politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some interesting poll findings
As we await the next batch of Lord Ashcroft marginals polling at 5pm, here’s some appetising hors d’oeuvre from other pollsters appear that go against what most people perceive to be true.
@paulwaugh: One key lesson from TV debates fiasco. Tories have run rings round the broadcasters, playing em like a cheap fiddle.
I remember thinking when the subject first came up that it was obvious Cameron was working from a script delivered by gaming theory...
I remember thinking of clever way Varofakis played his hand at the EU, and how it was almost a model of trying to get the best out of a poor hand (In the end it may transpire that his hand was just too weak regardless of the skill of the player) and wishing Cameron would play our EU negotiations with a similar flair. The fact that his hasn't, and yet he has played the TV debates to perfection is.... interesting.
Wait: Greece got nothing.
The deal for Greece remains exactly what it was: maturity extensions, coupon reductions, and repayments linked to GDP. And in return, they need to run a budget surplus and enact structural reforms.
@FrancisUrquhart It's Prime Ministers Evasions. He wriggled, blustered and then flew off at tangent. A bit like a woodpecker with a weasel on its back might be your preferred metaphor? To most other people he looks as though he is soiling his underwear.
What exactly did Cameron say in regards to debating Miliband? My feed cut out.
Just avoided the question
What was the question...Oi Chubby Chunks when are me and you doing some mud wrestling then?
Or was it the usual why wont you 100% agree to all the debates in the exact format as laid down by the broadcasters? Which Cameron always doesn't give a solid answer to, and so far has rewarded him with much favourable terms.
@FrancisUrquhart It's Prime Ministers Evasions. He wriggled, blustered and then flew off at tangent. A bit like a woodpecker with a weasel on its back might be your preferred metaphor? To most other people he looks as though he is soiling his underwear.
Smarmy...That's your opinion. You don't speak for "most other people".. you only speak for yourself.
Would Labour want to be lumbered with the other small parties if Cameron is empty chaired? On the one hand the chance to speak directly to a massive prime time audience is something that can't be ignored, but the presence of three left leaning anti-austerity parties must make it a far less appealing scenario than the original format. Cameron would still look very bad for missing it, but Labour may not benefit.
Even more amazing, the New York Times is wondering if Hillary has a death wish and notes that the Clintons love to live on the line between defiance and self-destruction:
Alot of people in various betting markets didn't seem to twig that if you back both Conservative Most Seats, Labour most votes and Conservative Most Seats, Conservative most votes then if the Tories get most seats you'll err win money.
Party appears to be mainly over on that one, but I've managed to get Tory votes, Tory seats at an average of over evens in the electoral bias market which has complemented the Tory Seats, Labour votes long odds in the fixed odds markets.
@SquareRoot Prime minister who claims television debates are essential for a healthy democracy, declines debates unless he gets to make sure they are rigged in his favour? Yes....probably just me.
What exactly did Cameron say in regards to debating Miliband? My feed cut out.
Just avoided the question
What was the question...Oi Chubby Chunks when are me and you doing some mud wrestling then?
Or was it the usual why wont you 100% agree to all the debates in the exact format as laid down by the broadcasters? Which Cameron always doesn't give a solid answer to, and so far has rewarded him with much favourable terms.
From memory, Miliband said in response to Cameron saying he was a better leader
"The broadcaster have made a date 30th April, you and me to debate head to head, I will be there, will you?"
Cameron blustered without answering saying he was happy to debate here and now but didn't answer yes or no
Miliband said "Ok lets change the date to whenever you like, will you debate you vs me, if its all about leadership, you should be up for it"
Would Labour want to be lumbered with the other small parties if Cameron is empty chaired? On the one hand the chance to speak directly to a massive prime time audience is something that can't be ignored, but the presence of three left leaning anti-austerity parties must make it a far less appealing scenario than the original format. Cameron would still look very bad for missing it, but Labour may not benefit.
The last thing Milliband needs is to be in a debate with Farage and the smaller parties. He needs Cameron alone and Cameron is not going to play.
@SquareRoot Prime minister who claims television debates are essential for a healthy democracy, declines debates unless he gets to make sure they are rigged in his favour? Yes....probably just me.
Broaching the subject of vote rigging is never going to be a win for Labour. Zero credibility on the matter.
What exactly did Cameron say in regards to debating Miliband? My feed cut out.
Just avoided the question
What was the question...Oi Chubby Chunks when are me and you doing some mud wrestling then?
Or was it the usual why wont you 100% agree to all the debates in the exact format as laid down by the broadcasters? Which Cameron always doesn't give a solid answer to, and so far has rewarded him with much favourable terms.
From memory, Miliband said in response to Cameron saying he was a better leader
"The broadcaster have made a date 30th April, you and me to debate head to head, I will be there, will you?"
Cameron blustered without answering saying he was happy to debate here and now but didn't answer yes or no
Miliband said "Ok lets change the date to whenever you like, will you debate you vs me, if its all about leadership, you should be up for it"
And Cameron didn't say yes or no etc
I expect that'll have swung a lot of waverers in JCRs across the land.
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''. His column does make one good point - ''Whoever wins Kensington should be someone who you could imagine in ten years’ time leading the Conservative Party and then the country.''
This is a right wing take on Rahm Emanuel's hiccup in getting re-elected as Chicago's mayor, and its implications for the direction of the Democratic party and Hillary's chances.
Perhaps some ideologically-influence and self-serving alarmism, but also some kernels of truth.
I've stayed as a liberal-lefty-question-the-worldy-type-swing-voter throughout my 20's. No sign of change yet.
But yeah, by the time I retire in the 2050's (If ever), I think it's quite likely I'll be voting for the equivalent of UKIP, wanting the world to go back to how it was in the simple, good old days of 2015.
@SquareRoot Prime minister who claims television debates are essential for a healthy democracy, declines debates unless he gets to make sure they are rigged in his favour? Yes....probably just me.
Smarmy.. I think you are deliberately misunderstanding me. If of course you can provide any evidence that you ACTUALLY speak for other people.. then fine....
@Bond_James_Bond I deduce from your blustering that you are D. Cameron, and I therefore claim my tax free account in Panama!
Tax dodging doesn't play well for Labour either given that Miliband is himself a tax dodger.
Actually, nothing plays well for Labour since on any subject imaginable they are more inept than any alternative imaginable.
Southam reckons he wants a big state. He should vote Conservative. A small state under the Tories will be bigger than a big state would be under an economy-destroying government run by Unite's sockpuppets in the HoC.
3 tweets from OGH and one by Paul Waugh don't "the great and the good" make.
Even more so since we all know that OGH has called this one completely wrong from the get-go
Mike said the debates wouldn't happen. Told us to bet accordingly.
He eventually got there.
Went through a whole range of "Cameron has screwed this up" "it's going to kill him in the polls" "he's going to be empty-chaired" until he finally realised that Cameron had played it well - either a debate that favoured him or nothing.
There are only I0 types of people who understand binary: those that do and those that don't. But there are II types of people that understand Roman numerals.
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''. His column does make one good point - ''Whoever wins Kensington should be someone who you could imagine in ten years’ time leading the Conservative Party and then the country.''
hell no!
I want an MP who will care about the constituency, not some favorite of David Cameron he wants to help up the greasy pole.
Would Labour want to be lumbered with the other small parties if Cameron is empty chaired? On the one hand the chance to speak directly to a massive prime time audience is something that can't be ignored, but the presence of three left leaning anti-austerity parties must make it a far less appealing scenario than the original format. Cameron would still look very bad for missing it, but Labour may not benefit.
The last thing Milliband needs is to be in a debate with Farage and the smaller parties. He needs Cameron alone and Cameron is not going to play.
There will be no debates.
I doubt there will be any debates and you are right that Miliband is not talking about debating with the other parties. But Cameron is not going to commit to a time for any debates either. He wants them earlier - which is quite legitimate - so he is not going to agree a time or omit other parties just to please Ed Miliband. Personally I think these 'debates' are not debates at all and are invariably shallow and a corruption of democracy.
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''.
I'm always bewildered by this kind of remark. By all accounts Hitler, Stalin, Blair, Farage, Rolf Harris, and Anthony Wedgewood Benn all came / come over as thoroughly nice blokes on meeting them. All of them were / are anything but nice, covering there the full spectrum from severely misguided to malevolent to downright homicidal. So this sort of remark amounts to little more than an assertion that while you might not judge a book by its cover, it is worth mentioning that it has a nice cover. If it's not saying that, why make it at all?
Is it all about Iain Dale showing how re rubs shoulders with famous people?
The details of Hillary's setting up and running her own private email account for use as Secretary of State make it look more premeditated that the aim was to provide her with control over which of her official communications could be accessed under Freedom of Information requests:
If the other debates don't go ahead, I don't think Ofcom rules will allow the Sky head to head to go ahead either.
Not true - just have to allocate time - not format dependant.
Says nothing about time here:
6.9 If a candidate takes part in an item about his/her particular constituency, or electoral area, then candidates of each of the major parties must be offered the opportunity to take part. (However, if they refuse or are unable to participate, the item may nevertheless go ahead.)
Now I take it that the 'item' in this case would be the debates. If no other debates take place then the Sky debate becomes the 'item'.
This is a right wing take on Rahm Emanuel's hiccup in getting re-elected as Chicago's mayor, and its implications for the direction of the Democratic party and Hillary's chances.
Perhaps some ideologically-influence and self-serving alarmism, but also some kernels of truth.
The Economist went to the trouble of endorsing Emmanuel (they love his schools policy) but made it clear he had an uphill struggle, so the writer is arguably a bit disingenuous when he says it's amazing. Clearly there is an issue of the left feeling that their leaders aren't leftish enough, as there is in Britain, but they'll rally round Hillary rather more than they would with most centrists.
Mr Cameron said: “we’re having a debate now,” before suggesting that he would not take part in any contest after the “short campaign” which begins when Parliament is dissolved at the end of March.
I've definitely moved further to the left. If my current self was voting in the 1987 election, I wouldn't be voting SDP. (But not quite SWP either!)
I have never understood this point that is often raised. I have always been a democratic socialist and still am. Yes, I have gone on the property ladder, pay tax at a high rate etc. etc. but still vote Labour.
Why should anyone change their vote ? Surely, you vote on what you believe in.
Before anyone jumps up and reminds me of my 2005 and 2010 votes, I voted Lib Dem in 2005 because of Iraq [ Blair was a Tory - I had found out by then ] and in 2010 I voted for them again to keep the Tories out. Obviously, hugely betrayed.
In 2015, I will be voting Labour regardless of the wasted vote !
I've definitely moved further to the left. If my current self was voting in the 1987 election, I wouldn't be voting SDP. (But not quite SWP either!)
I have never understood this point that is often raised. I have always been a democratic socialist and still am. Yes, I have gone on the property ladder, pay tax at a high rate etc. etc. but still vote Labour.
Why should anyone change their vote ? Surely, you vote on what you believe in.
Before anyone jumps up and reminds me of my 2005 and 2010 votes, I voted Lib Dem in 2005 because of Iraq [ Blair was a Tory - I had found out by then ] and in 2010 I voted for them again to keep the Tories out. Obviously, hugely betrayed.
In 2015, I will be voting Labour regardless of the wasted vote !
Society can change; but also one's own beliefs can change, as one experiences different things. These can lead one to move to the right or left of where one was (or where society's mid-point was) when young.
The best example I can think of is the 18-34 year old age cohort, who placed the Conservatives third in the October 1974 general election. The same age cohort voted heavily in favour of EU membership in 1975.
Move forward 41 years, and the same age cohort puts the Conservatives first, UKIP and Labour vying for second, and is strongly in favour of leaving the EU.
Or you could look at the 18-29 year olds who marginally favoured George McGovern in 1972, and heavily favoured Mitt Romney in 2012.
This is a right wing take on Rahm Emanuel's hiccup in getting re-elected as Chicago's mayor, and its implications for the direction of the Democratic party and Hillary's chances.
Perhaps some ideologically-influence and self-serving alarmism, but also some kernels of truth.
The Economist went to the trouble of endorsing Emmanuel (they love his schools policy) but made it clear he had an uphill struggle, so the writer is arguably a bit disingenuous when he says it's amazing. Clearly there is an issue of the left feeling that their leaders aren't leftish enough, as there is in Britain, but they'll rally round Hillary rather more than they would with most centrists.
Nick, why are you a bigger price (2/5) to retake Broxtowe than Leonie Mathers (a fresh candidate) is to regain Sherwood (2/7)?
From a distance the results look almost identical, as does the Ashcroft polling?
I'd have thought that given your continued contact with the electorate etc. these prices should be the other way around? 10/3 on the Tories in Sherwood looks fair.
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''.
I'm always bewildered by this kind of remark. By all accounts Hitler, Stalin, Blair, Farage, Rolf Harris, and Anthony Wedgewood Benn all came / come over as thoroughly nice blokes on meeting them. All of them were / are anything but nice, covering there the full spectrum from severely misguided to malevolent to downright homicidal. So this sort of remark amounts to little more than an assertion that while you might not judge a book by its cover, it is worth mentioning that it has a nice cover. If it's not saying that, why make it at all?
Is it all about Iain Dale showing how re rubs shoulders with famous people?
Mr Bond, no, although who knows. I think Iain Dale comes across as a decent bloke - but too decent for the good of his own politics. He says nice things about Yasmin Alibhai-Brown for instance who I think is loathsome. He gives far too much leniency to Labour figures who I think in reality hate his guts.
If the other debates don't go ahead, I don't think Ofcom rules will allow the Sky head to head to go ahead either.
Not true - just have to allocate time - not format dependant.
Says nothing about time here:
6.9 If a candidate takes part in an item about his/her particular constituency, or electoral area, then candidates of each of the major parties must be offered the opportunity to take part. (However, if they refuse or are unable to participate, the item may nevertheless go ahead.)
Now I take it that the 'item' in this case would be the debates. If no other debates take place then the Sky debate becomes the 'item'.
I've definitely moved further to the left. If my current self was voting in the 1987 election, I wouldn't be voting SDP. (But not quite SWP either!)
I have never understood this point that is often raised. I have always been a democratic socialist and still am. Yes, I have gone on the property ladder, pay tax at a high rate etc. etc. but still vote Labour.
Why should anyone change their vote ? Surely, you vote on what you believe in.
Before anyone jumps up and reminds me of my 2005 and 2010 votes, I voted Lib Dem in 2005 because of Iraq [ Blair was a Tory - I had found out by then ] and in 2010 I voted for them again to keep the Tories out. Obviously, hugely betrayed.
In 2015, I will be voting Labour regardless of the wasted vote !
I voted Labour in 1974, the party of the working class.
Why should anyone change their vote? Is the fact that the party has changed beyond all recognition not reason enough, or should we spend our whole lives doing the same as a we did 40 years ago regardless.
Which funnily enough, is exactly what Cameron is going to get from his renegotiation, however at least Varofakis looked like he was trying to make a fight, hence his popularity of 80%+, Dave doesn't hence his is rather less
@SquareRoot Prime minister who claims television debates are essential for a healthy democracy, declines debates unless he gets to make sure they are rigged in his favour? Yes....probably just me.
Is a healthy democracy just the two main parties that won't get two thirds of the votes between them, or should it include the other parties as well?
Has Tim's libellous comment been removed... Deary me...
Where can you see this "libellous" comment ?
its been removed.
I always miss the fun! People get banned when I'm not looking, Libellous tweets evaporate before I can read them.....without getting OGH into trouble, can you give us a clue?
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''. His column does make one good point - ''Whoever wins Kensington should be someone who you could imagine in ten years’ time leading the Conservative Party and then the country.''
hell no!
I want an MP who will care about the constituency, not some favorite of David Cameron he wants to help up the greasy pole.
And then you will be complaining about the poor quality of some future PM/leader candidate list... The issue is not one of being a 'friend'... it is rather one of the executive coming from the legislature. There are enough thick tory backbenchers as it is who will rather grandstand and make the party unelectable. A seat like Kensington offers a good opportunity for the local party to actually think about the party. I do not think that is too selfish.
"Jihadi unmasked Former LibDem Leader Sir Menzies Campbell MP"
I always thought there was something dodgy about him.
I still can't believe how stupid his question at his first PMQs as acting leader was.
Sir Menzies [...] asked why "one in five schools do not have a permanent head".
As Mr Blair's backbenchers pointed at the leaderless Lib Dems, the PM didn't miss the open goal gifted by Sir Menzies: "It can be difficult to find a permanent head of an organisation when the post is vacant - particularly if it is a failing organisation."
Which funnily enough, is exactly what Cameron is going to get from his renegotiation, however at least Varofakis looked like he was trying to make a fight, hence his popularity of 80%+, Dave doesn't hence his is rather less
Number of cards held by the Greeks: zero Also, he wasn't just negotiating with "the eurogroup" but the IMF too.
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''. His column does make one good point - ''Whoever wins Kensington should be someone who you could imagine in ten years’ time leading the Conservative Party and then the country.''
hell no!
I want an MP who will care about the constituency, not some favorite of David Cameron he wants to help up the greasy pole.
And then you will be complaining about the poor quality of some future PM/leader candidate list... The issue is not one of being a 'friend'... it is rather one of the executive coming from the legislature. There are enough thick tory backbenchers as it is who will rather grandstand and make the party unelectable. A seat like Kensington offers a good opportunity for the local party to actually think about the party. I do not think that is too selfish.
A perfect example of what is wrong with politics today. Party before constituency or country. Shameful.
There are only I0 types of people who understand binary: those that do and those that don't. But there are II types of people that understand Roman numerals.
There are two types of people in this world. Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''. His column does make one good point - ''Whoever wins Kensington should be someone who you could imagine in ten years’ time leading the Conservative Party and then the country.''
hell no!
I want an MP who will care about the constituency, not some favorite of David Cameron he wants to help up the greasy pole.
And then you will be complaining about the poor quality of some future PM/leader candidate list... The issue is not one of being a 'friend'... it is rather one of the executive coming from the legislature. There are enough thick tory backbenchers as it is who will rather grandstand and make the party unelectable. A seat like Kensington offers a good opportunity for the local party to actually think about the party. I do not think that is too selfish.
The local party should be thinking about their fellow constituents, not the party.
The job of an MP is to represent Kensington.
Neither Portillo or Rifkind had any interest - I only once saw Rifkind in 10 years of living here - he arrived late and left early from the annual Mayor's Service at St. Mary Abbot's
"Jihadi unmasked Former LibDem Leader Sir Menzies Campbell MP"
I always thought there was something dodgy about him.
I still can't believe how stupid his question at his first PMQs as acting leader was.
Sir Menzies [...] asked why "one in five schools do not have a permanent head".
As Mr Blair's backbenchers pointed at the leaderless Lib Dems, the PM didn't miss the open goal gifted by Sir Menzies: "It can be difficult to find a permanent head of an organisation when the post is vacant - particularly if it is a failing organisation."
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Sadly it says much for Iain Dale's perspicacity these days that he thinks Ed Balls ''has a great sense of humour and in reality is a thoroughly nice guy''. His column does make one good point - ''Whoever wins Kensington should be someone who you could imagine in ten years’ time leading the Conservative Party and then the country.''
hell no!
I want an MP who will care about the constituency, not some favorite of David Cameron he wants to help up the greasy pole.
And then you will be complaining about the poor quality of some future PM/leader candidate list... The issue is not one of being a 'friend'... it is rather one of the executive coming from the legislature. There are enough thick tory backbenchers as it is who will rather grandstand and make the party unelectable. A seat like Kensington offers a good opportunity for the local party to actually think about the party. I do not think that is too selfish.
A perfect example of what is wrong with politics today. Party before constituency or country. Shameful.
That's party politics for you. Same in any democracy in the world.
At least we've got FPTP which mitigates it, far worse in PR-nations where all that matters is being on the party list and forget about constituencies.
Crickey...ISIS funded by little old ladies shocker.
Counter-terror police investigating large-scale fraud linked to UK extremists travelling to Syria have arrested two men on suspicion of money-laundering.
The arrests are linked to reports of vulnerable and elderly victims being 'cold called' over the phone by a suspect impersonating a police officer, who informs them their bank account has been compromised, Scotland Yard said.
Victims are then tricked into transferring money to an account under the control of the suspect, with one pensioner losing around £150,000.
Comments
3 tweets from OGH and one by Paul Waugh don't "the great and the good" make.
Even more so since we all know that OGH has called this one completely wrong from the get-go
The deal for Greece remains exactly what it was: maturity extensions, coupon reductions, and repayments linked to GDP. And in return, they need to run a budget surplus and enact structural reforms.
Apparently it makes you go bland.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/572796636268793857
It's Prime Ministers Evasions. He wriggled, blustered and then flew off at tangent.
A bit like a woodpecker with a weasel on its back might be your preferred metaphor?
To most other people he looks as though he is soiling his underwear.
Dave seemed to be needling poor old Ed Balls.. was there a punch up?
Or was it the usual why wont you 100% agree to all the debates in the exact format as laid down by the broadcasters? Which Cameron always doesn't give a solid answer to, and so far has rewarded him with much favourable terms.
What was the first question Ed raised at PMQs?
*Innocent Face*
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/what-if-hillary-clinton-drops-out-115715.html?hp=t4_r#.VPcO4kswwpF
Even more amazing, the New York Times is wondering if Hillary has a death wish and notes that the Clintons love to live on the line between defiance and self-destruction:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/opinion/frank-bruni-hillary-and-bill-clinton-secrecy-and-state-department-emails.html?ref=opinion&_r=1
Party appears to be mainly over on that one, but I've managed to get Tory votes, Tory seats at an average of over evens in the electoral bias market which has complemented the Tory Seats, Labour votes long odds in the fixed odds markets.
Prime minister who claims television debates are essential for a healthy democracy, declines debates unless he gets to make sure they are rigged in his favour?
Yes....probably just me.
"The broadcaster have made a date 30th April, you and me to debate head to head, I will be there, will you?"
Cameron blustered without answering saying he was happy to debate here and now but didn't answer yes or no
Miliband said "Ok lets change the date to whenever you like, will you debate you vs me, if its all about leadership, you should be up for it"
And Cameron didn't say yes or no etc
There will be no debates.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-31717179
Watch out for rattled cages and contributions from conspiracy theorists. Is this being kicked into long grass or will it open up a can of worms?
I deduce from your blustering that you are D. Cameron, and I therefore claim my tax free account in Panama!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11325064/Murder-link-to-Margaret-Thatcher-aide-accused-of-raping-teenage-boy.html
Clegg has talked about this before Christmas as well.
As some point the ticking time bomb is going to go off, when that is who knows.
Perhaps some ideologically-influence and self-serving alarmism, but also some kernels of truth.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/03/rahm-emanuels-chicago-run-off-should-terrify-hillaryland/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-31715672
But yeah, by the time I retire in the 2050's (If ever), I think it's quite likely I'll be voting for the equivalent of UKIP, wanting the world to go back to how it was in the simple, good old days of 2015.
If of course you can provide any evidence that you ACTUALLY speak for other people.. then fine....
Actually, nothing plays well for Labour since on any subject imaginable they are more inept than any alternative imaginable.
Southam reckons he wants a big state. He should vote Conservative. A small state under the Tories will be bigger than a big state would be under an economy-destroying government run by Unite's sockpuppets in the HoC.
Went through a whole range of "Cameron has screwed this up" "it's going to kill him in the polls" "he's going to be empty-chaired" until he finally realised that Cameron had played it well - either a debate that favoured him or nothing.
But there are II types of people that understand Roman numerals.
Wibbling on about Thatcher turning in her grave. Strange man.
http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2015/02/23/898/
I want an MP who will care about the constituency, not some favorite of David Cameron he wants to help up the greasy pole.
But Cameron is not going to commit to a time for any debates either. He wants them earlier - which is quite legitimate - so he is not going to agree a time or omit other parties just to please Ed Miliband.
Personally I think these 'debates' are not debates at all and are invariably shallow and a corruption of democracy.
Is it all about Iain Dale showing how re rubs shoulders with famous people?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/03/04/clintons_email_server_traced_to_home-based_service_125817.html
6.9 If a candidate takes part in an item about his/her particular constituency, or electoral area, then candidates of each of the major parties must be offered the opportunity to take part. (However, if they refuse or are unable to participate, the item may nevertheless go ahead.)
Now I take it that the 'item' in this case would be the debates. If no other debates take place then the Sky debate becomes the 'item'.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/elections/
Mr Cameron said: “we’re having a debate now,” before suggesting that he would not take part in any contest after the “short campaign” which begins when Parliament is dissolved at the end of March.
Why should anyone change their vote ? Surely, you vote on what you believe in.
Before anyone jumps up and reminds me of my 2005 and 2010 votes, I voted Lib Dem in 2005 because of Iraq [ Blair was a Tory - I had found out by then ] and in 2010 I voted for them again to keep the Tories out. Obviously, hugely betrayed.
In 2015, I will be voting Labour regardless of the wasted vote !
The best example I can think of is the 18-34 year old age cohort, who placed the Conservatives third in the October 1974 general election. The same age cohort voted heavily in favour of EU membership in 1975.
Move forward 41 years, and the same age cohort puts the Conservatives first, UKIP and Labour vying for second, and is strongly in favour of leaving the EU.
Or you could look at the 18-29 year olds who marginally favoured George McGovern in 1972, and heavily favoured Mitt Romney in 2012.
From a distance the results look almost identical, as does the Ashcroft polling?
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/01/sherwood/
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/01/broxtowe/
I'd have thought that given your continued contact with the electorate etc. these prices should be the other way around? 10/3 on the Tories in Sherwood looks fair.
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/with_replies
The spiel sounds familiar.....3,000+ tweets and fewer than 80 followers.....bless.....
Perhaps like the Oscars & BAFTA we should have an 'In Memoriam thread.....
tim 'he rode a horse, shopped in Morrisons, COULSON!!!!!!!!'
Comical 'its a victory for Eck' James
Mick 'SHRIEK!!! You don't understand! Its all about GOTV!' Pork
And then there was Yellow Box Avery, who at least added to the sum of human knowledge, rather than subtracted from it.....
Why should anyone change their vote? Is the fact that the party has changed beyond all recognition not reason enough, or should we spend our whole lives doing the same as a we did 40 years ago regardless.
Former LibDem Leader Sir Menzies Campbell MP"
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius
Apologies if not...
The issue is not one of being a 'friend'... it is rather one of the executive coming from the legislature. There are enough thick tory backbenchers as it is who will rather grandstand and make the party unelectable. A seat like Kensington offers a good opportunity for the local party to actually think about the party. I do not think that is too selfish.
Sir Menzies [...] asked why "one in five schools do not have a permanent head".
As Mr Blair's backbenchers pointed at the leaderless Lib Dems, the PM didn't miss the open goal gifted by Sir Menzies: "It can be difficult to find a permanent head of an organisation when the post is vacant - particularly if it is a failing organisation."
http://www.theguardian.com/news/blog/2006/jan/11/mercilessonmi
Also, he wasn't just negotiating with "the eurogroup" but the IMF too.
Shameful.
That's the benchmark we should use to see how the big two are doing in the marginal seats.
The job of an MP is to represent Kensington.
Neither Portillo or Rifkind had any interest - I only once saw Rifkind in 10 years of living here - he arrived late and left early from the annual Mayor's Service at St. Mary Abbot's
Labour 24%
Conservatives 58%
Liberal Democrat 2%
Green 3%
UKIP 6%
Other 7%
Thank you for voting
Construction News: http://www.cnplus.co.uk/?cm_ven=ExactTarget&cm_cat=CN_Pro_EM1_04032015&cm_pla=All+Subscribers&cm_lm=shellyjfellows@yahoo.co.uk&WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=CN_Pro_EM1_04032015&&
"Pensioners...
"Declare your interest!"
I was away from PB at the time due to being unwell but when I came back he had left us.
At least we've got FPTP which mitigates it, far worse in PR-nations where all that matters is being on the party list and forget about constituencies.
Counter-terror police investigating large-scale fraud linked to UK extremists travelling to Syria have arrested two men on suspicion of money-laundering.
The arrests are linked to reports of vulnerable and elderly victims being 'cold called' over the phone by a suspect impersonating a police officer, who informs them their bank account has been compromised, Scotland Yard said.
Victims are then tricked into transferring money to an account under the control of the suspect, with one pensioner losing around £150,000.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2979381/Counter-terror-police-arrest-two-men-cold-call-scam-targeting-elderly-victims.html