We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
And yet the Blues still poll a few points away from 2010 despite the mid teen presence of Ukip.
The resilience of the blue core vote is impressive, and I can see that being critical, and more inclined to actually vote than the Labour core both North and South of the border.
Still looks like NOC to me though.
There's a fair number of Blue Liberals (10-15% of the Lib Dem vote from 2010) who partly offset losses to UKIP.
And who are going to run a mile from this latest bout of illiberal tosh.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
And yet the Blues still poll a few points away from 2010 despite the mid teen presence of Ukip.
The resilience of the blue core vote is impressive, and I can see that being critical, and more inclined to actually vote than the Labour core both North and South of the border.
Still looks like NOC to me though.
Indeed.
My ARSE has been in NOC mode for over two years and the rise of the SNP make this outcome even more likely.
Having an ARSE with No Overall Control seems a messy but appropriate response to the threat of a Milliband/Balls government!
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
http://www2.labour.org.uk/uploads/TheLabourPartyManifesto-2010.pdf Labour Manifesto: "A Future Bankrupt For All" Page 4:3 " and over the next four years, we will deliver up to £20 billion of efficiencies in the frontline NHS, ensuring that every pound is reinvested in frontline care. "
Sounds very much like they intended a top-down reorganisation.
'A staff lead restructuring of core medical services' please.
I have just been looking at the draft for the bill Hitchens is complaining about, the worst thing about it is its basically a wide open bit of enabling legislation giving the minister essentially Henry VIII powers to do whatever he wants.
The power to make regulations under this section— (a) is exercisable by statutory instrument; (b) includes power to make transitional, transitory or saving provision; (c) may, in particular, be exercised by amending, repealing, revoking or otherwise modifying any provision made by or under primary legislation passed before this Act or in the same Session.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
And yet the Blues still poll a few points away from 2010 despite the mid teen presence of Ukip.
The resilience of the blue core vote is impressive, and I can see that being critical, and more inclined to actually vote than the Labour core both North and South of the border.
Still looks like NOC to me though.
Indeed.
My ARSE has been in NOC mode for over two years and the rise of the SNP make this outcome even more likely.
Having an ARSE with No Overall Control seems a messy but appropriate response to the threat of a Milliband/Balls government!
A medical practitioner like your good self will clearly be able to offer a cure albeit I hope the waiting time will not be until May 7th !!
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
Carlotta (6.42) should not place his/her faith in sub samples unless they are aggregated over a period of time.
Today's YouGov Sunday Times Scottish sub sample (of 136 people!) is indeed 33-31 SNP over Labour however today's YouGov Sun on Sunday sub sample (of 160 people!) is 41-24 SNP over Labour.
What is more the Sunday Mirror Comres sub sample (of 156 people!) is 47-22 SNP over Labour.
I think Carlotta you should temper your enthusiasm for an SNP "plunge" to a 10 per cent lead and only winning 26 more seats! That enthusiasm must be great since you were posting about it at 2am and again at 6.42 am.
Are you a) a night shift worker b) an insomniac c) a generic group of right wing posters working in shifts?
All that the polls (both aggregate sub samples) and full polls tell us right now is that the SNP has a double digit lead over Labour in Scotland. If Mr Milliband had a 10 per cent lead over the Tories in any poll in the UK then the game would be up for Cameron.
Marvellous to see the usual suspects deciding Panelbase is now the gold standard. Once you start upholding SLab as your last, great hope, I guess any reverse ferret is possible.
The Sunday Times seems to be taking a decidedly different view on the poll's implications compared to the headlines on here.
Jason Allardyce @SundayTimesSco · 59 mins 59 minutes ago Dreadful poll findings for Scottish Labour in today's Sunday Times poll - Murphy not exactly Moses coming down Mount Sinai says John Curtice
Jason Allardyce @SundayTimesSco · 59 mins 59 minutes ago SNP set to be Westminster kingmakers, says today's Sunday Times poll
Here's Curtice's full write up, which pulls all the various strands together:
Putting this Panelbase into Scottish UNS calculation gives:
SNP 35 Lab 20 LD 2 Con 2
The Scottish seats need huge swings to win. For example, even with a swing of 10% to the SNP, Labour only loses 3 seats. 12% gives the SNP, 7 Labour seats.
This shows how big the swing to the SNP still is compared to GE2010. 16% [ latest Panelbase ]
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
To be fair to Cameron, belief that 9/11 was an inside job is most prevalent in the Muslim world, where it goes hand in hand with the belief that it was Jews doing it. So most 9/11 conspiracy theorists do believe it was a Jewish plot, even if a minority (such as yourself) do not.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Because this government is a Coalition Govt. And not a Conservative Govt. Of course the LibDems leave no stone unturned in their efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Of course, if 50,000 UKIP voters in those seats the Tories failed to win had voted blue instead, you would have seen how much closer they could have got to the world they want to see under a blue government. Such is life....
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Because this government is a Coalition Govt. And not a Conservative Govt. Of course the LibDems leave no stone unturned in their efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Of course, if 50,000 UKIP voters in those seats the Tories failed to win had voted blue instead, you would have seen how much closer they could have got to the world they want to see under a blue government. Such is life....
Are you seriously suggesting that the LDs proposed this current wave of illiberal security theatre nonsense. Measures which Clegg has been around the media saying are unacceptable and he doesn't support them ?
Hitchens is mad as a box of frogs, but he does sometimes make sound points. The threat to freedom of speech isn't just from gun-toting maniacs, but from politicians who are mendacious, weak, ignorant and unable or unwilling to stand up for hard won liberties.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
To be fair to Cameron, belief that 9/11 was an inside job is most prevalent in the Muslim world, where it goes hand in hand with the belief that it was Jews doing it. So most 9/11 conspiracy theorists do believe it was a Jewish plot, even if a minority (such as yourself) do not.
I believe it was deep state elements and rogue networks within the US Government - and that many more (including now it seems the British Government) are responsible for its suppression (I use the term suppression not 'cover up', because few elements of the story are 'covered up' in any meaningful sense). For me the ethnicity or religious belief of those involved is not a focus. For others it obviously is.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Because this government is a Coalition Govt. And not a Conservative Govt. Of course the LibDems leave no stone unturned in their efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Of course, if 50,000 UKIP voters in those seats the Tories failed to win had voted blue instead, you would have seen how much closer they could have got to the world they want to see under a blue government. Such is life....
I doubt if it's the Lib Dems who are pushing for the sort of legislation Hitchens is criticising.
Are we to understand that last night's YouGov poll in the Sun on Sunday replaced YG's usual poll in The Sunday Times, as I have seen no reference to the latter?
Interesting to note that the Sun have SNP 41% - SLAB 24%, whereas the ST split is SNP 33% - SLAB 31% !!
Thanks calum - strange that the Sunday Times poll received no PB thread coverage at all, but then again I suppose it was the one showing the best result for the Tories.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Just the other day several Conservative supporters on here argued that UKIP voters were like people that wanted to buy bananas from a grocers that only sold apples and would have to just accept bananas weren't available. When it was argued that the grocer could remain in business by selling both apples and bananas, they said the banana-likers would just have to buy apples, because otherwise the shop would be replaced by pet store that only sold dog-food, which is worse than apples.
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
I think most people would prefer to trust their safety to professionals in M15 and not amateur sleuths.
Back in the early 90s the US government tried to tackle the same issue of encryption making the NSA’s job difficult by creating a standard for hardware with a backdoor built in. They hoped this NSA designed Clipper chip would replace all the other common cryptosystems that were in use at the time.
The Clipper chip used an NSA designed cipher called Skipjack, and the system encrypted data into a message format that carried an additional payload called the Law Enforcement Access Field, which contained data that would enable the message encryption key to be recovered.
The idea of the LEAF is that authorised parties would be able to decrypt the LEAF and then recover the key used to encrypt the whole message, but the LEAF had a problem, it’s own integrity was inadequately protected, which meant that it was possible to replace the real LEAF with a bogus but valid LEAF that locked out the authorised parties.
That pretty much did for the Clipper chip, as if the LEAF didn’t work there was much point to the Clipper chip anymore. But it could have been much worse. The misdesigned LEAF meant that the backdoor was broken, but consider what it would have meant if the misdesinged LEAF had insteaded revealed the encryption key? Every user of the Clipper chip would in effect be sending their messages unprotected. If Clipper had taken off, and such a flaw was found at a later date the effects would have been disastrous, and that would be even more so today.
Now if the extremely clever and well funded NSA can cock-up the design of a backdoor into a cryptosystem do we really want the UK to go down a similar path where every bit of data that we encrypt — and that is a vast number of services we rely on purely to keep the country going — is protected by a system where a cock-up would have catastrophic effects?
A even better question might be why does a supposedly politically savvy person like David Cameron want to put the entire UK’s communications eggs in one basket? If it ever goes wrong it will have a terminal effect on the government of the day.
Just the other day several Conservative supporters on here argued that UKIP voters were like people that wanted to buy bananas from a grocers that only sold apples and would have to just accept bananas weren't available. When it was argued that the grocer could remain in business by selling both apples and bananas, they said the banana-likers would just have to buy apples, because otherwise the shop would be replaced by pet store that only sold dog-food, which is worse than apples.
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
The problem on the right seems to be that some want apples and no bananas and others want bananas and no apples. None of you seem to be in the market for a fruit salad.
A even better question might be why does a supposedly politically savvy person like David Cameron want to put the entire UK’s communications eggs in one basket? If it ever goes wrong it will have a terminal effect on the government of the day.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Just the other day several Conservative supporters on here argued that UKIP voters were like people that wanted to buy bananas from a grocers that only sold apples and would have to just accept bananas weren't available. When it was argued that the grocer could remain in business by selling both apples and bananas, they said the banana-likers would just have to buy apples, because otherwise the shop would be replaced by pet store that only sold dog-food, which is worse than apples.
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
It's a terrible analogy, amusing though it is to refer to UKIP as the bananas party.
A better analogy would be to envisage UKIP supporters as customers who want to buy durian from a conventional fruiterers. "How unreasonable the fruiterer is", they cry, "not to stock this variety of fruit. Surely he should see that he should be trying to widen his range to maximise his appeal?"
But if the fruiterer ever did succumb to the clamour, many of the current customers would refuse to countenance stepping into such a foul-smelling establishment.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Because this government is a Coalition Govt. And not a Conservative Govt. Of course the LibDems leave no stone unturned in their efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Of course, if 50,000 UKIP voters in those seats the Tories failed to win had voted blue instead, you would have seen how much closer they could have got to the world they want to see under a blue government. Such is life....
Except a great deal of the policies that have offended blue voters have had nothing to do with the Lib Dems, including a refusal to negotiate over limits to EU migration, the ceding of British protections to the EAW, the snooper's charter, the encryption ban, continuous cock-ups at the Home Office, contributing to Eurozone bailouts etc etc.
Even on civil liberties alone, had the government announced they were rolling back the big brother state, bringing in warrants for the security services, removing anti-free speech laws, etc etc, the Lib Dems would have been on board.
I'm confused. The most recent poll in that list shows the SNP ahead by 17%. The table is badly laid out and cluttered with extra stuff which is confusing.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Because this government is a Coalition Govt. And not a Conservative Govt. Of course the LibDems leave no stone unturned in their efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Of course, if 50,000 UKIP voters in those seats the Tories failed to win had voted blue instead, you would have seen how much closer they could have got to the world they want to see under a blue government. Such is life....
Believing your own propaganda is a surefire way to lose contact with those you need to convince to vote for you.
Conservative difficulties in keeping supporters aboard have very little to do with LDs or UKIP and lots to do with their failure to many a broad church.
Sturgeon: Very or Quite Satisfied-42% Very or Quite Dissatisfied-32%
Murphy: Very or Quite Satisfied-21% Very or Quite Dissatisfied-33%
Not enough to offset the utterly dire approval ratings for Milliband in Scotland.
Perhaps worse still for Labour in Scotland is that a significant element of the population appear not to care whether the Tories or Labour win.
That potentially removes such people from being influenced by the only real card Labour have had to play for generation(s) in Scotland-"Vote Labour to keep the Tories out."
Panelbase asked that question last month
Which of the following possible General Election outcomes do you think would be best for Scotland: A Labour Government with no overall majority and with the Scottish National Party holding the balance of power – 35% A Labour Government with an overall majority – 19% A Conservative Government with an overall majority – 13% A Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition – 4% A Labour/Liberal Democrat coalition – 3% None of these/ Don’t know – 26%
Just the other day several Conservative supporters on here argued that UKIP voters were like people that wanted to buy bananas from a grocers that only sold apples and would have to just accept bananas weren't available. When it was argued that the grocer could remain in business by selling both apples and bananas, they said the banana-likers would just have to buy apples, because otherwise the shop would be replaced by pet store that only sold dog-food, which is worse than apples.
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
The problem on the right seems to be that some want apples and no bananas and others want bananas and no apples. None of you seem to be in the market for a fruit salad.
Why do you include "on the right"? Believing in things and disagreeing on details with people you're broadly in line with occurs across the political spectrum, does it not?
It's a terrible analogy, amusing though it is to refer to UKIP as the bananas party.
A better analogy would be to envisage UKIP supporters as customers who want to buy durian from a conventional fruiterers. "How unreasonable the fruiterer is", they cry, "not to stock this variety of fruit. Surely he should see that he should be trying to widen his range to maximise his appeal?"
But if the fruiterer ever did succumb to the clamour, many of the current customers would refuse to countenance stepping into such a foul-smelling establishment.
Except that policies desired by the blue defectors - control of immigration, basic civil liberties, etc - are indeed very common things throughout the world's developed democracies, so not a rare fruit at all. A quick look at opinion polls and recent electoral history also shows pretty clearly that such policies would not cost votes. So the 'foul smell' claim is also completely absurd.
In this argument the other day, I listed three policies that would likely bring back the majority of blue defectors. Not a single Tory on here could say that would put them off the party. Their problem isn't with the policies that would be needed to attract UKIP voters back. Their problem is they have a snobbery and prejudice against UKIP voters and don't want them in the party. Then they complain when they can't get a majority. This is entirely why the Tories are the toxic party. It's a general demeanour felt by many that the party doesn't like people like them.
"Just the other day several Conservative supporters on here argued that UKIP voters were like people that wanted to buy bananas from a grocers that only sold apples and would have to just accept bananas weren't available. When it was argued that the grocer could remain in business by selling both apples and bananas, they said the banana-likers would just have to buy apples, because otherwise the shop would be replaced by pet store that only sold dog-food, which is worse than apples."
Reminds me of the man who went into a shop and asked the shopkeeper for a lb of apples.
"I'm very sorry but I don't sell apples. I'm a mohel" said the shopkeeper
"Well why the Hell have you got apples in your window?"
F1: time is short for Marussia and Caterham. Testing starts early February, and if Caterham isn't there it looks like they'll be out. Marussia seems dead, just not buried yet.
If we have 18 cars it'd be stupid giving points down to 10th place.
It's a terrible analogy, amusing though it is to refer to UKIP as the bananas party.
A better analogy would be to envisage UKIP supporters as customers who want to buy durian from a conventional fruiterers. "How unreasonable the fruiterer is", they cry, "not to stock this variety of fruit. Surely he should see that he should be trying to widen his range to maximise his appeal?"
But if the fruiterer ever did succumb to the clamour, many of the current customers would refuse to countenance stepping into such a foul-smelling establishment.
Except that policies desired by the blue defectors - control of immigration, basic civil liberties, etc - are indeed very common things throughout the world's developed democracies, so not a rare fruit at all. A quick look at opinion polls and recent electoral history also shows pretty clearly that such policies would not cost votes. So the 'foul smell' claim is also completely absurd.
In this argument the other day, I listed three policies that would likely bring back the majority of blue defectors. Not a single Tory on here could say that would put them off the party. Their problem isn't with the policies that would be needed to attract UKIP voters back. Their problem is they have a snobbery and prejudice against UKIP voters and don't want them in the party. Then they complain when they can't get a majority. This is entirely why the Tories are the toxic party. It's a general demeanour felt by many that the party doesn't like people like them.
Odd to make that assertion on a day when the Conservative party polls relatively well on likeability.
And believe what you like, but there is abundant evidence that many centrist voters are put off even by the limited pandering to kippers that has already taken place. You just close your eyes to it.
Have you considered how many firms would relocate because they can no longer trade safely in the uk? Amongst other things this bill would have to end is the use of secure VPN's.
Have you considered the damage to the growing ecommerce business in this country due to the increased danger of doing ecommerce in a non secure environment
How many of these app's and operating systems would roll over and put in backdoors for Cameron and how many would just say "Its only 60 million people and the bad publicity from complying would damage us more than the profit to be made".
You already have major firms defying the wishes of the us government and implementing end to end encryption for users that the company can't hand over the keys for. You think they will roll over for Cameron?
On top of it all how many of your citizens are you going to brand a criminal because they step around the law, not necessarily to get encryption but they want to continue access to their favourite app or social media outlet
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
It's a terrible analogy, amusing though it is to refer to UKIP as the bananas party.
A better analogy would be to envisage UKIP supporters as customers who want to buy durian from a conventional fruiterers. "How unreasonable the fruiterer is", they cry, "not to stock this variety of fruit. Surely he should see that he should be trying to widen his range to maximise his appeal?"
But if the fruiterer ever did succumb to the clamour, many of the current customers would refuse to countenance stepping into such a foul-smelling establishment.
No that's a bad analogy. UKIP voters aren't asking for something obscure and left field, but a return to something they liked, made sense to them, and is widely popular
They are customers that want to go into their favourite café and order an English Breakfast and read the football in The Sun but are insulted & ridiculed by its new owner for their choice and told they must eat from the new menu that only offers Granola or muesli, and the newspaper is The Guardian
When they choose to go to another café the Granola seller then starts saying he is going to start doing fry ups again soon if they come back and eat Granola for a while, and when that doesn't work makes a half arsed effort and serves up the worst fry up in the world as a last ditch attempt to win them back.. but they've decided they prefer the atmosphere and food in their new café now
Just the other day several Conservative supporters on here argued that UKIP voters were like people that wanted to buy bananas from a grocers that only sold apples and would have to just accept bananas weren't available. When it was argued that the grocer could remain in business by selling both apples and bananas, they said the banana-likers would just have to buy apples, because otherwise the shop would be replaced by pet store that only sold dog-food, which is worse than apples.
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
The problem on the right seems to be that some want apples and no bananas and others want bananas and no apples. None of you seem to be in the market for a fruit salad.
While there are cases of this, I'm not sure it's really true. I guess most non-defecting Tories in the party want a policy platform of being pro-business, a balanced budget, tough on crime etc. Meanwhile the UKIP defectors want pre-Labour levels of immigration, protections for civil liberties, and a tough negotiation with the EU over repatriation powers. I don't think many of the former lot would be upset by the second lot (a few Ken Clarke devotees aside), or vice versa. It's just the first lot dislike the second lot, and don't want them in the party.
And believe what you like, but there is abundant evidence that many centrist voters are put off even by the limited pandering to kippers that has already taken place. You just close your eyes to it.
Why do you include "on the right"? Believing in things and disagreeing on details with people you're broadly in line with occurs across the political spectrum, does it not?
A) Because I was responding to a post about the right and B ) Because I was joking about the matter
I've noticed that most jokey remarks, regardless of who tells them, almost always go undetected in the bubbling cauldron of earnestness that is PB so that's why I included the winking smilie at the end of my comments. Clearly this isn't enough - maybe all non-serious remarks made on PB should be topped and tailed with *THIS IS INTENDED AS A JOKE* so that there's slightly less room for these misunderstandings?
And believe what you like, but there is abundant evidence that many centrist voters are put off even by the limited pandering to kippers that has already taken place. You just close your eyes to it.
Poor man. Professional driver, so regular health checks, too.
It was, nonetheless, a mistake to put out that statement saying his identity would "never" be released. It was odd, and merely fuelled rumours.
Either way, now there is no need for secrecy there must surely be an inquest (FAI in Scotland?). Questions need answering: was the lorry maintained properly? No emergency brake? Was that the right route on a hugely busy shopping day?
If I was a relative of the dead, I'd want those questions answered PDFQ.
And so they damn’ well should be. SOMETHING went wrong, that’s beyond the bl*****g obvious. People often mock "Elf ’n Safety but there may well be something added, on the lines of the answers to Mr T’s questions. Just because it’s only happened quite like this once, doesn’t mean something like it hasn’t happened before ....... miracle no-one killed etc ...... or can’t again.
It's a terrible analogy, amusing though it is to refer to UKIP as the bananas party.
A better analogy would be to envisage UKIP supporters as customers who want to buy durian from a conventional fruiterers. "How unreasonable the fruiterer is", they cry, "not to stock this variety of fruit. Surely he should see that he should be trying to widen his range to maximise his appeal?"
But if the fruiterer ever did succumb to the clamour, many of the current customers would refuse to countenance stepping into such a foul-smelling establishment.
Except that policies desired by the blue defectors - control of immigration, basic civil liberties, etc - are indeed very common things throughout the world's developed democracies, so not a rare fruit at all. A quick look at opinion polls and recent electoral history also shows pretty clearly that such policies would not cost votes. So the 'foul smell' claim is also completely absurd.
In this argument the other day, I listed three policies that would likely bring back the majority of blue defectors. Not a single Tory on here could say that would put them off the party. Their problem isn't with the policies that would be needed to attract UKIP voters back. Their problem is they have a snobbery and prejudice against UKIP voters and don't want them in the party. Then they complain when they can't get a majority. This is entirely why the Tories are the toxic party. It's a general demeanour felt by many that the party doesn't like people like them.
Odd to make that assertion on a day when the Conservative party polls relatively well on likeability.
And believe what you like, but there is abundant evidence that many centrist voters are put off even by the limited pandering to kippers that has already taken place. You just close your eyes to it.
We are about to see who is right. If the Tories get elected, they were right, if it eventually looks like they shed 2 votes on the right for every 1 they picked up in the middle, they were wrong.
I'm amazed by the number of people who think the make-up of the government post-May will simply be determined by whatever Cameron/Miliband/Clegg/Salmond(?)/whoever has the numbers. HenryG has already said he doesn't see the Labour party endorsing a coalition with the Lib Dems. Cameron has no cash in the bank with his MPs and they won't make it easy for him. Many grassroots Lib Dems want to go back into opposition to rebuild. They'll all be tied down by their own parties whilst whoever is leading for the SNP and DUP can make hay.
No that's a bad analogy. UKIP voters aren't asking for something obscure and left field, but a return to something they liked, made sense to them, and is widely popular
What are they missing that they've always had? For example, immigration is one of their big issues, but Commonwealth citizens could stay and work unrestricted until 1962, and the big restrictions weren't until 1972, then Britain joined the EU in 1973 resulting in an open door to somebody else.
There's gay marriage, I guess. Are UKIP still against gay marriage?
Have you considered how many firms would relocate because they can no longer trade safely in the uk? Amongst other things this bill would have to end is the use of secure VPN's.
Have you considered the damage to the growing ecommerce business in this country due to the increased danger of doing ecommerce in a non secure environment
This is quite a serious point, Huawei — which is the largest telecoms equipment manufacturer — gets locked out of bidding for various projects by governments who are suspicious of the company simply because it is Chinese.
Some US companies have complained that the Snowden revelations — about agents within companies, tampering with standards, and intercepting shipped equipment — have damaged their business as well. US networking and telecom companies are perceived as either being too close to the NSA, or within the remit of draconian US surveillance laws.
If Britain is perceived as being a country where the government has made all companies add back doors to their software and hardware that will not be good for the reputation of those companies overseas, even in cases where the products they are offering are back door free.
If a UK company has products where encryption is an integral part they probably will consider if the UK remains a good place to be based should Cameron get the chance to carry out his plans.
On top of it all how many of your citizens are you going to brand a criminal because they step around the law, not necessarily to get encryption but they want to continue access to their favourite app or social media outlet
Not to mention our international standing as being the only country do it beside Iran, Syria, Russia and North Korea (none of whom have had much success despite being de facto police states)
Even the French figured it out. France used to have hugely draconian encryption laws, jail terms for sending anything other than in plain text. Then through the 90's they realised it was killing their competitiveness, and completely stopped any progress in ecommerce and retreated, such that by 2004 they had basically scrapped the law completely. Are we proposing to go the opposite direction, the must be rubbing their hands together in glee.
The Finance Industry, responsible for basically a third of our GDP wont run without end-to-end encryption, and they won't trust any government agency to keep the keys safe for them, they will be gone in a shot if this happens.
* Yes I am aware I thought France still had the ban, have been reading up on it since!
No that's a bad analogy. UKIP voters aren't asking for something obscure and left field, but a return to something they liked, made sense to them, and is widely popular
What are they missing that they've always had? For example, immigration is one of their big issues, but Commonwealth citizens could stay and work unrestricted until 1962, and the big restrictions weren't until 1972, then Britain joined the EU in 1973 resulting in an open door to somebody else.
There's gay marriage, I guess. Are UKIP still against gay marriage?
They wouldn't do anything to change it, I don't know how to tell if they are for or against it.
I am talking about UKIP supporters who are ex Tories and the analogies were all made to reflect the decision to return or not, so not really anything to do with what you mention
(Off Topic) Film about the reconstruction of London Bridge station in the 1970s. At 2 minutes 37 seconds there is a useful historical reminder (for us oldies) or a history lesson (for youngsters) about how people used to be able to open train doors (ridiculously narrow, with no thought of access for disabled people) even before the train had stopped.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
To be fair to Cameron, belief that 9/11 was an inside job is most prevalent in the Muslim world, where it goes hand in hand with the belief that it was Jews doing it. So most 9/11 conspiracy theorists do believe it was a Jewish plot, even if a minority (such as yourself) do not.
The US intelligence agencies must be conspiracy theorists too given their official report.
Sunil - It looks like you will soon have some stiff competition for ELBOW ....... I've just noticed this on UKPR from Anthony Wells dated 14 January: "Very soon I am going to launch a weighted average of the polls, the UKPR polling average. I’ve thought long and hard about this because generally speaking I don’t like polling averages. There is no statistical justification for a polling average – the different companies do slightly different things, they weight differently, ask different questions and include people who are more or less likely to vote and more or less certain for whom. Averaging them together isn’t the equivalent of one big poll with a smaller margin of error, it’s just mishmash of different methodologies. Neither does an average get you the better results – the true picture isn’t normally the average of the polls, in fact, when compared to elections the poll that’s worst for Labour tends to be the best. So, with all that in mind why am I doing it? Two reasons: the first is that there is demand for it, and if I don’t provide it other people will, and will do it less well."
The emboldened pre-penultimate sentence is interesting and in fact reinforces what OGH has often stated, although not of late it has to be said.
Hitchens is mad as a box of frogs, but he does sometimes make sound points. The threat to freedom of speech isn't just from gun-toting maniacs, but from politicians who are mendacious, weak, ignorant and unable or unwilling to stand up for hard won liberties.
Curtice is surely right in his analysis of this poll (linked below).
"As many as 46% [of Scots] think the fall in the price of oil has weakened the case for independence. Now, of course, many of those who take that view are committed unionists. But 22% of SNP supporters (and the same proportion of those who voted Yes in September) also share this view" ... Salmond and Sturgeon lied. This will surely hurt them in Holyrood in 2016, the question is how much it will hurt them before GE 2015.
At the risk of being boring - it is also the volatility of oil prices. And for comparison http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4a83b09e-811c-11e4-896c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PAiRHz2a ''Norway’s central bank had unexpectedly cut interest rates to a record low as the country reels from the impact of the slump in oil prices.'' ''the Norwegian government struggling to formulate a response ... resisted the pleas of trade unions representing petroleum workers to prop up the sector'' ''Growth forecasts have been slashed for next year'' And this was with the price at $65
I'm confused. The most recent poll in that list shows the SNP ahead by 17%. The table is badly laid out and cluttered with extra stuff which is confusing.
I have worked out why I was confused. It is a combination of the facts that (a) the list is in the wrong order (reverse chronological); (b) the list is cluttered up with extra unwanted information;
and (most importantly of all)
(c) some unbelievably idiotic booliak wrote "2014" at the top of the table instead of "2015". I had been trying to read the table in chronological order going down.
(Off Topic) Film about the reconstruction of London Bridge station in the 1970s. At 2 minutes 37 seconds there is a useful historical reminder (for us oldies) or a history lesson (for youngsters) about how people used to be able to open train doors (ridiculously narrow, with no thought of access for disabled people) even before the train had stopped.
Remember those; an acquaintance got pushed out of the train as everyone was trying to get "first place" at the upcoming station and broke his leg very badly. Equally, in my youth other acquaintances used to climb out of the door while the train was moving and get into the next compartment. Those "compartments" were sealed units, too. Quite useful if travelling with ones girl-friend, threatening if with an "enemy".
I don't believe this poll is an outlier. From what I hear the gloss is rapidly fading from Nicola and as predicted Murphy is proving a smart operator. As Westminster's obviously a two horse race the Nat's are going to get squeezed. The desire to get rid of the Tories will always trump a wistful vision of what might have been. Also Murphy's brilliant poster won't have done any harm
Poor man. Professional driver, so regular health checks, too.
It was, nonetheless, a mistake to put out that statement saying his identity would "never" be released. It was odd, and merely fuelled rumours.
Either way, now there is no need for secrecy there must surely be an inquest (FAI in Scotland?). Questions need answering: was the lorry maintained properly? No emergency brake? Was that the right route on a hugely busy shopping day?
If I was a relative of the dead, I'd want those questions answered PDFQ.
I think you are forgetting that they never said 'never' - only that his EMPLOYER said that it would not be doing the releasing, but by implication leaving it open to the appropriate agencies.
Hitchens is mad as a box of frogs, but he does sometimes make sound points. The threat to freedom of speech isn't just from gun-toting maniacs, but from politicians who are mendacious, weak, ignorant and unable or unwilling to stand up for hard won liberties.
Good morning Mr. D., I understand that you might not wish to fall foul of the policies of the site by not plugging your short story too often even though at least the beginning of it is rather good. My question is how do we get to read the rest of it? Is it a subscription site, if so where do we sign up and pay? Leaving your readers up in the air and wanting to know what happens next is great advertising but serving the hors d'oeuvres without a main course to follow is just cruelty.
"From personal experience, talking to People on both sides, patients and staff, reading the papers, etc., etc., there are definitely major problems in the NHS in Lothian which are being discretely buried. "
More anecdotal comment (just like Roger) which I do not doubt has sadly a basis in fact, but in political terms fails to recognise that recent polling has shown the SNP remain the most trusted on the NHS.
As I (almost) said elsewhere, only the institutional unionism of BBC Scotland is allowing Labour to attack the SNP while ignoring their own abject failure in Wales.
Nor their previous failures in Scotland, SHS whilst it may have problems would have been far worse in labour hands.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
Curtice is surely right in his analysis of this poll (linked below).
"As many as 46% [of Scots] think the fall in the price of oil has weakened the case for independence. Now, of course, many of those who take that view are committed unionists. But 22% of SNP supporters (and the same proportion of those who voted Yes in September) also share this view"
So more than fifth of the theoretical YES vote has fallen away, as the price of oil has jumped out the windae. That has to be bad for indyreffers, and Nats. The Nats blatantly lied about iScotland's immediate economic stability; they blatantly lied about the income they could reasonably expect from North Sea Oil. And the lies are now being revealed.
Salmond and Sturgeon lied. This will surely hurt them in Holyrood in 2016, the question is how much it will hurt them before GE 2015.
The UK Gmt was using much the same range of oil price figures. Were they lying too? I think you are putting too much weight on the concept of 'lying'. And independence would not have been till 2016-17 anyway, so we will see what the price is then.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again.
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Carlotta (6.42) should not place his/her faith in sub samples unless they are aggregated over a period of time.
Today's YouGov Sunday Times Scottish sub sample (of 136 people!) is indeed 33-31 SNP over Labour however today's YouGov Sun on Sunday sub sample (of 160 people!) is 41-24 SNP over Labour.
What is more the Sunday Mirror Comres sub sample (of 156 people!) is 47-22 SNP over Labour.
I think Carlotta you should temper your enthusiasm for an SNP "plunge" to a 10 per cent lead and only winning 26 more seats! That enthusiasm must be great since you were posting about it at 2am and again at 6.42 am.
Are you a) a night shift worker b) an insomniac c) a generic group of right wing posters working in shifts?
All that the polls (both aggregate sub samples) and full polls tell us right now is that the SNP has a double digit lead over Labour in Scotland. If Mr Milliband had a 10 per cent lead over the Tories in any poll in the UK then the game would be up for Cameron.
Of the Tory establishment more like, some ghastly Scottish Tory if you are to believe her as well, if indeed you believe she is in fact a she. A plant for sure.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again.
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Politicians of all colours seem to be trying hard not to mention it, telling people that the interest on the national debt is more than the Education budget should be understandable by most of the electorate.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again. Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Very true. No one wants cuts if they are unnecessary. Unfortunately some voters think they have a right to have unfunded government spending.
Curtice is surely right in his analysis of this poll (linked below).
"As many as 46% [of Scots] think the fall in the price of oil has weakened the case for independence. Now, of course, many of those who take that view are committed unionists. But 22% of SNP supporters (and the same proportion of those who voted Yes in September) also share this view"
So more than fifth of the theoretical YES vote has fallen away, as the price of oil has jumped out the windae. That has to be bad for indyreffers, and Nats. The Nats blatantly lied about iScotland's immediate economic stability; they blatantly lied about the income they could reasonably expect from North Sea Oil. And the lies are now being revealed.
Salmond and Sturgeon lied. This will surely hurt them in Holyrood in 2016, the question is how much it will hurt them before GE 2015.
Yet we see another poll pointing differently.............
The survey, conducted for think tank British Future, found that despite the No result of last September's referendum, almost half (48%) of Scots believe independence will happen in 10 years. Another 18% believe it will occur within 50 years, while just 17% said they think it will never happen.
Nearly half of English voters polled also believe Scotland will gain independence, with just 28% saying it will never happen.
The report notes that the idea the referendum was a once-in-lifetime vote seems "rather less likely now, given the way in which the Scottish National Party have turned the disappointment of the referendum result into a nationalist surge".
When the question of independence will be put again could, it suggests, become "one of the big political questions during the second half of 2015".
PS: your pathetic comment about SNP lying is pathetic, only a cretin could post such guff.
Kevin McKenna makes the not unreasonable point in The Observer that the unionists spent years trying to hide the truth from (lying to?) the Scots about the boon from north sea oil. Perhaps in that context it isn't too surprising that the Nats can be economical with the truth. That's the way the game is played. Still better to have lied 30 years ago than 6 months ago. The unionists should be a little careful I would have thought though, it's dangerous to talk Scotland down, make it seem to wee for independence. Best bet would be to go after individuals. Don't dismiss nationalism, just point out that their leadership cannot be trusted and are happy to lie through their teeth to get whatever they want.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again.
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
I agree that a Greece/Eurozone meltdown would probably have a big impact. Imo, that's the only reason people were even slightly accepting of austerity back in 2010-11 -- because it gave the Tories a chance to point and say "see, that's what will happen if we don't Do Something".
Without that vivid example of disaster, people just aren't going to see why it even matters whether we have a deficit or not, and they won't see why public services and living standards should suffer just to bring it down.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again.
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Politicians of all colours seem to be trying hard not to mention it, telling people that the interest on the national debt is more than the Education budget should be understandable by most of the electorate.
If that did become a popular meme during the election campaign, I wonder which party it would favour.
Poor man. Professional driver, so regular health checks, too.
It was, nonetheless, a mistake to put out that statement saying his identity would "never" be released. It was odd, and merely fuelled rumours.
Either way, now there is no need for secrecy there must surely be an inquest (FAI in Scotland?). Questions need answering: was the lorry maintained properly? No emergency brake? Was that the right route on a hugely busy shopping day?
If I was a relative of the dead, I'd want those questions answered PDFQ.
I think you are forgetting that they never said 'never' - only that his EMPLOYER said that it would not be doing the releasing, but by implication leaving it open to the appropriate agencies.
Astonishing to see what some PBers made of it.
Considering the previous hysterics from the big jessie after minor events in London , it is hardly surprising he jumped to the wrong conclusion.
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again.
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
I agree that a Greece/Eurozone meltdown would probably have a big impact. Imo, that's the only reason people were even slightly accepting of austerity back in 2010-11 -- because it gave the Tories a chance to point and say "see, that's what will happen if we don't Do Something".
Without that vivid example of disaster, people just aren't going to buy the commentariat's insistence of the "economic facts of life" being that the deficit needs to be brought down, and they won't see why public services and living standards should suffer just to bring it down.
The irony is that the coalition has done such a good job of convincing people of its competence at book balancing that many don't think there is a problem any more. I'm sure a lot of people would think the national debt has fallen since 2010.
I heard a Lib Dem health minister being questioned this morning and saying after the election he wanted to increase spending on mental health. The interviewer asked if this was a pledge or an aspiration. He said it was a pledge.....
.....The Lib Dems are level with the Greens on 6%. Our democracy is clearly out of sync
Nick Clegg was on the radio just now saying "it's probably unlikely that he will be PM after the election" but that the most likely outcome is that the LibDems will remain in government with either the Tories or Labour... he then set out a series of 10 year pledges...
If you had to choose which of the following directions should the next government take?
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24% Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32% Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29% Don't know: 15%
We will see how much that drifts if Greece goes up in flames at the end of the month. There hasn't been much news about why having such a large deficit is bad in the last few months. Greece might vote to change that and flare up the whole debt/deficit argument again.
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Politicians of all colours seem to be trying hard not to mention it, telling people that the interest on the national debt is more than the Education budget should be understandable by most of the electorate.
If that did become a popular meme during the election campaign, I wonder which party it would favour.
CONs dont want to mention it because it will highlight that its still bad despite the austerity LABs dont want to mention it because it will remind people that they caused it in the first place
Kevin McKenna makes the not unreasonable point in The Observer that the unionists spent years trying to hide the truth from (lying to?) the Scots about the boon from north sea oil. Perhaps in that context it isn't too surprising that the Nats can be economical with the truth. That's the way the game is played. Still better to have lied 30 years ago than 6 months ago. The unionists should be a little careful I would have thought though, it's dangerous to talk Scotland down, make it seem to wee for independence. Best bet would be to go after individuals. Don't dismiss nationalism, just point out that their leadership cannot be trusted and are happy to lie through their teeth to get whatever they want.
Frank, when we see the lying cheating toerag alternatives, I am afraid the SNP appear to be saints, hence their popularity.
But Commonwealth immigration only got to unacceptable levels for about 15 years and then there was a political consensus to change the mad situation that had materialised. The same thing has now happened with the EU exept now the big three support the mad situation.
No that's a bad analogy. UKIP voters aren't asking for something obscure and left field, but a return to something they liked, made sense to them, and is widely popular
What are they missing that they've always had? For example, immigration is one of their big issues, but Commonwealth citizens could stay and work unrestricted until 1962, and the big restrictions weren't until 1972, then Britain joined the EU in 1973 resulting in an open door to somebody else.
There's gay marriage, I guess. Are UKIP still against gay marriage?
Apropos Free speech and being offensive to others:
Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 732, was a case heard before the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court regarding freedom of speech and breach of the peace. The decision upheld the freedom to express lawful matters in a way which other people might take great exception to; that the right to free speech, enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, includes the right to be offensive; and a police officer has no right to call upon a citizen to desist from lawful conduct. That others might react unlawfully does not itself render the actions of the speaker unlawful.
Lord Justice Sedley commented:
“Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having”
If the UKIP voters from the 2014 European Election say that only 53% of them will vote UKIP in the General Election (and 21% will vote Conservative, and so on) then that means that UKIP will only retain 2.3 million votes in 2015 out of the 4.3 million they got in 2014. And the turnout in the General Election will be 28 to 30 million (ish).
In other words, UKIP will only get about 8% of the votes, not the 15% which they are getting in the opinion polls at the moment. In other words, the UKIP vote will collapse substantially in time for polling day (just as I've always thought it would) and the Conservative Party will win by a landslide (like in 1987).
Kevin McKenna makes the not unreasonable point in The Observer that the unionists spent years trying to hide the truth from (lying to?) the Scots about the boon from north sea oil. Perhaps in that context it isn't too surprising that the Nats can be economical with the truth. That's the way the game is played. Still better to have lied 30 years ago than 6 months ago. The unionists should be a little careful I would have thought though, it's dangerous to talk Scotland down, make it seem to wee for independence. Best bet would be to go after individuals. Don't dismiss nationalism, just point out that their leadership cannot be trusted and are happy to lie through their teeth to get whatever they want.
Frank, when we see the lying cheating toerag alternatives, I am afraid the SNP appear to be saints, hence their popularity.
I would reluctantly agree. Cameron marching in favour of free speech whilst actively legislating to destroy it makes Salmond's blustering and obfuscations look positively trivial.
Mr. Llama, one episode will be released each month throughout the year (on the 15th/16th).
Ah, I see the old strategy used by Dickens and Dumas, amongst others. Fair enough, of course Dickens and Dumas published a bit more per episode and were able to leave their readers satisfied but still hungry to see happens next. The Count of Monte Cristo is a perhaps the finest example of that style of writing (I do wonder if he knew, other in the most general terms, how the plot was going to play out when he first started to publish).
Looking forward to 15 Feb, be sure to remind us when the next episode is released.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
So the evidence is so abundant you can't even cite it. Its amazing how people that claim to be evidence based suddenly bury their heads in the sand when it comes to this. The Tories have lost about seven points or so to UKIP. How many have they lost to the Lib Dems?
And believe what you like, but there is abundant evidence that many centrist voters are put off even by the limited pandering to kippers that has already taken place. You just close your eyes to it.
If the UKIP voters from the 2014 European Election say that only 53% of them will vote UKIP in the General Election (and 21% will vote Conservative, and so on) then that means that UKIP will only retain 2.3 million votes in 2015 out of the 4.3 million they got in 2014. And the turnout in the General Election will be 28 to 30 million (ish).
In other words, UKIP will only get about 8% of the votes, not the 15% which they are getting in the opinion polls at the moment. In other words, the UKIP vote will collapse substantially in time for polling day (just as I've always thought it would) and the Conservative Party will win by a landslide (like in 1987).
Is this a joke? Not all Ukip supporters will have voted in the European elections which are still regarded by many people as a complete waste of time. I can't see any serious downward momentum in the Ukip vote or much upward trend for the Tories. The polls are volatile though, so predictions are risky though yours is stretching it.
We are on the verge of founding Britain’s first Thought Police. Using the excuse of terrorism – whose main victim is considered thought – Theresa May’s Home Office is making a law which attacks free expression in this country as it has never been attacked before. We already have some dangerous laws on the books. The Civil Contingencies Act can be used to turn Britain into a dictatorship overnight, if politicians can find an excuse to activate it................
If that bill is as described its a complete disgrace. Can't see that many LDs voting blue when they find out about it either, I know quite a few blues that won't vote blue as well.
This government leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to stop blues from voting blue.
Cameron already warned us of this at the UN: 'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism' http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
Certainly you could argue that his implication was not what I, or nsnbc.me claim it to be, but the fact that legislation has now been tabled to make good his threat would seem to suggest otherwise.
" Ironically, and perhaps unfairly, NHS in crisis stories will boost Labour. HTH."
It isn't really ironic. Most people understand that government is responsible for funding the NHS not for running it. Everyone remembers how Labour-Gordon Brown in particular-pumped massive amounts of money into the service saving it from the depleted service it was becoming and had become under Thatcher and Major.
A Labour government in 2010 would have slashed the money given to the NHS.
What health services do you think they would have cut?
http://www2.labour.org.uk/uploads/TheLabourPartyManifesto-2010.pdf Labour Manifesto: "A Future Bankrupt For All" Page 4:3 " and over the next four years, we will deliver up to £20 billion of efficiencies in the frontline NHS, ensuring that every pound is reinvested in frontline care. "
Makes sense to me. It's a shame Labour seem to have retreated from this. Ring-fencing NHS spending is a great sound-bite, but the practical consequences mean that there are additional cuts elsewhere which actually put a far greater burden on the NHS than might otherwise be the case.
If the UKIP voters from the 2014 European Election say that only 53% of them will vote UKIP in the General Election (and 21% will vote Conservative, and so on) then that means that UKIP will only retain 2.3 million votes in 2015 out of the 4.3 million they got in 2014. And the turnout in the General Election will be 28 to 30 million (ish).
In other words, UKIP will only get about 8% of the votes, not the 15% which they are getting in the opinion polls at the moment. In other words, the UKIP vote will collapse substantially in time for polling day (just as I've always thought it would) and the Conservative Party will win by a landslide (like in 1987).
Is this a joke? Not all Ukip supporters will have voted in the European elections which are still regarded by many people as a complete waste of time. I can't see any serious downward momentum in the Ukip vote or much upward trend for the Tories. The polls are volatile though, so predictions are risky though yours is stretching it.
It seems broadly plausible to me. The EU is UKIPs supposed reason for existence. If it cannot get its vote out then, when can it?
Of course UKIP are peddling its anti immigrant hate campaign now but it was not shy about peddling it in the Euro's either.
Kevin McKenna makes the not unreasonable point in The Observer that the unionists spent years trying to hide the truth from (lying to?) the Scots about the boon from north sea oil. Perhaps in that context it isn't too surprising that the Nats can be economical with the truth. That's the way the game is played. Still better to have lied 30 years ago than 6 months ago. The unionists should be a little careful I would have thought though, it's dangerous to talk Scotland down, make it seem to wee for independence. Best bet would be to go after individuals. Don't dismiss nationalism, just point out that their leadership cannot be trusted and are happy to lie through their teeth to get whatever they want.
Frank, when we see the lying cheating toerag alternatives, I am afraid the SNP appear to be saints, hence their popularity.
I would reluctantly agree. Cameron marching in favour of free speech whilst actively legislating to destroy it makes Salmond's blustering and obfuscations look positively trivial.
Your notions are overwhelmingly hysterical. Or ignorant. I guess you have to spout rubbish to keep your fantasy world going.
Comments
'We know this world view; The peddling of lies that 9/11 as somehow a Jewish plot, or that the 7/7 attacks in London were staged. … We must be clear, to defeat the ideology of extremism, not just violent extremism'
http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/03/cameron-declares-war-uk-citizens/
-Note the inclusion of 'a jewish plot', to add the smear of racism. Intellectual enquiry into the causes of 'terror' is now to banned.
Is it an international world order confident of its version of events that attempts to ban the alternative from being discussed?
Carlotta (6.42) should not place his/her faith in sub samples unless they are aggregated over a period of time.
Today's YouGov Sunday Times Scottish sub sample (of 136 people!) is indeed 33-31 SNP over Labour however today's YouGov Sun on Sunday sub sample (of 160 people!) is 41-24 SNP over Labour.
What is more the Sunday Mirror Comres sub sample (of 156 people!) is 47-22 SNP over Labour.
I think Carlotta you should temper your enthusiasm for an SNP "plunge" to a 10 per cent lead and only winning 26 more seats! That enthusiasm must be great since you were posting about it at 2am and again at 6.42 am.
Are you a) a night shift worker b) an insomniac c) a generic group of right wing posters working in shifts?
All that the polls (both aggregate sub samples) and full polls tell us right now is that the SNP has a double digit lead over Labour in Scotland. If Mr Milliband had a 10 per cent lead over the Tories in any poll in the UK then the game would be up for Cameron.
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2015/01/reason-labour-smile-little/
SNP 35
Lab 20
LD 2
Con 2
The Scottish seats need huge swings to win. For example, even with a swing of 10% to the SNP, Labour only loses 3 seats. 12% gives the SNP, 7 Labour seats.
This shows how big the swing to the SNP still is compared to GE2010. 16% [ latest Panelbase ]
Of course, if 50,000 UKIP voters in those seats the Tories failed to win had voted blue instead, you would have seen how much closer they could have got to the world they want to see under a blue government. Such is life....
Amazingly, this was an analogy that the Tory supporters, not the UKIP supporters, came up with.
The Clipper chip used an NSA designed cipher called Skipjack, and the system encrypted data into a message format that carried an additional payload called the Law Enforcement Access Field, which contained data that would enable the message encryption key to be recovered.
The idea of the LEAF is that authorised parties would be able to decrypt the LEAF and then recover the key used to encrypt the whole message, but the LEAF had a problem, it’s own integrity was inadequately protected, which meant that it was possible to replace the real LEAF with a bogus but valid LEAF that locked out the authorised parties.
That pretty much did for the Clipper chip, as if the LEAF didn’t work there was much point to the Clipper chip anymore. But it could have been much worse. The misdesigned LEAF meant that the backdoor was broken, but consider what it would have meant if the misdesinged LEAF had insteaded revealed the encryption key? Every user of the Clipper chip would in effect be sending their messages unprotected. If Clipper had taken off, and such a flaw was found at a later date the effects would have been disastrous, and that would be even more so today.
Now if the extremely clever and well funded NSA can cock-up the design of a backdoor into a cryptosystem do we really want the UK to go down a similar path where every bit of data that we encrypt — and that is a vast number of services we rely on purely to keep the country going — is protected by a system where a cock-up would have catastrophic effects?
A even better question might be why does a supposedly politically savvy person like David Cameron want to put the entire UK’s communications eggs in one basket? If it ever goes wrong it will have a terminal effect on the government of the day.
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2015/01/reason-labour-smile-little/
The problem on the right seems to be that some want apples and no bananas and others want bananas and no apples. None of you seem to be in the market for a fruit salad.
(Like the other 1.8m UK citizens that had their webcam pictures intercepted without a warrant, or indeed them being an intelligence target of any sort)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/27/gchq-nsa-webcam-images-internet-yahoo
A better analogy would be to envisage UKIP supporters as customers who want to buy durian from a conventional fruiterers. "How unreasonable the fruiterer is", they cry, "not to stock this variety of fruit. Surely he should see that he should be trying to widen his range to maximise his appeal?"
But if the fruiterer ever did succumb to the clamour, many of the current customers would refuse to countenance stepping into such a foul-smelling establishment.
Even on civil liberties alone, had the government announced they were rolling back the big brother state, bringing in warrants for the security services, removing anti-free speech laws, etc etc, the Lib Dems would have been on board.
Conservative difficulties in keeping supporters aboard have very little to do with LDs or UKIP and lots to do with their failure to many a broad church.
Which of the following possible General Election outcomes do you think would be best for Scotland:
A Labour Government with no overall majority and with the Scottish National Party holding the balance of power – 35%
A Labour Government with an overall majority – 19%
A Conservative Government with an overall majority – 13%
A Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition – 4%
A Labour/Liberal Democrat coalition – 3%
None of these/ Don’t know – 26%
In this argument the other day, I listed three policies that would likely bring back the majority of blue defectors. Not a single Tory on here could say that would put them off the party. Their problem isn't with the policies that would be needed to attract UKIP voters back. Their problem is they have a snobbery and prejudice against UKIP voters and don't want them in the party. Then they complain when they can't get a majority. This is entirely why the Tories are the toxic party. It's a general demeanour felt by many that the party doesn't like people like them.
Reminds me of the man who went into a shop and asked the shopkeeper for a lb of apples.
"I'm very sorry but I don't sell apples. I'm a mohel" said the shopkeeper
"Well why the Hell have you got apples in your window?"
"Well what do you want me to put in my window?"
F1: time is short for Marussia and Caterham. Testing starts early February, and if Caterham isn't there it looks like they'll be out. Marussia seems dead, just not buried yet.
If we have 18 cars it'd be stupid giving points down to 10th place.
And believe what you like, but there is abundant evidence that many centrist voters are put off even by the limited pandering to kippers that has already taken place. You just close your eyes to it.
Have you considered how many firms would relocate because they can no longer trade safely in the uk? Amongst other things this bill would have to end is the use of secure VPN's.
Have you considered the damage to the growing ecommerce business in this country due to the increased danger of doing ecommerce in a non secure environment
How many of these app's and operating systems would roll over and put in backdoors for Cameron and how many would just say "Its only 60 million people and the bad publicity from complying would damage us more than the profit to be made".
You already have major firms defying the wishes of the us government and implementing end to end encryption for users that the company can't hand over the keys for. You think they will roll over for Cameron?
On top of it all how many of your citizens are you going to brand a criminal because they step around the law, not necessarily to get encryption but they want to continue access to their favourite app or social media outlet
They are customers that want to go into their favourite café and order an English Breakfast and read the football in The Sun but are insulted & ridiculed by its new owner for their choice and told they must eat from the new menu that only offers Granola or muesli, and the newspaper is The Guardian
When they choose to go to another café the Granola seller then starts saying he is going to start doing fry ups again soon if they come back and eat Granola for a while, and when that doesn't work makes a half arsed effort and serves up the worst fry up in the world as a last ditch attempt to win them back.. but they've decided they prefer the atmosphere and food in their new café now
and
B ) Because I was joking about the matter
I've noticed that most jokey remarks, regardless of who tells them, almost always go undetected in the bubbling cauldron of earnestness that is PB so that's why I included the winking smilie at the end of my comments. Clearly this isn't enough - maybe all non-serious remarks made on PB should be topped and tailed with *THIS IS INTENDED AS A JOKE* so that there's slightly less room for these misunderstandings?
People often mock "Elf ’n Safety but there may well be something added, on the lines of the answers to Mr T’s questions. Just because it’s only happened quite like this once, doesn’t mean something like it hasn’t happened before ....... miracle no-one killed etc ...... or can’t again.
Lab 33.3 (-0.1)
Con 31.7 (-0.6)
UKIP 16.1 (+1.4)
LD 7.1 (-0.5)
Grn 6.3 (-0.1)
Lab lead 1.6 (+0.5)
There's gay marriage, I guess. Are UKIP still against gay marriage?
Some US companies have complained that the Snowden revelations — about agents within companies, tampering with standards, and intercepting shipped equipment — have damaged their business as well. US networking and telecom companies are perceived as either being too close to the NSA, or within the remit of draconian US surveillance laws.
If Britain is perceived as being a country where the government has made all companies add back doors to their software and hardware that will not be good for the reputation of those companies overseas, even in cases where the products they are offering are back door free.
If a UK company has products where encryption is an integral part they probably will consider if the UK remains a good place to be based should Cameron get the chance to carry out his plans.
Even the French figured it out. France used to have hugely draconian encryption laws, jail terms for sending anything other than in plain text. Then through the 90's they realised it was killing their competitiveness, and completely stopped any progress in ecommerce and retreated, such that by 2004 they had basically scrapped the law completely. Are we proposing to go the opposite direction, the must be rubbing their hands together in glee.
The Finance Industry, responsible for basically a third of our GDP wont run without end-to-end encryption, and they won't trust any government agency to keep the keys safe for them, they will be gone in a shot if this happens.
* Yes I am aware I thought France still had the ban, have been reading up on it since!
I am talking about UKIP supporters who are ex Tories and the analogies were all made to reflect the decision to return or not, so not really anything to do with what you mention
Film about the reconstruction of London Bridge station in the 1970s. At 2 minutes 37 seconds there is a useful historical reminder (for us oldies) or a history lesson (for youngsters) about how people used to be able to open train doors (ridiculously narrow, with no thought of access for disabled people) even before the train had stopped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Qlnu9Gbdw
Out for 149 of 44
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/08/28/did-certain-foreign-governments-facilitate-the-911-attacks/
"Very soon I am going to launch a weighted average of the polls, the UKPR polling average. I’ve thought long and hard about this because generally speaking I don’t like polling averages. There is no statistical justification for a polling average – the different companies do slightly different things, they weight differently, ask different questions and include people who are more or less likely to vote and more or less certain for whom. Averaging them together isn’t the equivalent of one big poll with a smaller margin of error, it’s just mishmash of different methodologies. Neither does an average get you the better results – the true picture isn’t normally the average of the polls, in fact, when compared to elections the poll that’s worst for Labour tends to be the best.
So, with all that in mind why am I doing it? Two reasons: the first is that there is demand for it, and if I don’t provide it other people will, and will do it less well."
The emboldened pre-penultimate sentence is interesting and in fact reinforces what OGH has often stated, although not of late it has to be said.
And for comparison
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4a83b09e-811c-11e4-896c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PAiRHz2a
''Norway’s central bank had unexpectedly cut interest rates to a record low as the country reels from the impact of the slump in oil prices.''
''the Norwegian government struggling to formulate a response ... resisted the pleas of trade unions representing petroleum workers to prop up the sector''
''Growth forecasts have been slashed for next year''
And this was with the price at $65
(a) the list is in the wrong order (reverse chronological);
(b) the list is cluttered up with extra unwanted information;
and (most importantly of all)
(c) some unbelievably idiotic booliak wrote "2014" at the top of the table instead of "2015". I had been trying to read the table in chronological order going down.
Equally, in my youth other acquaintances used to climb out of the door while the train was moving and get into the next compartment.
Those "compartments" were sealed units, too. Quite useful if travelling with ones girl-friend, threatening if with an "enemy".
Astonishing to see what some PBers made of it.
149 (44)
Fastest ODI 50
Fastest ODI century
1 run short of the fastest 150
16 sixes from 44 balls (36%!)
Reduce government borrowing, at expense of public services: 24%
Increase spending on public services, even if government borrowing increases: 32%
Keep borrowing and spending about the same as now: 29%
Don't know: 15%
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/01/14/voters-prefer-spending-services-cutting-borrowing/
Support for cuts is always higher when there is news about it, otherwise it is difficult to get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
* Or indeed when there is news about the consequencies of having not done it, which I guess is also what you meant.
The survey, conducted for think tank British Future, found that despite the No result of last September's referendum, almost half (48%) of Scots believe independence will happen in 10 years. Another 18% believe it will occur within 50 years, while just 17% said they think it will never happen.
Nearly half of English voters polled also believe Scotland will gain independence, with just 28% saying it will never happen.
The report notes that the idea the referendum was a once-in-lifetime vote seems "rather less likely now, given the way in which the Scottish National Party have turned the disappointment of the referendum result into a nationalist surge".
When the question of independence will be put again could, it suggests, become "one of the big political questions during the second half of 2015".
PS: your pathetic comment about SNP lying is pathetic, only a cretin could post such guff.
Without that vivid example of disaster, people just aren't going to see why it even matters whether we have a deficit or not, and they won't see why public services and living standards should suffer just to bring it down.
Opinion polls also bringing EICIPM closer too.
Life is good!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30869585
He disagrees with Pope Happyslapper's suggestion punching people for being offensive is ok.
LABs dont want to mention it because it will remind people that they caused it in the first place
Apropos Free speech and being offensive to others: Lord Justice Sedley commented:
If the UKIP voters from the 2014 European Election say that only 53% of them will vote UKIP in the General Election (and 21% will vote Conservative, and so on) then that means that UKIP will only retain 2.3 million votes in 2015 out of the 4.3 million they got in 2014. And the turnout in the General Election will be 28 to 30 million (ish).
In other words, UKIP will only get about 8% of the votes, not the 15% which they are getting in the opinion polls at the moment. In other words, the UKIP vote will collapse substantially in time for polling day (just as I've always thought it would) and the Conservative Party will win by a landslide (like in 1987).
Looking forward to 15 Feb, be sure to remind us when the next episode is released.
Certainly you could argue that his implication was not what I, or nsnbc.me claim it to be, but the fact that legislation has now been tabled to make good his threat would seem to suggest otherwise.
Mrs BJ got 2 and she only picks based on names/colours FFS
Of course UKIP are peddling its anti immigrant hate campaign now but it was not shy about peddling it in the Euro's either.