All he is saying (I think) is: let's have a framework which applies boringly and automatically and uncontroversially, so we don't waste further time arguing about it. Like PPBs: there is a framework. There is no legislation which says that Party leaders must go to prison for failing to put out PPBs.
The two are not comparable. The "framework" as you term it for PPBs is a restrictive one. To prevent a flood of uncontrolled advertising. To limit them in terms of volume and content. To restrain them growing like Topsy.
The rather sinister You Must Talk To Me Act 2016 is aimed at artificially creating a permanent new phenomenon after only one previous outing.
We have too many laws as it is. Now is the time to be repealing them, not legislating for extra diary entries in a PMs schedule.
Depends what he is actually saying doesn't it? What he might, sensibly, be proposing is limits on what the broadcasters are allowed to offer. Even he is unlikely to think that the PM should be under legal compulsion to comply with Murdoch's broadcasting schedules. But inevitably he attracts mockery of the You Must Talk To Me Act 2016 kind (excellent by the way, I'm not complaining) because ed.
Miliband will be desperate to justify that decision. If he fails to become PM, it will have been for nothing.
Just consider a labour/SNP coalition for a moment. Given the regard the SNP have for England, it would be a bit like a labour/Vladimir Putin coalition.
The sensible labour MPs must be praying for defeat in May.
what does everyone think of Labbrokes bet that the lib dems will gain at least one seat from anyone that they did not hold in 2010? Its 6/4 and I am tempted
Frankly, I'm not sure Ed can even deliver. His marginal MPs will take one look at the SNPs proposals for legalised theft of English property to feed Scottish subsistence and weep.
I thought those were Jim Murphy's proposals?
There won't be a Labour SNP coalition, so you can conserve your wheesht .
I cannot see the SNP entering a formal coalition with Labour (or Labour wanting them to).What I could see is the SNP prop up a labour minority government and w hills 5/1 on a lab minority government is cracking value imo
Re the debates it seems it is Lynton Crosby who has ruled them out and it looks certain that the offer David Cameron made for one debate is the final offer. Also the narrative in the news of Ed Miliband introducing a law to make them mandatory is being largely laughed at. The narrative is changing and in particular the Labour/SNP question is going to become a very big issue. Neither Caroline Flint or Harriet Harman ruled it out an agreement and ducked a straight answer. With the budget in 10 days time and George Osborne's political antennae it looks much more likely that the Conservatives will have most seats and not far off a small majority
what does everyone think of Labbrokes bet that the lib dems will gain at least one seat from anyone that they did not hold in 2010? Its 6/4 and I am tempted
I think JackW said Watford was a likely LibDem gain.
Despite MarkSenior's suggestion that the party was likely to fight hard for Oxford West and Abingdon, that is on much longer odds.
what does everyone think of Labbrokes bet that the lib dems will gain at least one seat from anyone that they did not hold in 2010? Its 6/4 and I am tempted
Watford where the four times elected Mayor, Dorothy Thornhill, is candidate looks like a good prospect. The yellows trying very hard to win back Oxford W & Abingdon though Ashcroft polling had them some way behind.
what does everyone think of Labbrokes bet that the lib dems will gain at least one seat from anyone that they did not hold in 2010? Its 6/4 and I am tempted
I think JackW said Watford was a likely LibDem gain.
Despite MarkSenior's suggestion that the party was likely to fight hard for Oxford West and Abingdon, that is on much longer odds.
Thanks and Montgomeryshire must be a possibility as well given the abnormal result last time.
Ashfield has a very popular LD candidate who nearly got there last time and is standing again I believe
I wouldn't be surprised if another referendum occurred relatively soon, but it's far from certain.
MD, maybe not certain but very close unless Westminster ante up what they promised. They do not have a lot of time.
Given Scots don't exactly know what they want that should be fun.
LOL, Alan the sensible ones do, we just need to knock some brains into Labour supporters.
Well it's a slow morning malc, tell me what's on your shopping list.
I am reading the paper then down to some work , busy busy week ahead. For shopping I would like Holyrood to be really responsible for their actions, proper full federal or just get it broken up completely. We cannot continue with Westminster rule as it is , the country will just go down the drain.
it's just struck me that you must now be the elder statesman of the PB Nats having been longer on the board than any other Nat - an achievement in Nattery by itself :-)
If you can stay on until the end of the year I'll award you the presitigeous Golden Turnip for services to Southerners.
LOL, I look forward to that accolade , far better than being the ARSE of the site for sure, glad a worthier arse already has that sown up.
It is unacceptable for the SNP to be in a position to influence the government of the UK, even via C&S. Like SF in 1918, they are enemies of this state and a grand coalition, as suggested by 2 Tory elder statesmen, is preferable to a Lab-SNP arrangement, if no other combination commands an OM in the HoC. The Tories need to pursue EM's refusal to rule out collaboration with the SNP as unpatriotic. This might lead to a Scottish UDI, but IMO this is inevitable if the SNP do as well in 2015 as SF did in 1918.
2015 is not about independence unless the other parties make it about independence.
It is hard not to make it so if the will of the Scottish people is that they want their UK Parliamentary reps to overwhelmingly be in favour of independence. Sure it may not be first on the agenda immediately following the election, but it's hard not to imagine things heading down that route again as a result.
It is a certainty
Do they want MPS in favour of Independence or MPs not tied to a party that has much larger vested interests in a much larger country elsewhere further south?
It would be nice to have MP's that have at least a passing interest in Scottish interests rather than labour troughers. majority would have been happy with some sort of federal arrangement, as that is prohibited because Westminster wanting to keep all the power in London it will be independence eventually.
With many previously-safe Scottish seats looking precarious (Labour's position in Scotland seeming anything from a near wipe-out to very poor), and Labour's less-than-laden war chest; how much energy and money will the party pour into Scotland during the GE campaign? Although I doubt their position is as bad as the polling is showing, it'll be interesting to see how they prioritise the endangered Scottish seats over English and Welsh ones.
There is very little sign of Labour shifting its resourcs to Scotland and time is running out. Last year I started suggesting that Labour needed a massive shift to shore up SLAB. It was dismissed by the few Labour folk on here and NickPalmer said that it would not happen. The Labour party seem to think that SLAB does not really matter for their future. The Conservatives also thought that.....
A misquote, I think. What I remember saying was that we had no complaints about the level of support, which is primarily internal in the constituency and from neighbouring Nottingham members. If the party needs to move resources to Scotland that's OK - we'll manage with the local resources we have.
I have no link but the phrase was along the lines of "it is not going to happen". Probably too late now for SLAB and EdM's chances of a majority, for a switch of resources to have any meaningful effect. Why is it that HQs in parties ignore the signs of local party distress in what should be safe seats? There were several examples in SLAB of almost zero canvassing data. Yet Labour HQ seem to have done nothing about it even after losing two Scottish parliament elections...
what does everyone think of Labbrokes bet that the lib dems will gain at least one seat from anyone that they did not hold in 2010? Its 6/4 and I am tempted
I think JackW said Watford was a likely LibDem gain.
Despite MarkSenior's suggestion that the party was likely to fight hard for Oxford West and Abingdon, that is on much longer odds.
Thanks and Montgomeryshire must be a possibility as well given the abnormal result last time.
Ashfield has a very popular LD candidate who nearly got there last time and is standing again I believe
I'd hesitate before calling the Montgomeryshire result 'abnormal', although I admit it was a fairly conscious rejection of an unpopular sitting MP who had totally lost touch with reality (and was off cashing in on all sorts of junkets while Parliament was sitting) in favour of a very strong local candidate. That being said, Montgomeryshire has been trending Tory for a while - don't forget they now hold the Assembly seat as well and are strong on the County Council. I think Montgomeryshire could be a fairly easy hold for the Conservatives.
In Oxford West and Abingdon, my instinct is that Evan Harris makes enemies too easily to get back unless there is a huge anti-Tory swing, but I could be wrong. It's not as though his Conservative rival is exactly an amiable compromise candidate!
But she didn't post a link to the actual data tables nor the name of pollster and left with the misleading impression it was a poll of 1,754 Scots.
There's enough fantastic polling for you Nats out there to play games like this with subsamples.
But neither fantasy nor made up.
Nowadays sub samples seem to have gained a new currency on here for all sorts of folk when it suits them. If memes can be pushed regarding the accents of canvassers or MOE increases in SLab polling numbers, anything goes I guess.
I cannot see the SNP entering a formal coalition with Labour (or Labour wanting them to).What I could see is the SNP prop up a labour minority government and w hills 5/1 on a lab minority government is cracking value imo
The SNP will not vote with the Tories to bring a Labour government down. If you work from that fact you soon realise that Labour will not need any formal agreement with the SNP, let alone a coalition.
In Oxford West and Abingdon, my instinct is that Evan Harris makes enemies too easily to get back unless there is a huge anti-Tory swing, but I could be wrong. It's not as though his Conservative rival is exactly an amiable compromise candidate!
Ah, have just seen Harris is not standing again. That might make it a bit more plausible.
OT I'm attempting to watch Dallas Buyers Club - jeez it's boring. I love Matthew McConaughey, but I've restarted it twice and turned it off once and it's only 21mins in.
Can anyone who's seen it convince me to continue? It feels such a retread of Erin Brockovitch [sp], Silkwood et al.
So EdM wants legislation to ensure there are TV debates among Political Leaders every five years for 90 minutes..but does not want a referendum on the Country,s continued membership of the EU.. yep ..the boy is a total Dork..and his partnership with the English hating SNP will be his downfall.
OT I'm attempting to watch Dallas Buyers Club - jeez it's boring. I love Matthew McConaughey, but I've restarted it twice and turned it off once and it's only 21mins in.
Can anyone who's seen it convince me to continue? It feels such a retread of Erin Brockovitch [sp], Silkwood et al.
Stick with it. The performances were truly worthy of the Oscars.
I cannot see the SNP entering a formal coalition with Labour (or Labour wanting them to).What I could see is the SNP prop up a labour minority government and w hills 5/1 on a lab minority government is cracking value imo
The SNP will not vote with the Tories to bring a Labour government down. If you work from that fact you soon realise that Labour will not need any formal agreement with the SNP, let alone a coalition.
You mean 'the snp will not vote with the Tories *again* to bring a labour government down'?
it's just struck me that you must now be the elder statesman of the PB Nats having been longer on the board than any other Nat - an achievement in Nattery by itself :-)
If you can stay on until the end of the year I'll award you the presitigeous Golden Turnip for services to Southerners.
I cannot see the SNP entering a formal coalition with Labour (or Labour wanting them to).What I could see is the SNP prop up a labour minority government and w hills 5/1 on a lab minority government is cracking value imo
The SNP will not vote with the Tories to bring a Labour government down. If you work from that fact you soon realise that Labour will not need any formal agreement with the SNP, let alone a coalition.
You mean 'the snp will not vote with the Tories *again* to bring a labour government down'?
That's exactly what I mean. The last time they did it they leaned it was not a good idea.
OT I'm attempting to watch Dallas Buyers Club - jeez it's boring. I love Matthew McConaughey, but I've restarted it twice and turned it off once and it's only 21mins in.
Can anyone who's seen it convince me to continue? It feels such a retread of Erin Brockovitch [sp], Silkwood et al.
Stick with it. The performances were truly worthy of the Oscars.
Just received word that Lord Sunil has issued a directive to The Sunil on Sunday editorial team to delay publication of this week's ELBOW by 24 hrs to give time to TNS UK to get off their ARSE
If the Tories want to throw down red meat in the manifesto they have to commit to the 2% defence spending target for 2015-2020 and pay for it by freezing aid spending in cash terms, shrinking it as a proportion of GDP. It is absolute insanity to grow aid spending by 2% per year in real terms while our military shrinks and we lose the capability to globally project our forces.
The figures are percentages! That is 1 per cent of the Scots think Milliband is doing "very well" and his overall rating is minus 75 per cent. How you could read this any other way is totally beyond me. The overall rating for Clegg is minus 66 per cent and for Cameron minus 44 per cent.I pointed this out in my reply to Plato at 10.44am. Perhaps you should have read it before running at the mouth. As for Coolagorna's claim that I made up the figures. Just a further indication of how overwrought unionist men are getting on this site.
As for the complaint that it is the YouGov sub sample. Of course it is the sub sample. It is this mornings YouGov poll which is why I posted it today! We don't have a Scottish YouGov on Sunday. I made it clear it was a GB sample in the origonal post!
I have long argued that you should take a minimum of five sub sample polls when looking at Party ratings to allow for variation. However, it is commonplace to take attitude polling from various geographical parts of a UK sample. And it is perfectly valid to draw attention to todays YouGov.
Finally as has been noted by others this is perfectly consistent with the polling from the Scottish polls where for example Mr Murphy is averaging MINUS 10 per cent and Nicola Sturgeon PLUS 40 per cent.
One seat, although not involving the Liberal Democrats, where there might be some value available is Gloucester. At the moment, Paddy Power are offering 13/10 on Labour. That seems a bit high to me. Labour might well have held Gloucester last time had it not been for the antics of their candidate (Parmjit Dhanda) whom nobody liked or trusted and who ran a longstanding smear campaign against his opponent in the fond belief that nobody knew who was behind it. It should be noted, however, that Richard Graham has not exactly pulled up any trees as a constituency MP - he comes across as rather disengaged and not over-bright. The Labour candidate (Sophy Gardner) also has a very interesting back story as a former RAF wing commander, although so far as I know she has never seen action, and that might attract a few Labour voters who have been flirting with UKIP.
The are two reasons to be cautious about Gloucester as a Labour gain: (1) Graham is local, Gardner is not, and the people of Gloucester can be extremely parochial even when the candidate is rubbish (2) Gloucester has for a long time been a bellweather seat (since 1979) but it has not been won by Labour when they have failed to win an overall majority since 1959. But even so I think 4/6 on the Tories is optimistic and 13/10 on Labour is too long - the result should be a lot closer than that.
The same logic, coupled with a much weaker Conservative candidate, should see Labour retake Stroud unless there is a massive Green surge (which I can't quite see with David Drew as the Labour candidate).
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I expect it will work in much the same way as their unilaterally imposed currency union......
No I didn't. I pasted it from the poll as I have just done again above. The clue is in the "1754 GB adults"!
You bunch are a real shower. "Hear no bad polls, speak no bad polls, and above all listen to no bad polls!"
Save the union! Give me strength!
You may not have twigged, but most posters on here are not members of the EdM fan club. They would not see a poll in which EdM has poor ratings as being "bad". Except for him and Labour (a party which most on here have no affection for either).
If the Tories want to throw down red meat in the manifesto they have to commit to the 2% defence spending target for 2015-2020 and pay for it by freezing aid spending in cash terms, shrinking it as a proportion of GDP. It is absolute insanity to grow aid spending by 2% per year in real terms while our military shrinks and we lose the capability to globally project our forces.
This has 'unforced error' written all over it, so one I wouldn't be at all surprised if they made....
If the Tories want to throw down red meat in the manifesto they have to commit to the 2% defence spending target for 2015-2020 and pay for it by freezing aid spending in cash terms, shrinking it as a proportion of GDP. It is absolute insanity to grow aid spending by 2% per year in real terms while our military shrinks and we lose the capability to globally project our forces.
Does "aid" include our £10bn net contribution to the relatively well-off nations of the EU? Or is only cutting aid to poor "brown" countries acceptable?
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I expect it will work in much the same way as their unilaterally imposed currency union......
It's an interesting one. As was the other Dair notion that Scotland can blithely walk away from its biggest trading partner without taking on its share of the UK national debt unless the rUK agrees to a currency deal dictated by Holyrood. But that's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
No the signficance is that NO Labour leader has EVER been more unpopular than a Tory Prime Minister in Scotland, not Foot, not Kinnock and not even the war mongering Blair.
This is not because Cameron is popular. Minus 44 is WORSE than most Thatcher ratings in Scotland. It is because Milliband is more unpopular.
In addition Murph's rating of MINUS 10 is WORSE not better than Lamonts. Sturgeons impressive rating of PLUS 40 is marginally less than Salmond at peak but she was marginally more popular than Salmond by the time of referendum..
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I expect it will work in much the same way as their unilaterally imposed currency union......
But that's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
Ah, if only I was as sure of anything as he is of everything....
No the signficance is that NO Labour leader has EVER been more unpopular than a Tory Prime Minister in Scotland, not Foot, not Kinnock and not even the war mongering Blair.
This is not because Cameron is popular. Minus 44 is WORSE than most Thatcher ratings in Scotland. It is because Milliband is more unpopular.
In addition Murph's rating of MINUS 10 is WORSE not better than Lamonts. Sturgeons impressive rating of PLUS 40 is marginally less than Salmond at peak but she was marginally more popular than Salmond by the time of referendum..
Just another example of Scotland becoming more like England then.
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I expect it will work in much the same way as their unilaterally imposed currency union......
But that's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
Ah, if only I was as sure of anything as he is of everything....
No I didn't. I pasted it from the poll as I have just done again above. The clue is in the "1754 GB adults"!
You bunch are a real shower. "Hear no bad polls, speak no bad polls, and above all listen to no bad polls!"
Save the union! Give me strength!
You may not have twigged, but most posters on here are not members of the EdM fan club.
I'm not sure about Roger.....
.....I think he expects Ed to whip out his secret weapon at the last minute and annihilate the Tories to the never-ending gratitude of a grateful populace. Or something like that.....
I cannot see the SNP entering a formal coalition with Labour (or Labour wanting them to).What I could see is the SNP prop up a labour minority government and w hills 5/1 on a lab minority government is cracking value imo
The SNP will not vote with the Tories to bring a Labour government down. If you work from that fact you soon realise that Labour will not need any formal agreement with the SNP, let alone a coalition.
You mean 'the snp will not vote with the Tories *again* to bring a labour government down'?
That's exactly what I mean. The last time they did it they leaned it was not a good idea.
I am sure there are circumstances when the SNP would vote to bring down a Labour Government. Otherwise the SNP would only be a SLAB under a different name, which they are clearly not. However, that said, I doubt that a minority Labour Government would try and do anything that does not have the approval of the SNP and, if I am correct, that has grave implications.
The SNP by definition is about securing independence for Scotland, and in the interim getting the best deal for its country. It is not about governing the UK to best effect for the best benefit of its population as a whole. For a party intent on the break-up of the UK and, in the meantime the enrichment of one small minority, to hold a de facto veto over the policies of HMG will be a very bad thing on so many levels.
Personally, I think that the disconnect between the populations of Scotland and England has now reached such a depth and breadth as to be unbridgeable. It is a shame that the SNP made such a pig's breakfast of their campaign last year and alas from the posts on here I see no sign of them thinking through the big issues that they failed to have answers for last time. Still we can hope that in 2017 or 2018 they do better and manage to convince at least 50%+1 of Scottish residents to do the right thing.
P.S. It is not often that I praise the EU but one thing they have got right is the practise of requiring a country to keep having a referendum until they vote the right way.
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I expect it will work in much the same way as their unilaterally imposed currency union......
But that's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
Ah, if only I was as sure of anything as he is of everything....
He's great. My favourite poster currently.
He certainly advances arguments, which is a blessed relief from that quarter - and they are usually striking, if rarely persuasive.....
I thoroughly enjoyed Dair's contributions last night. Particularly the stuff about UDI. Hopefully, he'll talk us through how that will work in practice at some stage.
I expect it will work in much the same way as their unilaterally imposed currency union......
But that's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
Ah, if only I was as sure of anything as he is of everything....
"The figures are percentages! That is 1 per cent of the Scots think Milliband is doing "very well" and his overall rating is minus 75 per cent. How you could read this any other way is totally beyond me. The overall rating for Clegg is minus 66 per cent and for Cameron minus 44 per cent.I pointed this out in my reply to Plato at 10.44am. Perhaps you should have read it before running at the mouth."
Perhaps if you'd mentioned the pollster it would have helped. I looked at the Opinium Research figures and they bore no resemblance to yours which is why sub samples have no credibility on here. Infact the excellent Nat poster Stuart Dickson was banned for his use of subsamples and they were never used in the crass way yours were.
If the Tories want to throw down red meat in the manifesto they have to commit to the 2% defence spending target for 2015-2020 and pay for it by freezing aid spending in cash terms, shrinking it as a proportion of GDP. It is absolute insanity to grow aid spending by 2% per year in real terms while our military shrinks and we lose the capability to globally project our forces.
Why are defence and aid special cases? Why not just have the parties setting *all* departments' spending levels as percentages of GDP?
You could leave 3-4% for contingencies (or even reducing the deficit). A big advantage would be that the departments would know what they have to work with year-on-year. And it would be, as far as possible, fair and clear. Any spending from contingency would have to be done as a result of vote of parliament.
If Labour were to be very brave, they could say we need investment (i.e. borrowing) and make the percentages add up to more than 100%.
It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with.
On topic, I've been saying for some time that Farron should be the next Lib Dem leader (even though I don't necessarily agree with him on many things). The party need to rebuild and decide what it wants to be, and to do that it needs to listen to the activists, not the grandees.
He may not be leader for more than a couple of years, but he seems the best choice to see that difficult process through.
But in what conceivable circumstances would he only be leader for a couple of years? Unless he'd utterly failed in the very task you think he's suited to do, he'd be there for a decade. He's certainly not the sort of chap to do the job and ride off into the sunset - that completely misreads the make-up of the man.
Good point, but let's not forget the Lib Dem's history in getting rid of leaders. ;-)
No I didn't. I pasted it from the poll as I have just done again above. The clue is in the "1754 GB adults"!
You bunch are a real shower. "Hear no bad polls, speak no bad polls, and above all listen to no bad polls!"
Save the union! Give me strength!
You may not have twigged, but most posters on here are not members of the EdM fan club.
Well, Ed is what gives a PBer his power. He is an energy field created by all living things. Ed surrounds us and penetrates us. He binds the Galaxy together.
No I didn't. I pasted it from the poll as I have just done again above. The clue is in the "1754 GB adults"!
You bunch are a real shower. "Hear no bad polls, speak no bad polls, and above all listen to no bad polls!"
Save the union! Give me strength!
You may not have twigged, but most posters on here are not members of the EdM fan club.
Well, Ed is what gives a PBer his power. He is an energy field created by all living things. Ed surrounds us and penetrates us. He binds the Galaxy together.
France "On March 22nd and 29th French voters, albeit probably not many of them, will head to the polls to elect representatives in each of the country's 101 départements or counties.
As many as 29 percent of them will vote for the National Front according to the latest CSA poll for BFM TV, ahead of both the opposition UMP party (25 percent) and the ruling Socialists (21 percent)."
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
One seat, although not involving the Liberal Democrats, where there might be some value available is Gloucester. At the moment, Paddy Power are offering 13/10 on Labour. That seems a bit high to me. Labour might well have held Gloucester last time had it not been for the antics of their candidate (Parmjit Dhanda) whom nobody liked or trusted and who ran a longstanding smear campaign against his opponent in the fond belief that nobody knew who was behind it. It should be noted, however, that Richard Graham has not exactly pulled up any trees as a constituency MP - he comes across as rather disengaged and not over-bright. The Labour candidate (Sophy Gardner) also has a very interesting back story as a former RAF wing commander, although so far as I know she has never seen action, and that might attract a few Labour voters who have been flirting with UKIP.
The are two reasons to be cautious about Gloucester as a Labour gain: (1) Graham is local, Gardner is not, and the people of Gloucester can be extremely parochial even when the candidate is rubbish (2) Gloucester has for a long time been a bellweather seat (since 1979) but it has not been won by Labour when they have failed to win an overall majority since 1959. But even so I think 4/6 on the Tories is optimistic and 13/10 on Labour is too long - the result should be a lot closer than that.
The same logic, coupled with a much weaker Conservative candidate, should see Labour retake Stroud unless there is a massive Green surge (which I can't quite see with David Drew as the Labour candidate).
There are a number of seats which will be determined by an organisational ground-game which has located its vote with a high rate of contact.A good GOTV operation based on the best principles of the red army is worth 1-3% extra. Good organisation and a bit of extra heave can swing these seats from CON-LAB.These are the 6 pointers.
I had Scarlet Fever as a kid - covered in red squares and sent home from school. Does anyone get that nowadays? A relative of my mother had Diphtheria - now that's one frightening illness to catch.
'Does anyone get it these days'. That's what I thought but apparently as 'Mono' the answer is yes and I never used to think of it as potentially fatal.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
OT I keep tripping across references to Mono as an illness in US TV shows - is it the same thing as Scholar Fever here in the UK?
My brother's girlfriend was ill for months with Scholar Fever and it sounded horrible.
EDIT Google doesn't seem to know what I'm talking about
Glandular Fever
Or as we biochemists like to call it - Epstein-Barr Virus.
ALS, in UK, is a variation of MND. I think in the US it’s the other way round. I’m not sure of how it works, just takes longer. There are, IIRC three “varieties" of MND, the first of which kills horrifyingly quickly. Took my daughter a year ago; not possible to slow down deterioration, upport devices even if arriving promptly could be too late.
If the Tories want to throw down red meat in the manifesto they have to commit to the 2% defence spending target for 2015-2020 and pay for it by freezing aid spending in cash terms, shrinking it as a proportion of GDP. It is absolute insanity to grow aid spending by 2% per year in real terms while our military shrinks and we lose the capability to globally project our forces.
Does "aid" include our £10bn net contribution to the relatively well-off nations of the EU? Or is only cutting aid to poor "brown" countries acceptable?
The overseas aid we give to the EU is certainly the most glaring example of wasteful expenditure.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) 08/03/2015 12:39 Apologies to the British media. I said last year 50,000 Romanians/Bulgarians would register to work in the UK. It's actually 187,370. Wow.
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) 08/03/2015 12:39 Apologies to the British media. I said last year 50,000 Romanians/Bulgarians would register to work in the UK. It's actually 187,370. Wow.
Of the 290k net migration 187k were from those two countries. Dave may have met his under 100k target without them. One can't help but laugh.
I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. It seems similar to MS - strikes randomly and with differing degrees. A very good friend of mine has had that for 40yrs, another was gone in 10. Hope she died peacefully.
The attention given to ALS on US TV is massive just from the shows I've watch over here. I can't recall it ever mentioned in the UK bar David Niven. That's why I noticed it so much.
Ditto Early Onset Parkinson's - without Michael J Fox, it'd never get a shout-out. He's a brilliant advocate for the condition and gets serious anti-victim screentime in the US in shows like The Good Wife.
The dwaft lobby has some serious lobbyists too - I can't think of any in recent years on UK shows - the US has many from Boston Legal to Game of Thrones to Bones. All top rated shows and no Feel-Sorry characters.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
OT I keep tripping across references to Mono as an illness in US TV shows - is it the same thing as Scholar Fever here in the UK?
My brother's girlfriend was ill for months with Scholar Fever and it sounded horrible.
EDIT Google doesn't seem to know what I'm talking about
Glandular Fever
Or as we biochemists like to call it - Epstein-Barr Virus.
ALS, in UK, is a variation of MND. I think in the US it’s the other way round. I’m not sure of how it works, just takes longer. There are, IIRC three “varieties" of MND, the first of which kills horrifyingly quickly. Took my daughter a year ago; not possible to slow down deterioration, upport devices even if arriving promptly could be too late.
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
OT I keep tripping across references to Mono as an illness in US TV shows - is it the same thing as Scholar Fever here in the UK?
My brother's girlfriend was ill for months with Scholar Fever and it sounded horrible.
EDIT Google doesn't seem to know what I'm talking about
Glandular Fever
Or as we biochemists like to call it - Epstein-Barr Virus.
ALS, in UK, is a variation of MND. I think in the US it’s the other way round. I’m not sure of how it works, just takes longer. There are, IIRC three “varieties" of MND, the first of which kills horrifyingly quickly. Took my daughter a year ago; not possible to slow down deterioration, upport devices even if arriving promptly could be too late.
The detail of today’s YouGov is Con 33.8% Lab 33.4% – Con lead 0.4%. Because the party shares have been rounded up and down the effect is to more than double the lead to 1%. As it happens , the Tories have benefiited a fair bit over the past week by this rounding effect. Tory leads of 3% 2% and 1% have on closer inspection been shown to be leads of 2.15% , 1.55% and today’s 0.4%. There was also a tie which was actually a Labour lead of 0.3% Surely it would make more sense to round the lead – rather than the party shares
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
Indeed. But I live in hope. ;-)
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
I'm not even sure Tim Farron would be a good choice for next Lib Dem leader. Us political geeks know he's lefty and always been a Coalition-sceptic, but remember Joe Public still doesn't have a bloody clue who he is. And I think, given how unforgiving the electorate are going to be towards the Lib Dems for the foreseeable future, they're going to automatically assume the worst of any LibDem they don't already know. They're going to just project their default image of the Lib Dems in general (untrustworthy as anything) onto him.
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.
OKC. A shocking thing to happen. I've now twice seen these things come out of a clear blue sky and neither were relatives but there really are no words. I found it difficult imagining how they were able to cope or even carry on.
Comments
Can anyone answer and/or explain this poll from Scotslass. Out of 1754 Adults only 10 are in anyway satisfied with Ed Miliband?
scotslass said:
Sample Size: 1754 GB Adults
Fieldwork: 5th - 6th March 2015
Scotland
Do you think Ed Miliband is doing well or badly as leader
of the Labour party?
Very well 1
Fairly well 9
TOTAL WELL 10
Fairly badly 43
Very badly 42
TOTAL BADLY 85
THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT POLLING FINDING OF THE DAY. MILLIBAND MINUS 75 IN SCOTLAND!
There's enough fantastic polling for you Nats out there to play games like this with subsamples.
Despite MarkSenior's suggestion that the party was likely to fight hard for Oxford West and Abingdon, that is on much longer odds.
'Can anyone answer and/or explain this poll from Scotslass. Out of 1754 Adults only 10 are in anyway satisfied with Ed Miliband? '
Ed really is crap?
There is also Lembit's old seat in Wales.
I'm on at 11/2 in Watford
Ashfield has a very popular LD candidate who nearly got there last time and is standing again I believe
"There's enough fantastic polling for you Nats out there to play games like this with subsamples."
I think we'll all count our spoons before supping with that particular lass again
In Oxford West and Abingdon, my instinct is that Evan Harris makes enemies too easily to get back unless there is a huge anti-Tory swing, but I could be wrong. It's not as though his Conservative rival is exactly an amiable compromise candidate!
Watford might be worth a bet.
Nowadays sub samples seem to have gained a new currency on here for all sorts of folk when it suits them. If memes can be pushed regarding the accents of canvassers or MOE increases in SLab polling numbers, anything goes I guess.
Can anyone who's seen it convince me to continue? It feels such a retread of Erin Brockovitch [sp], Silkwood et al.
yep ..the boy is a total Dork..and his partnership with the English hating SNP will be his downfall.
Is his stripper film as bad as it sounds?
I haven't forgiven the writers of True Detective for the crappy final show. It was spellbinding until then.
11:10AM
The figures are percentages! That is 1 per cent of the Scots think Milliband is doing "very well" and his overall rating is minus 75 per cent. How you could read this any other way is totally beyond me. The overall rating for Clegg is minus 66 per cent and for Cameron minus 44 per cent.I pointed this out in my reply to Plato at 10.44am. Perhaps you should have read it before running at the mouth. As for Coolagorna's claim that I made up the figures. Just a further indication of how overwrought unionist men are getting on this site.
As for the complaint that it is the YouGov sub sample. Of course it is the sub sample. It is this mornings YouGov poll which is why I posted it today! We don't have a Scottish YouGov on Sunday. I made it clear it was a GB sample in the origonal post!
I have long argued that you should take a minimum of five sub sample polls when looking at Party ratings to allow for variation. However, it is commonplace to take attitude polling from various geographical parts of a UK sample. And it is perfectly valid to draw attention to todays YouGov.
Finally as has been noted by others this is perfectly consistent with the polling from the Scottish polls where for example Mr Murphy is averaging MINUS 10 per cent and Nicola Sturgeon PLUS 40 per cent.
The are two reasons to be cautious about Gloucester as a Labour gain: (1) Graham is local, Gardner is not, and the people of Gloucester can be extremely parochial even when the candidate is rubbish (2) Gloucester has for a long time been a bellweather seat (since 1979) but it has not been won by Labour when they have failed to win an overall majority since 1959. But even so I think 4/6 on the Tories is optimistic and 13/10 on Labour is too long - the result should be a lot closer than that.
The same logic, coupled with a much weaker Conservative candidate, should see Labour retake Stroud unless there is a massive Green surge (which I can't quite see with David Drew as the Labour candidate).
Miliband Net 'well': (Cameron)
London: -33 (-1)
RoS: -61 (+7)
Mid/Wales: -37 (-4)
North: -35 (-17)
Has Glenn Close ever been a goodie? I can't think of a role where she's been anything other than coldly calculating. And very good at it.
Screaming Egos11.36 am
No I didn't. I pasted it from the poll as I have just done again above. The clue is in the "1754 GB adults"!
You bunch are a real shower. "Hear no bad polls, speak no bad polls, and above all listen to no bad polls!"
Save the union! Give me strength!
Perhaps his speech yesterday telling Scots how they had to vote has caused a movement down to 10%?
No the signficance is that NO Labour leader has EVER been more unpopular than a Tory Prime Minister in Scotland, not Foot, not Kinnock and not even the war mongering Blair.
This is not because Cameron is popular. Minus 44 is WORSE than most Thatcher ratings in Scotland. It is because Milliband is more unpopular.
In addition Murph's rating of MINUS 10 is WORSE not better than Lamonts. Sturgeons impressive rating of PLUS 40 is marginally less than Salmond at peak but she was marginally more popular than Salmond by the time of referendum..
.....I think he expects Ed to whip out his secret weapon at the last minute and annihilate the Tories to the never-ending gratitude of a grateful populace. Or something like that.....
The SNP by definition is about securing independence for Scotland, and in the interim getting the best deal for its country. It is not about governing the UK to best effect for the best benefit of its population as a whole. For a party intent on the break-up of the UK and, in the meantime the enrichment of one small minority, to hold a de facto veto over the policies of HMG will be a very bad thing on so many levels.
Personally, I think that the disconnect between the populations of Scotland and England has now reached such a depth and breadth as to be unbridgeable. It is a shame that the SNP made such a pig's breakfast of their campaign last year and alas from the posts on here I see no sign of them thinking through the big issues that they failed to have answers for last time. Still we can hope that in 2017 or 2018 they do better and manage to convince at least 50%+1 of Scottish residents to do the right thing.
P.S. It is not often that I praise the EU but one thing they have got right is the practise of requiring a country to keep having a referendum until they vote the right way.
"The figures are percentages! That is 1 per cent of the Scots think Milliband is doing "very well" and his overall rating is minus 75 per cent. How you could read this any other way is totally beyond me. The overall rating for Clegg is minus 66 per cent and for Cameron minus 44 per cent.I pointed this out in my reply to Plato at 10.44am. Perhaps you should have read it before running at the mouth."
Perhaps if you'd mentioned the pollster it would have helped. I looked at the Opinium Research figures and they bore no resemblance to yours which is why sub samples have no credibility on here. Infact the excellent Nat poster Stuart Dickson was banned for his use of subsamples and they were never used in the crass way yours were.
Labour will take Gloucester for sure.Not sure about Stroud.
You could leave 3-4% for contingencies (or even reducing the deficit). A big advantage would be that the departments would know what they have to work with year-on-year. And it would be, as far as possible, fair and clear. Any spending from contingency would have to be done as a result of vote of parliament.
If Labour were to be very brave, they could say we need investment (i.e. borrowing) and make the percentages add up to more than 100%.
It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with.
My brother's girlfriend was ill for months with Scholar Fever and it sounded horrible.
EDIT Google doesn't seem to know what I'm talking about
Or as we biochemists like to call it - Epstein-Barr Virus.
"On March 22nd and 29th French voters, albeit probably not many of them, will head to the polls to elect representatives in each of the country's 101 départements or counties.
As many as 29 percent of them will vote for the National Front according to the latest CSA poll for BFM TV, ahead of both the opposition UMP party (25 percent) and the ruling Socialists (21 percent)."
http://www.thelocal.fr/20150305/national-front-set-to-storm-another-election
"It would also give the heads of overspending departments some real responsibility wrt budget, knowing that ministers could not just chuck them money from the contingency without notice.
It would give the public something solid to vote on (as opposed to wishy-washy manifesto commitments) and give them something to measure the performance of the government and departments with."
Look at your proposal from the point of view of the Civil Service and Politicians. Do you see why it will never be adopted? People held to account for their actions? Voters given indisputable facts by which to measure performance? It would be the end of civilisation as we know it.
It's scarlett fever. My New York producer's daughter died of it five years after losing his son-in-law in the Twin Towers.
I emailed 'I just couldn't find the words....' and he wrote back "Sometimes Roger there just aren't any words"
It's so weird coming across the same diseases called different things. I'm assuming that Motor-Neuron Disease is ALS or Leu Gehrig's? I'd never heard of him until watching US TV. That David Niven died of it too seems to be lost in the wash.
“It’s quite clear that if the Tories are the largest party come the 8th of May they will form the government of the United Kingdom.”
http://tinyurl.com/pvp2sat
Good organisation and a bit of extra heave can swing these seats from CON-LAB.These are the 6 pointers.
Labour, scaring voters into voting for them since (fill your own date in).
You've got your sense of humour back! (One T too many)
'Does anyone get it these days'. That's what I thought but apparently as 'Mono' the answer is yes and I never used to think of it as potentially fatal.
http://www.annsteward.org.uk/about-ann
http://www.michaelbakerukip.org.uk/about/
Yes.Exclude 5 million Scots from governing the country because they made the wrong choice.That should really help the unity of this country.
Yes, ALS is indeed better known here as MND.
(sorry for all the TLAs!)
08/03/2015 12:39
Apologies to the British media. I said last year 50,000 Romanians/Bulgarians would register to work in the UK. It's actually 187,370. Wow.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/green-party/11453910/The-Green-Party-is-a-Looney-Tunes-alliance-of-druids-and-trots.html
But we all knew that, or if we didn't, we should have known.
The attention given to ALS on US TV is massive just from the shows I've watch over here. I can't recall it ever mentioned in the UK bar David Niven. That's why I noticed it so much.
Ditto Early Onset Parkinson's - without Michael J Fox, it'd never get a shout-out. He's a brilliant advocate for the condition and gets serious anti-victim screentime in the US in shows like The Good Wife.
The dwaft lobby has some serious lobbyists too - I can't think of any in recent years on UK shows - the US has many from Boston Legal to Game of Thrones to Bones. All top rated shows and no Feel-Sorry characters.
Surely it would make more sense to round the lead – rather than the party shares
I haven't really been able to come up with any *sane* reasons against it (aside from people's self-protection, as you mention).
On another note, I have a military history question I'd appreciate some help with whilst you are on. I need to go out, but in short:
A couple of decades ago I read somewhere about a few UK military engineers (tanks, in this case), being embedded within Russian formations so they could examine captured German tanks and weaponry; the Russians had a few in our formations as well.
I have no idea where I read this; I *think* it was non-fiction, but might be wrong.
Do you have any ideas where I might look?
Imo, the next leader will have to be someone the public already know AND who they trust to have some integrity. Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy are really the only candidates who fit the bill as far as I can see.