These seats are showing rises in the UKIP vote share of anything from 20-36%. My guess is that you would see similar rises in the Thanets, Thurrock, Dover, Folkestone, South Yorkshire (outside of Sheffield) , Cornwall, Plymouth, Grimsby, Dudley. Those rises are similar to the kind of swings the SNP is getting. If UKIP can maintain those figures, it seems very likely that at least some of the seats in question will fall to them.
Quite simply amazing that people have taken these polls as bad for ukip... It almost confirms a bias more extreme than I thought possible.
Ahead on unweighted numbers in South Basildon and East thurrock is simply amazing. I'm on them to win this and am happier about it now than at 10.59 this morning
The numbers speak for themselves. A vote share of 15% overall for UKIP, means a vote share of 16-17% in England. That means a vote share of 20% outside London and the core cities. That means a vote share of 25-30% in UKIP's best counties. That means a vote share of 30%+ in UKIP's best seats. That means some of UKIP's targets fall.
No need to go through all those stages - you can see above that you have a vote share of 30%+ in two of your best seats. Which isn't enough to win them. And I think you yourself expect UKIP to fall back a little by the election, don't you?
All that said, if you get 35%-40% in half a dozen [non-Clacton] seats you'd be unlucky to lose them all.
Shows up the financial shenanigans that goes on behind the scenes at Westminster.
I want my short money too.
There's a large, untested assumption there, namely that you can pro-rata for a part year. If you can't then I suggest UKIP will have to wait.
I don't know who makes that decision. If it is the other parties (or a committee thereof), then do you really expect them to give vote-competitor UKIP a big lump of money?
These seats are showing rises in the UKIP vote share of anything from 20-36%. My guess is that you would see similar rises in the Thanets, Thurrock, Dover, Folkestone, South Yorkshire (outside of Sheffield) , Cornwall, Plymouth, Grimsby, Dudley. Those rises are similar to the kind of swings the SNP is getting. If UKIP can maintain those figures, it seems very likely that at least some of the seats in question will fall to them.
Quite simply amazing that people have taken these polls as bad for ukip... It almost confirms a bias more extreme than I thought possible.
Ahead on unweighted numbers in South Basildon and East thurrock is simply amazing. I'm on them to win this and am happier about it now than at 10.59 this morning
The numbers speak for themselves. A vote share of 15% overall for UKIP, means a vote share of 16-17% in England. That means a vote share of 20% outside London and the core cities. That means a vote share of 25-30% in UKIP's best counties. That means a vote share of 30%+ in UKIP's best seats. That means some of UKIP's targets fall.
No need to go through all those stages - you can see above that you have a vote share of 30%+ in two of your best seats. Which isn't enough to win them. And I think you yourself expect UKIP to fall back a little by the election, don't you?
All that said, if you get 35%-40% in half a dozen [non-Clacton] seats you'd be unlucky to lose them all.
Not sure if it counts as "unlucky" to come up against voters who want you even less than other parties - and are prepared to vote accordingly. Some might just call that democracy?
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
Mr. Indigo, not sure I'd see anything wrong with calling the frogs frogs, anymore than I'd be irked to be called a rosbif (which, I gather, is French for 'clearly superior Anglo-Saxon').
One of the reasons I learned French at school, was so I could mock les grenouilles in their own language.
They hate the Rosbification of their language.
I learnt French AND German (up to GCSE level, at any rate!)
I learnt French, German and Latin at school, plus I can speak, inter alia, Urdu and Punjabi
One of my French friends accused me the other day of speaking "King's French"
They really do need to update the textbooks at school...
(admittedly I had just sent her a text reading Merci Madam, Vous ete tres gentil)
My German is Hochdeutsch, which is at such odds with my native cockney that it caused one of my teachers to comment that my German accent is a good deal better than my English.
Mine is Schweizerdeutsch, so I suspect we'd better stick to English!
I find the reaction to Germany's stance on all sides astonishing.
People really can't seem to grasp that a major government could make a simple decision not to throw good taxpayer money after bad
They are about to. Greece is due 7bn at the end of this month. If they fall out the Euro then Germany gets saddled a large share of quarter of a trillion euros of crystallised Target2 money, plus Greek bonds held by the ECB, plus bilateral loans.
If they find some excuse to make the UK liable for any of that it might move the vote significantly.
Surely these are decent results for UKIP. Castle Point samples were taken prior to their campaign launch on Canvey for a start. I'd expect them to be ahead there now. To be in contention in Basildon is surprising and with plenty of Labour votes to squeeze it's game on. The one worry is that they selected too young a candidate in Boston. Personally I wouldn't vote anyone under the age of 25 (definitely not the awful Emily Benn!), I think this may make it a tighter race than necessary. The Cambridgeshire seat was never on their radar which makes me think Ashcroft may have polled the likes of Thanet South and Great Yarmouth but withheld the results for certain reasons!
These seats are showing rises in the UKIP vote share of anything from 20-36%. My guess is that you would see similar rises in the Thanets, Thurrock, Dover, Folkestone, South Yorkshire (outside of Sheffield) , Cornwall, Plymouth, Grimsby, Dudley. Those rises are similar to the kind of swings the SNP is getting. If UKIP can maintain those figures, it seems very likely that at least some of the seats in question will fall to them.
Quite simply amazing that people have taken these polls as bad for ukip... It almost confirms a bias more extreme than I thought possible.
Ahead on unweighted numbers in South Basildon and East thurrock is simply amazing. I'm on them to win this and am happier about it now than at 10.59 this morning
Surely you'd concede that you can't really claim a rise of 36% as a true reflection, given that Bob Spink MP polled 27% in Castle Point last time with UKIP support? So ignoring Castle Point, you're looking at a rise of 23% on average. Which isn't winning UKIP anything [by-elections excepted].
Clearly these numbers are impressive, given where you were in 2010. Clearly they are consistent with 15% or so nationwide. But these are some of UKIP's best seats and they aren't currently winning them according to the pollster's own interpretation of their data. If you want to interpret otherwise, go right ahead.
I am interpreting them otherwise! Quite obviously
No need to turn this into a cock fight, feel free to bet how you like
I am happier with Ukips position in castle point and s BASILDON than I was 4 hours ago... Apologies
I had the same things constantly said to me on here re clacton and Rochester... I stuck to my guns and was successful, but maybe at the GE I will be proven wrong
If you like we can make bets castle point, Boston and South Bas?
Evs in the first two and you lay me 4/1 in the. 3rd?
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
Dear me. Not a nice story, but you're turning into a green-ink parody with some of your comments.
Mr. Indigo, not sure I'd see anything wrong with calling the frogs frogs, anymore than I'd be irked to be called a rosbif (which, I gather, is French for 'clearly superior Anglo-Saxon').
One of the reasons I learned French at school, was so I could mock les grenouilles in their own language.
They hate the Rosbification of their language.
I learnt French AND German (up to GCSE level, at any rate!)
I learnt French, German and Latin at school, plus I can speak, inter alia, Urdu and Punjabi
One of my French friends accused me the other day of speaking "King's French"
They really do need to update the textbooks at school...
(admittedly I had just sent her a text reading Merci Madam, Vous ete tres gentil)
My German is Hochdeutsch, which is at such odds with my native cockney that it caused one of my teachers to comment that my German accent is a good deal better than my English.
Mine is Schweizerdeutsch, so I suspect we'd better stick to English!
Kein Deutsch, nur ein bischen Schwabisch.
I'm actually spending a day in Swabia next month. It'll be nice to have a whole day in the same country
They are about to. Greece is due 7bn at the end of this month.
True, but the Germans have calculated this against what they might be liable for if they keep this charade going.
An amount of money so great in the end, that, as pointed out, it will be Greece that has the whip hand.
It's not just that, it is the fear of losing discipline in the rest of Southern Europe. Germany has around €400bn worth of liabilities to Southern Europe, only €70bn are related to Greece. Better to lose €70bn than all €400bn being put up for "renegotiation" if Greece gets its way. At least that is the thinking in Germany.
Thank you Morris_Dancer! shame I had to join after a few lunchtime drinks! As a long time lurker I must say I was expecting to comment on Scottish constituencies today but Ashcroft threw a bit of a curveball. After jumping on UKIP winning Castle Point a couple of weeks back I'm very much on #TeamHuntman and see the polling results as being rather encouraging.
Greece - Extend and Pretend Germany - No more pretence Greece - You started it, you lent us too much Germany - nein, your borrowed from us Greece - but you invaded us...
hmm. Not going so well for the Euro. At bloody last, an end will be in sight to the endless recession and financial repression.
"Assistant Chief Constable Wayne Mawson told the committee that a total of 20,086 records had been lost because a "computer programmer pressed the wrong button between May and July last year".
Mr. Flashman (deceased), does make me wonder if Miliband's going to try waving his head in the air and saying, "These aren't the donations you're looking for."
This is fascinating. I'm reading that Merkel's lefty allies are starting to buckle on this stance.
Could it bring down the German government?
Unlikely. Helping Greece renege on their debts is not a popular position in Germany. If the SPD bring down the government over that issue they will get destroyed in a federal election (given that Merkel won't be able to pass a vote of confidence and there isn't a viable coalition available without the CDU/CSU). The CDU, domestically, have no choice but to take this line, if they softball Greece then AfD will begin to threaten the centre-right consensus.
All things considered, we believe that a Grexit would not lead to a degree of direct contagion that would drive other sovereigns out of the euro, not least because the eurozone rescue architecture is more robust than during the last Grexit scare in 2012.
We believe that the financial burden of a Grexit on the remaining 18 eurozone sovereigns would be moderate and absorbed over decades, and we therefore do not expect that a Grexit, by itself, would have significant rating implications for these sovereign.
These seats are showing rises in the UKIP vote share of anything from 20-36%. My guess is that you would see similar rises in the Thanets, Thurrock, Dover, Folkestone, South Yorkshire (outside of Sheffield) , Cornwall, Plymouth, Grimsby, Dudley. Those rises are similar to the kind of swings the SNP is getting. If UKIP can maintain those figures, it seems very likely that at least some of the seats in question will fall to them.
Quite simply amazing that people have taken these polls as bad for ukip... It almost confirms a bias more extreme than I thought possible.
Ahead on unweighted numbers in South Basildon and East thurrock is simply amazing. I'm on them to win this and am happier about it now than at 10.59 this morning
Surely you'd concede that you can't really claim a rise of 36% as a true reflection, given that Bob Spink MP polled 27% in Castle Point last time with UKIP support? So ignoring Castle Point, you're looking at a rise of 23% on average. Which isn't winning UKIP anything [by-elections excepted].
Clearly these numbers are impressive, given where you were in 2010. Clearly they are consistent with 15% or so nationwide. But these are some of UKIP's best seats and they aren't currently winning them according to the pollster's own interpretation of their data. If you want to interpret otherwise, go right ahead.
I am interpreting them otherwise! Quite obviously
No need to turn this into a cock fight, feel free to bet how you like
I am happier with Ukips position in castle point and s BASILDON than I was 4 hours ago... Apologies
I had the same things constantly said to me on here re clacton and Rochester... I stuck to my guns and was successful, but maybe at the GE I will be proven wrong
If you like we can make bets castle point, Boston and South Bas?
Evs in the first two and you lay me 4/1 in the. 3rd?
I think the Boston poll is the headline "bad for UKIP" here - when you're 4/7 you're not expecting to be 3% behind.
I've already said I think the 4/1 is more than fair on Basildon and you certainly seem to have an inside line on that one. Couldn't go bigger than 3s.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
These seats are showing rises in the UKIP vote share of anything from 20-36%. My guess is that you would see similar rises in the Thanets, Thurrock, Dover, Folkestone, South Yorkshire (outside of Sheffield) , Cornwall, Plymouth, Grimsby, Dudley. Those rises are similar to the kind of swings the SNP is getting. If UKIP can maintain those figures, it seems very likely that at least some of the seats in question will fall to them.
Quite simply amazing that people have taken these polls as bad for ukip... It almost confirms a bias more extreme than I thought possible.
Ahead on unweighted numbers in South Basildon and East thurrock is simply amazing. I'm on them to win this and am happier about it now than at 10.59 this morning
Surely you'd concede that you can't really claim a rise of 36% as a true reflection, given that Bob Spink MP polled 27% in Castle Point last time with UKIP support? So ignoring Castle Point, you're looking at a rise of 23% on average. Which isn't winning UKIP anything [by-elections excepted].
Clearly these numbers are impressive, given where you were in 2010. Clearly they are consistent with 15% or so nationwide. But these are some of UKIP's best seats and they aren't currently winning them according to the pollster's own interpretation of their data. If you want to interpret otherwise, go right ahead.
I am interpreting them otherwise! Quite obviously
No need to turn this into a cock fight, feel free to bet how you like
I am happier with Ukips position in castle point and s BASILDON than I was 4 hours ago... Apologies
I had the same things constantly said to me on here re clacton and Rochester... I stuck to my guns and was successful, but maybe at the GE I will be proven wrong
If you like we can make bets castle point, Boston and South Bas?
Evs in the first two and you lay me 4/1 in the. 3rd?
I think the Boston poll is the headline "bad for UKIP" here - when you're 4/7 you're not expecting to be 3% behind.
I've already said I think the 4/1 is more than fair on Basildon and you certainly seem to have an inside line on that one. Couldn't go bigger than 3s.
Fair enough shall we have a couple of friendly bets at evens on Boston and castle point?
Mr. Indigo, not sure I'd see anything wrong with calling the frogs frogs, anymore than I'd be irked to be called a rosbif (which, I gather, is French for 'clearly superior Anglo-Saxon').
One of the reasons I learned French at school, was so I could mock les grenouilles in their own language.
They hate the Rosbification of their language.
I learnt French AND German (up to GCSE level, at any rate!)
I learnt French, German and Latin at school, plus I can speak, inter alia, Urdu and Punjabi
One of my French friends accused me the other day of speaking "King's French"
They really do need to update the textbooks at school...
(admittedly I had just sent her a text reading Merci Madam, Vous ete tres gentil)
My German is Hochdeutsch, which is at such odds with my native cockney that it caused one of my teachers to comment that my German accent is a good deal better than my English.
Posh English accents originated in Germany, whereas working class accents originated in France and Scandinavia?
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
Their behaviour doesn't even come close to what happened in the 30's.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
In Westminster under FPTP there's no prize for coming second in any seat or for having a reasonable percentage of the votes. Obviously UKIP are a major party in Euro elections but it's unlikely that they will be in Westminster elections. The SNP on the other hand may well be a major Westminster party.
These seats are showing rises in the UKIP vote share of anything from 20-36%. My guess is that you would see similar rises in the Thanets, Thurrock, Dover, Folkestone, South Yorkshire (outside of Sheffield) , Cornwall, Plymouth, Grimsby, Dudley. Those rises are similar to the kind of swings the SNP is getting. If UKIP can maintain those figures, it seems very likely that at least some of the seats in question will fall to them.
Quite simply amazing that people have taken these polls as bad for ukip... It almost confirms a bias more extreme than I thought possible.
Ahead on unweighted numbers in South Basildon and East thurrock is simply amazing. I'm on them to win this and am happier about it now than at 10.59 this morning
Surely you'd concede that you can't really claim a rise of 36% as a true reflection, given that Bob Spink MP polled 27% in Castle Point last time with UKIP support? So ignoring Castle Point, you're looking at a rise of 23% on average. Which isn't winning UKIP anything [by-elections excepted].
Clearly these numbers are impressive, given where you were in 2010. Clearly they are consistent with 15% or so nationwide. But these are some of UKIP's best seats and they aren't currently winning them according to the pollster's own interpretation of their data. If you want to interpret otherwise, go right ahead.
I am interpreting them otherwise! Quite obviously
No need to turn this into a cock fight, feel free to bet how you like
I am happier with Ukips position in castle point and s BASILDON than I was 4 hours ago... Apologies
I had the same things constantly said to me on here re clacton and Rochester... I stuck to my guns and was successful, but maybe at the GE I will be proven wrong
If you like we can make bets castle point, Boston and South Bas?
Evs in the first two and you lay me 4/1 in the. 3rd?
I think the Boston poll is the headline "bad for UKIP" here - when you're 4/7 you're not expecting to be 3% behind.
I've already said I think the 4/1 is more than fair on Basildon and you certainly seem to have an inside line on that one. Couldn't go bigger than 3s.
Fair enough shall we have a couple of friendly bets at evens on Boston and castle point?
Yeah, happy to do that, you probably have more idea than I do but 50:50 on each seems fair. Will message you re stakes.
I see Labour are (putting it charitably) utterly confused:
The Labour party has done some analysis on the new data from the Electoral Commission which suggests that hedge fund donors gave the Conservative party £2m over last last quarter of 2014.
Some journalist ought to ask them how on earth they come to that conclusion, which is utter bollocks. It's very worrying that a party which clearly hasn't the faintest clue about what businesses do might actually be in power in a few weeks' time.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
The political picture in England and Wales is so so different from Scotland now... it's tricky.
Well the answer is to take two level view of things adding a regional view of things to the national view. Unfortunately the one group who don't seem to want to do that are the TV companies (as demonstrated by the latest absurd debate proposals which seem to breach Ofcom rules). So Ofcom really do need to sort the TV companies out.
The regime under which UK intelligence agencies, including MI5 and MI6, have been monitoring conversations between lawyers and their clients for the past five years is unlawful, the British government has admitted.
The admission that the activities of the security services have failed to comply fully with human rights laws in a second major area – this time highly sensitive legally privileged communications – is a severe embarrassment for the government.
The admission that the regime surrounding state snooping on legally privileged communications has also failed to comply with the European convention on human rights comes in advance of a legal challenge, to be heard early next month, in which the security services are alleged to have unlawfully intercepted conversations between lawyers and their clients to provide the government with an advantage in court.
And we want to give them more powers to misuse in this way, such as the encryption idiocy that Cameron is proposing ?!
Mr. Indigo, I agree entirely. The Conservative policy on the internet is ****ing insane. If Balls weren't the Labour candidate here I'd probably be looking elsewhere.
I see Labour are (putting it charitably) utterly confused:
The Labour party has done some analysis on the new data from the Electoral Commission which suggests that hedge fund donors gave the Conservative party £2m over last last quarter of 2014.
Some journalist ought to ask them how on earth they come to that conclusion, which is utter bollocks. It's very worrying that a party which clearly hasn't the faintest clue about what businesses do might actually be in power in a few weeks' time.
Looking on the blog they bring up the point that the Tories received donations from three people with HSBC Swiss accounts. Is this guilt by association, or has it been shown all clients at the bank were given (and used) tax avoidance advice? Guilt is also a pretty strong word, since it apparently wasn't illegal.
I see Labour are (putting it charitably) utterly confused:
The Labour party has done some analysis on the new data from the Electoral Commission which suggests that hedge fund donors gave the Conservative party £2m over last last quarter of 2014.
Some journalist ought to ask them how on earth they come to that conclusion, which is utter bollocks. It's very worrying that a party which clearly hasn't the faintest clue about what businesses do might actually be in power in a few weeks' time.
Do you remember a few years ago when Mirror ran a big splash about the % of money Tories got from the "City"...and on closer inspection their definition of the "City" was about as honest and accurate as Lord Mandleson claims around number of new Green jobs which was found to included people like shoe makers.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
In Westminster under FPTP there's no prize for coming second in any seat or for having a reasonable percentage of the votes. Obviously UKIP are a major party in Euro elections but it's unlikely that they will be in Westminster elections. The SNP on the other hand may well be a major Westminster party.
Ofcom have a perfectly reasonable set of criteria for judging such things. Its laid out in the report I linked previously. It takes account of far more considerations than your rather convenient simplistic view does. If you don't like it I suggest you take it up with them. I'm sure they will enjoy you repeating one of Mike Smithson's favourite sayings even if I think it rather misses the point.
Mr. Indigo, not sure I'd see anything wrong with calling the frogs frogs, anymore than I'd be irked to be called a rosbif (which, I gather, is French for 'clearly superior Anglo-Saxon').
One of the reasons I learned French at school, was so I could mock les grenouilles in their own language.
They hate the Rosbification of their language.
I learnt French AND German (up to GCSE level, at any rate!)
I learnt French, German and Latin at school, plus I can speak, inter alia, Urdu and Punjabi
One of my French friends accused me the other day of speaking "King's French"
They really do need to update the textbooks at school...
(admittedly I had just sent her a text reading Merci Madam, Vous ete tres gentil)
My German is Hochdeutsch, which is at such odds with my native cockney that it caused one of my teachers to comment that my German accent is a good deal better than my English.
Posh English accents originated in Germany, whereas working class accents originated in France and Scandinavia?
Dunno.
My accent originated in Hackney Wick, which had no posh bits at the time.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
In Westminster under FPTP there's no prize for coming second in any seat or for having a reasonable percentage of the votes. Obviously UKIP are a major party in Euro elections but it's unlikely that they will be in Westminster elections. The SNP on the other hand may well be a major Westminster party.
I think Ofcom make their determination based on support, not seats.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
In Westminster under FPTP there's no prize for coming second in any seat or for having a reasonable percentage of the votes. Obviously UKIP are a major party in Euro elections but it's unlikely that they will be in Westminster elections. The SNP on the other hand may well be a major Westminster party.
Second past the post may well be a very worthwhile position if a second election.
Greetings from the eurozone btw. Great value here, even in € prices are down, great value in £.
Financial rigour is worth it in the end, inflation and devaluation are not a route to prosperity.
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
In Westminster under FPTP there's no prize for coming second in any seat or for having a reasonable percentage of the votes. Obviously UKIP are a major party in Euro elections but it's unlikely that they will be in Westminster elections. The SNP on the other hand may well be a major Westminster party.
I think Ofcom make their determination based on support, not seats.
IIRC Both actually. Polls, Performance and seats in all interim elections and performance and seats at previous general elections if I remember correctly.
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
F1: surprising news, from the Sky F1 livefeed: "Breaking news: Marussia have finalised a deal which will see the team come out of administration with the aim of returning to the 2015 grid in the guise of Manor F1."
If Ukip end up with 2 or 3 seats then the decision to categorise them as a "major" party will look particularly foolish.
No it won't as Ofcom specfies in its criteria for selection of major party status it is not solely based on the number of seats won at the General Election. Ofcom fully justified the inclusion of UKIP. Furthermore, if UKIP poll a larger vote share and retain more deposits than the Libdems surely that would then raise the question of whether the Libdems are a major party or not? Funny you didn't mention that?
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
In Westminster under FPTP there's no prize for coming second in any seat or for having a reasonable percentage of the votes. Obviously UKIP are a major party in Euro elections but it's unlikely that they will be in Westminster elections. The SNP on the other hand may well be a major Westminster party.
Second past the post may well be a very worthwhile position if a second election.
Greetings from the eurozone btw. Great value here, even in € prices are down, great value in £.
Financial rigour is worth it in the end, inflation and devaluation are not a route to prosperity.
Do you believe people should be allowed to declare bankruptcy or would they be better off in the long run sticking to economic rigour and always paying their debts? Defaulting is a legitimate policy for sovereigns, Iceland being a good example.
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
Things must be bad in Euroland - the BBC are leading with it. Are there no Tories to bash?
By the by, on the news the other day, I noticed the senior German negotiator was a very stern looking guy in a wheelchair. I thought "this won't end well for Greece - they've brought Dr Strangelove out of retirement...."
Was that wrong?
That's a stroke of luck for the Tories. Otherwise we'd still be hearing about the dangers of deflation and the spike in youth unemployment.
Presenters on BBC TV business news keep trying to get interviewees to say that we are going to enter a disastrous deflationary cycle. For the Beeb there is no unadulterated good news while the Tories are in government.
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
'...'but to ensure they do not attempt to self-harm or hang themselves while in police custody.... Three female officers carried out the strip-search. She was put into a gown... The officers had therefore not acted disproportionately''
We are indeed descending into hell (although that may be better than the Paris Metro) ... ''She had been arrested in 2010 for being drunk and disorderly outside a kebab shop after drinking a large quantity of vodka.''
As for the Gestapo. There is surely even in kipperworld a bit of a difference between trying to stop someone from committing suicide and gassing people for the gold fillings in their teeth.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
Kept the child under observation and called for the parents, as per PACE recommendations. The parents didn't even find out she had been taken into custody until the following morning. Legal ? Yes. Best practise ? Hardly. The judges admitted it was legal, but were far from impressed.
“Children in custody are vulnerable and ... special care is required to protect their interests and well being. [We] express concern that it should have been thought appropriate immediately to remove the clothes of a distressed and vulnerable 14-year-old girl without thought for alternative and less invasive measures to protect her from herself.”
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
To be fair to be BBC they do mention PwC, and Hodges comment, quite clearly in their report. Whether the (undeniably true) heading displays bias, I'll leave up to you to decide.
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
To be fair to be BBC they do mention PwC, and Hodges comment, quite clearly in their report. Whether the (undeniably true) heading displays bias, I'll leave up to you to decide.
On the UK news home page the headline is also true, but even less even-handed
Tories top latest donation figures The Conservatives received the most in donations in the final three months of 2014, according to figures published by the Electoral Commission.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
'...'but to ensure they do not attempt to self-harm or hang themselves while in police custody.... Three female officers carried out the strip-search. She was put into a gown... The officers had therefore not acted disproportionately''
Good old Flightpath, completely glosses over the criticisms made by the judges, the Conservatives can do no wrong!
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
To be fair to be BBC they do mention PwC, and Hodges comment, quite clearly in their report. Whether the (undeniably true) heading displays bias, I'll leave up to you to decide.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
Kept the child under observation and called for the parents, as per PACE recommendations. The parents didn't even find out she had been taken into custody until the following morning. Legal ? Yes. Best practise ? Hardly. The judges admitted it was legal, but were far from impressed.
“Children in custody are vulnerable and ... special care is required to protect their interests and well being. [We] express concern that it should have been thought appropriate immediately to remove the clothes of a distressed and vulnerable 14-year-old girl without thought for alternative and less invasive measures to protect her from herself.”
So you would have been content leaving her with materials to potentially commit suicide? As for being under observation she was. But there is no way that it could have been non stop. It was likely video/intermittent personal obs.
@Indigo Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
"Support by PwC staffers" apparently... but registered as a donation, from a company Labour is labelling as industrial scale tax avoiders, having told the HoC that Labour hadn't received any donations from any tax avoiders.... awkward.
To be fair to be BBC they do mention PwC, and Hodges comment, quite clearly in their report. Whether the (undeniably true) heading displays bias, I'll leave up to you to decide.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
Kept the child under observation and called for the parents, as per PACE recommendations. The parents didn't even find out she had been taken into custody until the following morning. Legal ? Yes. Best practise ? Hardly. The judges admitted it was legal, but were far from impressed.
“Children in custody are vulnerable and ... special care is required to protect their interests and well being. [We] express concern that it should have been thought appropriate immediately to remove the clothes of a distressed and vulnerable 14-year-old girl without thought for alternative and less invasive measures to protect her from herself.”
So you would have been content leaving her with materials to potentially commit suicide? As for being under observation she was. But there is no way that it could have been non stop. It was likely video/intermittent personal obs.
This partisan bullshit is tiring. The judges, who one must assume have at least a passing familiarity with the criminal justice system fell that while it was legal, it was not the best approach. They expressed concern that the police's immediate instinct with a distressed minor was to take her clothes off, rather than say sit her down with a cup of tea and let her calm down, while someone called so see if her parents were available. Since no one tried, we shall never know if they could have been there in half an hour and this whole sorry business could have been avoided.
I wasn't surprised by the others but with Boston it's a different thing. I'm surprised in Boston that UKIP takes many more votes there from Labour than the Tories and performing their worst among he over 65's, which is the opposite of their nationwide profile. Boston is UKIP's greatest stronghold yet they perform worse there than in other seats.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
'...'but to ensure they do not attempt to self-harm or hang themselves while in police custody.... Three female officers carried out the strip-search. She was put into a gown... The officers had therefore not acted disproportionately''
We are indeed descending into hell (although that may be better than the Paris Metro) ... ''She had been arrested in 2010 for being drunk and disorderly outside a kebab shop after drinking a large quantity of vodka.''
As for the Gestapo. There is surely even in kipperworld a bit of a difference between trying to stop someone from committing suicide and gassing people for the gold fillings in their teeth.
No one gassed anyone "when the Nazis came to power in 1933". That came later, hence the words "That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know". Furthermore no one gassed anyone primarily "for the gold fillings in their teeth", and the Gestapo were not responsible for the gassing operations.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
Kept the child under observation and called for the parents, as per PACE recommendations. The parents didn't even find out she had been taken into custody until the following morning. Legal ? Yes. Best practise ? Hardly. The judges admitted it was legal, but were far from impressed.
“Children in custody are vulnerable and ... special care is required to protect their interests and well being. [We] express concern that it should have been thought appropriate immediately to remove the clothes of a distressed and vulnerable 14-year-old girl without thought for alternative and less invasive measures to protect her from herself.”
So you would have been content leaving her with materials to potentially commit suicide? As for being under observation she was. But there is no way that it could have been non stop. It was likely video/intermittent personal obs.
This partisan bullshit is tiring. The judges, who one must assume have at least a passing familiarity with the criminal justice system fell that while it was legal, it was not the best approach. They expressed concern that the police's immediate instinct with a distressed minor was to take her clothes off, rather than say sit her down with a cup of tea and let her calm down, while someone called so see if her parents were available. Since no one tried, we shall never know if they could have been there in half an hour and this whole sorry business could have been avoided.Police not covered in glory, rapped on the knuckles, no real harm done to the girl. Stripped of the politics, it's hardly an earth-shattering story, is it.
A fascinating article about a man who spent 7 days watching Russian TV. It goes a long way to explaining False Flag's state of mind. Doesnt leave any clues about how Flightpath ended up the way he did though.
Mr. Anorak, 'the BBC has learned' is a bloody annoying phrase.
Not as bad as Mark Austin's atrocious attempts at humour at the end of ITV News at Ten, mind.
I watched Newsnight yesterday, and in the piece on Oborne's resignation, they said that the "BBC had learned" about an incident which was reported in his bloody resignation letter!!
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
Kept the child under observation and called for the parents, as per PACE recommendations. The parents didn't even find out she had been taken into custody until the following morning. Legal ? Yes. Best practise ? Hardly. The judges admitted it was legal, but were far from impressed.
“Children in custody are vulnerable and ... special care is required to protect their interests and well being. [We] express concern that it should have been thought appropriate immediately to remove the clothes of a distressed and vulnerable 14-year-old girl without thought for alternative and less invasive measures to protect her from herself.”
So you would have been content leaving her with materials to potentially commit suicide? As for being under observation she was. But there is no way that it could have been non stop. It was likely video/intermittent personal obs.
This partisan bullshit is tiring. The judges, who one must assume have at least a passing familiarity with the criminal justice system fell that while it was legal, it was not the best approach. They expressed concern that the police's immediate instinct with a distressed minor was to take her clothes off, rather than say sit her down with a cup of tea and let her calm down, while someone called so see if her parents were available. Since no one tried, we shall never know if they could have been there in half an hour and this whole sorry business could have been avoided.
What is partisan in asking what you would do? It's all well and good huffing and puffing but unless viable alternative solution can be suggested utterly pointless.
As for sitting down for a nice chat with a pissed up 14 year old, good luck.
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
If you had been the duty custody sergeant, what, exactly, would you have done under those same circumstances?
Kept the child under observation and called for the parents, as per PACE recommendations. The parents didn't even find out she had been taken into custody until the following morning. Legal ? Yes. Best practise ? Hardly. The judges admitted it was legal, but were far from impressed.
“Children in custody are vulnerable and ... special care is required to protect their interests and well being. [We] express concern that it should have been thought appropriate immediately to remove the clothes of a distressed and vulnerable 14-year-old girl without thought for alternative and less invasive measures to protect her from herself.”
So you would have been content leaving her with materials to potentially commit suicide? As for being under observation she was. But there is no way that it could have been non stop. It was likely video/intermittent personal obs.
This partisan bullshit is tiring.
What on earth is partisan about this? In what way is this in any way party political?
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
'...'but to ensure they do not attempt to self-harm or hang themselves while in police custody.... Three female officers carried out the strip-search. She was put into a gown... The officers had therefore not acted disproportionately''
We are indeed descending into hell (although that may be better than the Paris Metro) ... ''She had been arrested in 2010 for being drunk and disorderly outside a kebab shop after drinking a large quantity of vodka.''
As for the Gestapo. There is surely even in kipperworld a bit of a difference between trying to stop someone from committing suicide and gassing people for the gold fillings in their teeth.
A disturbed 14 year old being drunk and disorderly outside a kebab shop in a northern town? What possible risk could she be under?
If only the SYP had taken such girls into custody to protect them from harm.
This partisan bullshit is tiring. The judges, who one must assume have at least a passing familiarity with the criminal justice system fell that while it was legal, it was not the best approach. They expressed concern that the police's immediate instinct with a distressed minor was to take her clothes off, rather than say sit her down with a cup of tea and let her calm down, while someone called so see if her parents were available. Since no one tried, we shall never know if they could have been there in half an hour and this whole sorry business could have been avoided.
Police not covered in glory, rapped on the knuckles, no real harm done to the girl. Stripped of the politics, it's hardly an earth-shattering story, is it.
Well it wouldn't be if the usual suspects didn't treat every such story as a personal attack on the government and cut and paste in large chunks of irrelevancies wrapped in a ladle full of hyperbole in order to say that it was nothing to do with Dave and the Tories are blameless, rather than making an entirely correct and adult observation such as yours above.
A fascinating article about a man who spent 7 days watching Russian TV. It goes a long way to explaining False Flag's state of mind. Doesnt leave any clues about how Flightpath ended up the way he did though.
That is why I don't watch much TV these past 3 years, apart from TV being obsolete. And also why the end of the old media will bring a very different social and political environment.
The weighting adjustments are interesting. In three of the four polls more people chose UKIP than any other party. The odd one out was NE Cambridgeshire where both weighted and unweighted the Tories are ahead.
In the poll for Boston the weightings boosted the Tory figure by 4 points at the expense of UKIP whose figures were shrunk by four points. UKIP had a 5 point advantage in the raw figures.
In the Castlepoint poll the Tories were boosted by 3 and UKIPs figure shrank by two by the weightings. UKIP had a 3 point advantage in the raw figures
In the Basildon poll UKIP had a marginal lead by a couple of people in the raw figures with the weightings boosting the Tories by three points and shrinking UKIPs share by 2 points.
The situation in those seats would seem to rest on how much in these uniquely interesting times the weighting presumptions from previous elections still apply.....
I can understand weighting by who people say they voted for in 2010 if it were a Labour - Tory contest. But in a Tory - UKIP fight such as Castle Point where UKIP didn't even stand last time, it seems to me utterly absurd .
In south Basildon UKIP are not helped by Kerry Smith now standing as an independent and in Boston the spoliers "An Independence from Europe" appear to have the UKIP 2010 candidate standing, so UKIP actually being ahead on raw figures is pretty good going.
This partisan bullshit is tiring. The judges, who one must assume have at least a passing familiarity with the criminal justice system fell that while it was legal, it was not the best approach. They expressed concern that the police's immediate instinct with a distressed minor was to take her clothes off, rather than say sit her down with a cup of tea and let her calm down, while someone called so see if her parents were available. Since no one tried, we shall never know if they could have been there in half an hour and this whole sorry business could have been avoided.
Police not covered in glory, rapped on the knuckles, no real harm done to the girl. Stripped of the politics, it's hardly an earth-shattering story, is it.
Well it wouldn't be if the usual suspects didn't treat every such story as a personal attack on the government and cut and paste in large chunks of irrelevancies wrapped in a ladle full of hyperbole in order to say that it was nothing to do with Dave and the Tories are blameless, rather than making an entirely correct and adult observation such as yours above.
I asked a very simple question. Nothing political in it whatsoever. You need to stop seeing things that are not there.
On the question of possible tactical voting by Labour supporters in seats which appear to be Con/UKIP battles, we have to be careful not to assume that the Labour supporters form a monolithic block who are likely to behave in a uniform way. At the risk of over-simplifying, we can consider two types of Labour voter:
- Traditional WWC Labour voters, more likely to be in socio-economic classes C1/C2 or DE, worried about immigration, possibly working in the public sector in lowish-paid jobs, typically Sun or Mirror readers. These are voters potentially likely to be tempted by UKIP, and , even if they'd prefer a Labour MPS, might therefore be susceptible to tactical voting for the UKIP candidate.
- Liberal-left voters, academics, more highly-paid public sector workers, Guardian or Indy readers, very concerned about racisim and very suspicious that Farage's anti-immigration stance is racist. Such voters might be tempted, if Labour couldn't win in their seat, to hold their noses and vote Tory as the lesser of two evils.
Whether one of these effects happens will depend on the seat and on the UKIP candidate - for example, in Newark, there was definitely anti-UKIP tactical voting, but in Rochester & Strood there may have been anti-Tory tactical voting. Indeed you might get both effects simultaneously in a given seat.
What of those category of labour voters do you think live in thurrock/Basildon?
One of the features of the seats where UKIP have done well is that the Traditional WWC Labour voters would invariably heavily outnumber any urban liberal types
Nationwide I would have thought that rather more of Labours support comes from the first rather than the latter. Which is bad news for Labour.
The urban liberal types will never vote for UKIP because they are Urban Liberal types who in times past would have always voted Liberal but in recent decades since the 1920s have dispersed into the Labour and Tory parties due to no prospect of a Liberal government. Unfortunatley these wets joined the tories in sufficient numbers to eventually take the party over in 2005 which is why they can't get a majority.
Comments
Shows up the financial shenanigans that goes on behind the scenes at Westminster.
I want my short money too.
I think it would work out far worse for Germany in the long run if they agreed to what the Greeks were proposing.
1700 Clonmel
Heart Island 80-1 (VC)
De Name Escapes Me 100-1 (BetFred)
Either/both are value as ew punts if you have accounts with the bookmakers named (and haven't been restricted).
All that said, if you get 35%-40% in half a dozen [non-Clacton] seats you'd be unlucky to lose them all.
I don't know who makes that decision. If it is the other parties (or a committee thereof), then do you really expect them to give vote-competitor UKIP a big lump of money?
Police removal of 14-year-old girl's clothes was legal, court rules http://d.gu.com/8dWTzx
This country is gradually descending into hell. How can this be right? Our judges and police are behaving as the gestapo did when the Nazis came to power in 1933. That soon changed to worse deeds, as we now know.
#liquidity ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31540281
If they find some excuse to make the UK liable for any of that it might move the vote significantly.
To be in contention in Basildon is surprising and with plenty of Labour votes to squeeze it's game on.
The one worry is that they selected too young a candidate in Boston. Personally I wouldn't vote anyone under the age of 25 (definitely not the awful Emily Benn!), I think this may make it a tighter race than necessary. The Cambridgeshire seat was never on their radar which makes me think Ashcroft may have polled the likes of Thanet South and Great Yarmouth but withheld the results for certain reasons!
No need to turn this into a cock fight, feel free to bet how you like
I am happier with Ukips position in castle point and s BASILDON than I was 4 hours ago... Apologies
I had the same things constantly said to me on here re clacton and Rochester... I stuck to my guns and was successful, but maybe at the GE I will be proven wrong
If you like we can make bets castle point, Boston and South Bas?
Evs in the first two and you lay me 4/1 in the. 3rd?
True, but the Germans have calculated this against what they might be liable for if they keep this charade going.
An amount of money so great in the end, that, as pointed out, it will be Greece that has the whip hand.
Germany - No more pretence
Greece - You started it, you lent us too much
Germany - nein, your borrowed from us
Greece - but you invaded us...
hmm. Not going so well for the Euro. At bloody last, an end will be in sight to the endless recession and financial repression.
That said, somebody is screwing up their planning if a single programmer is even _able_ to do this to important data.
This is fascinating. I'm reading that Merkel's lefty allies are starting to buckle on this stance.
Could it bring down the German government?
All things considered, we believe that a Grexit would not lead to a degree of direct contagion that would drive other sovereigns out of the euro, not least because the eurozone rescue architecture is more robust than during the last Grexit scare in 2012.
We believe that the financial burden of a Grexit on the remaining 18 eurozone sovereigns would be moderate and absorbed over decades, and we therefore do not expect that a Grexit, by itself, would have significant rating implications for these sovereign.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/blog/live/2015/feb/19/greece-to-seek-bailout-extension-after-33bn-lifeline
I've already said I think the 4/1 is more than fair on Basildon and you certainly seem to have an inside line on that one. Couldn't go bigger than 3s.
Not only that but does that mean also that even though the SNP will likely only poll a quarter
of the votes of either UKIP or the Libdems at best but could win 40 or 50 seats that they should automatically receive major party status next time around despite not standing in 80% plus of the seats?
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/major-parties-15/summary/Major_parties.pdf
The Labour party has done some analysis on the new data from the Electoral Commission which suggests that hedge fund donors gave the Conservative party £2m over last last quarter of 2014.
Some journalist ought to ask them how on earth they come to that conclusion, which is utter bollocks. It's very worrying that a party which clearly hasn't the faintest clue about what businesses do might actually be in power in a few weeks' time.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/feb/19/nick-clegg-outlines-liberal-democrat-childcare-plans-politics-live-blog
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/18/uk-admits-unlawfully-monitoring-legally-privileged-communications And we want to give them more powers to misuse in this way, such as the encryption idiocy that Cameron is proposing ?!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-NsmlIIAAEZhl_.jpg
My accent originated in Hackney Wick, which had no posh bits at the time.
Greetings from the eurozone btw. Great value here, even in € prices are down, great value in £.
Financial rigour is worth it in the end, inflation and devaluation are not a route to prosperity.
Was this a cash donation, or was it their standard support for the three main parties by way of researchers on an "intern" basis?
Edit, it would probably be better described as a "secondment"
Makes no difference - still registered as donation.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11422875/Labours-in-trouble-over-Ed-Milibands-tax-hypocrisy.html
"Breaking news: Marussia have finalised a deal which will see the team come out of administration with the aim of returning to the 2015 grid in the guise of Manor F1."
b) An attempt to curry favour with a group of politicians who might have large contracts to award in the not too distant future.
Take your pick.
We are indeed descending into hell (although that may be better than the Paris Metro) ... ''She had been arrested in 2010 for being drunk and disorderly outside a kebab shop after drinking a large quantity of vodka.''
As for the Gestapo. There is surely even in kipperworld a bit of a difference between trying to stop someone from committing suicide and gassing people for the gold fillings in their teeth.
a) A contribution towards the better governance of this nation by supporting a political party in its policy development process
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/19/nigel-farage-predicts-david-cameron-will-lead-largest-party-after-election?CMP=share_btn_tw
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31535635
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-31538480
What is this time 17.15pm? Or are BBC stories written by Mike Oldfield?
"Labour top the donations table with the largest single donor being the tax payer, the BBC has learned but would never report."
This partisan bullshit is tiring. The judges, who one must assume have at least a passing familiarity with the criminal justice system fell that while it was legal, it was not the best approach. They expressed concern that the police's immediate instinct with a distressed minor was to take her clothes off, rather than say sit her down with a cup of tea and let her calm down, while someone called so see if her parents were available. Since no one tried, we shall never know if they could have been there in half an hour and this whole sorry business could have been avoided.
I'm surprised in Boston that UKIP takes many more votes there from Labour than the Tories and performing their worst among he over 65's, which is the opposite of their nationwide profile.
Boston is UKIP's greatest stronghold yet they perform worse there than in other seats.
Not as bad as Mark Austin's atrocious attempts at humour at the end of ITV News at Ten, mind.
It's been a confusing day for you, hasn't it?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/magazine/out-of-my-mouth-comes-unimpeachable-manly-truth.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
What is partisan in asking what you would do? It's all well and good huffing and puffing but unless viable alternative solution can be suggested utterly pointless.
As for sitting down for a nice chat with a pissed up 14 year old, good luck.
What on earth is partisan about this? In what way is this in any way party political?
If only the SYP had taken such girls into custody to protect them from harm.
And also why the end of the old media will bring a very different social and political environment.
In south Basildon UKIP are not helped by Kerry Smith now standing as an independent and in Boston the spoliers "An Independence from Europe" appear to have the UKIP 2010 candidate standing, so UKIP actually being ahead on raw figures is pretty good going.
The urban liberal types will never vote for UKIP because they are Urban Liberal types who in times past would have always voted Liberal but in recent decades since the 1920s have dispersed into the Labour and Tory parties due to no prospect of a Liberal government. Unfortunatley these wets joined the tories in sufficient numbers to eventually take the party over in 2005 which is why they can't get a majority.