taxation that can be put right again at a later date. Possibly he thinks that the 19bn quid we save from not giving it to the EU might pay for the Spare Room Subsidy and leave change so its still a nett gain. I would venture to suggest there are Conservative policies you dont agree with, but you still plan to vote for them, the idea that you have to agree with every single policy of a party to vote for them is frankly infantile.
UKIP attract people who oppose EU membership, and wish to control immigration. You may thoroughly disagree with such proposals, but it's futile to deny that a constituency exists for these things.
And how exactly will that constituency get any opportunity to influence these areas until at least 2020/2030 by voting UKIP? Many of the UKIP vote will be dead way before the long game plays out.
Voting Conservative gets them a say in 2017.
It's generally better to vote for the party that agrees with you than the one that doesn't.
You're a smart guy. You must see how voting for a party that does not - cannot - deliver what its voters want is a fraud on those supporters?
Intellectual void ?
What do Cameron's conservatives stand for ?
Well let's start with offering the voters a democratic say on the EU - in or out in 2017. Next...
That's not actually something you stand for, it's something you've been forced in to. Cameron could quite happily have held a referendum in this Parliament but didn't sp[end his political capital on it. Whether he attempts to do so in 2017 remains to be seen, though I note that 2017 is alsothe year when the UK holds the EU presidency. Can't really see Cameron spoiling his own summit somehow.
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
Err remind me how the Conservatives have been in coalition with the LDs who oppose any such referendum...and the Labour Party oppose any such referendum. The sums don't add up for a go it alone referendum.
(I always knew many Conservatives can't do sums...I blame the education system :-)
You make one basic error. You are ascribing the art of rational thought to UKIP supporters..
By that, I don't mean they are incapable of rational thought: they clearly are.. But most are emotionally involved with their politics and rational thought about politics means a clear and calculating view of what they want to achieve and how to achieve it..
I see no evidence of rational and detached thought in UKIP leadership except perhaps for Carswell. Most of the headlines appear to show UKIP candidates as full of irrational prejudices.... and even UKIP can't keep up winnowing them out.
Madasafish,
Carswell will end up one disillusioned man, I think.
Interesting that NP says that the local Tory MP has attacked the LD’s “relentlessly”. Similar situation locally; the Tory MP maintains a steady attack on the neighbouring LD Council in a small local free paper but doesn’t appear to comment in either other free’s or in the local “paid for”. It’s almost as though they want the LD’s to be able to claim at the GE that “they stopped the Tories being even worse”!
'Politician attacks rivals' - why is this news?
No doubt Nick Palmer does it himself, attacking Anna Soubry at every opportunity.
Actually one of the interesting points about Nick is that he doesn't do that politics stuff very well, at least in terms of utter cutthroat streetfighting. It is rare to see him launch a personal attack on anyone, even a direct political opponent. The way he tends to conduct himself on here is also the way he conducts himself in campaigns.
I am not sure that helps his chances of winning but at least he practices what he preaches.
Ironically it's locked me in - on the occasions when I do criticise an opponent, I get annoyed emails from normal non-party supporters saying "That's not like you, why can't you stay positive?" And yet sometimes an opposition candidate has to say what they don't feel is ideal about the current incumbents. I try to make the distinction between attacking policies (fine) and attacking people (yuck), but people go by the tone.
My point about the LibDems, though, is that it was an odd decision by the Tory MP to attack the LibDems systematically while they were in Government together. Just as a matter of tactical vote-hunting, I'd have thought that it was sensible to be friendly. I think that the current MP's natural preference to fight everyone in the house, though.
Another prediction. The left have dined out for decades by smearing any party from the right that threatens their route to power as fascists or racists. It's worked well for them, indeed its a lot easier than having to construct a coherent rebuttal of their policies and large chunks of the media being receptive to propagating their smears has made the monstering easy.
May 2015 will demonstrate that they will have to stop smearing and try and win the argument through reason and intellectual justification if they ever want power again.
They think they are clever smearing UKIP as racists and fascists, but few are taken in and they just come across as bullies.
As we saw in a recent topic, UKIP supporters are less likely to care if they use language that can cause offense to certain groups. To point out that UKIP is intolerant is not a matter of smearing or bullying, but a matter of pointing out a fact, as supported by scientifically conducted opinion polls.
Actually, what the Yougov poll showed was that right wing voters in general were much less likely than left wing voters to find certain terms offensive. in other news, the Pope's a Catholic.
People were not asked whether they cared about giving offence to others.
The Telegraph says after looking at the data that it, ''shows that just one in 10 of those who consider themselves Ukip supporters agreed that the words were offensive, compared to four out of 10 Conservatives, and 62 per cent of Labour backers.'' 72% of LDs considered it offensive.
UKIP go out of their way attract and spread intolerance and indeed they are merely helping the left justify all they have ever said. Despite Carswell's words Farage has always been more than happy to whip up and spread it as an easy way to get cheap popularity.
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
It just goes to show that you shouldn't feed the crocodile.
What you call melodrama I call passsion for my country.
Which translates into support for a leader who is happy - or even desperate - to see your country continue to suffer through its membership of a supra-national, undemocratic bloc.
It's really very simple... Cameron will have a Referendum..the rest will not..Your choice.
Except that a lot of people dont trust or believe him... Dave "Cast Iron, No Ifs, No Buts" Cameron has a huge credibility problem which is killing his party in the polls. Hell, I'm a Conservative and I dont believe him.
An interesting and encouraging story at your company. Can I play devil's advocate a little?
I remember in the 1980s working closely with a couple of gay people (we were a on a small site and this was before it was fashionable). They were good people, very friendly and sociable and their partners would come along to events too. They were happy in their own skin.
In the 2000s, I worked in the Civil Service and they had a formal LBGT group. Their organiser was an evangelist for gayness but I and many others found him obnoxious. He spent his time badgering people (gay and straight) to show their support and wouldn't take a polite no for an answer. He brought a case of harassment/homophobia against one of my members who told him to .. go away (I was a union rep at the time).
Fortunately, it was relatively easy to convince HR that it wasn't so much homophobia as him-ophobia. They'd had dealing with the man before.
The point is that it's personalities that count. I reckon it's the same with politics; often, the sort of people who want to be MPs are the obnoxious, it's all about me people.
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
And cut half in 5 years what Healey cut in 1 year.
It's really very simple... Cameron will have a Referendum..the rest will not..Your choice.
Except that a lot of people dont trust or believe him... Dave "Cast Iron, No Ifs, No Buts" Cameron has a huge credibility problem which is killing his party in the polls. Hell, I'm a Conservative and I dont believe him.
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
That's exactly the type of response I was expecting. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom's renegotiation of membership is one of the new Commission president's five objectives, a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives, an Act of Parliament has been passed to prevent any further transfer of power without a referendum. Which government since the Second World War has taken a less friendly approach to the EU?
I think the one certainty is that the majority opinion on sites like this will be wrong with any predictions they make now for the GE. This will be mainly for two reasons, the partisan nature of the anoraks who predict based on their own tribal loyalty, and perhaps more important their closed minds and inability to read the runes, the public mood, and the evidence of their own eyes, in preference to strict adherence to the 'scientific evidence' from the polls.
As a kipper I have watched for 20 + years predictions of our demise, and from as recently as 2011 the anoraks on this site, Vote-2012 Pro and its predecessor, as well as all the professional psephologists, all move from a position that UKIP would fall back from their high point of 3% in the 2010 to the general predication of 1-3% in the 2015 GE, and they would never win seats under FPTP. As each unpredicted rise in their support, opinion has covered their own backs, abandoning cast in stone positions as the evidence piled up against them. Kippers have been stating since at least 2011 that they were making inroads into the Labour core vote to the scorn of the anoraks claiming UKIP were only a Conservative problem, until of course it became as clear as the nose on your face, and they became instantly wise after the event. Where are all the 'UKIP will fall back to 1percenters and never win an MP now. Very quiet I fancy!
To be honest I would suggest you should all give up on long term predictions, because to be honest you are completely rubbish at them, and by long term I don't mean 6 months or a year, more likely 6 weeks or the 6 days until the next poll. The quality of the predictions are generally no more relevant than being wise after the event, akin to predicting the numbers of the national lottery after they have been drawn.
Mike is right in having doubts about the point of national polling in our new politics, and no doubt the result of the general election will result in a wholesale review by the ' scientific polling community' as they eat large quantities of humble pie, when they wonder what was the point of all the graphs and analysis, when even tossing a coin gives you a rough 50-50 chance of being right, rather than the near 100% chance of being wrong using the current anorak system.
You are dead right about the wrong predictions.. on here the full set of excuses to dampen UKIPs rise have been tried, and no doubt if UKIP get 12%, or 3 MPs, people will actually believe themselves to be proved right that "UKIP wont perform as well as expected" despite having predicted 5,7 ,9 % or no MPs themselves
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
That's exactly the type of response I was expecting. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom's renegotiation of membership is one of the new Commission president's five objectives, a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives, an Act of Parliament has been passed to prevent any further transfer of power without a referendum. Which government since the Second World War has taken a less friendly approach to the EU?
Couldn't have highlighted Cameron's gap on credibility any better myself.
A thread full of wishful thinking and thinkers, with many PBers casting magic spells to ward off the evil UKIP fairy.
Just a word to those who are betting on Cameron giving an in/out referendum on the EU in 2017. First, Cameron is a noted liar and deceiver. Secondly, Cameron is a noted liar and deceiver. Thirdly, Cameron is a noted liar and deceiver. Fourthly,.........................
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
That's exactly the type of response I was expecting. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom's renegotiation of membership is one of the new Commission president's five objectives, a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives, an Act of Parliament has been passed to prevent any further transfer of power without a referendum. Which government since the Second World War has taken a less friendly approach to the EU?
The 'referendum lock' to prevent powers being transferred to the EU without a referendum did not prevent powers being transferred to the EU without a referendum.
The government is not seeking any repatriation of powers from the EU that I am aware of.
a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives
Which so far is talk, and people dont believe it will really happen. Cameron fatally shot his credibility in the foot with his "no ifs, no buts" immigration claim and his pre-announcement that he wants to stay in the EU and wouldn't use the threat of leaving to get what the country wants.
It's really very simple... Cameron will have a Referendum..the rest will not..Your choice.
Except that a lot of people dont trust or believe him... Dave "Cast Iron, No Ifs, No Buts" Cameron has a huge credibility problem which is killing his party in the polls. Hell, I'm a Conservative and I dont believe him.
Poor excuse and it's one which relies on ignoring reality, ie we do not want ever closer union we do not want to be in the euro. We do need a new relationship. The results of the negotiations will be what they will be - the point is the vote at the end of it. If you want to obsess about the EU, you have a choice between 2 options and only one offers a referendum. It the same choice that actually voted against the Lisbon Treaty.
They think they are clever smearing UKIP as racists and fascists, but few are taken in and they just come across as bullies.
Tiresome, isn't it?
'Nigel Farage blasts 'fascist' protesters after Edinburgh confrontation
UKIP leader Nigel Farage has described protesters who besieged him in an Edinburgh pub as "fascist scum"... ...He told BBC Scotland the incident was deeply racist and displayed a total hatred of the English.'
IIRC, one of the only two protesters the polis found it worth arresting was English, and the other one a Labour Party activist ... I really did wonder what newspapers Mr Farage read!
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
That's exactly the type of response I was expecting. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom's renegotiation of membership is one of the new Commission president's five objectives, a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives, an Act of Parliament has been passed to prevent any further transfer of power without a referendum. Which government since the Second World War has taken a less friendly approach to the EU?
Which government has had a party that's raison d'etre is to leave the EU breathing down it's neck for 4 years, tempting it's MP's to defect, beating it in by elections, wining national elections?
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
That's exactly the type of response I was expecting. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom's renegotiation of membership is one of the new Commission president's five objectives, a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives, an Act of Parliament has been passed to prevent any further transfer of power without a referendum. Which government since the Second World War has taken a less friendly approach to the EU?
The Common Market appeared a benign entity, the current aggressively imperialist EU is an entirely different kettle of fish. False comparison, I'm afraid.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
Total tosh.
It's that kind of detailed analysis that keeps me coming to the site.
Elections are won from the centre. When the batshit crazies get too crazy, they're better lost, as Labour found in the 1980s.
The school of thought that thinks this government is weirdly leftwing shows that the use of dangerous mind-altering substances is not confined to the young and liberal.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful. The problem written large is that immigration is the number one issue in the country, 76% of the population including no few Labour voters want it reduced, 52% by a lot. Cameron promised to reduce it, and didn't, he was even stupid enough to tell people they could throw him out if he did not reduce immigration, and now they intend to. Cameron therefore has no credibility on the issue that is most important to the public at the moment, the rest is really beside the point.
I see the kippers and kipper fellow travellers are queuing up to make my point, while avoiding the question that I asked.
Which question was that? The one about a more anti-EU government since WWII? Well for a start the question makes no sense as the EU didn't exist until 1993. However, if you are looking for a more generally Euro-sceptic government then you could consider between the Administrations of Atlee, Churchill, Eden and Wilson's 1st (even his second, at least he gave us a vote on whether to stay in the EEC). Those generally considered as pro Europe (e.g. MacmIllan) would probably have never accepted the level of integration that we now have.
I find the hard right's take on the current government baffling. It is by some distance following the most rightwing policies of any government since the Second World War, whether you look at the economy, social security, education or the EU. By any objective measure, the hard right should be delighted.
? The current government has passed more powers to the EU.
That's exactly the type of response I was expecting. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom's renegotiation of membership is one of the new Commission president's five objectives, a referendum on EU membership is offered by 2017 by the Conservatives, an Act of Parliament has been passed to prevent any further transfer of power without a referendum. Which government since the Second World War has taken a less friendly approach to the EU?
The 'referendum lock' to prevent powers being transferred to the EU without a referendum did not prevent powers being transferred to the EU without a referendum.
The government is not seeking any repatriation of powers from the EU that I am aware of.
They're still being vague but I'm pretty sure they want John Major's opt-out from the Social Chapter back. There's even talk about making John Major the negotiator.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful. The problem written large is that immigration is the number one issue in the country, 76% of the population including no few Labour voters want it reduced, 52% by a lot. Cameron promised to reduce it, and didn't, he was even stupid enough to tell people they could throw him out if he did not reduce immigration, and now they intend to. Cameron therefore has no credibility on the issue that is most important to the public at the moment, the rest is really beside the point.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
Total tosh.
It's that kind of detailed analysis that keeps me coming to the site.
Elections are won from the centre. When the batshit crazies get too crazy, they're better lost, as Labour found in the 1980s.
The school of thought that thinks this government is weirdly leftwing shows that the use of dangerous mind-altering substances is not confined to the young and liberal.
Hey it's the appropriate reply to generalist bullshit.
I also happen not to accept the centrist theory of elections. You can't win just from the centre or the LDs would be in permanent government. In our system you have to appeal to a broad church which includes your far out wings as well as the centre to create a majority. The Blairite mantra of there's nowhere else for them to go is no longer valid as there now are, on both left and right.
Cameron's problem is he has moved to the centre to get votes but not done enough to keep traditional voters on board; worse he compounded the error by insulting some of them so they won't return. Bad politics.
Elections are won from the centre. When the batshit crazies get too crazy, they're better lost, as Labour found in the 1980s.
This sort of nonsense is continuously spouted here and it patently isn't true otherwise the LDs would win every election going sitting in their position right in the centre. Appeal to the centre ground is necessary, but not sufficient, its no good holding the centre ground if your core peels off or stays at home. Thatcher won because she had the right wing on side and managed to pick up the C2 Blue Labour vote as well. Blair won because he managed (at least initially) to keep the left on board while he scooped up the middle ground. Miliband and Cameron have both moved into the middle and are squabbling over their same metropolitan liberal votes while their core slips off to the Greens and/or UKIP.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful. The problem written large is that immigration is the number one issue in the country, 76% of the population including no few Labour voters want it reduced, 52% by a lot. Cameron promised to reduce it, and didn't, he was even stupid enough to tell people they could throw him out if he did not reduce immigration, and now they intend to. Cameron therefore has no credibility on the issue that is most important to the public at the moment, the rest is really beside the point.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
I see the kippers and kipper fellow travellers are queuing up to make my point, while avoiding the question that I asked.
Which question was that? The one about a more anti-EU government since WWII? Well for a start the question makes no sense as the EU didn't exist until 1993. However, if you are looking for a more generally Euro-sceptic government then you could consider between the Administrations of Atlee, Churchill, Eden and Wilson's 1st (even his second, at least he gave us a vote on whether to stay in the EEC). Those generally considered as pro Europe (e.g. MacmIllan) would probably have never accepted the level of integration that we now have.
Wilson's first? Britain applied to join the EEC in that government.
As for your comments about the level of integration, in the 1940s and 50s, there was more than one serious proposal that Britain and France should become a single country.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful. The problem written large is that immigration is the number one issue in the country, 76% of the population including no few Labour voters want it reduced, 52% by a lot. Cameron promised to reduce it, and didn't, he was even stupid enough to tell people they could throw him out if he did not reduce immigration, and now they intend to. Cameron therefore has no credibility on the issue that is most important to the public at the moment, the rest is really beside the point.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
Don't let the fact that the other leaders are completely inept get in the way either.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful. The problem written large is that immigration is the number one issue in the country, 76% of the population including no few Labour voters want it reduced, 52% by a lot. Cameron promised to reduce it, and didn't, he was even stupid enough to tell people they could throw him out if he did not reduce immigration, and now they intend to. Cameron therefore has no credibility on the issue that is most important to the public at the moment, the rest is really beside the point.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
that's not so much comparing apples and oranges as Trabants with Wartburgs.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful. The problem written large is that immigration is the number one issue in the country, 76% of the population including no few Labour voters want it reduced, 52% by a lot. Cameron promised to reduce it, and didn't, he was even stupid enough to tell people they could throw him out if he did not reduce immigration, and now they intend to. Cameron therefore has no credibility on the issue that is most important to the public at the moment, the rest is really beside the point.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
Yes, he can sit on the opposition benches feeling detoxed, smug, and out of power.
"The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful"
The likes of you and I cannot have any effect on the result of the next general election. However that does not mean we cannot have any influence on what happens after it.
Some people are totally fixated with the idea of the influence of power, if your party is not in power you cannot get anything that you might want. However, in politics, as in life, there is the power of influence. For example, Cameron would never have agreed to a referendum on membership of the EU (we can argue about what his promise is worth later) without the rise of UKIP. A vote for a minor party may thus produce results if enough people are prepared to resist the siren calls and voting for what you want as opposed to the least worst is never a wasted vote.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
There seems to be a strong whiff of panic among the Cameron haters of all parties..They seem to be scared witless about him having the referendum And it matters not one jot what his personal preference is, he ,like the rest of us,only has one vote. He is the only one giving the rest of the population a chance to really choose their future..none of the others trust the British Population as they claim to know what is best for us.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
In which case Cameron should win handsomely, but he doesn't seem to be in a position to do that. I might also ask why so many people feel it is necessary to spend so much energy on here attacking UKIP.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
In which case Cameron should win handsomely, but he doesn't seem to be in a position to do that. I might also ask why so many people feel it is necessary to spend so much energy on here attacking UKIP.
Because it's only now they realise they might need the votes ?
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
"It's that kind of detailed analysis that keeps me coming to the site."
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
In which case Cameron should win handsomely, but he doesn't seem to be in a position to do that. I might also ask why so many people feel it is necessary to spend so much energy on here attacking UKIP.
Under FPTP, elections are won in the middle. Blair was always on the look out for nutters to pick a fight with. Dave seems intent on bottling it now the opportunity has reared its head.
OGH "The LD share As can be seen this ranges from 5% to 14% which is down to different methodologies. If ranges on this scale continue some pollsters will have egg on their faces."
Ah yes the most extreme VI is ICM's 14%. The "gold standard"s ratings for the LDs are often on the high side. The last 6 ICM polls before GE2010's actual 23% LD vote were:- ICM/Guardian 2010-05-05 26 ICM/Guardian 2010-05-02 28 ICM/Sunday Tel 2010-04-30 27 ICM/Guardian 2010-04-25 30 ICM/Sunday Tel 2010-04-23 31 ICM/Guardian 2010-04-18 30 All between 3 and 8 bigger than election day.....
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
In which case Cameron should win handsomely, but he doesn't seem to be in a position to do that. I might also ask why so many people feel it is necessary to spend so much energy on here attacking UKIP.
Because it's only now they realise they might need the votes ?
I think you are right, but the bit I dont understand is how being rude to people and insulting their (probably deeply held) views is going to get them to change their vote back.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
What's that got to do with the price of fish ?
There are a fair few won't vote conservatives on PB, Cameron is not persuading them to get off their butts and vote for him. They are probably his best hope and he can't persuade them. For all your pleading on Cameron, you won't be voting for him either.
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
In which case Cameron should win handsomely, but he doesn't seem to be in a position to do that. I might also ask why so many people feel it is necessary to spend so much energy on here attacking UKIP.
Under FPTP, elections are won in the middle. Blair was always on the look out for nutters to pick a fight with. Dave seems intent on bottling it now the opportunity has reared its head.
FFS this again. If elections are won in the middle why haven't we had an LD government for the past couple of decades ?
Of course, there is literally nothing that David Cameron could do to satisfy the headbangers. He's made the serious mistake of trying.
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
^the most astute PB post I've read in a long time.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
In which case Cameron should win handsomely, but he doesn't seem to be in a position to do that. I might also ask why so many people feel it is necessary to spend so much energy on here attacking UKIP.
Because it's only now they realise they might need the votes ?
I think you are right, but the bit I dont understand is how being rude to people and insulting their (probably deeply held) views is going to get them to change their vote back.
Me neither, it was one of those things that switched me off Cameron, I couldn't see how picking a needless fight was in anyone's interest.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
Then they can surely be safely ignored. Except, well, quite a lot of people voted for them in the Euros and they have won a couple of by-elections and given Labour a fright in a third. Perhaps we should restrict the franchise so that only nice sensible people have the vote then we will only get nice sensible MPs.
What I'd like is a real renegotiation in Europe. I believe Cameron will hold a referendum in 2017. First, he will bring back some bits of tinsel then it will be like 1975. I was a supporter of Europe but even I was embarrassed by the one-sided nature of the debate then.
The BBC will lead the chorus of gratitude for the crumbs given to us, and any nay-sayers will be dismissed as ... fruitcakes and loons. And given virtually no media attention, There will be no debates, it will be a coronation.
A common market is a great idea. Political union needs to be debated. It will not be.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
Well personally I think that the silliest and most unpleasant party are the Lib Dems whose record in Government is extremely silly and undoubtedly unpleasant.
But given that both your opinion and mine are just that - opinions - it has very little bearing on the matter.
OGH "The LD share As can be seen this ranges from 5% to 14% which is down to different methodologies. If ranges on this scale continue some pollsters will have egg on their faces."
Ah yes the most extreme VI is ICM's 14%. The "gold standard"s ratings for the LDs are often on the high side. The last 6 ICM polls before GE2010's actual 23% LD vote were:- ICM/Guardian 2010-05-05 26 ICM/Guardian 2010-05-02 28 ICM/Sunday Tel 2010-04-30 27 ICM/Guardian 2010-04-25 30 ICM/Sunday Tel 2010-04-23 31 ICM/Guardian 2010-04-18 30 All between 3 and 8 bigger than election day.....
Well we can all select the polls we want to make a point
ICM December 2009 Lib Dems at 18 increase to GE 2010 5%
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
Then they can surely be safely ignored. Except, well, quite a lot of people voted for them in the Euros and they have won a couple of by-elections and given Labour a fright in a third. Perhaps we should restrict the franchise so that only nice sensible people have the vote then we will only get nice sensible MPs.
Silly and unpleasant people should have the vote. But most people when it comes down to it are not silly and unpleasant, though they can act in that way if they are fearful. All of the main parties have gone about dealing with UKIP in utterly the wrong way, as you suggest. A far better tactic would have been to lead the public by appealing to their better nature, not seek to pander to their worst fears. There's always someone else who can pander more shamelessly.
There seems to be a strong whiff of panic among the Cameron haters of all parties..They seem to be scared witless about him having the referendum And it matters not one jot what his personal preference is, he ,like the rest of us,only has one vote. He is the only one giving the rest of the population a chance to really choose their future..none of the others trust the British Population as they claim to know what is best for us.
No he isn't and you are rather silly to believe that.
Events dear boy, events. In a month's time, UKIP's analysis of Europe's problems could look correct to the point of genius.
So we can be clear if it happens, what analysis of Europe's problems are we talking about specifically?
Presumably SYRIZA winning on Jan 25th and calling a hard default on Greek Debt, followed by several banks going bust and another huge bill landing on the taxpayers lap for bailouts.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
That coming from a Green is either psychological projection or more likely mere trolling.
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Strange.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
Do tell me which party that is please.
Try UKIP's 'Policies for People'. It's in there, until Farage says it's all rubbish and comes up with something completely different.
Another prediction. The left have dined out for decades by smearing any party from the right that threatens their route to power as fascists or racists. It's worked well for them, indeed its a lot easier than having to construct a coherent rebuttal of their policies and large chunks of the media being receptive to propagating their smears has made the monstering easy.
May 2015 will demonstrate that they will have to stop smearing and try and win the argument through reason and intellectual justification if they ever want power again.
They think they are clever smearing UKIP as racists and fascists, but few are taken in and they just come across as bullies.
As we saw in a recent topic, UKIP supporters are less likely to care if they use language that can cause offense to certain groups. To point out that UKIP is intolerant is not a matter of smearing or bullying, but a matter of pointing out a fact, as supported by scientifically conducted opinion polls.
Actually, what the Yougov poll showed was that right wing voters in general were much less likely than left wing voters to find certain terms offensive. in other news, the Pope's a Catholic.
People were not asked whether they cared about giving offence to others.
The Telegraph says after looking at the data that it, ''shows that just one in 10 of those who consider themselves Ukip supporters agreed that the words were offensive, compared to four out of 10 Conservatives, and 62 per cent of Labour backers.'' 72% of LDs considered it offensive.
UKIP go out of their way attract and spread intolerance and indeed they are merely helping the left justify all they have ever said. Despite Carswell's words Farage has always been more than happy to whip up and spread it as an easy way to get cheap popularity.
So six out of 10 Conservatives weren't offended. My point exactly.
Intolerance takes many forms. In general, it isn't UKIP supporters who demand that Student Unions ban speakers or publications that they disapprove of, or demand curbs on Internet useage.
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Strange.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
Do tell me which party that is please.
Try UKIP's 'Policies for People'. It's in there, until Farage says it's all rubbish and comes up with something completely different.
I've never voted UKIP and am not planning to. So try again.
Events dear boy, events. In a month's time, UKIP's analysis of Europe's problems could look correct to the point of genius.
So we can be clear if it happens, what analysis of Europe's problems are we talking about specifically?
Presumably SYRIZA winning on Jan 25th and calling a hard default on Greek Debt, followed by several banks going bust and another huge bill landing on the taxpayers lap for bailouts.
As of the most recent MORI poll, David Cameron has the highest satisfaction ratings of any party leader. But don't let facts get in the way.
I am sure he will be sailing to victory then, nothing further needs to be said, Cameron majority nailed on.
No, he made the serious mistake of trying to appease the unappeasable right. Instead of seeking to pay Danegeld, he should have told them to stop fantasising about enemies that didn't exist and a world that had long since moved on, and concentrated on presenting the government as a government for sensible people. Instead, he has let the Conservatives drift way to the right, where it is more likely than not it will founder.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
Because insulting his core vote and belittling them has worked so well so far... for Farage.
UKIP are a silly and unpleasant party. There's no way to sugar that pill.
Then they can surely be safely ignored. Except, well, quite a lot of people voted for them in the Euros and they have won a couple of by-elections and given Labour a fright in a third. Perhaps we should restrict the franchise so that only nice sensible people have the vote then we will only get nice sensible MPs.
Silly and unpleasant people should have the vote. But most people when it comes down to it are not silly and unpleasant, though they can act in that way if they are fearful. All of the main parties have gone about dealing with UKIP in utterly the wrong way, as you suggest. A far better tactic would have been to lead the public by appealing to their better nature, not seek to pander to their worst fears. There's always someone else who can pander more shamelessly.
No one wins an election by appealing to peoples' better nature. Parties win by successfully demonising their opponents.
Events dear boy, events. In a month's time, UKIP's analysis of Europe's problems could look correct to the point of genius.
So we can be clear if it happens, what analysis of Europe's problems are we talking about specifically?
Presumably SYRIZA winning on Jan 25th and calling a hard default on Greek Debt, followed by several banks going bust and another huge bill landing on the taxpayers lap for bailouts.
Nice pictures, but how much are the British on the hook for?
I would imagine a large share of the big number that comes from the ECB, and a chunk of the big number that comes from the IMF, plus all of the big number that comes from guaranteeing consumer accounts for any British banks that fall as collateral damage if big fish with huge liabilities like SocGen go under. I dare say there are other liabilities that aren't obvious as well.
So the question remains what do Camerons Conservatives stand for ?
That is the problem in a nutshell, I am a Tory and I dont believe Cameron will hold a meaningful referendum in 2017 (I suspect excuses will be found to put it off for a year or two, then it will be too close to the next election), so he hasn't the faintest chance of convincing any Kippers back to the fold with that sort of promise.
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Like you I'm a Conservative who can't see the point in voting Cameron. I find the creeping desperation from the PB Conservative party stalwarts in relation to UKIP more than a little amusing.
Strange.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
Do tell me which party that is please.
Try UKIP's 'Policies for People'. It's in there, until Farage says it's all rubbish and comes up with something completely different.
I've never voted UKIP and am not planning to. So try again.
Apologies then for mistakenly identifying you as a Kipper.
Comments
Yes, yes I know, its going to be 2017, no ifs, no buts.....
Voting UKIP gives them a chance of a UKIP MP. That is what matters. Voting Tory gets the a Europhile PM and in most cases probably a Europhile MP as well. Cameron losing offers a chance, however slim, to change the Tory party. Cameron staying means the struggle to leave the EU is all the harder. </blockquote
Richard,
A changed Tory party is no good if it is not an electable Tory Party. If the Conservatives lose there will likely be a civil war on the Right with both the Conservatives and UKIP becoming equally unelectable.
I agree that Cameron is not for OUT and almost certainly never will be. But that is not the point because in a referendum he will have one vote, just like everyone else.
OUTers really do need to give some thought to the practicalities of achieving their aim. They have first to secure a referendum, then they will have to win the campaign. Winning the campaign will require credible leadership. Credible leadership will involve selecting non-polarising personalities (definitely NOT Farage) and also achieving significant business support. They are miles away on all of these counts. UKIP would be better engaged in dealing with these fundamentals rather than denouncing David Cameron who, for all his faults, is the only politician who can get them beyond base camp.
Cameron's only aim is to get them high enough up the mountain so he can thrown them off. He has been dragged kicking and screaming to this point and now is looking for any means to both stay in power and stay in the EU. That is the beginning and end of his ambition as far as referendum goes.
How can you equate bring a 'Conservative' with voting for a party that wants to reintroduce such Left wing policies as the Spare Room Subsidy?
OUTers really do need to give some thought to the practicalities of achieving their aim. They have first to secure a referendum, then they will have to win the campaign. Winning the campaign will require credible leadership. Credible leadership will involve selecting non-polarising personalities (definitely NOT Farage) and also achieving significant business support. They are miles away on all of these counts. UKIP would be better engaged in dealing with these fundamentals rather than denouncing David Cameron who, for all his faults, is the only politician who can get them beyond base camp.
You make one basic error. You are ascribing the art of rational thought to UKIP supporters..
By that, I don't mean they are incapable of rational thought: they clearly are.. But most are emotionally involved with their politics and rational thought about politics means a clear and calculating view of what they want to achieve and how to achieve it..
I see no evidence of rational and detached thought in UKIP leadership except perhaps for Carswell. Most of the headlines appear to show UKIP candidates as full of irrational prejudices.... and even UKIP can't keep up winnowing them out.
Or could be if UKIP believed in recycling!
By that, I don't mean they are incapable of rational thought: they clearly are.. But most are emotionally involved with their politics and rational thought about politics means a clear and calculating view of what they want to achieve and how to achieve it..
I see no evidence of rational and detached thought in UKIP leadership except perhaps for Carswell. Most of the headlines appear to show UKIP candidates as full of irrational prejudices.... and even UKIP can't keep up winnowing them out.
Madasafish,
Carswell will end up one disillusioned man, I think.
My point about the LibDems, though, is that it was an odd decision by the Tory MP to attack the LibDems systematically while they were in Government together. Just as a matter of tactical vote-hunting, I'd have thought that it was sensible to be friendly. I think that the current MP's natural preference to fight everyone in the house, though.
UKIP go out of their way attract and spread intolerance and indeed they are merely helping the left justify all they have ever said. Despite Carswell's words Farage has always been more than happy to whip up and spread it as an easy way to get cheap popularity.
It just goes to show that you shouldn't feed the crocodile.
Strange passion.
An interesting and encouraging story at your company. Can I play devil's advocate a little?
I remember in the 1980s working closely with a couple of gay people (we were a on a small site and this was before it was fashionable). They were good people, very friendly and sociable and their partners would come along to events too. They were happy in their own skin.
In the 2000s, I worked in the Civil Service and they had a formal LBGT group. Their organiser was an evangelist for gayness but I and many others found him obnoxious. He spent his time badgering people (gay and straight) to show their support and wouldn't take a polite no for an answer. He brought a case of harassment/homophobia against one of my members who told him to .. go away (I was a union rep at the time).
Fortunately, it was relatively easy to convince HR that it wasn't so much homophobia as him-ophobia. They'd had dealing with the man before.
The point is that it's personalities that count. I reckon it's the same with politics; often, the sort of people who want to be MPs are the obnoxious, it's all about me people.
Sam, of course, is not in this category.
Just a word to those who are betting on Cameron giving an in/out referendum on the EU in 2017.
First, Cameron is a noted liar and deceiver.
Secondly, Cameron is a noted liar and deceiver.
Thirdly, Cameron is a noted liar and deceiver.
Fourthly,.........................
The government is not seeking any repatriation of powers from the EU that I am aware of.
The results of the negotiations will be what they will be - the point is the vote at the end of it. If you want to obsess about the EU, you have a choice between 2 options and only one offers a referendum. It the same choice that actually voted against the Lisbon Treaty.
C 281 (-7)
L 301 (+6)
LD 28 (+2)
UKIP 2 (-)
OTH 38 (-1)
Still looking like a very hung parliament with Labour the biggest party...
(Changes with respect to November 2014)
In the long run, it may well be good for the Conservatives if all the nutjobs shuffle off to UKIP. In the short to medium term, it will mean an extended period of Labour rule.
And all the people on this site moaning about David Cameron now will be screaming about Ed Miliband in 9 months' time. The funny thing is, they will all blame David Cameron rather than their own insistence on ideological purity.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/11315857/Greek-failure-in-presidential-vote-sends-markets-into-turmoil-as-election-triggered.html
Elections are won from the centre. When the batshit crazies get too crazy, they're better lost, as Labour found in the 1980s.
The school of thought that thinks this government is weirdly leftwing shows that the use of dangerous mind-altering substances is not confined to the young and liberal.
I also happen not to accept the centrist theory of elections. You can't win just from the centre or the LDs would be in permanent government. In our system you have to appeal to a broad church which includes your far out wings as well as the centre to create a majority. The Blairite mantra of there's nowhere else for them to go is no longer valid as there now are, on both left and right.
Cameron's problem is he has moved to the centre to get votes but not done enough to keep traditional voters on board; worse he compounded the error by insulting some of them so they won't return. Bad politics.
As for your comments about the level of integration, in the 1940s and 50s, there was more than one serious proposal that Britain and France should become a single country.
True, a bit like a beauty contest which Ann Widdecombe wins.
UKIP have given dave the ultimate tory-detox.
Only the manifest ineptness of the official opposition gives the Conservatives a chance.
"The very idea that me in my safe Tory seat, or any other contributor on here will have any effect on the election at all is fanciful"
The likes of you and I cannot have any effect on the result of the next general election. However that does not mean we cannot have any influence on what happens after it.
Some people are totally fixated with the idea of the influence of power, if your party is not in power you cannot get anything that you might want. However, in politics, as in life, there is the power of influence. For example, Cameron would never have agreed to a referendum on membership of the EU (we can argue about what his promise is worth later) without the rise of UKIP. A vote for a minor party may thus produce results if enough people are prepared to resist the siren calls and voting for what you want as opposed to the least worst is never a wasted vote.
He is the only one giving the rest of the population a chance to really choose their future..none of the others trust the British Population as they claim to know what is best for us.
Has anyone ordered their Waterloo campaign medal?
Ah yes the most extreme VI is ICM's 14%. The "gold standard"s ratings for the LDs are often on the high side. The last 6 ICM polls before GE2010's actual 23% LD vote were:-
ICM/Guardian 2010-05-05 26
ICM/Guardian 2010-05-02 28
ICM/Sunday Tel 2010-04-30 27
ICM/Guardian 2010-04-25 30
ICM/Sunday Tel 2010-04-23 31
ICM/Guardian 2010-04-18 30
All between 3 and 8 bigger than election day.....
There are a fair few won't vote conservatives on PB, Cameron is not persuading them to get off their butts and vote for him. They are probably his best hope and he can't persuade them. For all your pleading on Cameron, you won't be voting for him either.
Events dear boy, events. In a month's time, UKIP's analysis of Europe's problems could look correct to the point of genius.
And people who get things right are listened to.
What I'd like is a real renegotiation in Europe. I believe Cameron will hold a referendum in 2017. First, he will bring back some bits of tinsel then it will be like 1975. I was a supporter of Europe but even I was embarrassed by the one-sided nature of the debate then.
The BBC will lead the chorus of gratitude for the crumbs given to us, and any nay-sayers will be dismissed as ... fruitcakes and loons. And given virtually no media attention, There will be no debates, it will be a coronation.
A common market is a great idea. Political union needs to be debated. It will not be.
But given that both your opinion and mine are just that - opinions - it has very little bearing on the matter.
ICM December 2009 Lib Dems at 18 increase to GE 2010 5%
Nice graphic here of who Greece owes and how much.
http://demonocracy.info/infographics/eu/debt_greek/debt_greek.html
The analysis that the European Union is completely unworkable socially, politically and economically.
And it always will be.
Looks like the 2014 CET is likely to the warmest ever recorded. Can't be due to anthropogenic forcing of course!
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/cet_info_mean.html
Thanks to all for the conversation this morning. Play nicely.
Intolerance takes many forms. In general, it isn't UKIP supporters who demand that Student Unions ban speakers or publications that they disapprove of, or demand curbs on Internet useage.
Spanish and Italian govvies starting to slip a bit.