Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
No.
Better off out != right wing.
isam is not right wing; his is BOO Alans Sked is not right wing; he is BOO There are plenty of people on the left who are BOO
What defines Right Wing / Left Wing?
I'd argue that Left Wing means a belief that it is the government's job to proactively change individual outcomes by actively interfering in the free market process.
And I would argue that Right Wing means believing that the free market process will lead to generally higher living standards and higher levels of employment, at the expense of some inequality.
Mr. Flag, a Labour victory would be sufficient for them to bugger up English devolution. The best we could hope for is for them to ignore it, though empty-headed meddling would seem more likely.
It won't be empty-headed.
It will be entirely self-interested, and probably counter to England's narrow interests
What are England's interests? Is it in England's interests for a party to impose policies that have not been endorsed by a majority of English voters, or at least approved by parties that represent the votes of a majority of English voters?
To have a balanced relationship with Scotland and the other parts of the UK to ensure a strong and sustainable union.
Labour's track record is to look to their own interests in designing constitutional reform - and we have all seen the problems that has caused
I think that you will find that the Tory track record is the same or even worse.
The difference between me and Charles is that he believes that Labour is self-interested and the Tories are driven by a desire for what is best for the country, while I believe all parties are driven by self-interest. Funnily enough, what the Tories advocate constitutionally is what works best for the Tories and gives them the best chance of winning elections. Charles will see this as being entirely coincidental. I am less sure.
The best thing for the Tories constitutionally would be the independence of Scotland and Wales, yet they don't support either.
I know that we all have our political preferences to grind but you cannot be totally unaware that Sunday's Scottish YouGov crossbreak was 47-22 SNP-Lab, about the highest gap in their series, Populus yesterday's cross break was 45 SNP to 22 Lab, by far the highest gap in their series and, far, far more importantly than either today's REAL YouGov Scottish poll is SNP 48% to Lab 27%, the highest gap in the history of YouGov polling.
I think in the absence of a full poll, averaging YouGov cross breaks over five to ten days or so is worthwhile (and shows a huge SNP lead). But even that is trumped by today's proper poll.
In the light of the weight of polling evidence your comment of "all to play for" in Scotland, on the back of a single day's crossbreak, seems a tad -how shall I put it - optimistic!
Combined with his plans to make housebuilding less economic, it's perfect storm for the young.
I really feel sorry for the poor mugs who will pay the price if we get a Miliband government. Ironically, those who will suffer most will be Labour-voting demographics.
If Ed does manage a five year stretch I wonder to what depths of unpopularity he'll have sunk to by around Christmas 2017...?
If Labour come first in votes they will be so close to an overall majority that they will have viable option of having a minority government. If they are (just) second but still have the most seats then EICIPM. If they are second in seats as well the tories will have won the popular vote by quite a margin and are likely to remain in government in some form.
You underestimate the challenge for the Conservatives. This is best illustrated with numbers. Imagine a Parliament roughly as follows:
Con 290 Lab 270 SNP 40 Lib Dem 25
There is no plausible Conservative-led majority that is stable. But Labour + SNP + Lib Dem would have a majority of 18, not to mention the support in practice from Plaid Cymru, the SDLP and others in all probability. So some government of that type would be formed.
Would Ed Miliband be seen as the man to lead it, given that Labour would have been seen to have underperformed and he would presumably be personally blamed for that? The point is at least open to question.
Whilst the likely make up of the House of Commons after May would make it much easier for Labour to run a minority government than the Conservatives, 270 seats just wouldn't be enough to govern. The SNP would need to vote through pretty much every bill, or if they abstain then Labour would need to garner the support of multiple other parties to avoid defeat.
Contrary to what some people in Scotland think, the inevitable consequence of a SNP landslide isn't going to be a progressive coalition of "leftiness" but a second election at the start of next year.
Mr. Flag, a Labour victory would be sufficient for them to bugger up English devolution. The best we could hope for is for them to ignore it, though empty-headed meddling would seem more likely.
It won't be empty-headed.
It will be entirely self-interested, and probably counter to England's narrow interests
What are England's interests? Is it in England's interests for a party to impose policies that have not been endorsed by a majority of English voters, or at least approved by parties that represent the votes of a majority of English voters?
To have a balanced relationship with Scotland and the other parts of the UK to ensure a strong and sustainable union.
Labour's track record is to look to their own interests in designing constitutional reform - and we have all seen the problems that has caused
I think that you will find that the Tory track record is the same or even worse.
The difference between me and Charles is that he believes that Labour is self-interested and the Tories are driven by a desire for what is best for the country, while I believe all parties are driven by self-interest. Funnily enough, what the Tories advocate constitutionally is what works best for the Tories and gives them the best chance of winning elections. Charles will see this as being entirely coincidental. I am less sure.
The best thing for the Tories constitutionally would be the independence of Scotland and Wales, yet they don't support either.
No the best thing for the Tories consititutionally would be to get off their arses and put some effort in to growing support outside the SE of England.
No the best thing for the Tories consititutionally would be to get off their arses and put some effort in to growing support outside the SE of England.
That may be the best thing for the Tories to do, but I fail to see how it represents constitutional change..
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
I want to know why OGH who is always talking up the LDs chances wont make a proper prediction on the number of seats his beloved party is going to win in May. Myself i think they are a good buy at 28 on Betfair and expect them to get around 37.The downside at 28 is pretty limited when you look at the likes of definite LD shoo ins as Farron,Mulholland,Davey,Brake,Clegg,Laws etc etc..
Cameron's ability to (miss) manage the commons is becoming almost legendary. How to take a nice simple issue that would have clear appeal to voters and totally fsck it up and turn it into a very public division within the party.
Offer the party two options, declare without any evidence that the one the executive like and the rank and file hate is the winner, then talk about the possibility of pushing it through on Labour votes. ON LABOUR VOTES !? three months from an election, has he totally taken leave of his senses ?
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
No.
Better off out != right wing.
isam is not right wing; his is BOO Alans Sked is not right wing; he is BOO There are plenty of people on the left who are BOO
What defines Right Wing / Left Wing?
I'd argue that Left Wing means a belief that it is the government's job to proactively change individual outcomes by actively interfering in the free market process.
And I would argue that Right Wing means believing that the free market process will lead to generally higher living standards and higher levels of employment, at the expense of some inequality.
There are several axes of right vs left wing. That is one of them.
And, what is considered right or left wing will change over time.
Amazing that Labour have got into a row with a foreign national domiciled in a tax haven at a time they are struggling with the WWC vote and being outflanked on the left. What idiots
But it is good soundbite ! The bleeding boss who dodges taxes lecturing us. Good politics.
Lay into the bastard, I say !
Sorry, what idiots should have been in italics as I was being sarcastic. It's amazing that a board who was keen to champion Cameron as a political genius for mentioning the Greens can't spot an equally transparently political move by Labour.
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
I don't accept your definition.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
I don't accept your definition.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
Cameron's ability to (miss) manage the commons is becoming almost legendary. How to take a nice simple issue that would have clear appeal to voters and totally fsck it up and turn it into a very public division within the party.
Offer the party two options, declare without any evidence that the one the executive like and the rank and file hate is the winner, then talk about the possibility of pushing it through on Labour votes. ON LABOUR VOTES !? three months from an election, has he totally taken leave of his senses ?
Jesus. Option 3 isn't English votes for English laws at all! It the actual vote that matters, the Scots still get to reject laws that have majority English support! I thought this was one issue they would make halfway progress on but they're buckling again, just like they've done again and again Europe.
Moderate conservatives simply can not trust the Conservative party any more. Not until they get new leadership.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
No.
Better off out != right wing.
isam is not right wing; his is BOO Alans Sked is not right wing; he is BOO There are plenty of people on the left who are BOO
What defines Right Wing / Left Wing?
I'd argue that Left Wing means a belief that it is the government's job to proactively change individual outcomes by actively interfering in the free market process.
And I would argue that Right Wing means believing that the free market process will lead to generally higher living standards and higher levels of employment, at the expense of some inequality.
There are several axes of right vs left wing. That is one of them.
And, what is considered right or left wing will change over time.
That is true. But I don't like people attempting to kidnap patriotism and ascribe it to one end of the political spectrum.
To quote the awesome Show of Hands: "It's my flag too, and I want it back."
We've become so used to the catastrophic collapse in Labour's position in Scotland that we no longer bother to express surprise at polls like the latest YouGov. This is wrong: we should remain astonished at the sheer scale of the shift and its consistency. Since November 1st, there have 10 Scottish Westminster polls, 9 of which have shown SNP leads of at least 17 points. John Curtice's current poll of polls has an SNP lead of 20 points, to be compared with a GE2010 Labour lead of 22 points. On UNS, that would translate to a staggering 52 SNP Westminster MPs.
Now, maybe we should ignore the polling, or at least mentally adjust it back a bit. Maybe we should make allowance for incumbency, especially for well-established LibDem MPs. But even making all those allowances, the betting markets still don't seem to believe the height and reach of the SNP tsunami:
SPIN: 32-34 seats Spreadex: 31-24 seats Ladbrokes Over/Under: 32.5 seats Ladbrokes constituencies: SNP favourite in 30 seats
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
I want to know why OGH who is always talking up the LDs chances wont make a proper prediction on the number of seats his beloved party is going to win in May.
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
I don't accept your definition.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
I'd feel that I had more in common, politically, with an economically left wing politician who believed in the former (say Peter Shore or Austin Mitchell) than I had with an economically right wing politician who favoured the latter (say, Angela Merkel).
That is true. But I don't like people attempting to kidnap patriotism and ascribe it to one end of the political spectrum.
To quote the awesome Show of Hands: "It's my flag too, and I want it back."
And there are plenty of right wing people who support restrictions on capitalism.
If we trace right wing back to the original meaning, it refers to traditionalists versus revolutionaries - nothing to do with laissez-faire versus dirigism.
The SNP exist to break up the UK, they are not putting so much effort into taking seats off Labour to then just offer them up easily to make up the numbers in a Milliband government. They would let a Labour government fail if they could find a way of framing it so they won't get the blame, hint: look at their "red line" position on Trident. The Tories in power provides fertile ground for them to achieve their objective, although they can't do anything to explicitly help the Tories and would need to give the appearance of giving Labour a fair go. I see there was a story in the Telegraph about a Labour - SNP coalition being likely, I wouldn't bet on it, supply and confidence at most.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Not to mention throwing hundreds of thousands of pounds down the drain by litigating over wills.
If Labour come first in votes they will be so close to an overall majority that they will have viable option of having a minority government. If they are (just) second but still have the most seats then EICIPM. If they are second in seats as well the tories will have won the popular vote by quite a margin and are likely to remain in government in some form.
You underestimate the challenge for the Conservatives. This is best illustrated with numbers. Imagine a Parliament roughly as follows:
Con 290 Lab 270 SNP 40 Lib Dem 25
There is no plausible Conservative-led majority that is stable. But Labour + SNP + Lib Dem would have a majority of 18, not to mention the support in practice from Plaid Cymru, the SDLP and others in all probability. So some government of that type would be formed.
Would Ed Miliband be seen as the man to lead it, given that Labour would have been seen to have underperformed and he would presumably be personally blamed for that? The point is at least open to question.
Whilst the likely make up of the House of Commons after May would make it much easier for Labour to run a minority government than the Conservatives, 270 seats just wouldn't be enough to govern. The SNP would need to vote through pretty much every bill, or if they abstain then Labour would need to garner the support of multiple other parties to avoid defeat.
Contrary to what some people in Scotland think, the inevitable consequence of a SNP landslide isn't going to be a progressive coalition of "leftiness" but a second election at the start of next year.
Not a bad thing, the SNP can then finish the job and pick up any remaining Scottish seats they don't hold.
If we trace right wing back to the original meaning, it refers to traditionalists versus revolutionaries - nothing to do with laissez-faire versus dirigism.
Nonsense, political historians will confirm that originally right-wing meant support for sugar and spice and all things nice whereas left-wing meant support for slugs and snails and puppy-dog tails.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Not to mention throwing hundreds of thousands of pounds down the drain by litigating over wills.
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
Right wing in a social sense has nothing to do with Nationalist vs Internationalist. It is related to personal responsibility and moral hazard - things like drug decriminalisation, reduced welfare state, personal freedoms. It's unsupported by any party in the UK.
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
UKIP deputy leader Paul Nuttall reselected as candidate for Bootle:
twitter.com/BBCNWT/status/562528847464501248
You'd think UKIP would put their high profile individuals in winnable seats, even if it does mean they have no local roots. I get the impression that UKIP MEP's have an easy life in Brussels and don't actually want to become MPs.
UKIP might do better than anyone imagines in Bootle. It's been such a rock-solid seat for so long that there must be a great deal of complacency in Labour ranks. Turnout is usually pitiful and the electorate is often shrinking faster than almost anywhere else in England.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Quite. I don't think there's anything wrong with eating meat, but there's absolutely no reason animals need to suffer in the process. Humane conditions as they are raised and stunning before slaughter should be required, and screw the religious fundamentalists that aren't ok with that.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
Not to mention throwing hundreds of thousands of pounds down the drain by litigating over wills.
One only has to look at the vast and glossy HQ in Horsham to understand why they need those legacies.
Of SO's examoles: equalising constituency sizes is a "principle" issue. And I think that - with a reasonably flexibility to allow for practicality - it's difficult to argue why they should be different sizes.
The previous rules were also for equal-sized constituencies, but with a tolerance of +/-10% to allow for local boundaries to be respected.
The change in the law was simply to reduce that tolerance to +/-5% and to allow the boundary commission to ignore local boundaries in order to meet it. This resulted in a number of seat boundaries that local people took exception to - such as the Devonwall seat, for example. Having bizarre boundaries runs contrary to the principles that justify FPTP, that one is electing a representative of a cohesive community, rather than of an abstract political unit.
The only principle involved was the Blairite one. Win elections at any cost.
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
Rod hasnt said which of the models he favours. He was all excited about it earlier in the Parliament but I'd be slightly surprised if he plumped for L&N in the end.
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
He said yesterday that he thought a Labour overall majority was "out".
The SNP exist to break up the UK, they are not putting so much effort into taking seats off Labour to then just offer them up easily to make up the numbers in a Milliband government. They would let a Labour government fail if they could find a way of framing it so they won't get the blame, hint: look at their "red line" position on Trident. The Tories in power provides fertile ground for them to achieve their objective, although they can't do anything to explicitly help the Tories and would need to give the appearance of giving Labour a fair go. I see there was a story in the Telegraph about a Labour - SNP coalition being likely, I wouldn't bet on it, supply and confidence at most.
Welcome, and I agree. I think the optimal play for the SNP would be to publicly support a Miliband government on condition of trident which would be very unpopular in England and a gift for the Tories, prop them up for six months, and then publicly have a falling out with them over austerity or whatever looks convenient to give their party of the people image a shine and make it look like it was Labour's fault. Cameron would then get a chance to form a government, the SNP would claim with a straight face in having no interest in bringing down any government and largely abstain on English issues and let Conservatives stagger on with a weak minority government occasionally voting with Labour when it suited them, or to stir the pot, whilst largely retreating to Scotland to win the Holyrood elections.
The most notable prediction so far for GE2015 came from Peter Kellner who forecasts Con + LD = 323, enough for the present parties to stay in power one way or another.
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
Right wing in a social sense has nothing to do with Nationalist vs Internationalist. It is related to personal responsibility and moral hazard - things like drug decriminalisation, reduced welfare state, personal freedoms. It's unsupported by any part in the UK.
The terms go back to the National Assembly during the French revolution and primarily referred to the maintenance or restoration of traditional institutions or tearing them down and starting again. In the current context, those that wish to restore parliamentary sovereignty are right of centre. Those that wish to replace it with an EU superstate are left of centre.
OGH reports a TNS poll as Lab 33%, Con 27%, UKIP 18%, Lib Dem 6%, Green 8%, Others 8%. Is that the poll that appeared on their website last night, but with the figures re-worked?
Now you have a mass of superannuated party hacks, who can't be removed by the electorate, manoeuvring for partisan advantage and trying to embarrass the government rather than doing their fundamental job as a revising house.
If only they had a few more scions of proper families in there to tut at them to show them how they are meant to behave things would be much better.
Not really. I know my family, and some of them would be good (my aunt makes an excellent crossbencher), whereas other would be superannuated party hacks (my uncle, for instance). What's important is to have people who have areas of expertise and can review and improve legislation but who don't have the inclination to pursue a career in politics.
UKIP deputy leader Paul Nuttall reselected as candidate for Bootle:
twitter.com/BBCNWT/status/562528847464501248
You'd think UKIP would put their high profile individuals in winnable seats, even if it does mean they have no local roots. I get the impression that UKIP MEP's have an easy life in Brussels and don't actually want to become MPs.
UKIP might do better than anyone imagines in Bootle. It's been such a rock-solid seat for so long that there must be a great deal of complacency in Labour ranks. Turnout is usually pitiful and the electorate is always shrinking faster than almost anywhere else in England.
The Northwest I expect to be a happy hunting ground for Labour this time round, Morecameb and Lunsdale and Bury North are both going as a starter for ten. Blackpool and Clevelys too.
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
Rod hasnt said which of the models he favours. He was all excited about it earlier in the Parliament but I'd be slightly surprised if he plumped for L&N in the end.
Yes, I edited the post after mentioning he favours it, he has never said that iirc
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
He said yesterday that he thought a Labour overall majority was "out".
Ed PM and Labour Majority are two very different things.
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I'm meaning "right wing" in the social sense, believing in sovereignty of domestic institutions, maintaining their national culture, respecting traditional liberties, and supporting free speech. Instead right wing parties have done the opposite, supporting the encroachment of a European superstate, mass immigration, big brother government and the policing of speech they dislike.
I don't accept your definition.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
I'd feel that I had more in common, politically, with an economically left wing politician who believed in the former (say Peter Shore or Austin Mitchell) than I had with an economically right wing politician who favoured the latter (say, Angela Merkel).
Agreed. Also, poor economic policy can be reversed quite quickly: see the Thatcher revolution. However things like cultural change from mass immigration could take a hundred years to correct.
@AndyJS - Also you'll note that I think Ed M PM @ 6-4 or above is now a sensible bet, that doesn't mean it has to be likely for the bet to be profitable.
If we trace right wing back to the original meaning, it refers to traditionalists versus revolutionaries - nothing to do with laissez-faire versus dirigism.
Nonsense, political historians will confirm that originally right-wing meant support for sugar and spice and all things nice whereas left-wing meant support for slugs and snails and puppy-dog tails.
To be fair, I would have thought that unconditional support for the slave trade and the spice trade were pretty unreconstructed positions!
(And yes, I know, all you pedants out there, Wilberforce was a Tory. But in today's terms he'd have been Cameroon, not a Kipper)
That aside, you'd tend to think undecideds or uninteresteds will kick back to their traditional parties, and in that case the 2010 weighting was Cons 36.1, Lab 29, LD 23. The latter is the only cause for hope left for the LibDems: that somehow people will return.
In today's YouGov 19% of 2010 Lib Dems don't know who they will vote for compared to 10% Labour and 9% Conservative.
That is, of course, why ICM tends to give larger shares for the Liberal Democrats than other pollsters, because of the spiral of silence adjustment. The average Lib Dem share in ICM in 2014 was 12%. The highest Lib Dem share in YouGov in 2014 was 11%.
Our perception of British Politics would, I think, be very different if The Sun were paying ICM for a daily poll, and YouGov were left with the monthly Guardian contract. And yet, out there in the real world, nothing would be different.
Still, it's pretty nice to see the Conservatives shameless opportunism, lust for power, ideological belief in entrenched mass privatisation and shameless support for lower taxation for the wealthiest turn into one single ridiculous policy.
You're funny. Student?
Not at all. I used to be right-wing when I was younger but then I grew up.
Interesting, and the polar opposite to most people. Was there a moment of epiphany, or was it more a gradual, creeping realignment?
Gradually over many, many years. I went from growing up hard right, much like my parents, to right, to centrist, to left-wing, to becoming hard left across the last few years.
There's many reasons but a major one is exposure to people's views on the Internet. Indeed, it was being exposed to the views of the right, which demonstrated a warped and narrow world view and a lack of nuance or outright dismissal of complicated real-world issues.
Which led to me becoming far more left wing... and far less political, largely because reading the news makes me feel increasingly miserable and hopeless about the direction of the world.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Still, it's pretty nice to see the Conservatives shameless opportunism, lust for power, ideological belief in entrenched mass privatisation and shameless support for lower taxation for the wealthiest turn into one single ridiculous policy.
You're funny. Student?
Not at all. I used to be right-wing when I was younger but then I grew up.
Interesting, and the polar opposite to most people. Was there a moment of epiphany, or was it more a gradual, creeping realignment?
Gradually over many, many years. I went from growing up hard right, much like my parents, to right, to centrist, to left-wing, to becoming hard left across the last few years.
There's many reasons but a major one is exposure to people's views on the Internet. Indeed, it was being exposed to the views of the right, which demonstrated a warped and narrow world view and a lack of nuance or outright dismissal of complicated real-world issues.
Which led to me becoming far more left wing... and far less political, largely because reading the news makes me feel increasingly miserable and hopeless about the direction of the world.
If you visit Tumblr, you might shift back in the other direction.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
TNS frequently place the Conservatives <30%, probably due to reporting high scores for UKIP.
The reason they are losing is that they are failing to debunk the myth that there is an alternative to austerity. People think we have austerity for ideological reasons, not because we have to live within our means.
Negotiating with the likes of Tsipras will one day be seen to be a catastrophic mistake.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Effectively the LDs share has fallen 25%..whats OGH got to say about that?
This was posted last night. Fieldwork a week ago off a sample size of 518. Voodoo.
Sweet Lord. The sample size issue was explained to you last night. For someone who talks a lot about data you dont seem to have a great grasp of statistics.
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
He said yesterday that he thought a Labour overall majority was "out".
And he's right. Pretty much every other option is still possible, but not a Labour majority.
If nothing else this is shaping up to be a very interesting election.
A weak government of whatever stripe is the last thing we need right now though and it really is hard to see us getting anything else.
I think the country would have been better governed if the executive had been weaker in the years 1997-2010.
What I would like to see is individual MPs freeing themselves of the shackles of the whips, so that Parliament could properly debate the way forward for the country, and its collective will would choose a course out of this mess.
PMQs shows us that this is unlikely, but living without optimism is not a happy prospect.
Labour were an unmitigated disaster - I agree with you that Labour were too strong in their period of office - those were however happier economic times.
We need a stable government able to take decisions at the present time - not a weak government unable or unwilling to make tough decisions in the national interest.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
Whatever their methodology, they managed to find Lab ahead among over 55s. Is this likely?
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
No.
Better off out != right wing.
isam is not right wing; his is BOO Alans Sked is not right wing; he is BOO There are plenty of people on the left who are BOO
What defines Right Wing / Left Wing?
I'd argue that Left Wing means a belief that it is the government's job to proactively change individual outcomes by actively interfering in the free market process.
And I would argue that Right Wing means believing that the free market process will lead to generally higher living standards and higher levels of employment, at the expense of some inequality.
There are several axes of right vs left wing. That is one of them.
And, what is considered right or left wing will change over time.
That is true. But I don't like people attempting to kidnap patriotism and ascribe it to one end of the political spectrum.
To quote the awesome Show of Hands: "It's my flag too, and I want it back."
Arrogance Ignorance And Greed (AIG) is great too. Don't watch it if you're a banker.
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Voodoo.
By the way, fieldwork was 23-26 Jan and they mashed the polling for GB voting in the same telephone call as their woman's hour polling. A right dog's breakfast, always accepting the Golden Rule caveat.
William Hill client from Hampstead has staked £5000 on Ed Miliband to be NEXT Prime Minister at odds of 4/5.
Doubt it was Dan Hodges.
That's a good idea for getting rich quick: accepting bets on Ed being PM this year.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
Rod Crosby has never said it won't happen, you need to win his posts more carefully. The L&N model predicts 100% chance of a Conservative majority currently, but there are caveats...
He said yesterday that he thought a Labour overall majority was "out".
And he's right. Pretty much every other option is still possible, but not a Labour majority.
Why is a Tory outright majority not at least as unlikely as a Lab one?
Yesterday's TNS poll was not politically weighted (I think because it was for the BBC, who don't allow their polls to be weighted as such, IIRC). This one is presumably their regular poll.
TNS is by far the most Labour-friendly outfit (see Anthony Wells on the matter) but this is still a very poor poll for the Tories.
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
This is the kind of thing that the RSPCA should really be getting stuck into. I guess going after fox hunting toffs is the easier option.
The footage was obtained by the charity "Animal Aid". Other animal charities exist. Why do you appear to want the RSPCA to exercise a monopoly?
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
Whatever their methodology, they managed to find Lab ahead among over 55s. Is this likely?
Individual subsamples don't invalidate a whole poll, I raise my eyebrows when Populus has SNP and Labour level, but that reason alone doesn't make the whole poll invalid.
An average of polls using different methodologies is the best poll of all. If they all start using the same methodology then herding bias creeps in, and the average is less accurate. So we should be thankful to see apparent outliers, and all else being equal there should be outliers on the opposite side if the true picture is one of level pegging. You need alot of polls to produce them, but they are coming thick and fast now... I expect to see the Conservatives ahead by 5 or so in one poll in the next couple of weeks.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Having promised a 15 per cent wage and pensions increase during last month’s annual state of the nation address, Mr Maduro last week announced emergency measures to relax currency restrictions on importers of key goods, including everything from toilet paper to tuna fish.
But with real inflation now running at nearly 100 per cent, according to Robert Bottome of the VenEconomia think-tank, and with Venezuela’s oil revenues being squeezed further by international oil prices, the measures were equivalent to trying to open an umbrella in a hurricane.
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Right-wing parties have done badly all over the EU, as their leaders have given up on centre-right positions to sell out to a European superstate, political correctness and mass immigration. They've been foolish enough to equate such things with "inevitable modernity", when there's nothing inevitable about any of them. They are policy choices that the mainstream right has acquiesced to.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
No.
Better off out != right wing.
isam is not right wing; his is BOO Alans Sked is not right wing; he is BOO There are plenty of people on the left who are BOO
What defines Right Wing / Left Wing?
I'd argue that Left Wing means a belief that it is the government's job to proactively change individual outcomes by actively interfering in the free market process.
And I would argue that Right Wing means believing that the free market process will lead to generally higher living standards and higher levels of employment, at the expense of some inequality.
There are several axes of right vs left wing. That is one of them.
And, what is considered right or left wing will change over time.
That is true. But I don't like people attempting to kidnap patriotism and ascribe it to one end of the political spectrum.
To quote the awesome Show of Hands: "It's my flag too, and I want it back."
Arrogance Ignorance And Greed (AIG) is great too. Don't watch it if you're a banker.
Don't forget the earlier cutthroats, crooks, and conmen
If we trace right wing back to the original meaning, it refers to traditionalists versus revolutionaries - nothing to do with laissez-faire versus dirigism.
Nonsense, political historians will confirm that originally right-wing meant support for sugar and spice and all things nice whereas left-wing meant support for slugs and snails and puppy-dog tails.
To be fair, I would have thought that unconditional support for the slave trade and the spice trade were pretty unreconstructed positions!
(And yes, I know, all you pedants out there, Wilberforce was a Tory. But in today's terms he'd have been Cameroon, not a Kipper)
Opposition to the slave trade was fairly conservative, as there were court cases which established that slavery was contrary to English law and could not be enforced in England. It was allowed in the colonies I think as some kind of recognition that it was a universal law.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
The 11% lead came from a poll with fieldwork on the 23rd-26th January. I can't find any data tables for this poll yet.
If TNS are doing a weekly poll then the fieldwork dates for that would be 30th - 2nd February, I think.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
The 11% lead came from a poll with fieldwork on the 23rd-26th January. I can't find any data tables for this poll yet.
If TNS are doing a weekly poll then the fieldwork dates for that would be 30th - 2nd February, I think.
Yesterday's TNS poll was not politically weighted (I think because it was for the BBC, who don't allow their polls to be weighted as such, IIRC). This one is presumably their regular poll.
Do you have evidence of that? Last night's poll certainly includes data on how people voted in 2010, presumably for weighting purposes. Having said that, I haven't looked at the tables myself yet as I have been doing internet on my phone since it was posted, and the file is just too big and clunky to look at easily.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Effectively the LDs share has fallen 25%..whats OGH got to say about that?
This was posted last night. Fieldwork a week ago off a sample size of 518. Voodoo.
That is not the definition of a voodoo poll - which is a term used for a self-selecting sample. I'm not sure that it is the same poll as that reported last night - need to see the data tables. The sample size of 518 refers to the sample after won't knows and won't votes are excluded and is typical for opinion polls with a starting sample of 1,000 - ie a standard sample size for British phone polls. I told you that last night.
Comments
isam is not right wing; his is BOO
Alans Sked is not right wing; he is BOO
There are plenty of people on the left who are BOO
What defines Right Wing / Left Wing?
I'd argue that Left Wing means a belief that it is the government's job to proactively change individual outcomes by actively interfering in the free market process.
And I would argue that Right Wing means believing that the free market process will lead to generally higher living standards and higher levels of employment, at the expense of some inequality.
8:57AM
I know that we all have our political preferences to grind but you cannot be totally unaware that Sunday's Scottish YouGov crossbreak was 47-22 SNP-Lab, about the highest gap in their series, Populus yesterday's cross break was 45 SNP to 22 Lab, by far the highest gap in their series and, far, far more importantly than either today's REAL YouGov Scottish poll is SNP 48% to Lab 27%, the highest gap in the history of YouGov polling.
I think in the absence of a full poll, averaging YouGov cross breaks over five to ten days or so is worthwhile (and shows a huge SNP lead). But even that is trumped by today's proper poll.
In the light of the weight of polling evidence your comment of "all to play for" in Scotland, on the back of a single day's crossbreak, seems a tad -how shall I put it - optimistic!
Lol.
Contrary to what some people in Scotland think, the inevitable consequence of a SNP landslide isn't going to be a progressive coalition of "leftiness" but a second election at the start of next year.
Myself i think they are a good buy at 28 on Betfair and expect them to get around 37.The downside at 28 is pretty limited when you look at the likes of definite LD shoo ins as Farron,Mulholland,Davey,Brake,Clegg,Laws etc etc..
Cameron's ability to (miss) manage the commons is becoming almost legendary. How to take a nice simple issue that would have clear appeal to voters and totally fsck it up and turn it into a very public division within the party.
Offer the party two options, declare without any evidence that the one the executive like and the rank and file hate is the winner, then talk about the possibility of pushing it through on Labour votes. ON LABOUR VOTES !? three months from an election, has he totally taken leave of his senses ?
And, what is considered right or left wing will change over time.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
UKIP = Right wing and all that is good
Everyone else = LibLabCon left wing traitors.
Moderate conservatives simply can not trust the Conservative party any more. Not until they get new leadership.
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
To quote the awesome Show of Hands: "It's my flag too, and I want it back."
13-8 Betfair £30.
If we trace right wing back to the original meaning, it refers to traditionalists versus revolutionaries - nothing to do with laissez-faire versus dirigism.
If Rod Crosby and Peter Kellner both say it won't happen, it won't happen IMO.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-31109331
Hinchinbrooke Hospital H of C evidence.
The change in the law was simply to reduce that tolerance to +/-5% and to allow the boundary commission to ignore local boundaries in order to meet it. This resulted in a number of seat boundaries that local people took exception to - such as the Devonwall seat, for example. Having bizarre boundaries runs contrary to the principles that justify FPTP, that one is electing a representative of a cohesive community, rather than of an abstract political unit.
The only principle involved was the Blairite one. Win elections at any cost.
OGH reports a TNS poll as Lab 33%, Con 27%, UKIP 18%, Lib Dem 6%, Green 8%, Others 8%. Is that the poll that appeared on their website last night, but with the figures re-worked?
Shit Hill is on a knife edge.
(And yes, I know, all you pedants out there, Wilberforce was a Tory. But in today's terms he'd have been Cameroon, not a Kipper)
That is, of course, why ICM tends to give larger shares for the Liberal Democrats than other pollsters, because of the spiral of silence adjustment. The average Lib Dem share in ICM in 2014 was 12%. The highest Lib Dem share in YouGov in 2014 was 11%.
Our perception of British Politics would, I think, be very different if The Sun were paying ICM for a daily poll, and YouGov were left with the monthly Guardian contract. And yet, out there in the real world, nothing would be different.
LAB 33% (+2)
CON 27% (-4)
UKIP 18% (+2)
GREEN 8% (+1)
LIB DEM 6% (-2)
OTHER 8% (+1)
There's many reasons but a major one is exposure to people's views on the Internet. Indeed, it was being exposed to the views of the right, which demonstrated a warped and narrow world view and a lack of nuance or outright dismissal of complicated real-world issues.
Which led to me becoming far more left wing... and far less political, largely because reading the news makes me feel increasingly miserable and hopeless about the direction of the world.
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/feb/03/how-giving-prince-philip-a-knighthood-left-australias-pm-fighting-for-survival
TNS-BMRB [Nick Howat] Telephone 020-7656 5742
http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/officers-members/
The reason they are losing is that they are failing to debunk the myth that there is an alternative to austerity. People think we have austerity for ideological reasons, not because we have to live within our means.
Negotiating with the likes of Tsipras will one day be seen to be a catastrophic mistake.
If some people are using the http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.116758783 market rather than
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.105756340
With better odds for Ed in the first by some margin as there is basically no effective way to back Cameron staying on in the second ?
Also no payout in the second market if you Lay Ed and Dave stays on for another five year term.
We need a stable government able to take decisions at the present time - not a weak government unable or unwilling to make tough decisions in the national interest.
IMO it is.
TNS is by far the most Labour-friendly outfit (see Anthony Wells on the matter) but this is still a very poor poll for the Tories.
An average of polls using different methodologies is the best poll of all. If they all start using the same methodology then herding bias creeps in, and the average is less accurate. So we should be thankful to see apparent outliers, and all else being equal there should be outliers on the opposite side if the true picture is one of level pegging. You need alot of polls to produce them, but they are coming thick and fast now... I expect to see the Conservatives ahead by 5 or so in one poll in the next couple of weeks.
Some brilliant modern folk with a decidedly left wing slant. Even as a true blue, I love their music
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/01/29/three-trumps-could-win-labour-election/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/11385294/Venezuelas-socialist-paradise-turns-into-a-nightmare-medical-shortages-claim-lives-as-oil-price-collapses.html
Nat 36.7%,
Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
<<innocent face>>
If TNS are doing a weekly poll then the fieldwork dates for that would be 30th - 2nd February, I think.
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/uploads/files/TNS_BMRB_Tables_-_All_adults.pdf