I like in a marginal (Enfield North) but will likely be abroad on the day of the GE.
I'm not sure Enfield North will be all that marginal when it comes to it. If Labour dont take this back comfortably they are in for a very bad night. You can get a postal vote or appoint a proxy if you cant vote on the day.
Next to Brent Central, I see this as Labour's likeliest gain in London.
You'll not be surprised to hear I'm in favour of STV over FPTP - the truth of FPTP is that in the 500 or so safe seats, the electorate has no power to "change" the MP. The MP is changed via the selection process within the Party.
Neil Hamilton.
Rock solid Tory majority of 16,000+, ditched by a disapproving public.
No - dispatched by a single Independent candidate in the absence of a Labour or Lib Dem candidate and aided by thousands of former Conservatives deserting the Party in that election as they did right across the country.
Martin Bell won because the Labour and Lib Dems stood aside to give him every chance. That could happen anywhere and has happened in other places. A better example would be Wyre Forest in 2001.
Bell benefitted from a high and positive public profile and he received substantial financial and logistical help during his campaign which was extremely well run after a shaky start.
Indeed, and if he was 10th on the Conservative Party List, then what would have happened ?
- Myself - Sean Fear - Richard Tyndall - Casino Royale - isam - Luckyguy1983 - any other UKIP supporters on here
...which ones do you think the Conservatives are capable of winning back and what manifesto policies do you think it would take to win them back?
Sean is sort-of won back in that he has said he'd vote Conservative in a Con/Lab marginal if the candidate was right, and Casino is perhaps persuadable. The rest are lost causes, I'd have thought, (or are Labour->UKIP switchers) but are not typical of the Con->UKIP defectors/waverers whom I know.
What will win back those who are not lost causes? The economy, the economy and the economy, with a topping of Miliband.
Will this be enough? Dunno.
So out of all the UKIP supporters on here, you're writing all but two off as lost causes? And your suggested strategy for winning them back is limited to "the economy's doing great!" and "he's worse!"
No wonder the Tories are where they are. If you want to win voters back, here's a novel idea: talk to those voters and find out what's repelling them from the party. Then try to reach out to them with policies that address the difficult issues, but don't excessively offend the left flank.
I was being realistic, which I think is a good thing to be. But, as I said, the Kippers here are not at all representative.
The Sun should retaliate by having a naked (waist-up) picture of a lady, saying they were obliging Jo Swinson by showing the model without a bikini.
Getting worked up about Page 3, or women in bikinis, has always seemed to me like getting worked up about Carry On Films or Saucy Postcards. There's far more salacious material out there, just a couple of mouse clicks away (or in magazines like Cosmopolitan for example).
- Myself - Sean Fear - Richard Tyndall - Casino Royale - isam - Luckyguy1983 - any other UKIP supporters on here
...which ones do you think the Conservatives are capable of winning back and what manifesto policies do you think it would take to win them back?
Sean is sort-of won back in that he has said he'd vote Conservative in a Con/Lab marginal if the candidate was right, and Casino is perhaps persuadable. The rest are lost causes, I'd have thought, (or are Labour->UKIP switchers) but are not typical of the Con->UKIP defectors/waverers whom I know.
What will win back those who are not lost causes? The economy, the economy and the economy, with a topping of Miliband.
Will this be enough? Dunno.
So out of all the UKIP supporters on here, you're writing all but two off as lost causes? And your suggested strategy for winning them back is limited to "the economy's doing great!" and "he's worse!"
No wonder the Tories are where they are. If you want to win voters back, here's a novel idea: talk to those voters and find out what's repelling them from the party. Then try to reach out to them with policies that address the difficult issues, but don't excessively offend the left flank.
Sorry to butt in, but I was never a Conservative anyway so they should be happy that my UKIP vote means one less for Labour
If you want to win voters back, here's a novel idea: talk to those voters
I imagine that's that Tory activists are doing up and down the country, dont you?
Yeah, but that only matter's as a prerequisite for "Then try to reach out to them with policies that address the difficult issues, but don't excessively offend the left flank", which wont happen it seems.
The Sun should retaliate by having a naked (waist-up) picture of a lady, saying they were obliging Jo Swinson by showing the model without a bikini.
Getting worked up about Page 3, or women in bikinis, has always seemed to me like getting worked up about Carry On Films or Saucy Postcards. There's far more salacious material out there, just a couple of mouse clicks away (or in magazines like Cosmopolitan for example).
It's an easy way to generate some media grabbing hot air and noise, when one is too dim to think of anything intelligent on which to campaign. How do these people manage to become MPs?
Mr. F, not to mention the fact that if you don't like something, you don't have to buy it. Saying "I dislike this therefore it must be banned for everyone" is censorious bullshit, the same line of reasoning used by those that want to inflict blasphemy laws who don't even subscribe to their religion.
You'll not be surprised to hear I'm in favour of STV over FPTP - the truth of FPTP is that in the 500 or so safe seats, the electorate has no power to "change" the MP. The MP is changed via the selection process within the Party.
Neil Hamilton.
Rock solid Tory majority of 16,000+, ditched by a disapproving public.
No - dispatched by a single Independent candidate in the absence of a Labour or Lib Dem candidate and aided by thousands of former Conservatives deserting the Party in that election as they did right across the country.
Martin Bell won because the Labour and Lib Dems stood aside to give him every chance. That could happen anywhere and has happened in other places. A better example would be Wyre Forest in 2001.
Bell benefitted from a high and positive public profile and he received substantial financial and logistical help during his campaign which was extremely well run after a shaky start.
Indeed, and if he was 10th on the Conservative Party List, then what would have happened ?
I like in a marginal (Enfield North) but will likely be abroad on the day of the GE.
I'm not sure Enfield North will be all that marginal when it comes to it. If Labour dont take this back comfortably they are in for a very bad night. You can get a postal vote or appoint a proxy if you cant vote on the day.
Next to Brent Central, I see this as Labour's likeliest gain in London.
Hornsey and Wood Green should go red with relative ease too I expect.
If you want to win voters back, here's a novel idea: talk to those voters
I imagine that's that Tory activists are doing up and down the country, dont you?
Yeah, but that only matter's as a prerequisite for "Then try to reach out to them with policies that address the difficult issues, but don't excessively offend the left flank", which wont happen it seems.
It's amazing how many people think a party's policies should be individually tailored to their personal prejudices. In reality the parties will put out manifestos that they think are a good mix of what needs to be done and what will attract as many votes as possible. Dont take it as a personal slight if it isnt enough to win you over.
Cosmo was my husband's favourite magazine. I prefer Men's Health. Both are hilarious for exactly the same reasons. I'd love to know what percentage of their readers were the opposite of the notional target audience ;-)
The Sun should retaliate by having a naked (waist-up) picture of a lady, saying they were obliging Jo Swinson by showing the model without a bikini.
Getting worked up about Page 3, or women in bikinis, has always seemed to me like getting worked up about Carry On Films or Saucy Postcards. There's far more salacious material out there, just a couple of mouse clicks away (or in magazines like Cosmopolitan for example).
I was being realistic, which I think is a good thing to be. But, as I said, the Kippers here are not at all representative.
Only because most Kippers on here tend to be from a wealthier background and take the time to put their arguments more eloquently. Several times in the last year I've had workmen over at my house, and they reference politics a bit but are careful what they say. Once you express something which suggests sympathy with UKIPish positions, it all comes flooding out.
There's a real anger out there among the working and lower middle class that the government puts everyone else before them but they're scared of being called racist and bigoted if they express this to people they can't trust. They'll instead quietly go into the poll booth and vote for Mr Farage. These people could be won back, but immigration is a gateway issue for them to be prepared to listen. If you're not going to stop hundreds of thousands of people coming every year to compete for their jobs and houses and public services, they're not going to hear you out on anything else.
This just get ever weirder. Ed makes a fool of himself on the economy and all of his backbenchers raise the NHS. Cameron is dealing with one off questions with ease but it is impossible to meet expectations of the NHS and it is always good Labour territory.
Mr Chilcott just might have got the message today that everyone is sick to death of his prevarication.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 2m2 minutes ago If EdM had taken such a pummeling last Nov, I wonder if 'plot that never was' wdve fared differently? Lab MPs chewing wasps.
"Getting worked up about Page 3, or women in bikinis, has always seemed to me like getting worked up about Carry On Films..."
To be fair, the later (70s) Carry Ons did veer more and more towards outright porn in place of mere innuendo. There were other mainstream comedies at the time (the now-forgotten 'Confessions of a Window Cleaner' series) that got away with worse, though.
Twitter Paul Waugh @paulwaugh now10 seconds ago If EdM had taken such a pummeling last Nov, I wonder if 'plot that never was' wdve fared differently? Lab MPs chewing wasps
Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP 3m3 minutes ago What an arrogant, complacent bunch these Tories are.
Chris Bryant @ChrisBryantMP · 9m 9 minutes ago Cameron is a bully.
If you want to win voters back, here's a novel idea: talk to those voters
I imagine that's that Tory activists are doing up and down the country, dont you?
Yeah, but that only matter's as a prerequisite for "Then try to reach out to them with policies that address the difficult issues, but don't excessively offend the left flank", which wont happen it seems.
It's amazing how many people think a party's policies should be individually tailored to their personal prejudices. In reality the parties will put out manifestos that they think are a good mix of what needs to be done and what will attract as many votes as possible. Dont take it as a personal slight if it isnt enough to win you over.
Don't take this as a slight, I'm a Tory. I am however concerned that the way Dave chooses to run the party as a relatively narrow church, with an extremely narrow (largely Dave's Mates) executive is going to lose him the election. Where as with a slight broadening of the church, hell even being a bit nice to people on the right would be a start, might mean he wins it. If we lose this election because of Dave's short sighted detox purism, he will richly deserve to get the boot. Moving to the left to pick up a handful of Guardian readers that he would like to have around to dinner, whilst shedding buckets of right wingers that he personally finds rather distasteful was political idiocy.
"Getting worked up about Page 3, or women in bikinis, has always seemed to me like getting worked up about Carry On Films..."
To be fair, the later (70s) Carry Ons did veer more and more towards outright porn in place of mere innuendo. There were other mainstream comedies at the time (the now-forgotten 'Confessions of a Window Cleaner' series) that got away with worse, though.
The plots in porn films are generally ridiculous. In what part of the world could you 'phone for an electrician or builder and have someone turn up in ten minutes?
Twitter Paul Waugh @paulwaugh now10 seconds ago If EdM had taken such a pummeling last Nov, I wonder if 'plot that never was' wdve fared differently? Lab MPs chewing wasps
Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP 3m3 minutes ago What an arrogant, complacent bunch these Tories are.
Chris Bryant @ChrisBryantMP · 9m 9 minutes ago Cameron is a bully.
Labour MPs have got a cheek calling anyone complacent. Their strategy for the last 5 years has been to hope that this election falls into their lap, and they haven't had the courage to do anything about one of the most major impediments to that happening.
Twitter Paul Waugh @paulwaugh now10 seconds ago If EdM had taken such a pummeling last Nov, I wonder if 'plot that never was' wdve fared differently? Lab MPs chewing wasps
Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP 3m3 minutes ago What an arrogant, complacent bunch these Tories are.
Chris Bryant @ChrisBryantMP · 9m 9 minutes ago Cameron is a bully.
Labour MPs have got a cheek calling anyone complacent. Their strategy for the last 5 years has been to hope that this election falls into their lap, and they haven't had the courage to do anything about one of the most major impediments to that happening.
From just over a year ago NickMP has been advising that voters views are settled with very little movement. In that time the Labour vote has lost almost 1/4 of their support. Most would view that as a catastrophic decline.
To be fair I did report that UKIP was taking Labour votes last summer (following their inroads on the Tories the previous year).
The discussion reminds me a bit of pre-2010, when I reported that Broxtowe was a lot closer than the polls would suggest - the general view was that either people were being polite to me or I was fibbing. In the event, it was indeed very close. We'll have to see in May whether my impressions this time are right or not, but they're genuine impressions - not much to gain by making stuff up to a random audience of PBers.
This just get ever weirder. Ed makes a fool of himself on the economy and all of his backbenchers raise the NHS. Cameron is dealing with one off questions with ease but it is impossible to meet expectations of the NHS and it is always good Labour territory.
Mr Chilcott just might have got the message today that everyone is sick to death of his prevarication.
Did last night's YG help calm your nerves after ICM?
The Sun started Page three pics because ... shock, horror ... most men like looking at female breasts.
One of the feminists claims is that it encourages men to think that all women must look like that. No, despite Cynthia Payne's view, most men are more sensible and realise that page three girls tend to be selectively chosen.
If we watch a Meryl Streep film, we don't assume that all women can act like that.
The Sun introduced it for financial reason. I assume they are stopping it for the same reasons.
Although the simple average of the week's five polls so far gives a teeny Labour lead of 0.2%, ELBOW for these polls gives a very slim Tory advantage of 0.06%!
Con 32.33 Lab 32.27 UKIP 14.1 LD 8.5 Green 7.6
Con lead of 0.06!
Caveat emptor being this is only a mid-week figure - let's wait until all of this week's polls come out before celebrating*/squeaky bumming*!
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
Although the simple average of the week's five polls so far gives a teeny Labour lead of 0.2%, ELBOW for these polls gives a very slim Tory advantage of 0.06%!
Con 32.33 Lab 32.27 UKIP 14.1 LD 8.5 Green 7.6
Con lead of 0.06!
Caveat emptor being this is only a mid-week figure - let's wait until all of this week's polls come out before celebrating*/squeaky bumming*!
(* delete as appropriate!)
ELBOW, joins Ashcroft and YouGov in being the Gold Standard.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
340 would be a better result than either 330 or 320. It's just that a very small majority [arguably] puts too much power into the hands of a few backbenchers aka the awkward squad. Not to mention the inevitable by-election dramas.
I like in a marginal (Enfield North) but will likely be abroad on the day of the GE.
I'm not sure Enfield North will be all that marginal when it comes to it. If Labour dont take this back comfortably they are in for a very bad night. You can get a postal vote or appoint a proxy if you cant vote on the day.
Next to Brent Central, I see this as Labour's likeliest gain in London.
I have a friend in Hendon Conservative Association. Leaving out the details, which are depressing, he says a Labour gain is absolutely nailed-on.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
It's so true. Was it you or someone else who said to me a few weeks back that Cameron might be better off 20 shy than 20 proud? There's something to be said for that. Can you imagine turds like Mark Reckless controlling British politics for 5 years?
I still think Cameron will win clear by 30+ and it will be moot. He might get the occasional rebellion in the next parliament but for the most part he'll be able to set a path broadly in line with Conservative ethos, and the right head-bangers will forgive him a fair bit for winning back clean power.
I like in a marginal (Enfield North) but will likely be abroad on the day of the GE.
I'm not sure Enfield North will be all that marginal when it comes to it. If Labour dont take this back comfortably they are in for a very bad night. You can get a postal vote or appoint a proxy if you cant vote on the day.
Next to Brent Central, I see this as Labour's likeliest gain in London.
I have a friend in Hendon Conservative Association. Leaving out the details, which are depressing, he says a Labour gain is absolutely nailed-on.
I have a feeling it will be close in Ilford North.
Nicky Morgan’s answer, it seems, is that we need to promote tolerance of beliefs and ideas even if we strongly disapprove of them.
If that's what she thinks, she's right. What's the point of tolerance if it only extend to beliefs that you agree with? Stalin was very tolerant of Stalinists.
It's important for civic cohesion that religious groups reach a similar position regarding each other, and IMO a proper requirement for schools that they promote it. That doesn't mean people have to think each others' beliefs sensible or desirable - merely that they tolerate them.The alternative is perpetual civil strife.
Sloppy thinking Nick. Teaching children that there are religions out there other than their own and this is what the central tenets are is fine. Teaching children that they should respect the fact that others are entitled to believe things different to what they believe is fine. But there seems to be a belief that we should also respect what people believe and not just their right to believe what they want. And that's wrong - and oppressive.
I accept that some people believe in homeopathy or Communism. I respect their right to do so. But I do not respect what they believe because one is nonsense and the other evil. And I do not think that - on any definition of tolerance - anyone should ask me to respect a belief system which I believe to be wrong. Respect needs to be earned, not demanded (let alone with menaces), something those who demand respect for their allegedly holy figures seem not to understand.
I do not want children taught that they should be cool with the fact that some people think that gays should be killed or that Jews are apes, not least because such views are completely incompatible with the Equality Act. And those who do think this as part of their religion should actively be taught that such views are incompatible with life in modern Britain.
If you think about it, a blasphemy law and freedom of religion are incompatible and cannot co-exist. You can only have and enforce a blasphemy law if one religion is given a status above all others since the very existence of religion A may well constitute blasphemy against religion B and both religions B and C could well be blasphemous against religions A and D.
Although the simple average of the week's five polls so far gives a teeny Labour lead of 0.2%, ELBOW for these polls gives a very slim Tory advantage of 0.06%!
Con 32.33 Lab 32.27 UKIP 14.1 LD 8.5 Green 7.6
Con lead of 0.06!
Caveat emptor being this is only a mid-week figure - let's wait until all of this week's polls come out before celebrating*/squeaky bumming*!
(* delete as appropriate!)
As a matter of interest when was the last time the Conservatives had an ELBOW lead? (Or whatever it's called!)
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
And 22 (or so) LDs is apparently better.... that appears to say, if that we cant get a majority of say 50, we are better off being in a coalition.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
It's so true. Was it you or someone else who said to me a few weeks back that Cameron might be better off 20 shy than 20 proud? There's something to be said for that. Can you imagine turds like Mark Reckless controlling British politics for 5 years?
I still think Cameron will win clear by 30+ and it will be moot. He might get the occasional rebellion in the next parliament but for the most part he'll be able to set a path broadly in line with Conservative ethos, and the right head-bangers will forgive him a fair bit for winning back clean power.
Yes.
You could make a strong case that this coalition government is more stable and less personality driven than say single party governments in the past.
Dave and Nick have worked well, and had less spats than say Maggie and Nigel, or Tony and George.
The same applies to Ed Miliband were he to get a majority of 20, he has his own awkward squad.
I like in a marginal (Enfield North) but will likely be abroad on the day of the GE.
I'm not sure Enfield North will be all that marginal when it comes to it. If Labour dont take this back comfortably they are in for a very bad night. You can get a postal vote or appoint a proxy if you cant vote on the day.
Next to Brent Central, I see this as Labour's likeliest gain in London.
I have a friend in Hendon Conservative Association. Leaving out the details, which are depressing, he says a Labour gain is absolutely nailed-on.
I bow to local knowledge, but last year's local election results seemed pretty encouraging for the Conservatives in that seat.
Do 15% of the electorate want the NHS scrapped, do 10% want the Greens manifesto. I'd imagine both percentages will decline as UKIP and The Greens policies become better know.
This just get ever weirder. Ed makes a fool of himself on the economy and all of his backbenchers raise the NHS. Cameron is dealing with one off questions with ease but it is impossible to meet expectations of the NHS and it is always good Labour territory.
Mr Chilcott just might have got the message today that everyone is sick to death of his prevarication.
Did last night's YG help calm your nerves after ICM?
Not really, to the extent it did not change my views. The Tories were still at 32%, pretty average for the last year or more. Only Labour's continued decline makes the situation look like it is improving.
The question that remains, as I said yesterday, is whether Labour can go through the floor rather than whether the Tories can raise the ceiling. I think it is increasingly likely that Labour will take a smaller percentage of the vote than they did under Gordon Brown. This is a stunning achievement on the part of Miliband who is deluded and incompetent but apparently sane.
Whether they can go sufficiently through the floor to give the Tories a sufficient edge remains to be seen but I still think it is odds against.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
And 22 (or so) LDs is apparently better.... that appears to say, if that we cant get a majority of say 50, we are better off being in a coalition.
I'd take any majority, but a small majority means you are at risk more from your own side.
Re: Cosmo and Men's Health - it's the sex 'tips' that I find so perplexing. They always seem to involve biting sensitive parts of the body, or spreading sweet & sticky preserves on exposed skin for sensual oral removal.
I just find it bizarre. I've never known anyone to actually do this. It just doesn't seem to be a real thing.
Do 15% of the electorate want the NHS scrapped, do 10% want the Greens manifesto. I'd imagine both percentages will decline as UKIP and The Greens policies become better know.
Never mind that it's bollocks and he didn't say it. What he said was
"There is no question that health care provision is going to have to be very much greater in 10 years than it is today, with an ageing population, and we're going to have to find ways to do it."
I like in a marginal (Enfield North) but will likely be abroad on the day of the GE.
I'm not sure Enfield North will be all that marginal when it comes to it. If Labour dont take this back comfortably they are in for a very bad night. You can get a postal vote or appoint a proxy if you cant vote on the day.
Next to Brent Central, I see this as Labour's likeliest gain in London.
I have a friend in Hendon Conservative Association. Leaving out the details, which are depressing, he says a Labour gain is absolutely nailed-on.
I bow to local knowledge, but last year's local election results seemed pretty encouraging for the Conservatives in that seat.
I wouldn't recommend a bet on it, not at current prices, but he's normally an optimist. So I take it seriously.
One of the feminists claims is that it encourages men to think that all women must look like that. No, despite Cynthia Payne's view, most men are more sensible and realise that page three girls tend to be selectively chosen.
I would have thought the reason why men look at page 3 is because they know that all women don't look like that. Why would you look at a grainy image in a newspaper if you had something that looked the same at home?
I'm still waiting for all these feminists complaining about page 3 to start calling for women's mags to stop featuring shirtless men.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
And 22 (or so) LDs is apparently better.... that appears to say, if that we cant get a majority of say 50, we are better off being in a coalition.
I'd take any majority, but a small majority means you are at risk more from your own side.
Agreed. Its just a question of whose idiotic policies you end up having to pay lip service to, Clegg's or Peter Bone's
I'd be happy for a year long EU renegotiated relationship followed by divorce.
EiT is a hardline europhile, so his comments have to be viewed from that perspective. This is (was) perfectly realistic. The truth is Cameron hasn't led and got his negotiating team in order. Merkel has sensed the politics and lack of conviction, and taken advantage of that.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
I said last time that 320 was likely to be a "better" result than 330, in terms of manageability. That still stands in general terms (and for Labour too), but for DC it might be worse this time as "can't win a majority" would be far more potent.
It also shows how far the Conservatives have come when they are concerned they might win a majority and then have to act as Conservatives. There has been a branch of the party for a few years that apparently feels the Conservatives could actually be better Conservatives by being Conservatives with a Liberal grip around their testicles, most odd.
It is more to do with the fact we're aware of history, the last Tory PM to win a majority, had a majority of 22, and was held hostage by a small bunch of headbangers.
And 22 (or so) LDs is apparently better.... that appears to say, if that we cant get a majority of say 50, we are better off being in a coalition.
I'd take any majority, but a small majority means you are at risk more from your own side.
Agreed. Its just a question of whose idiotic policies you end up having to pay lip service to, Clegg's or Peter Bone's
I'm a rarity, I like both Nick Clegg and Peter Bone.
I'd be happy for a year long EU renegotiated relationship followed by divorce.
EiT is a hardline europhile, so his comments have to be viewed from that perspective. This is (was) perfectly realistic. The truth is Cameron hasn't led and got his negotiating team in order. Merkel has sensed the politics and lack of conviction, and taken advantage of that.
Why would she do otherwise?
I agree. I was just pointing out that Carrey and Holly only stayed married for a year
But since Merkel is ruling out treaty changes, and is only going to consider changes of law, its worthless, because all those changes of law can be overturned in the ECJ.
The truth is Cameron hasn't led and got his negotiating team in order.
What negotiating team? Negotiation hasn't started, for the very good reason that it is not (yet) UK government policy, since the LibDems didn't sign up to it in this parliament.
As a Labour guy, the question I'd love to ask Ed is, 'If your leadership was the reason Labour failed to gain a majority at the next general election, and another person were able to do that, would you step down?'
I think if Ed had stepped aside last year and made a 'Im putting my party and country ahead of my own ambitions' kinda speech, he would have gained a lot of respect.
Comments
The Sun should retaliate by having a naked (waist-up) picture of a lady, saying they were obliging Jo Swinson by showing the model without a bikini.
Fnar Fnar
"Page 3 model Chloe Goodman holds her own in a feminism debate against Germaine Greer and Harriet Harman"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/page-3-model-chloe-goodman-holds-her-own-in-a-feminism-debate-against-germaine-greer-and-harriet-harman-9991846.html
Then perhaps a postal vote is called for, since the thought of arch-weasel Joan Ryan waltzing back into her old job is a profoundly depressing one!
And a Tory MP shouted at the TPD "Enjoy your last few weeks"
You can have open lists under PR!
https://twitter.com/CCHQPress/status/557874538986614784
Not that I ever read the Sun but ...
There's a real anger out there among the working and lower middle class that the government puts everyone else before them but they're scared of being called racist and bigoted if they express this to people they can't trust. They'll instead quietly go into the poll booth and vote for Mr Farage. These people could be won back, but immigration is a gateway issue for them to be prepared to listen. If you're not going to stop hundreds of thousands of people coming every year to compete for their jobs and houses and public services, they're not going to hear you out on anything else.
Mr Chilcott just might have got the message today that everyone is sick to death of his prevarication.
If EdM had taken such a pummeling last Nov, I wonder if 'plot that never was' wdve fared differently? Lab MPs chewing wasps.
To be fair, the later (70s) Carry Ons did veer more and more towards outright porn in place of mere innuendo. There were other mainstream comedies at the time (the now-forgotten 'Confessions of a Window Cleaner' series) that got away with worse, though.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh now10 seconds ago
If EdM had taken such a pummeling last Nov, I wonder if 'plot that never was' wdve fared differently? Lab MPs chewing wasps
Michael Dugher @MichaelDugherMP 3m3 minutes ago
What an arrogant, complacent bunch these Tories are.
Chris Bryant @ChrisBryantMP · 9m 9 minutes ago
Cameron is a bully.
The discussion reminds me a bit of pre-2010, when I reported that Broxtowe was a lot closer than the polls would suggest - the general view was that either people were being polite to me or I was fibbing. In the event, it was indeed very close. We'll have to see in May whether my impressions this time are right or not, but they're genuine impressions - not much to gain by making stuff up to a random audience of PBers.
If Cameron's a bully, Miliband's Softy Walter.
perversely, Dave could be in more trouble if he gets a majority than if he goes into coalition with someone.
A maj might embolden those who want a 'real conservative'
One of the feminists claims is that it encourages men to think that all women must look like that. No, despite Cynthia Payne's view, most men are more sensible and realise that page three girls tend to be selectively chosen.
If we watch a Meryl Streep film, we don't assume that all women can act like that.
The Sun introduced it for financial reason. I assume they are stopping it for the same reasons.
Have they all been sniffing glue ?
Although the simple average of the week's five polls so far gives a teeny Labour lead of 0.2%, ELBOW for these polls gives a very slim Tory advantage of 0.06%!
Con 32.33
Lab 32.27
UKIP 14.1
LD 8.5
Green 7.6
Con lead of 0.06!
Caveat emptor being this is only a mid-week figure - let's wait until all of this week's polls come out before celebrating*/squeaky bumming*!
(* delete as appropriate!)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0506q1s
Honestly, if you've ever fantasised about Caesar taking on Hannibal in a battle it was like that, so one sided and embarrassing.
As David "Caesar" Cameron gave Ed "Hannibal" Miliband the kind of thrashing you get when you visit a dominatrix.
http://order-order.com/2015/01/21/yet-another-labour-party-internetz-win/
And, meanwhile, the splits in UKIP continue:
http://order-order.com/2015/01/20/ukip-hit-puberty-slam-doors-shouts-at-parentsfaragecarswell-fall-out-semi-denied-by-party/
In this media age I'm afraid all the hacks know it too, so it spells a stormy time ahead for the kippers. My heart bleeds.
I still think Cameron will win clear by 30+ and it will be moot. He might get the occasional rebellion in the next parliament but for the most part he'll be able to set a path broadly in line with Conservative ethos, and the right head-bangers will forgive him a fair bit for winning back clean power.
I accept that some people believe in homeopathy or Communism. I respect their right to do so. But I do not respect what they believe because one is nonsense and the other evil. And I do not think that - on any definition of tolerance - anyone should ask me to respect a belief system which I believe to be wrong. Respect needs to be earned, not demanded (let alone with menaces), something those who demand respect for their allegedly holy figures seem not to understand.
I do not want children taught that they should be cool with the fact that some people think that gays should be killed or that Jews are apes, not least because such views are completely incompatible with the Equality Act. And those who do think this as part of their religion should actively be taught that such views are incompatible with life in modern Britain.
If you think about it, a blasphemy law and freedom of religion are incompatible and cannot co-exist. You can only have and enforce a blasphemy law if one religion is given a status above all others since the very existence of religion A may well constitute blasphemy against religion B and both religions B and C could well be blasphemous against religions A and D.
Select "Whats On"
Select the session in the Commons
Select "Watch from start" at the top of the screen
Wind forward to PMQs
IF he wins by 30+ I give Cameron two years. Actually, maybe 18 months.
You could make a strong case that this coalition government is more stable and less personality driven than say single party governments in the past.
Dave and Nick have worked well, and had less spats than say Maggie and Nigel, or Tony and George.
The same applies to Ed Miliband were he to get a majority of 20, he has his own awkward squad.
Its going to drive business to their online site, which is where the money is as their paper subscriptions fade away.
The question that remains, as I said yesterday, is whether Labour can go through the floor rather than whether the Tories can raise the ceiling. I think it is increasingly likely that Labour will take a smaller percentage of the vote than they did under Gordon Brown. This is a stunning achievement on the part of Miliband who is deluded and incompetent but apparently sane.
Whether they can go sufficiently through the floor to give the Tories a sufficient edge remains to be seen but I still think it is odds against.
I just find it bizarre. I've never known anyone to actually do this. It just doesn't seem to be a real thing.
I'm still waiting for all these feminists complaining about page 3 to start calling for women's mags to stop featuring shirtless men.
EiT is a hardline europhile, so his comments have to be viewed from that perspective. This is (was) perfectly realistic. The truth is Cameron hasn't led and got his negotiating team in order. Merkel has sensed the politics and lack of conviction, and taken advantage of that.
Why would she do otherwise?
But since Merkel is ruling out treaty changes, and is only going to consider changes of law, its worthless, because all those changes of law can be overturned in the ECJ.
Ed was positively IDS-like today.
Poor. If he was my leader I'd be very disappointed - he has no bite to him.
As a Labour guy, the question I'd love to ask Ed is, 'If your leadership was the reason Labour failed to gain a majority at the next general election, and another person were able to do that, would you step down?'
I think if Ed had stepped aside last year and made a 'Im putting my party and country ahead of my own ambitions' kinda speech, he would have gained a lot of respect.