politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why’s the Westminster bubble ignoring the Tory near collapse in England?
To work out swing you look the change in party figures from the last election an divide by 2. So here LAB is up 6.9% with Opinium in England and the Tories down 6.5%. So that makes a swing of 6.7%
It's worrying for the Conservatives and very worrying for the LDs. The conundrum for me is the potential impact of the Green vote in LD seats. One example is Ed Davey's seat - K&S might well be the kind of place where the Green candidate draws enough LD votes to get the Conservatives home. We don't know at this stage.
In my seat (East Ham), a Green candidate will make no difference to the result but could (perhaps) draw a small amount off the Labour vote. Again, we don't know.
As I've posted before, I really don't understand the LD attitude. Marching towards the sound of gunfire, as Jo Grimond advised, is all very well, but not when those manning the guns can see the whites of ones eyes!
It's worrying for the Conservatives and very worrying for the LDs. The conundrum for me is the potential impact of the Green vote in LD seats. One example is Ed Davey's seat - K&S might well be the kind of place where the Green candidate draws enough LD votes to get the Conservatives home. We don't know at this stage.
In my seat (East Ham), a Green candidate will make no difference to the result but could (perhaps) draw a small amount off the Labour vote. Again, we don't know.
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
@OldKingCole That's politician speak. It doesn't matter what it means, as long as it sounds good. (I offer translations for very moderate fees if you so desire) ;-)
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
@OldKingCole That's politician speak. It doesn't matter what it means, as long as it sounds good. (I offer translations for very moderate fees if you so desire) ;-)
I'm obliged for the thought, but sadly your fees are not tax-deductible!
I read somewhere that we vote for candidates, not parties, and that instead of looking at UNS you have to look at individual constituency polls conducted last August by well-known but relatively new polling firms we won't be using again.
I read somewhere that we vote for candidates, not parties, and that instead of looking at UNS you have to look at individual constituency polls conducted last August by well-known but relatively new polling firms we won't be using again.
Colour me confused.
The choices so far locally are three apparatchiks and a committed local councillor with a reputation as a campaigner.
Who was closer to the result of the indyreferendum. Me. Not you.
Who was closer to the result of the GE? Me. Not you.
Who predicted the SNP surge post NO? Me. Not you.
And on and on and on. I've had five bets on pb and lost won, and won four, etc etc.
You'd better hope that you break this peerless record of inferiority to me, when it comes to my other predictions, terroristic or otherwise.
You were most certainly not closer to the 2010 GE result than me or either of the 2008 or 2012 US presidential elections and as I recall you were regularly wetting your knickers at the prospect of a SNP referendum win on the basis of one opinion poll.
PB decided I and not you was TOTY and how right their collective wisdom was.
Go back to frightening old ladies and the children. The rest of us will not be moved.
I now officially predict the Chilcot report will be leaked during the election campaign.
Tony Blair has moved to end talk of a rift with Ed Miliband as he pledged to offer whatever support the Labour leader wants in the runup to the 7 May election.
With Miliband under intense pressure after a succession of business leaders criticised his policies as bad for the country, the former prime minister made clear that he was ready to aid Miliband’s push to restore Labour to power.
Just for a change OGH sticks the boot in the Tories using Opinium as his source this time, a pollster that regularly has the Tories well in arrears. Maybe everybody is ignoring this narrative because they think it's somewhat unlikely.
I read somewhere that we vote for candidates, not parties, and that instead of looking at UNS you have to look at individual constituency polls conducted last August by well-known but relatively new polling firms we won't be using again.
Colour me confused.
UNS is a bit like gravity. You can only defy it for so long.
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Just for a change OGH sticks the boot in the Tories using Opinium as his source this time, a pollster that regularly has the Tories well in arrears. Maybe everybody is ignoring this narrative because they think it's somewhat unlikely.
Well Opinium changed their methodology to increase tory share so that makes the narrative more credible
If OGH didn't write threads that challenged the site narrative it would be unbearable! He joined in with the pro tory narrative in Rochester and ended up with oeuf sur his visage like the rest of the unthinkers, so perhaps he's has enough
As I've posted before, I really don't understand the LD attitude. Marching towards the sound of gunfire, as Jo Grimond advised, is all very well, but not when those manning the guns can see the whites of ones eyes!
Perhaps this would be a good new theme tune for the LibDems?
"We fired our guns and the British kept a-coming. There wasn't quite as many as there was a while ago; We fired once more and they began a-running; all down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico"
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
1992
No I meant 2010. Even the pollsters didn't believe their own findings (because of 1992) and when asked (In the Independent I think) their personal opinions most thought the tories would manage a small majority.
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, will on Monday unveil a strategy to tackle the UK’s soaring rise in antisemitism, Islamophobia, homophobia and abuse of people with disabilities. The package includes making homophobic and disability hate crimes an aggravated criminal offence, ensuring that police treat such offences in the same way as racist hate crimes.
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
1992
No I meant 2010. Even the pollsters didn't believe their own findings (because of 1992) and when asked (In the Independent I think) their personal opinions most thought the tories would manage a small majority.
To be fair, whoever calculated the Exit Poll on Election Night got it almost spot on.
Because it doesn't fit the expectation that this is a tight race, which it isn't - or would not be were it not for Scotland - in terms of probable seats even if the vote shares will be mighty close
David Cameron has hailed Britain’s growing economic recovery as the “Great Revival”, as former Labour donors express their frustration at Ed Miliband’s “half baked” plans for business.
Writing for The Telegraph, Mr Cameron launched his strongest attack to date on Mr Miliband’s economic policies, warning that the Labour leader’s “sneering hatred of business” would cost the country almost 100,000 jobs.
It came as some of Britain’s most successful industrialists, who have donated large sums to Labour in the past, joined the criticism of Mr Miliband’s “unnecessary” attacks on enterprise.
Even if Labour does win most seats in England, or even a small majority there, if the SNP win 35-50 seats then they will still need their support to form a UK government. Ironically if the election was England and Wales alone, Labour on these numbers would be more likely to get a majority than with Scotland because of the SNP's present lead there and Labour's lead south of Hadrian's Wall
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Where the British military is engaged in humanitarian activity it should receive additional funding from DfID's budget.
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Where the British military is engaged in humanitarian activity it should receive additional funding from DfID's budget.
I always wondered why they didn't use that as a fix?
After all they used the same trick (although more damagingly) when they shifted the World Service from the FCO to the BBC budget
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
I think it is all fart and no follow through.
If you're applying for a job that requires a CRB or DBS check, it would show up already.
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
1992
No I meant 2010. Even the pollsters didn't believe their own findings (because of 1992) and when asked (In the Independent I think) their personal opinions most thought the tories would manage a small majority.
To be fair, whoever calculated the Exit Poll on Election Night got it almost spot on.
The massive exit poll operation cannot be compared with opinion polls.
43% think a Labour victory would be bad for British business, just 19% think it would be good
Paradoxically, 38% say govt should primarily support big business, 49% it should do more to stand up to it
Is that really paradoxical? People thinking the Labour would be "bad for businesses" does not necessarily imply that people disapprove of policies that are bad for (big) businessmen.
43% think a Labour victory would be bad for British business, just 19% think it would be good
Paradoxically, 38% say govt should primarily support big business, 49% it should do more to stand up to it
Is that really paradoxical? People thinking the Tories would be "best for business" does not necessarily imply that people actually want policies that are good for big businesses.
Even if Labour does win most seats in England, or even a small majority there, if the SNP win 35-50 seats then they will still need their support to form a UK government. Ironically if the election was England and Wales alone, Labour on these numbers would be more likely to get a majority than with Scotland because of the SNP's present lead there and Labour's lead south of Hadrian's Wall
The poll that is the basis for this thread has labour down on 29% in Wales with the Tories on 27% and UKIP on 24%
They'd lose a lot of Welsh seats, as well as Scottish, in that scenario.
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
1992
No I meant 2010. Even the pollsters didn't believe their own findings (because of 1992) and when asked (In the Independent I think) their personal opinions most thought the tories would manage a small majority.
To be fair, whoever calculated the Exit Poll on Election Night got it almost spot on.
The 2005 exit poll also got the Labour Majority spot on, if not the exact number of seats for each party.
In the Westminster bubble they still don't believe the polls and assume (as they did, wrongly, in 2010) that there will be last minute swing to the tories.
1992
No I meant 2010. Even the pollsters didn't believe their own findings (because of 1992) and when asked (In the Independent I think) their personal opinions most thought the tories would manage a small majority.
To be fair, whoever calculated the Exit Poll on Election Night got it almost spot on.
The 2005 exit poll also got the Labour Majority spot on, if not the exact number of seats for each party.
The joint BBC/ITV/Sky GE exit poll is NOT designed to work out vote share. The objective is to produce seat projections which at 2005 & 2010 it did brilliantly
People don't like CEOs in tax havens intervening in UK politics 73% felt Boots boss Pessina's intervention unacceptable
Yes, that's what I've heard locally - opinion largely divided between people who feel it was fine for him to comment but who cares what a bloke in Monaco thinks, and people who think he should shut up. The Nottingham Post gave me a column on it today (where I took the former view).
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
I think it is all fart and no follow through.
If you're applying for a job that requires a CRB or DBS check, it would show up already.
It's part of the "let's make people unemployable if they have broken the law" meme. Unfortunately means the rest of us will continue to provide them with a living through the benefits system.
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
I think it is all fart and no follow through.
If you're applying for a job that requires a CRB or DBS check, it would show up already.
It's part of the "let's make people unemployable if they have broken the law" meme. Unfortunately means the rest of us will continue to provide them with a living through the benefits system.
Ah, so another plot to increase the size of the Benefits dependent Labour client vote
People don't like CEOs in tax havens intervening in UK politics 73% felt Boots boss Pessina's intervention unacceptable
Yes, that's what I've heard locally - opinion largely divided between people who feel it was fine for him to comment but who cares what a bloke in Monaco thinks, and people who think he should shut up. The Nottingham Post gave me a column on it today (where I took the former view).
However, it’s also right that when a viewpoint is put forward by someone who no longer lives in this country
Stefano has never lived in the UK. He grew up in Rome, moved to Milan for university and then moved to Monaco about 30 years ago when he separated from his wife.
does not pay taxes here
Not really accurate. He pays VAT and all sorts of other taxes. I'd assume (but have never asked) that he has PAYE applied to his Boots salary. But Alliance Sante (the source of his wealth) was always based outside the UK - it was a pan-European company based in Luxembourg that was set up to acquire ASI (his father's company) and the Spanish business that was his first international acquisition)
does not pay taxes here and is therefore not a contributing member of our society, that this is also highlighted
Bullshit. You can be a contributing member of society regardless of whether you pay tax or not. Society is not the same as the State.
Who was closer to the result of the indyreferendum. Me. Not you.
Who was closer to the result of the GE? Me. Not you.
Who predicted the SNP surge post NO? Me. Not you.
And on and on and on. I've had five bets on pb and lost won, and won four, etc etc.
You'd better hope that you break this peerless record of inferiority to me, when it comes to my other predictions, terroristic or otherwise.
You were most certainly not closer to the 2010 GE result than me or either of the 2008 or 2012 US presidential elections and as I recall you were regularly wetting your knickers at the prospect of a SNP referendum win on the basis of one opinion poll.
PB decided I and not you was TOTY and how right their collective wisdom was.
Go back to frightening old ladies and the children. The rest of us will not be moved.
Er, I was also TOTY or whatever it was, and I was way closer to the GE result than you, and the rest of your remarks are irrelevant because no one knows whereof you speak. But who gives a f*ck, it's just a blog.
I was gonna add a vile but carefully honed insult here, but, y'know, what the hell. You are of senior years and I don't want a stupid argument with someone so venerable and honoured/
Pax. I hope you are feeling better after your break. Sincerely. The site would not be the same without you, old boy.
Your were not TOTY but POTY .... well quite.
My GE prediction was Con 305 seats and a Coalition with the LibDems. One seat out.
However in the spirit of fraternal PBing I wish all your puss fill warts a speedy end and more power to your drink fuelled ramblings. It entertains us all
On Topic. Answer to OGHs question (or is it bait), because the figures are distorted by large numbers of people in safe tory seats are planning to vote UKIP who voted tory last time and Labour has a leader who is about as easy to sell to the public as Rolfs paintings.
chestnut Labour would still win most seats and votes in Wales though, unlike Scotland, and because it has such big majorities in Wales only a handful of seats would fall to the Tories. Indeed the Tory vote is only up in Wales from 26% to 27% just as Labour's has fallen from 36% to 29%. the big rise is UKIP on 24%, not enough to make much difference to the significant number Labour would win from the Tories in England on the same poll
People don't like CEOs in tax havens intervening in UK politics 73% felt Boots boss Pessina's intervention unacceptable
Yes, that's what I've heard locally - opinion largely divided between people who feel it was fine for him to comment but who cares what a bloke in Monaco thinks, and people who think he should shut up. The Nottingham Post gave me a column on it today (where I took the former view).
However, it’s also right that when a viewpoint is put forward by someone who no longer lives in this country
Stefano has never lived in the UK. He grew up in Rome, moved to Milan for university and then moved to Monaco about 30 years ago when he separated from his wife.
does not pay taxes here
Not really accurate. He pays VAT and all sorts of other taxes. I'd assume (but have never asked) that he has PAYE applied to his Boots salary. But Alliance Sante (the source of his wealth) was always based outside the UK - it was a pan-European company based in Luxembourg that was set up to acquire ASI (his father's company) and the Spanish business that was his first international acquisition)
does not pay taxes here and is therefore not a contributing member of our society, that this is also highlighted
Bullshit. You can be a contributing member of society regardless of whether you pay tax or not. Society is not the same as the State.
Can I suggest you employ a fact-checker?
"does not pay taxes here and is therefore not a contributing member of our society"
I didn't realise Nick had written that.
So anyone who doesn't pay taxes here - including millions of benefit claimants - are not a contributing member of our society.
Perhaps Ed/Nick would like to take the vote from them too?
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Where the British military is engaged in humanitarian activity it should receive additional funding from DfID's budget.
I always wondered why they didn't use that as a fix?
After all they used the same trick (although more damagingly) when they shifted the World Service from the FCO to the BBC budget
The RAF aid drops for Yazidi civilians fleeing ISIS were largely funded by the Department for International Development. Likewise, sending troops to help with Ebola.
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Odd spin from the Telegraph. It wasn't the government wot done it, it was those beastly civil servants.
The last 15 published polls have seen 10 LAB leads 4 CON-LAB level pegging 1 CON lead
This week's 10 polls have a simple average Labour lead of 1.7% - ELBOW will be published once the YG tables are out.
Remind us what last week's ELBOW was. Is Labour's lead up this week?
Labour's lead was 0.8% last week
Does that include the TNS 11%?
Excluding that poll, the lead was 0.4%.
You really shouldn't include that poll.
Not properly weighted.
As far as I know, Opinium and Ipsos-MORI don't past-vote weight either, and TNS-BMRB doesn't as a matter of routine. (Not sure about recent polls that have been published under the TNS/TNS Global brand).
Mike, thanks for pointing out the effect of those English poll figures. They basically increase the Labour seats by 20 to 30 seats using almost any forecasting method, leaving them perhaps 10-15 seats short of a majority.
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Odd spin from the Telegraph. It wasn't the government wot done it, it was those beastly civil servants.
It's quite normal for Civil Servants to be asked to spend their budgets by the end of the financial year. Personally, I think they should be rewarded for under-spending, assuming they achieve their objectives, and receive a proportion of the saving as a bonus.
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
I think it is all fart and no follow through.
If you're applying for a job that requires a CRB or DBS check, it would show up already.
It's part of the "let's make people unemployable if they have broken the law" meme. Unfortunately means the rest of us will continue to provide them with a living through the benefits system.
Ah, so another plot to increase the size of the Benefits dependent Labour client vote
Incorrect pensioners are the biggest group of benefit claimants they predominantly vote Tory
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
Where the British military is engaged in humanitarian activity it should receive additional funding from DfID's budget.
I always wondered why they didn't use that as a fix?
After all they used the same trick (although more damagingly) when they shifted the World Service from the FCO to the BBC budget
The RAF aid drops for Yazidi civilians fleeing ISIS were largely funded by the Department for International Development. Likewise, sending troops to help with Ebola.
Yes, but easy to do it with specific projects.
But you could make a case for allocating, say, £2bn from DfID's budget to the MoD as a contribution towards the standing cost of maintaining capacity for emergency humanitarian intervention.
Sunil Indeed, which was also why there was such anger here over EU demands we increase our EU budget contributions. Personally, I would end ringfencing tomorrow, overseas aid, free TV licenses for wealthy pensioners, non-frontline health and education spending should face the same cuts as every other department
DecrepitJohnL It was of course the government target the civil servants had to meet
50% think it would be a bad thing if SNP were part of coalition after election, only 16% a good thing
Among Labour supporters 37% would support a Labour deal with SNP, 38% would be opposed
I don't see what Labour would have to lose by ruling out a coalition with the SNP, the SNP have said it's very unlikely that they'd be up for it, so it wouldn't look opportunistic by Labour. Neither party wants a coalition. Judging by some Scottish polls, people in Scotland seem to think it's actually a viable option.
Confidence and supply on some issues and abstention on others would suit both Labour and the SNP. Once a minority government is formed the general public aren't going to be interested in who votes through each individual bill.
People convicted of homophobic, transgender or disability hate crime would be put on a “blacklist” to warn future employers of past misdemeanours under new proposals by Labour.
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
I think it is all fart and no follow through.
If you're applying for a job that requires a CRB or DBS check, it would show up already.
It's part of the "let's make people unemployable if they have broken the law" meme. Unfortunately means the rest of us will continue to provide them with a living through the benefits system.
Ah, so another plot to increase the size of the Benefits dependent Labour client vote
Incorrect pensioners are the biggest group of benefit claimants they predominantly vote Tory
Complete non-sequitur.
But, in any case, you are obviously happy with the idea that criminals should be supported for the rest of their lives by the state.
Comments
Copyright - @SeanT
JackW Will Never Be Prime Minister.
It's worrying for the Conservatives and very worrying for the LDs. The conundrum for me is the potential impact of the Green vote in LD seats. One example is Ed Davey's seat - K&S might well be the kind of place where the Green candidate draws enough LD votes to get the Conservatives home. We don't know at this stage.
In my seat (East Ham), a Green candidate will make no difference to the result but could (perhaps) draw a small amount off the Labour vote. Again, we don't know.
That's politician speak.
It doesn't matter what it means, as long as it sounds good.
(I offer translations for very moderate fees if you so desire)
;-)
60 hours
In Sean's case a padded cell might be better than a ringfence?
(issajokesean)
I read somewhere that we vote for candidates, not parties, and that instead of looking at UNS you have to look at individual constituency polls conducted last August by well-known but relatively new polling firms we won't be using again.
Colour me confused.
Sadly, I'm not convinced by his party's policies.
PB decided I and not you was TOTY and how right their collective wisdom was.
Go back to frightening old ladies and the children. The rest of us will not be moved.
Tony Blair has moved to end talk of a rift with Ed Miliband as he pledged to offer whatever support the Labour leader wants in the runup to the 7 May election.
With Miliband under intense pressure after a succession of business leaders criticised his policies as bad for the country, the former prime minister made clear that he was ready to aid Miliband’s push to restore Labour to power.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/07/tony-blair-ed-miliband-labour-general-election
Sunil I believe so, and India's space programme. Indeed, while we are shutting libraries and theatres, sacking soldiers and policemen, raising tuition fees, slashing legal aid and welfare, and the NHS and social care are facing ever more pressures, it was gratifying to see DFID civil servants went on a £1 billion spending spree of taxpayers' money to ensure they did not underspend and fail to meet Cameron's target of spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11349411/Civil-Servants-spent-extra-1billion-in-eight-weeks-to-hit-aid-target.html
BTW charles, have you had an opportunity to call in at the Finborough Arms as yet?
Been juggling a jetlagged baby, so not yet...
If OGH didn't write threads that challenged the site narrative it would be unbearable! He joined in with the pro tory narrative in Rochester and ended up with oeuf sur his visage like the rest of the unthinkers, so perhaps he's has enough
Con 32, Lab 33, LD 7, UKIP 15, Greens 8
"We fired our guns and the British kept a-coming. There wasn't quite as many as there was a while ago; We fired once more and they began a-running; all down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_iRIcxsz0
@computor will appreciate from 1:05 onwards...
Tories seen as having best policies towards British business by 33% to Labour's 19% - same split as on economy
(That's it for the weekend, I presume?)
(foreword by TSE)
*sometimes safe for work*
It could be the New Nighthawks slogan?
Which doesn't mean there won't be any more.
Crimestop doubleplusgood crimethink.
43% think a Labour victory would be bad for British business, just 19% think it would be good
Paradoxically, 38% say govt should primarily support big business, 49% it should do more to stand up to it
Quite a few of those think that would be a good thing.
People don't like CEOs in tax havens intervening in UK politics 73% felt Boots boss Pessina's intervention unacceptable
I'm sure not being able to get jobs afterwards will help them learn the error of their ways rather than seeing no point in reforming as they'll still be screwed either way.
After all they used the same trick (although more damagingly) when they shifted the World Service from the FCO to the BBC budget
10 LAB leads
4 CON-LAB level pegging
1 CON lead
If you're applying for a job that requires a CRB or DBS check, it would show up already.
And what is the most popular story on the BBC site?
"Keep daffodils away from food"
*sighs*
"Keep daffodils away from food"
That was a plot line for one of the generic cop/forensic shows....which fortunately I can't remember the name of.
They'd lose a lot of Welsh seats, as well as Scottish, in that scenario.
attitudes hardening on Isis. UK air strikes on Isis backed by 63%, up from 59% in October. A new high
32% would support sending UK group troops back into Iraq, the same as in October
Found the 2010 article I referred to earlier.
[URL]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/voters-tell-brown-and-cameron-stop-lying-to-us-1941434.html[/URL]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/voters-tell-brown-and-cameron-stop-lying-to-us-1941434.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/voters-tell-brown-and-cameron-stop-lying-to-us-1941434.html
50% think it would be a bad thing if SNP were part of coalition after election, only 16% a good thing
Among Labour supporters 37% would support a Labour deal with SNP, 38% would be opposed
http://www.nottinghampost.com/Nick-Palmer/story-25981331-detail/story.html
Did they ask a question about possible Conservative partners?
No italics as on mobile.
Excluding YG (data awaited), but inc. Opinium, this week's lead is 1.5%
However, it’s also right that when a viewpoint is put forward by someone who no longer lives in this country
Stefano has never lived in the UK. He grew up in Rome, moved to Milan for university and then moved to Monaco about 30 years ago when he separated from his wife.
does not pay taxes here
Not really accurate. He pays VAT and all sorts of other taxes. I'd assume (but have never asked) that he has PAYE applied to his Boots salary. But Alliance Sante (the source of his wealth) was always based outside the UK - it was a pan-European company based in Luxembourg that was set up to acquire ASI (his father's company) and the Spanish business that was his first international acquisition)
does not pay taxes here and is therefore not a contributing member of our society, that this is also highlighted
Bullshit. You can be a contributing member of society regardless of whether you pay tax or not. Society is not the same as the State.
Can I suggest you employ a fact-checker?
My GE prediction was Con 305 seats and a Coalition with the LibDems. One seat out.
However in the spirit of fraternal PBing I wish all your puss fill warts a speedy end and more power to your drink fuelled ramblings. It entertains us all
Do NOT confuse your PfPs and PtPs, Sir!
"does not pay taxes here and is therefore not a contributing member of our society"
I didn't realise Nick had written that.
So anyone who doesn't pay taxes here - including millions of benefit claimants - are not a contributing member of our society.
Perhaps Ed/Nick would like to take the vote from them too?
Never realised this is what they thought.
Not properly weighted.
DFID doesn't include the net £10 billion we give to the relatively well-off countries of the EU each year (Europe also has a space programme!).
Ed Milband Will Never Be Prime Minister
But you could make a case for allocating, say, £2bn from DfID's budget to the MoD as a contribution towards the standing cost of maintaining capacity for emergency humanitarian intervention.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/07/labour-conservatives-opinion-poll-miliband-cameron
Opinium/Observer Lab 34% Con 32% UKIP 15% Green 8% Lib Dem 7%
Perhaps the "Ed is Crap" meme has been pushed so hard and long the public no longer take notice of it.
DecrepitJohnL It was of course the government target the civil servants had to meet
Confidence and supply on some issues and abstention on others would suit both Labour and the SNP. Once a minority government is formed the general public aren't going to be interested in who votes through each individual bill.
But, in any case, you are obviously happy with the idea that criminals should be supported for the rest of their lives by the state.