Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Whatever could this mean?

1235»

Comments

  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723

    MikeL said:

    Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?

    OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.

    Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.

    People have rumbled lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
    I know all that.

    My question was "What has happened in the last week?"

    All of your post applied equally 7 days ago.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    @MikeL No Malcolm Rifkind or NHS crisis stories ?
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    MikeL said:

    Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?

    OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.

    Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.

    People have rumble lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
    Would you take a risk on being hit by a wrecking ball? What can Labour offer to improve things? Why would people want to change things?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @antifrank
    With the Libdems, I wouldn't be putting the house on the swing being uniform?

    At 5% or less, UNS starts to apply and the LD's can't escape the electoral black hole.
    No, they UNDER perform UNS.
    The premise that the LD's will do about 10 seats better than UNS that the polls suggest due to incumbency and tactical voting is around for 4.5 years now, but at 5% Baxter says 3 seats and UNS says 11 seats.

    So clearly the LD's at 5% are at the event horizon, where the physical laws of LD local outperformance no longer apply.
    If you are suggesting the LDs are relying on Quantum Tunnelling then they do have a problem.
    They are more relying on Quantum Leap for someone to possess Nick Clegg's body in early May 2010 and prevent him from entering a coalition with the Tories.
    To what end? Politicians who never spend their political capital are cowards.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @antifrank
    With the Libdems, I wouldn't be putting the house on the swing being uniform?

    At 5% or less, UNS starts to apply and the LD's can't escape the electoral black hole.
    No, they UNDER perform UNS.
    The premise that the LD's will do about 10 seats better than UNS that the polls suggest due to incumbency and tactical voting is around for 4.5 years now, but at 5% Baxter says 3 seats and UNS says 11 seats.

    So clearly the LD's at 5% are at the event horizon, where the physical laws of LD local outperformance no longer apply.
    If you are suggesting the LDs are relying on Quantum Tunnelling then they do have a problem.
    They are more relying on Quantum Leap for someone to possess Nick Clegg's body in early May 2010 and prevent him from entering a coalition with the Tories.
    To what end? Politicians who never spend their political capital are cowards.
    And get re-elected to live another day.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @MikeL
    I can agree with that. It might be people really did engage with student fees, but I feel it is unlikely to have moved the polls much.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)

    Changes since the last election.

    Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%

    UKIP only hurts the Tories?

    The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.
    SNP taking some off Labour so that would mean more going to Labour to balance out. So say 5 missing? Then again some Labour will have gone to greens so maybe that counteract that .. er doesn't it?
    Any road up... It seems to me the LDs are a bit lower than they should be for the policies they represent, but not hugely so.
    Their vote above that has been built on protest, not for actually doing anything in government. They have been very poor in enunciating the issues of actually being in government and the people who had voted for them are not interested in that anyway. Those people only want to complain and protest.

    Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
    That's why I said it's an oversimplification.
    Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP.
    So why vote for the LD's?
    Thats right. The LDs do not seem interested in government, other than to trash their own government. Its a big mistake.
    However. A week is a long time in politics and dare I say it the voluptuous soprano may be clearing her throat, but she has not started to sing yet.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Sun will the important news of the night...

    https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/572889036022525952

    I doubt it will have an effect at all.

    After all its not going to change the supermarkets multiple buy offers.
    It might if the duty cut only applied to on-sales as opposed to off license sales.

    This would be a big help to pubs, where beer sales are down nearly 50% over a decade. British pub culture is dying.
    That would be a good idea.

    Even better would be knock 20p off the price of a pub pint.

    The money to be recouped with a 20p duty on the price of a cup of coffee in Starbucks etc.

    It was beer which made Britain great not frothy coffee:

    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hogarth+beer+street&rlz=1C1KMZB_enGB576GB576&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=vzz2VPvkLoXDOYbpgJAL&ved=0CCEQsAQ&biw=1360&bih=653#imgdii=_&imgrc=9AzmPD9WG343GM%3A;1YQNwihf-gkLEM;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shakespeares-sonnets.com%2FArchive%2FImages%2FBeerSt1.jpg;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shakespeares-sonnets.com%2FArchive%2FBeerSt1.htm;1200;1412
    Actually, you're wrong.

    There is a very close correlation between the upswing in English economic performance and the introduction of coffee to London.

    Stick a bunch of bright, ambitious people in a small place, withdraw depressants and replace with a stimulant...
    You might have an argument with tea but not with coffee.

    Beer, tea and rum were what built an empire and revolutionised industry.

    I read a book about it a decade ago. This is earlier than tes & rum: probably last 16/early 17 century. Innovations like Lloyd's Coffee Shop developing pooled insurance for trading ships made the mercentile trade viable (this was the roots of Lloyds of London)
  • Smarmeron said:

    @MikeL
    I can agree with that. It might be people really did engage with student fees, but I feel it is unlikely to have moved the polls much.

    Perhaps Labour's move on tuition fees was seen for what it was - a populist election bribe
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)

    Changes since the last election.

    Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%

    UKIP only hurts the Tories?

    The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.

    Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
    That's why I said it's an oversimplification.
    Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP.
    So why vote for the LD's?
    Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
    Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
    The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Greenwich_Floater
    Could well be, but the Tories dropped a few during the week as well?
    People wouldn't have noticed those?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Big Ashcroft day tommorow, both England and Scotland.

    #Megasupermassivepollingwednesday
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Smarmeron said:

    @MikeL
    I can agree with that. It might be people really did engage with student fees, but I feel it is unlikely to have moved the polls much.

    Generally it takes more than a week for anything to impact on polling.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    Pulpstar said:

    Big Ashcroft day tommorow, both England and Scotland.

    #Megasupermassivepollingwednesday

    If opinion really is moving to Con we should see evidence of it in the Good Lords marginals polls....

    #holdon2urhats

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Pulpstar said:

    Big Ashcroft day tommorow, both England and Scotland.

    #Megasupermassivepollingwednesday

    Unfortunately I'll miss it, i'm out for 2 weeks vacation tommorow, I won't have an internet connection which perhaps will piss me off, on the other hand though it's a vacation so no internet might be a plus.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Pulpstar said:

    Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.

    LD supporters are consistently the least enthusiastic about their current party.

    If one party was going to see their support collapse, the LDs would be the most likely candidate.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @felix

    'With a 5% national score how realistic is the 30+ seats for the LDs?'

    Must be an outlier,as only a week ago we were told that the Lib Dems private polling had shown them to be 'competitive' in seats like Solihull.

  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)

    Changes since the last election.

    Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%

    UKIP only hurts the Tories?

    The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.

    Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
    That's why I said it's an oversimplification.
    Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP.
    So why vote for the LD's?
    Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
    Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
    The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
    But the Tories never won an election so talk of a majority is pointless. The Lib Dems have messed up. That struck a very bad deal on the coalition, stupidly adopting the Tories' fiscal plans, not running any major departments and then allowing it to run 5 years.

    Still that is from a 2010 Lib Dem perspective. As we now know Clegg and those around him were utterly duplicitous and his soft left election campaign was nothing more than a pretence. In that way the coalition was more a convenience for him than a bungling negotiation. But the electorate don't forgive such shenanigans as he'll find out.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)

    Changes since the last election.

    Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%

    UKIP only hurts the Tories?

    The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.

    Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
    That's why I said it's an oversimplification.
    Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP.
    So why vote for the LD's?
    Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
    Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
    The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
    Very noble of the LD to sacrifice their existence to try to moderate the Tory party.

    They destroyed themselves and lead to UKIP getting their place.
    Without the coalition the LD would still be here and UKIP would not have filled the vacuum created by the shift of the Tories to the centre.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,937
    MikeL said:

    MikeL said:

    Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?

    OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.

    Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.

    People have rumbled lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
    I know all that.

    My question was "What has happened in the last week?"

    All of your post applied equally 7 days ago.
    Yes. But we are getting to the point where people are waking up, yawning, stretching, realising there is an election round the corner, starting to pay some attention... Ed making populist policy announcements has been a backdrop to people thinking about politics. Just not favourably for Labour.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited March 2015
    john_zims said:

    @felix

    'With a 5% national score how realistic is the 30+ seats for the LDs?'

    Must be an outlier,as only a week ago we were told that the Lib Dems private polling had shown them to be 'competitive' in seats like Solihull.

    Did they specify if they were competitive for:

    First Place?
    Runners up?
    Bronze place?
    Penultimate Place?
    Last place?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,404
    edited March 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.

    I'm not sure they will. The Lib vote has continually declined since 2010: sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And everybody says they'll recover, or there's swingback, or they have a personal vote, or there's good constituency organisation, or, or or....

    ...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    MikeL said:

    MikeL said:

    Q: Why would Voting Intention move now? What has happened in the last week?

    OK, we are getting nearer the crunch but I'm doubtful enough has happened to cause a move as big as indicated so far by this week's polls.

    Labour aren't making the case to "kick the bums out". They have dicked about for nearly five years without crafting policies. They expected a world of pain for the Coalition from hugely unpopular cuts. People have barely noticed them. They expected unemployment- especially youth unemployment - to be at toxic levels. We are at close to full employment, even with immigration not closed down. Labour has called everything wrong since 2010. Not just to the public, but far worse - to themselves. Basically, Ed's advisors expected a stroll. Bedroom tax. NHS. Evil bastard Tory tax evading bankers. Job done. Hello again Downing Street.

    People have rumbled lazy Labour. Why would you take the risk?
    I know all that.

    My question was "What has happened in the last week?"

    All of your post applied equally 7 days ago.
    Yes. But we are getting to the point where people are waking up, yawning, stretching, realising there is an election round the corner, starting to pay some attention... Ed making populist policy announcements has been a backdrop to people thinking about politics. Just not favourably for Labour.
    Anthony think's, if something is happening, it's likely just to be the "slow drift of public support"

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

    We may well look back on the ICM/Guardian poll from February as a pivitol moment?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    edited March 2015
    viewcode said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.

    I'm not sure they will. The Lib vote has continually declined since 2010: sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And everybody says they'll recover, or there's swingback, or they have a personal vote, or there's good constituency organisation, or, or or....

    ...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't

    Good job OGH is away of you'd be out the door for that! :smiley:

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    There is a tendency for politico-obsessives to assume everyone is more interested in politics - and more thoughtful as to why they support the parties they do - than is really true.

    Thus the idea of a straight switch from Lib-Dem to UKIP is out of the question. They're supposed to be polar opposites. But the reality is there is a space for a third party of protest, NOTA voters. The Lib Dems and UKIP are the party of Others. If you're right-wing vote Tory, if you're left wing vote Labour. If you're neither or bitter or whatever vote Other. By entering government the Lib Dems forfeited the Other vote. Those who want a Right Wing government will still vote Tory, those who want a Left Wing government will vote Labour, those who want Other will vote UKIP, Green or SNP.

    The LD's have lost their Unique Selling Point. They're literally pointless now.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited March 2015
    On the day that the Mirror were accused of making NOTW phone hacking activities look like small fry...Piers Morgan has written this article...

    Sorry, Hillary but I'm afraid coverup@stinkstohighheaven.com is no email address for a presidential contender

    "This action automatically made all emails far less secure, and thus considerably easier for nefarious outsiders to access should they be so inclined."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2978177/PIERS-MORGAN-Sorry-Hillary-coverup-stinkstohighheaven-com-no-email-address-presidential-contender.html
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,404

    Perhaps Labour's move on tuition fees was seen for what it was - a populist election bribe

    Didn't somebody point out the obvious problem: it appealed to students (a group who don't vote) and repelled pensioners (a group that do vote)



  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Anyway goodnight PB, see you in 2 weeks at the next solar eclipse.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,404
    GIN1138 said:

    viewcode said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Although it's funny to see the Lib Dems on 5%, they'll get more than this in May.

    I'm not sure they will. The Lib vote has continually declined since 2010: sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And everybody says they'll recover, or there's swingback, or they have a personal vote, or there's good constituency organisation, or, or or....

    ...but what if there just isn't? We've seen Liberal parties get annihilated before, and we don't have to go back far: look at the FDP in Germany. There is no guaantee the Libs will recover, and every piece of evidence we have says that they aren't

    Good job OGH is away of you'd be out the door for that! :smiley:

    Keeping bad news from somebody is not a courtesy. Politeness demands it be presented with respect, not that it be withheld.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    The UK government has announced that it is selling its 40% stake in the cross-Channel train operator Eurostar to an Anglo-Canadian consortium for £757.1m.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31721334
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    Workers' income still below pre-crisis levels, says IFS

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31711854

    This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    The most astonishing thing about that YouGov poll (and other pollsters have a similar thing)

    Changes since the last election.

    Tories down 1%, UKIP up 11%

    UKIP only hurts the Tories?

    The clue here is LD down 18%, Labour up 5%, Greens up 5%, so there is 8% missing probably to the Tories but that is an oversimplification.

    Tories have a tricky task. Harness the proto-UKIP vote and the anti UKIP vote. Will being plain vanilla Conservative win out?
    That's why I said it's an oversimplification.
    Anyway for another oversimplification: if you are a liberal you vote Tory, if you are a lefty you vote Labour, and if you are a conservative you vote UKIP.
    So why vote for the LD's?
    Vote LD because you like the coalition and coalition politics, rather than either Tory or Labour headbangers running the country.
    Everyone knows that the coalition is dominated by Tories. The obvious thing to do if you like the coalition is to vote Tory.
    The coalition is dominated by the Tories, but has substantial LD moderation. If it had been a Tory majority it would have pandered to Carswell and Reckless much more.
    Not if they wanted to be re-elected.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @FrancisUrquhart
    Selling off the family silver for "bribes" to the electorate....or "getaway" money?
    :)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    Smarmeron said:

    @FrancisUrquhart
    Selling off the family silver for "bribes" to the electorate....or "getaway" money?
    :)

    Don't think the money raised will be able to produce that much of a give-away even if Osborne wants to.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928

    Workers' income still below pre-crisis levels, says IFS

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31711854

    This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.

    But with the dramatic fall in the oil price Labour should have seen that their cost of living crisis message would lose resonance. Miliband should have been going on and on and on about the oil price for months. It'll feel like a tax cut.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @FrancisUrquhart
    Every little helps, but if it was intentional, you would expect several other share sales, if not, then it might just mean they think it is the best time?
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    Workers' income still below pre-crisis levels, says IFS

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31711854

    This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.

    I suspect a bit of politicing going on:
    "The IFS said tax increases and benefit cuts, part of the government's actions to reduce the deficit, had also had a negative impact on average incomes."

    The gigantic impact of income tax thresholds and council tax freeze, far outweighs the vat increase.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    Top 10 vice-chancellors' pay, 2013-14

    1. Nottingham Trent University, Neil Gorman: £623,000 (including accrued bonuses)

    2. London Metropolitan University, Malcolm Gillies: £453,000 (including payment in lieu of notice)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31715020

    Jeez....
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited March 2015
    notme said:

    Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).

    It is another policy that they have been marching up the hill, with talk of a mutual public company that gets to bid on franchise etc, but they always fallen short of going for the big British Rail Reunion. I wouldn't put it past Ed to go with it, why not....he could hale marry it, and hey if he wins the election he can always drop it later when the cost of buying out existing operators contracts becomes clear.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,404
    edited March 2015
    notme said:

    Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).

    At this point, it would be monkey tennis. He might as well go "Ah-ha!", just to drive home the point.

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    viewcode said:

    notme said:

    Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).

    At this point, it would be monkey tennis. He might as well go "Ah-ha!", just to drive home the point.

    I have just spilled my coffee from laughing at that.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,142
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Sun will the important news of the night...

    https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/572889036022525952

    I doubt it will have an effect at all.

    After all its not going to change the supermarkets multiple buy offers.
    It might if the duty cut only applied to on-sales as opposed to off license sales.

    This would be a big help to pubs, where beer sales are down nearly 50% over a decade. British pub culture is dying.
    That would be a good idea.

    Even better would be knock 20p off the price of a pub pint.

    The money to be recouped with a 20p duty on the price of a cup of coffee in Starbucks etc.

    It was beer which made Britain great not frothy coffee:

    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hogarth+beer+street&rlz=1C1KMZB_enGB576GB576&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=vzz2VPvkLoXDOYbpgJAL&ved=0CCEQsAQ&biw=1360&bih=653#imgdii=_&imgrc=9AzmPD9WG343GM%3A;1YQNwihf-gkLEM;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shakespeares-sonnets.com%2FArchive%2FImages%2FBeerSt1.jpg;http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shakespeares-sonnets.com%2FArchive%2FBeerSt1.htm;1200;1412
    Actually, you're wrong.

    There is a very close correlation between the upswing in English economic performance and the introduction of coffee to London.

    Stick a bunch of bright, ambitious people in a small place, withdraw depressants and replace with a stimulant...
    You might have an argument with tea but not with coffee.

    Beer, tea and rum were what built an empire and revolutionised industry.

    I read a book about it a decade ago. This is earlier than tes & rum: probably last 16/early 17 century. Innovations like Lloyd's Coffee Shop developing pooled insurance for trading ships made the mercentile trade viable (this was the roots of Lloyds of London)
    Charles is right - there is a school of thought on Coffee replacing Beer being A Good Thing in British cities. Wonderful essay on it by that media theorist (the one I included in my final year dissertation but now cannot for the life of me remember his name....HABERMAS!)

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,404

    viewcode said:

    notme said:

    Would Labour promising to nationalise the railways be a black swan event that would change things? (theres a lot of sympathy for it, despite it being bat sh*t crazy, never in the history of recent public policy has there been such a remarkable turnaround as to what we have seen in the railways).

    At this point, it would be monkey tennis. He might as well go "Ah-ha!", just to drive home the point.

    I have just spilled my coffee from laughing at that.
    Thank you

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Why former Liberal Democrat minister Jeremy Browne was really sacked by Nick Clegg

    Former Lib Dem Foreign Office minister Jeremy Browne, once tipped as his party’s future leader, is leaving Parliament after being sacked by Nick Clegg.

    Why? I am told: ‘He was too popular with the lobby, there was too much leadership speculation and he was blamed for not stopping the “racist ad vans”, aimed at illegal immigrants, when at the Home Office.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2978472/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-former-Liberal-Democrat-minister-Jeremy-Browne-really-sacked-Nick-Clegg.html
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    “If you want a politician who thinks that a good photo is the most important thing, then don’t vote for me.

    http://order-order.com/2015/03/03/milimetres-mystery-of-miraculously-massive-miliband/
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596

    “If you want a politician who thinks that a good photo is the most important thing, then don’t vote for me.

    http://order-order.com/2015/03/03/milimetres-mystery-of-miraculously-massive-miliband/

    http://labourlist.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Miliband-The-Sun-346x500.png
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    Get your money off UKIP. Farage has bottled it......

    UKIP's Farage rejects 'arbitrary' immigration targets

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31722779
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    5% for the Lib Dems in an opinion poll? So what? They only used up 4% in getting 57 MPs elected in 2010. The other 19% they got was not needed and can be discarded.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    Get your money off UKIP. Farage has bottled it......

    UKIP's Farage rejects 'arbitrary' immigration targets

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31722779

    It does seem an uncharacteristically sensibłe view - can we have the populist Nigel back?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited March 2015
    .
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    well I have to say the YouGov poll was a little underwhelming. Obviously delighted to see the Tories score 36 and be within touching distance of the 2010 score but Labour on 34 pretty disappointing. Yellow taxi anyone?
  • redman1redman1 Posts: 1
    Plenty of time Easterross, the fact is that the Tories have broken away from the low thirties position that they have been anchored in for a few years. With hammer blows to be landed on Miliband by the weight of the Press assault over the next few weeks, the Labour share will only go one way and finally we will be talking majority territory for Cameron.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    notme said:

    Workers' income still below pre-crisis levels, says IFS

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31711854

    This will Labour's attack line for the GE...you are still worse off under the Tories. Be interesting to see if it gets any traction.

    I suspect a bit of politicing going on:
    "The IFS said tax increases and benefit cuts, part of the government's actions to reduce the deficit, had also had a negative impact on average incomes."

    The gigantic impact of income tax thresholds and council tax freeze, far outweighs the vat increase.
    So they aren't comparing take home pay or disposable income ?

    Pretty crude then.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Get your money off UKIP. Farage has bottled it......

    UKIP's Farage rejects 'arbitrary' immigration targets

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31722779

    To be fair, that is what he/they always said.
This discussion has been closed.