If Clarkson intends to sue anyone surely it'll be the Daily Mail. They are the ones who publicized the libel if indeed there was one. The fact that someone might have briefed them doesn't in any way absolve them
That doesn’t make sense Roger – If the D’Mail merely reports the alleged comments made by a BBC executive, how does that absolve the BBC?
I too find it curious that the lawyers are struggling to get victims to come forward to claim compensation. Despite all the publicity over the last year there seem very few.
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Why don't you challenge them? Start with an FOI request to see how the figure was arrived at and take it from there.
Or are you just another apologist who regards the victims as collateral damage?
Either put up or shut up because at the moment you come across as a collaborator
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
It's been noted on here before that the Tories tend to get a poll slump in the days preceding the Budget. I put it down to healthy British scepticism and reserving judgement.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
It's been noted on here before that the Tories tend to get a poll slump in the days preceding the Budget. I put it down to healthy British scepticism and reserving judgement.
It might be as simple as "C'mon then Tories. Buy. My. Vote...."
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Dair First results showed Zionist Union ahead, I really don't think you can draw any definitive results for a while yet
Unless you can tell me why there is a specific reason why heavy Labor areas will be late to get their county in, sorry but it's over. Wouldn't Labor be concentrated in early declaring urban areas? It could get worse for them. But it's not likely to get better.
"That doesn’t make sense Roger – If the D’Mail merely reports the comments made by a BBC executive, how does that absolve the BBC? "
That's why newspapers have lawyers. It's their responsibility to ensure that they don't print a libel. That they claim that they were given the story counts for nothing. As they haven't even named the BBC executive I'd say their position is unsupportable. If you doubt this I suggest you ask Sally Bercow who did no more than repeat a story she had read.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
It's been noted on here before that the Tories tend to get a poll slump in the days preceding the Budget. I put it down to healthy British scepticism and reserving judgement.
It might be as simple as "C'mon then Tories. Buy. My. Vote...."
Nah, we're all paying too much attention to sampling variation. Anyway looks like the polls are bang level right now, perhaps CON is not 0.5% ahead as I thought.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
It's been noted on here before that the Tories tend to get a poll slump in the days preceding the Budget. I put it down to healthy British scepticism and reserving judgement.
It might be as simple as "C'mon then Tories. Buy. My. Vote...."
Nah, we're all paying too much attention to sampling variation. Anyway looks like the polls are bang level right now, perhaps CON is not 0.5% ahead as I thought.
We need a Yougov 4% Tory lead. Shares in tissues are tanking.
Increasingly feel like Bibi will be PM once again.
Ok, only about 5% of votes counted?, but Likud have a 6% lead over ZU.
Kulanu leader Kahlon said he will support largest party.
And it looks as though the rightwing Shas breakaway Yachad (Together) may clear the 3.25% bar and win 4 seats.
Right now, my gut feel says it will be Netanyahu again.
I agree that if "Together " i.e. Yachad get their 4 seats, then its game over for Herzog. But they have just dropped to 3.1% - beneath the 3,25% cut-off.
With a proper PR system like that of Israel the result should be pretty much clear once 10% of the vote is in
That statement is only true if the votes counted are representative of the votes cast. I don't know if that's true for Israel. An analogy would be to point out that the urban seats in UK get counted quicker than the rural ones, giving a Labour bias to the early count that disappears as the count progresses. That doesn't mean that Likud aren't ahead in the final count - they may well be, I don't know - but it does mean that early counts are not necessarily good guides
Incidentally, if memory serves correctly Israel is a single constituency.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 9.75 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 8.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and not far off what Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
"That doesn’t make sense Roger – If the D’Mail merely reports the comments made by a BBC executive, how does that absolve the BBC? "
That's why newspapers have lawyers. It's their responsibility to ensure that they don't print a libel. That they claim that they were given the story counts for nothing. As they haven't even named the BBC executive I'd say their position is unsupportable. If you doubt this I suggest you ask Sally Bercow who did no more than repeat a story she had read.
Indeed Roger, repeating a libel also has its consequences as dear Sally found out to her cost. However, not having seen the article in question I've no idea how the Mail covered themselves.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 10 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 9.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and that was UK wide, and almost as many as Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 10 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 9.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and that was UK wide, and almost as many as Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
Why Tyson is such an excellent poster. Some facts instead of the hysterical rubbish that has been demeaning this site for the last several months.
"Richard- do you know how many of the 1400 Rotherham plus have come out? 38 so far. Criminal injuries compensation is quite good and only 38 so far. For 10 convictions 38 is probably about right. Where are the other 1362 plus? Probably in the vacuous black hole of spurious witch hunting, manipulative, factless, data.
The Jay report 1400 data was never scrutinized because noone had the bollocks to do so. It is hardly fashionable to challenge a witch hunt, especially when you are perceived to side with Asian paedophiles.
And so with Cyril Smith, the establishment, Jimmy Saville, operation Yew Tree, and all the rest, the same old story. Most probably big Cyril had some high up contacts and some horrible low down habits. But the froth eyed, media frenzy- you would think there were Rosemary Baby death orgies happening at the HoC every day in the 80's.
And Fred Talbot was my form teacher and class teacher for five years. He was a bloody good teacher, a good man and never showed anything other than professionalism and commitment to our class. And I knew him very well."
While I don't know too much about child abuse victims, I have worked with female victims of sexual violence in the past, and this post is a classic of the denial genre. There seems to be a segment of the population that have an instinctive reaction of refusing to accept a crime has taken place, in the absence of all evidence. Here you have the "he's a good egg that wouldn't do such a thing" trope, the "it's all a witch hunt" trope, and the "it's not as bad as worst crime X" trope. All that is missing is the victim blaming.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
There is hardly anyone left voting for SF/SDLP in Belfast East (3 per cent in 2010) because it is the most Protestant constituency in Belfast and Long had already squeezed about a third of their earlier vote. Compare this to the 54 per cent combined DUP/UUP vote and it's bad news for Long. Belfast North was vaguely threatened by demographics favouring Sinn Féin in the long term, but there are more than enough unionist-minded voters to keep the DUP winning here for the moment. Fermanagh and West Tyrone could be a UUP win, though at medium-long odds. Newry and Armagh won't.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
They can forget about Newry & Armagh, Will not happen. Long was likely to be in diffs in East Belfast anyway. The DUP were likely to win North Belfast anyway even if it was going to narrow, the UUP are spent in that constituency so Dodds would coalesce the mainstream unionist vote.
@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll - Labour two ahead & polling highest score this year. Ukip poll their lowest: CON 34%, LAB 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 12%, GRN 6%
Tory hopes dying, dying...aaand dead.
The campaign hasn't properly started yet. Cons could easily put on 5 points in April campaign.
I would take issue with the word 'easily' in that sentence. More to the point, even with Scottish troubles, putting on 5 pts from today's score would probably not be enough to definitely secure most seats unless Labour also drop some. There is no guarantee the Tories will rise - the two seem effectively tied with the Tory ceiling being about the same as the Labour floor.
Take out Scottish troubles and Labour would be walking into an easy majority; that the Tories need to rely on a miracle 5+pt rise/opening up a 4+% gap (based off people suddenly seeing Ed M is crap and, maybe, a good final budget) is asking a lot even with the change in focus that comes with campaign proper.
Sure, there have been cases where it has happened. But in this situation, with this set of politicians?
I too find it curious that the lawyers are struggling to get victims to come forward to claim compensation. Despite all the publicity over the last year there seem very few.
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Nearly 300,000 people live in Rotherham borough. A figure of 1,400 is entirely plausible.
Why Tyson is such an excellent poster. Some facts instead of the hysterical rubbish that has been demeaning this site for the last several months.
These people are disgusting beyond belief, the damage they have done to their victims lives can never be measured. Anyone who has any modicum of sympathy or expresses any mitigation for these evil bastards is complicit in my view.
Well done Nige4England for perfectly illustrating my point.
As said before it is almost impossible to challenge this narrative because of the McCarthyist fervour that permeates the atmosphere because one then becomes implicit with the unmentionables. Safer, much safer to side with the mob and hang and flog em brigade.
@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll - Labour two ahead & polling highest score this year. Ukip poll their lowest: CON 34%, LAB 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 12%, GRN 6%
Tory hopes dying, dying...aaand dead.
The campaign hasn't properly started yet. Cons could easily put on 5 points in April campaign.
I would take issue with the word 'easily' in that sentence. More to the point, even with Scottish troubles, putting on 5 pts from today's score would probably not be enough to definitely secure most seats unless Labour also drop some. There is no guarantee the Tories will rise - the two seem effectively tied with the Tory ceiling being about the same as the Labour floor.
Take out Scottish troubles and Labour would be walking into an easy majority; that the Tories need to rely on a miracle 5+pt rise/opening up a 4+% gap (based off people suddenly seeing Ed M is crap and, maybe, a good final budget) is asking a lot even with the change in focus that comes with campaign proper.
Sure, there have been cases where it has happened. But in this situation, with this set of politicians?
All fair points, but as betting types I think we have to take account of the 'usual' Tory-in-government bounce in the latter stages of the campaign. Maybe it's my age, but 1992 is etched in my memory.
Anyone else wondering if Osborne has been cooking a giant rabbit in the slow cooker, which he'll be ready to unveil in just over 12 hours time?
I've always found rabbit a bit of a let down to be honest. Maybe it was in the preparation.
In truth what I'm most interested in is how Osborne will spin his key gimmicks from his speech as not actually being gimmicks, as he promised there wouldn't be any apparently.
Why Tyson is such an excellent poster. Some facts instead of the hysterical rubbish that has been demeaning this site for the last several months.
"Richard- do you know how many of the 1400 Rotherham plus have come out? 38 so far. Criminal injuries compensation is quite good and only 38 so far. For 10 convictions 38 is probably about right. Where are the other 1362 plus? Probably in the vacuous black hole of spurious witch hunting, manipulative, factless, data.
The Jay report 1400 data was never scrutinized because noone had the bollocks to do so. It is hardly fashionable to challenge a witch hunt, especially when you are perceived to side with Asian paedophiles.
And so with Cyril Smith, the establishment, Jimmy Saville, operation Yew Tree, and all the rest, the same old story. Most probably big Cyril had some high up contacts and some horrible low down habits. But the froth eyed, media frenzy- you would think there were Rosemary Baby death orgies happening at the HoC every day in the 80's.
And Fred Talbot was my form teacher and class teacher for five years. He was a bloody good teacher, a good man and never showed anything other than professionalism and commitment to our class. And I knew him very well."
While I don't know too much about child abuse victims, I have worked with female victims of sexual violence in the past, and this post is a classic of the denial genre. There seems to be a segment of the population that have an instinctive reaction of refusing to accept a crime has taken place, in the absence of all evidence. Here you have the "he's a good egg that wouldn't do such a thing" trope, the "it's all a witch hunt" trope, and the "it's not as bad as worst crime X" trope. All that is missing is the victim blaming.
Roger, this is a good post.
Not the disgusting apologist tripe that you and Tyson shame yourselves with.
@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll - Labour two ahead & polling highest score this year. Ukip poll their lowest: CON 34%, LAB 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 12%, GRN 6%
Tory hopes dying, dying...aaand dead.
The campaign hasn't properly started yet. Cons could easily put on 5 points in April campaign.
I would take issue with the word 'easily' in that sentence. More to the point, even with Scottish troubles, putting on 5 pts from today's score would probably not be enough to definitely secure most seats unless Labour also drop some. There is no guarantee the Tories will rise - the two seem effectively tied with the Tory ceiling being about the same as the Labour floor.
Take out Scottish troubles and Labour would be walking into an easy majority; that the Tories need to rely on a miracle 5+pt rise/opening up a 4+% gap (based off people suddenly seeing Ed M is crap and, maybe, a good final budget) is asking a lot even with the change in focus that comes with campaign proper.
Sure, there have been cases where it has happened. But in this situation, with this set of politicians?
All fair points, but as betting types I think we have to take account of the 'usual' Tory-in-government bounce in the latter stages of the campaign. Maybe it's my age, but 1992 is etched in my memory.
Ah, there you have the advantage of me. My first political memories were forged in the run up to 1997, though I was born and raised in a Tory stronghold, so I sometimes thinks that accounts for my tendency to lean more toward Tory/LD but generally predict very optimistic outcomes for Labour.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 9.75 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 8.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and not far off what Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
One has to look at it in the round. Overall, in this week's polls, Con and Lab average 33.5% each.
@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll - Labour two ahead & polling highest score this year. Ukip poll their lowest: CON 34%, LAB 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 12%, GRN 6%
Tory hopes dying, dying...aaand dead.
The campaign hasn't properly started yet. Cons could easily put on 5 points in April campaign.
Anything's possible, but it would be very unusual to see a big shift between the big two parties during the campaign - the equality of coverage tends to make them cancel out. The best Tory bet is probably tomorrow's Budget, though Budgets tend not to have a lasting effect either.
It looks like UKIP voters moving to Labour to me. But Con+UKIP at 46% still seems low compared to Lab+Green+LD at 49%.
What might be happening is that the imminency of the election is starting to coalesce opinion around the two main principle alternatives, albeit belatedly and reluctantly.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
There is hardly anyone left voting for SF/SDLP in Belfast East (3 per cent in 2010) because it is the most Protestant constituency in Belfast and Long had already squeezed about a third of their earlier vote. Compare this to the 54 per cent combined DUP/UUP vote and it's bad news for Long. Belfast North was vaguely threatened by demographics favouring Sinn Féin in the long term, but there are more than enough unionist-minded voters to keep the DUP winning here for the moment. Fermanagh and West Tyrone could be a UUP win, though at medium-long odds. Newry and Armagh won't.
The thing is Northern Ireland has a massively dysfunctional electorate. Nearly 50% have just opted out because they reject the religious parties. Long's hope will be that because she holds office she can persuade enough non-voters to opt back in and send a message that if non-religious parties can win, then there is a reason to vote again.
Turnout in Belfast East was 58% in 2010, if Long can drive that up above 65% she may still have a chance.
I too find it curious that the lawyers are struggling to get victims to come forward to claim compensation. Despite all the publicity over the last year there seem very few.
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Why don't you challenge them? Start with an FOI request to see how the figure was arrived at and take it from there.
Or are you just another apologist who regards the victims as collateral damage?
Either put up or shut up because at the moment you come across as a collaborator
The 1400 number was based on extrapolation from 66 confirmed cases (many of which include horrific detail), with extrapolation from a subgroup of 19 cases.
According to the report during the period in question 988 children were in residential care, for any reason. Many of these were for other issues, not child sexual exploitation by grooming gangs.
I do not doubt that there were many victims, but the 1400 figure does not seem well grounded statistically.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 9.75 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 8.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and not far off what Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
Anyone else wondering if Osborne has been cooking a giant rabbit in the slow cooker, which he'll be ready to unveil in just over 12 hours time?
I've always found rabbit a bit of a let down to be honest. Maybe it was in the preparation.
In truth what I'm most interested in is how Osborne will spin his key gimmicks from his speech as not actually being gimmicks, as he promised there wouldn't be any apparently.
Only one way to find out. I'm off to bed: to wait for the morning to find out.
It looks like he's spreading it around, so there's a shopping list for as broad a coalition of voters as possible: 40p threshold timetable brought forward, announcement of an IHT cut, personal allowance increase, rise in the minimum wage for apprentices. Also extra investment in the north and midlands, to try and save a few more Tory marginals.
All because we're following the long-term economic plan, natch.
I too find it curious that the lawyers are struggling to get victims to come forward to claim compensation. Despite all the publicity over the last year there seem very few.
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Nearly 300,000 people live in Rotherham borough. A figure of 1,400 is entirely plausible.
I would imagine that a lot of the girls come from broken homes where there are a huge number of issues.
Maybe they have been to the police, social services, etc., only to be ignored. I imagine their trust in the authorities is at rock bottom. I believe threats have also been made against the victims by the perpetrators. If they do not trust the authorities then they must feel incredibly unsafe. Proving guilt in a lawsuit years after the abuse is easier said than done. I believe one girl presented the police with evidence in the form of clothing only for it to disappear.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 9.75 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 8.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and not far off what Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
You may be right, just pulling your leg.
Consider my leg pulled; I do not like the prospect of actually having to film myself trying to eat a hat.
'Eh Eh..."Tory climate change minister racked up £22k jet-setting bill in THREE MONTHS"
Peanuts compared with Ed's £63,000 per month.
'Ed Miliband's £63,000 travel bill every month! | Daily Mail ... www.dailymail.co.uk/.../ANDREW-PIERCE-Ed-s-63-000-travel-bill-month... 1 Feb 2015 - Ed Miliband is acquiring an unwanted reputation to match that of Prince 'Airmiles' Andrew for the high cost of his travel arrangements, writes ...
Today being St Patrick's Day, it was intriguing to hear a TV commentator observe that as all races were getting drunk together, what did that say about race relations?
Why Tyson is such an excellent poster. Some facts instead of the hysterical rubbish that has been demeaning this site for the last several months.
These people are disgusting beyond belief, the damage they have done to their victims lives can never be measured. Anyone who has any modicum of sympathy or expresses any mitigation for these evil bastards is complicit in my view.
Well done Nige4England for perfectly illustrating my point.
As said before it is almost impossible to challenge this narrative because of the McCarthyist fervour that permeates the atmosphere because one then becomes implicit with the unmentionables. Safer, much safer to side with the mob and hang and flog em brigade.
Why Tyson is such an excellent poster. Some facts instead of the hysterical rubbish that has been demeaning this site for the last several months.
These people are disgusting beyond belief, the damage they have done to their victims lives can never be measured. Anyone who has any modicum of sympathy or expresses any mitigation for these evil bastards is complicit in my view.
Well done Nige4England for perfectly illustrating my point.
As said before it is almost impossible to challenge this narrative because of the McCarthyist fervour that permeates the atmosphere because one then becomes implicit with the unmentionables. Safer, much safer to side with the mob and hang and flog em brigade.
Why don't you offer a sensible alternative view then instead what is so obviously a party political diatribe?
Tribal politics is childish and you have now shown yourself to be a prime example of it.
I wonder if Ed will press Dave for immunity for those policemen who offer evidence on the alleged political grooming? Theresa May has already agreed it is worthwhile.
I think it's probably still a tie. It's true to say, though, that the trend to Tory leads we had last week has vanished.
I'm not sure why.
If LAB get 35% which hat will you be eating and will it be on youtube?
I have no problem putting my hand up, and eating humble pie, when I'm wrong. It's the only way you can start to understand your mistakes, so you can correct them and improve your analysis for next time.
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 9.75 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 8.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and not far off what Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
You may be right, just pulling your leg.
Consider my leg pulled; I do not like the prospect of actually having to film myself trying to eat a hat.
Easy peasy compared to the amount of humble pie I will need to consume if EICIPM is not the outcome.
'Eh Eh..."Tory climate change minister racked up £22k jet-setting bill in THREE MONTHS"
Peanuts compared with Ed's £63,000 per month.
'Ed Miliband's £63,000 travel bill every month! | Daily Mail ... www.dailymail.co.uk/.../ANDREW-PIERCE-Ed-s-63-000-travel-bill-month... 1 Feb 2015 - Ed Miliband is acquiring an unwanted reputation to match that of Prince 'Airmiles' Andrew for the high cost of his travel arrangements, writes ...
If there is a climate 'change meeting' on the other side of the world - or anywhere - then attendees have to get their somehow. Maybe by rowing boat or roller skate. Any 'climate change' meeting will of course be attended by gawd knows how many people all travelling vast distances. I thought the LDs were in charge of changing our climate.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
There is hardly anyone left voting for SF/SDLP in Belfast East (3 per cent in 2010) because it is the most Protestant constituency in Belfast and Long had already squeezed about a third of their earlier vote. Compare this to the 54 per cent combined DUP/UUP vote and it's bad news for Long. Belfast North was vaguely threatened by demographics favouring Sinn Féin in the long term, but there are more than enough unionist-minded voters to keep the DUP winning here for the moment. Fermanagh and West Tyrone could be a UUP win, though at medium-long odds. Newry and Armagh won't.
The thing is Northern Ireland has a massively dysfunctional electorate. Nearly 50% have just opted out because they reject the religious parties. Long's hope will be that because she holds office she can persuade enough non-voters to opt back in and send a message that if non-religious parties can win, then there is a reason to vote again.
Turnout in Belfast East was 58% in 2010, if Long can drive that up above 65% she may still have a chance.
This fails to comprehend where a surprising amount of Long's vote came from in 2010. It came from Loyalist housing estates who were, encouraged by the 'community representatives' aligned with the paramilitaries, out to stick one to the gilded empire of Peter Robinson. Whilst Long is considered by some to be the East Belfast grassroots girl made good, those same people that helped get her in in 2010 are not likely to stand up for her again. You might not see them make a direct switch from her to the DUP but you might just not have them turn out.
@Casino_Royale Get your local pizzeria to make a hat shaped one? (remember to get them to line it though, or you will be buying super strength shampoo for a month)
'Eh Eh..."Tory climate change minister racked up £22k jet-setting bill in THREE MONTHS"
Peanuts compared with Ed's £63,000 per month.
'Ed Miliband's £63,000 travel bill every month! | Daily Mail ... www.dailymail.co.uk/.../ANDREW-PIERCE-Ed-s-63-000-travel-bill-month... 1 Feb 2015 - Ed Miliband is acquiring an unwanted reputation to match that of Prince 'Airmiles' Andrew for the high cost of his travel arrangements, writes ...
If there is a climate 'change meeting' on the other side of the world - or anywhere - then attendees have to get their somehow. Maybe by rowing boat or roller skate. Any 'climate change' meeting will of course be attended by gawd knows how many people all travelling vast distances. I thought the LDs were in charge of changing our climate.
Apparently there are wondrous things called conference calls these days.
These people are much more interested in their five star junkets than climate change.
I too find it curious that the lawyers are struggling to get victims to come forward to claim compensation. Despite all the publicity over the last year there seem very few.
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Nearly 300,000 people live in Rotherham borough. A figure of 1,400 is entirely plausible.
I would imagine that a lot of the girls come from broken homes where there are a huge number of issues.
Maybe they have been to the police, social services, etc., only to be ignored. I imagine their trust in the authorities is at rock bottom. I believe threats have also been made against the victims by the perpetrators. If they do not trust the authorities then they must feel incredibly unsafe. Proving guilt in a lawsuit years after the abuse is easier said than done. I believe one girl presented the police with evidence in the form of clothing only for it to disappear.
1400? Its millions according to people on here isn't it? All done by Cyril Smith and that mad loony missing-link half brother's nephew of Queen Victorias illegitimate sisters grandson kept locked up in an attic of Buckingham Palace.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Thanks for the heads up on that, and @Yokel thanks for your thoughts too.
While I don't know too much about child abuse victims, I have worked with female victims of sexual violence in the past, and this post is a classic of the denial genre. There seems to be a segment of the population that have an instinctive reaction of refusing to accept a crime has taken place, in the absence of all evidence. Here you have the "he's a good egg that wouldn't do such a thing" trope, the "it's all a witch hunt" trope, and the "it's not as bad as worst crime X" trope. All that is missing is the victim blaming.
I'm not denying that Fred Talbot abused his position. He was a teacher and he most definitely had a predilection for adolescent boys- this is getting on for forty years ago, and Fred was in his twenties. But thankfully times have changed. But Fred was a good man and a good teacher when I knew him and I am sure that during his trial countless witnesses spoke on his behalf to say this. But I feel sorry for the kids that he manipulated and exploited.
And Sean Fear- really, on the Rotherham data. Out of the 300,000 population at any one time you would have perhaps ten to twenty 14-16 year old girls in local authority care- these were the ones targeted. And out of these maybe half would be vulnerable, the other would half be resilient. So how can you come up with 1400?
It is like saying in a population of London (9 million) extrapolating this there have been 50,000 victims over the last ten years- purely on extrapolation of the baseline numbers. This is nonsense.
You can only count on the number of victims who have come forward (38) and the number of people convicted- I think in Rotherham about 8. The rest is conjecture.
There was an attempt earlier to claim the Ashcroft's marginal polls were worse for tories than nationally but UKPR claims there is no real difference. ''I suspect it’s more of an England effect than a marginal effect – all the seats polled by Ashcroft were in England,'' ''Most of the seats Ashcroft polled showed results that were pretty similar to the last time he polled them'' In respect of YouGov we see Labour up UKIP down... Re. TNS: UKPR say about weighting by European vote... ''(though its introduction didn’t seem to make much difference, so its dropping really shouldn’t)''
PS - The last YouGov has tories on 33, now its 34. So the tories are themselves moving forward - not as much as Labour.
The TNS showed a jump by tories but a drop by Labour. Does anyone figure it all??
Bibi 7% ahead. Israeli pollsters going to get alot of egg on their faces ?
Although isn't the Arab list on about 1% right now and they're definitely going to end up in the teens, so I'm not sure straight extrapolation quite works.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
There is hardly anyone left voting for SF/SDLP in Belfast East (3 per cent in 2010) because it is the most Protestant constituency in Belfast and Long had already squeezed about a third of their earlier vote. Compare this to the 54 per cent combined DUP/UUP vote and it's bad news for Long. Belfast North was vaguely threatened by demographics favouring Sinn Féin in the long term, but there are more than enough unionist-minded voters to keep the DUP winning here for the moment. Fermanagh and West Tyrone could be a UUP win, though at medium-long odds. Newry and Armagh won't.
The thing is Northern Ireland has a massively dysfunctional electorate. Nearly 50% have just opted out because they reject the religious parties. Long's hope will be that because she holds office she can persuade enough non-voters to opt back in and send a message that if non-religious parties can win, then there is a reason to vote again.
Turnout in Belfast East was 58% in 2010, if Long can drive that up above 65% she may still have a chance.
This fails to comprehend where a surprising amount of Long's vote came from in 2010. It came from Loyalist housing estates who were, encouraged by the 'community representatives' aligned with the paramilitaries, out to stick one to the gilded empire of Peter Robinson. Whilst Long is considered by some to be the East Belfast grassroots girl made good, those same people that helped get her in in 2010 are not likely to stand up for her again. You might not see them make a direct switch from her to the DUP but you might just not have them turn out.
I see that the Tories are standing in East Belfast how much do you think they can pull UUP votes away from the DUP ?
Bibi 7% ahead. Israeli pollsters going to get alot of egg on their faces ?
Although isn't the Arab list on about 1% right now and they're definitely going to end up in the teens, so I'm not sure straight extrapolation quite works.
Joint list (Hadash, United Arab List, Balad, Taal) And dem 8.03%
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
Will be interesting to see if Sinn Fein and SDLP tactically vote for Naomi Long on Belfast East. But officially I would expect their leaderships to rail against this as they want the sectarian system as much as anyone and Alliance threaten that.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
There is hardly anyone left voting for SF/SDLP in Belfast East (3 per cent in 2010) because it is the most Protestant constituency in Belfast and Long had already squeezed about a third of their earlier vote. Compare this to the 54 per cent combined DUP/UUP vote and it's bad news for Long. Belfast North was vaguely threatened by demographics favouring Sinn Féin in the long term, but there are more than enough unionist-minded voters to keep the DUP winning here for the moment. Fermanagh and West Tyrone could be a UUP win, though at medium-long odds. Newry and Armagh won't.
The thing is Northern Ireland has a massively dysfunctional electorate. Nearly 50% have just opted out because they reject the religious parties. Long's hope will be that because she holds office she can persuade enough non-voters to opt back in and send a message that if non-religious parties can win, then there is a reason to vote again.
Turnout in Belfast East was 58% in 2010, if Long can drive that up above 65% she may still have a chance.
This fails to comprehend where a surprising amount of Long's vote came from in 2010. It came from Loyalist housing estates who were, encouraged by the 'community representatives' aligned with the paramilitaries, out to stick one to the gilded empire of Peter Robinson. Whilst Long is considered by some to be the East Belfast grassroots girl made good, those same people that helped get her in in 2010 are not likely to stand up for her again. You might not see them make a direct switch from her to the DUP but you might just not have them turn out.
I see that the Tories are standing in East Belfast how much do you think they can pull UUP votes away from the DUP ?
Wtf Are the Conservatives doing standing in East Belfast ?!
Wtf Are the Conservatives doing standing in East Belfast ?!
The Tories have been trying to establish themselves in NI for at least 30 years (probably a little longer, ever since they broke their formal link to the UUP in 1972). With very little to show for it. For some in the party it's very strong Dogmatic view that they should be relevant in NI politics.
Many a Scottish Young Tory conference would end with a rousing rendition of The Sash back in the day before camera phones made such activities problematic.
Plenty of abusers can come across as decent people to those that meet them in everyday life, but generosity and kindness in one area does not make someone a good man if they exploit and abuse the vulnerable elsewhere. Fred Talbot was convicted in a court of law as abusing children. That is something a good man does not do. I understand that can be difficult to process for those who have positive experiences of someone, but we must always empathize with the victims, even if we know the abuser better.
Comments
I'm not sure why.
Qtwtaiacn
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Why don't you challenge them? Start with an FOI request to see how the figure was arrived at and take it from there.
Or are you just another apologist who regards the victims as collateral damage?
Either put up or shut up because at the moment you come across as a collaborator
Haha, Murphy is crippled.
As long as they can name the source, and have proof they are free and clear... Who was it, did they say?
Gold standard.
You heard it here first...
and last.
Increasingly feel like Bibi will be PM once again.
Ok, only about 5% of votes counted?, but Likud have a 6% lead over ZU.
Kulanu leader Kahlon said he will support largest party.
And it looks as though the rightwing Shas breakaway Yachad (Together) may clear the 3.25% bar and win 4 seats.
Right now, my gut feel says it will be Netanyahu again.
This should be good news for the DUP in North Belfast and I have bet accordingly, and to a different extent it is good for unionists in the other two change seats (the fourth seat, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, had an agreed unionist candidate in 2010, so this simply returns us to status quo ante).
LAsh - Tory + 2
TNS - Tory +1
Populus - Tory/Lab Tie
YG are the only pollster with the Tories behind since the weekend, and they have a habit of two day splurges.
Tories will be in front with them by Friday.
"That doesn’t make sense Roger – If the D’Mail merely reports the comments made by a BBC executive, how does that absolve the BBC? "
That's why newspapers have lawyers. It's their responsibility to ensure that they don't print a libel. That they claim that they were given the story counts for nothing. As they haven't even named the BBC executive I'd say their position is unsupportable. If you doubt this I suggest you ask Sally Bercow who did no more than repeat a story she had read.
We could definately be looking at 324 as the new Majority in Westminster if UUP do well in Fermanagh and Newry
Hopefully he is taking the piss and playing the non-job for laughs. I would.
Early days yet.
Incidentally, if memory serves correctly Israel is a single constituency.
Should have entered the election game!
But I don't think I am. Labour are likely to drop 400k+ votes in Scotland. Assuming similar turnout nationwide, it would require them to get over 9.75 million votes in England and Wales, where they only managed 7.5 million last time.
Assuming they jump to the 2005 score in Wales (which would pick them up an extra 85k votes) they'd need 8.9 million votes in England.
Quite a bit more than Blair got in 2005, and not far off what Cameron in England got last time. A hat eating would be in order.
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=iw&u=http://www.votes20.gov.il/&prev=search
Likud crowd sound like they're well up for a very right wing Gov't.
Take out Scottish troubles and Labour would be walking into an easy majority; that the Tories need to rely on a miracle 5+pt rise/opening up a 4+% gap (based off people suddenly seeing Ed M is crap and, maybe, a good final budget) is asking a lot even with the change in focus that comes with campaign proper.
Sure, there have been cases where it has happened. But in this situation, with this set of politicians?
Does anyone know how the report came to the 1400 figure? I am sure there must be some reasoning behind it.
Foxinsoxuk- the Rotherham 1400 plus data was absolute nonsense. Impossible. Especially considering the paltry amount of convictions. The Oxford data came in last week at 400, still too high, but better. The problem is that the social services databases are such utter crap- they are confusing, count episodes rather than individuals- and if you get a dyslexic data cruncher, or (a headline witchunter grabber)- then 50 or 60 individuals can rapidly hit 1400- especially when noone has the bollocks to challenge them.
Nearly 300,000 people live in Rotherham borough. A figure of 1,400 is entirely plausible.
Might work, might not.
In truth what I'm most interested in is how Osborne will spin his key gimmicks from his speech as not actually being gimmicks, as he promised there wouldn't be any apparently.
Not the disgusting apologist tripe that you and Tyson shame yourselves with.
Turnout in Belfast East was 58% in 2010, if Long can drive that up above 65% she may still have a chance.
Why don't you challenge them? Start with an FOI request to see how the figure was arrived at and take it from there.
Or are you just another apologist who regards the victims as collateral damage?
Either put up or shut up because at the moment you come across as a collaborator
The Jay report in full can be read here:
http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/downloads/file/1407/independent_inquiry_cse_in_rotherham
The 1400 number was based on extrapolation from 66 confirmed cases (many of which include horrific detail), with extrapolation from a subgroup of 19 cases.
According to the report during the period in question 988 children were in residential care, for any reason. Many of these were for other issues, not child sexual exploitation by grooming gangs.
I do not doubt that there were many victims, but the 1400 figure does not seem well grounded statistically.
I think most of it's probably here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/11476279/Budget-2015-George-Osborne-to-announce-6billion-boost-to-UKs-coffers.html
It looks like he's spreading it around, so there's a shopping list for as broad a coalition of voters as possible: 40p threshold timetable brought forward, announcement of an IHT cut, personal allowance increase, rise in the minimum wage for apprentices. Also extra investment in the north and midlands, to try and save a few more Tory marginals.
All because we're following the long-term economic plan, natch.
Goodnight.
I would imagine that a lot of the girls come from broken homes where there are a huge number of issues.
Maybe they have been to the police, social services, etc., only to be ignored. I imagine their trust in the authorities is at rock bottom. I believe threats have also been made against the victims by the perpetrators. If they do not trust the authorities then they must feel incredibly unsafe. Proving guilt in a lawsuit years after the abuse is easier said than done. I believe one girl presented the police with evidence in the form of clothing only for it to disappear.
You're dead right. It took me ages! Speak soon.
'Eh Eh..."Tory climate change minister racked up £22k jet-setting bill in THREE MONTHS"
Peanuts compared with Ed's £63,000 per month.
'Ed Miliband's £63,000 travel bill every month! | Daily Mail ...
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../ANDREW-PIERCE-Ed-s-63-000-travel-bill-month...
1 Feb 2015 - Ed Miliband is acquiring an unwanted reputation to match that of Prince 'Airmiles' Andrew for the high cost of his travel arrangements, writes ...
Theresa May has already agreed it is worthwhile.
Mind i always liked pie!!
Get your local pizzeria to make a hat shaped one?
(remember to get them to line it though, or you will be buying super strength shampoo for a month)
These people are much more interested in their five star junkets than climate change.
I would imagine that a lot of the girls come from broken homes where there are a huge number of issues.
Maybe they have been to the police, social services, etc., only to be ignored. I imagine their trust in the authorities is at rock bottom. I believe threats have also been made against the victims by the perpetrators. If they do not trust the authorities then they must feel incredibly unsafe. Proving guilt in a lawsuit years after the abuse is easier said than done. I believe one girl presented the police with evidence in the form of clothing only for it to disappear.
1400? Its millions according to people on here isn't it? All done by Cyril Smith and that mad loony missing-link half brother's nephew of Queen Victorias illegitimate sisters grandson kept locked up in an attic of Buckingham Palace.
100 is serious enough - quite grotesque.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2999715/Clarkson-fights-furious-attack-BBC-bosses-brings-lawyers-Savile-comparison-senior-TV-source.html
While I don't know too much about child abuse victims, I have worked with female victims of sexual violence in the past, and this post is a classic of the denial genre. There seems to be a segment of the population that have an instinctive reaction of refusing to accept a crime has taken place, in the absence of all evidence. Here you have the "he's a good egg that wouldn't do such a thing" trope, the "it's all a witch hunt" trope, and the "it's not as bad as worst crime X" trope. All that is missing is the victim blaming.
I'm not denying that Fred Talbot abused his position. He was a teacher and he most definitely had a predilection for adolescent boys- this is getting on for forty years ago, and Fred was in his twenties. But thankfully times have changed. But Fred was a good man and a good teacher when I knew him and I am sure that during his trial countless witnesses spoke on his behalf to say this. But I feel sorry for the kids that he manipulated and exploited.
And Sean Fear- really, on the Rotherham data. Out of the 300,000 population at any one time you would have perhaps ten to twenty 14-16 year old girls in local authority care- these were the ones targeted. And out of these maybe half would be vulnerable, the other would half be resilient. So how can you come up with 1400?
It is like saying in a population of London (9 million) extrapolating this there have been 50,000 victims over the last ten years- purely on extrapolation of the baseline numbers. This is nonsense.
You can only count on the number of victims who have come forward (38) and the number of people convicted- I think in Rotherham about 8. The rest is conjecture.
Also are the SDLP going to stick a candidate up there, surely a SDLP/SF pact is inconceivable... I hope !
''I suspect it’s more of an England effect than a marginal effect – all the seats polled by Ashcroft were in England,''
''Most of the seats Ashcroft polled showed results that were pretty similar to the last time he polled them''
In respect of YouGov we see Labour up UKIP down...
Re. TNS: UKPR say about weighting by European vote... ''(though its introduction didn’t seem to make much difference, so its dropping really shouldn’t)''
PS - The last YouGov has tories on 33, now its 34. So the tories are themselves moving forward - not as much as Labour.
The TNS showed a jump by tories but a drop by Labour. Does anyone figure it all??
Horrific!!
Many a Scottish Young Tory conference would end with a rousing rendition of The Sash back in the day before camera phones made such activities problematic.
Plenty of abusers can come across as decent people to those that meet them in everyday life, but generosity and kindness in one area does not make someone a good man if they exploit and abuse the vulnerable elsewhere. Fred Talbot was convicted in a court of law as abusing children. That is something a good man does not do. I understand that can be difficult to process for those who have positive experiences of someone, but we must always empathize with the victims, even if we know the abuser better.