It looks as if the blue UKIP voters fear ED more than EU. What will the red ones do? (bearing in mind that Ed Miliband is getting more pro-eu by the day.)
Note that the motion to prevent internal criticism was accompanied by Eck calling for a state takeover of the national Broadcaster...
As opposed to privatising it.
No, I did not see that but it must tell everyone all there is to know about the SNP. It has moved far left and any sane centre right voter must see that.
I knew there was a reason why I kept my ice picks after giving up Ice Climbing. I'm off to join the SNP 3:)
The UKIP house is “a bit Hyacinth Bucket” and has “a wrought iron fence all round it to keep everyone out”. There is a flagpole in the garden and the local hunt is gathering outside. The ageing residents (who “don’t get on with their neighbours because they are a different colour”) are smoking heavily and “talking about how it was in their day”. The timer on the stereo is set to play the national anthem every day at noon.
Mr. Urquhart, no. Hatred, to paraphrase Darth Vader, is powerful. I don't think people who hate Cameron will change their mind. Those who are frustrated may. UKIP's support could decline, but it'll likely still remain high enough to secure a number of seats.
GoodnightVienna @CallingEngland 1m1 minute ago What's all this I'm hearing on the radio abt the Cons deliberately throwing Thanet South in order to hand it to Labour & oust Farage? #UKIP
Well the Conservatives have been plastering the Constituency since the start of the weekend with vote Mackinlay boards so they are not sparing the resources.
I will try and get an update on how the Conservatives view things so far and post it here.
If the Conservatives were to throw in the towel in that seat, then Farage would win easily.
Now clear that Sunday's YouGov was a mirage. No Milibounce.
HOWEVER, at the same time, Ashcroft's focus group does report there's been an improvement in underlying attitudes towards Ed (including a Labour lead over the Tories on "reasonable and sensible", for those who still inexplicably think Labour's platform is extremist left-wing), so that does atleast give him something to build on.
On a serious note, I think what is more interesting is that Tories are now starting to hit 35-36%...that is an uptick, I think taking some votes from UKIP. The question is that all, or will a Miliband government scare more of the "I hate f##king Cameron" brigade to switch at the end?
36 taking a pounding again.
In see from the Telegraph the LDs seem to be travelling the country in a yellow removal van. Marginally worse than a pink transit I think.
Meantime in more important news it also seems that leaders will be able to choose the heights of their podiums.
On a serious note, I think what is more interesting is that Tories are now starting to hit 35-36%...that is an uptick, I think taking some votes from UKIP.
It is starting to look like that is the case, and makes the narrative that was running in the press since Thursday's debate look a bit silly now.
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
Ashcroft focus group on resistance to further austerity:
But discussion about the prospect of future cuts revealed some confusion about the need for austerity, and particularly the difference between the debt and the deficit: “They have said we need to cut deeper but the national debt has gone up, apparently. So why have their been cuts? I don’t mind cuts if the debt’s not going up, but…” And if things are so good, why are they so bad? “We’re supposed to be out of recession. I don’t understand why we’ve got so much debt. They don’t explain it properly. With the taxes we pay, you think, how much do they want to drain us?”
The comment on Saturday night's thread are hysterical, they make Sion Simon look like a seer.
Yeah, but I was genuinely sh*tting myself. I drank half a bottle of wine and my wife had to console me by suggesting we put on my favourite Liam Neeson film.
Still think the tories could've sailed away with this with a more generous budget. But maybe they're right. I've been wrong wrong wrong about Cameron and Osborne for most of two years.
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
The UKIP house is “a bit Hyacinth Bucket” and has “a wrought iron fence all round it to keep everyone out”. There is a flagpole in the garden and the local hunt is gathering outside. The ageing residents (who “don’t get on with their neighbours because they are a different colour”) are smoking heavily and “talking about how it was in their day”. The timer on the stereo is set to play the national anthem every day at noon.
The Labour house is in a terrace, with the front door leading straight onto the pavement. High-vis jackets hang in the hallway, and people in the living room are watching their 50-inch plasma TV, and eating cottage pie with chips and beer. “The furniture is nice, but it’s all on HP”. The Conservative house has nice thick carpets and “one of those kitchen islands”. There are Hunter wellies in the hall and a “posh dog”, probably a chocolate Labrador. But “you can’t get to the door because there is an intercom at the gates” and once inside “you have to wipe your feet”. The Lib Dem house is in a cul-de-sac. There are sandals by the door and solar panels on the roof. This house is also home to a dog (“a mongrel from the rescue centre”) that would be allowed to jump on the sofa. The décor is either plain and beige or “quite odd”, having been chosen by “trendy intellectuals”.
Must say that the Labour House does not appear to be the same as EdM's - his is more like the Conservative House.
Mini coup for Labour getting the Hobbit on board..the same Hobbit whose old lady has just gone bankrupt to avoid a 120k tax bill...going well so far.
I never get why politicians feel they need to have celebrity endorsements, presumably to roll the lack of policy turd in glitter.
Still doesn't beat Cameron's endorsement by Charlotte Crosby.
Somehow, I can't see Martin Freeman making a similar offer to Milliband.
I'd be more impressed at his intervention if he did. :-)
Perhaps that's an ad Labour have lined up for the campaign.
'We, the undersigned luvvies offer to...'
LOL
looking at how the FT ad has been handled quite a lot of them are in for a surprise.
'But I was only giving an endorsement, not offering to kneel down before him'
" Sorry Ed, I was after a bigger part, there;s not much to sink my teeth in to "
"Ed, this is how you put a piece of meat in your gob, without looking like a bell end"
" The script for this new ad looks a bit of a mouthful - where's Roger ?"
Roger's reputation is built not on his scriptwriting abilities, but his skills as a lighting cameraman. Making vacuum cleaners look like glossy fighter planes, that kind of thing.
For £10K a day, he could easily make a wizened old pork and beef banger, look like an Apollo moon rocket.
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
Yes - but that was exceptional wasn't it - petrol pump prices and blockade by tanker drivers?
More London properties to be snapped up by foreign buyers at premium prices.
Block the foreigners from buying. Introduce punitive taxes on non-resident owners.
That would live about 10 seconds in the ECJ, you cant impose rules like that in the single European market, all EU citizens have to be treated the same as locals.
Hypothetically, what do consistent decent (let's say 4-5%) Tory leads later in the campaign do?
Do they make it "safe" for ex-Tories to vote UKIP again, push a few Scottish seats back to Labour, and motivate reluctant Red Libs to return back to Cleggy?
Or does a bandwagon effect take over for the Tories coupled with a "well I might as well vote how I think" effect on the left?
@Plato - the idea that FT readers will be concerned that the Labour FT ad will affect their investments is hilarious.
And, yes, I also believe that, unlike you, most of them will understand the point of the ad.
If Labour were a private company, they'd be in danger of passing off by implying the parties quoted had endorsed their product rather than just the dangers of leaving the EU. I don't see why it's different here. Not also the advertising regulations. http://uk.practicallaw.com/8-521-4902
For Labour the cost will be political, if they aren't prepared to defend their actions well.
There is no danger in passing off when you are directly quoting someone and you are not misrepresenting what they say. There is no implication in the ad that the people concerned support Labour. There are a series of quotes from some very senior business people to the effect that the UK withdrawing from the EU would be a very bad idea. Compare and contrast with the Irvine ad
We can debate the legalities, but really what's lacking is common courtesy. If you're going to use someone to endorse your position as a positive you should at least seek their agreement.
"There is no implication in the ad that the people concerned support Labour."
A much litigated point, not unlike defamation cases on implied meanings. If you put "Vote Labour" at the bottom it's clearly open to interpretation. And it's clear from what the business leaders have said today that they felt the implication was there.
I don't mean to suggest that Labour are going to be sued over this. The point is the idea they are far from doing "anything wrong" is silly.
I did like martins statement that the Tories have done sod all for the young. Since 2012 we have taken on 13 apprentices all aged 16 or 17 and the government has given us £1500 for each one to help pay for their training . Interesting definition of sod all . I must ask our apprentices to see what they think.
He was probably remembering that it was Vince Cable who really got the apprenticeship programme up and running.
You have posted 3 times within 60 seconds. A spam block is now in effect on your account. You must wait at least 120 seconds before attempting to post again.
This came up in brilliant red. Is this something new?
Meanwhile in France, ''French politics went from ding to dong on Sunday. One side, the dingers, was cock-a-hoop. The others, the dongers, swore they would be back next time. Both the conservative dingers and Socialist dongers agreed on one thing, though. Thank goodness they had once again kept out those nasty upstarts, the clangers of the National Front.''
At least the French see that 'ding dong' is better than 'ting tong'.
That obscure post is reporting the second round of the French local elections, which were interesting, because despite the refusal of the centre-right (Sarkozy) to agree a common front against the National Front, the voters did it anyway. The FN actually lost ground (by 3%) compared with the first round, winning only five councils out of 278 on a slightly higher turnout.
That appears to suggest a ceiling to the FN vote - they are able to get a quarter of the vote, but the other three quarters are generally hostile enough to vote for traditional rivals in order to keep them out.
It was obscure enough to be from the BBC to which I apologise for not linking to it. However I am grateful to you for repeating what it and I said using quite different words. Such is the richness of the English Language.
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
Yes - but that was exceptional wasn't it - petrol pump prices and blockade by tanker drivers?
How would you feel if you read this about the pilot of a plane you'd just got on?
'Andreas Lubitz, who deliberately crashed the Germanwings Airbus into the French Alps, was in therapy for suicidal tendencies before getting his pilot's licence, Germany's state prosecutor has said.'
Labour have screwed up badly with their FT ad. Of course, in general it wouldn't matter a hoot what quotes they take out of context and use without permission - the average voter will not notice, and wouldn't care anyway.
However, there is one important group who will both notice and care, and that is the type of person who reads the FT. Since presumably this is precisely the group whom Labour were trying to reach, it looks like a very silly, and expensive, own-goal.
I doubt it. Those who read the FT are sophisticated enough to understand that the ad does not mean the companies concerned are endorsing Labour and that the companies themselves were bound to react. They'll also notice that none has actually disowned the quotes. None of this will come as a surprise to Labour. Instead, it looks to me like Labour is using the FT name itself, as well as the companies concerned, to counter the Tory charge that the party is anti-business among voters as a whole. Whether that will be successful and whether the money could have been better spent elsewhere are, of course, different matters entirely.
Hypothetically, what do consistent decent (let's say 4-5%) Tory leads later in the campaign do?
Do they make it "safe" for ex-Tories to vote UKIP again, push a few Scottish seats back to Labour, and motivate reluctant Red Libs to return back to Cleggy?
Or does a bandwagon effect take over for the Tories coupled with a "well I might as well vote how I think" effect on the left?
It will never, ever, be safe to have even a 0.0000000001% chance of Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
The final week of the campaign will involve Tory activists delivering blue nosepegs for polling day....
How would you feel if you read this about the pilot of a plane you'd just got on?
'Andreas Lubitz, who deliberately crashed the Germanwings Airbus into the French Alps, was in therapy for suicidal tendencies before getting his pilot's licence, Germany's state prosecutor has said.'
Chuka Umunna: It’s no different from Sky News quoting a business leader.
Adam Boulton: Except yours says ‘VOTE LABOUR’ at the bottom.
Hat tip guido
I love it when campaigns start and the media get rightly arsey with the politicians. Serves them right. None of them are now MPs and they're called to account.
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
It was a dramatic swing and then a fairly dramatic swing back - a 15 point Average LAbour Lead in the preceding 7 polls, a 3 point Average Con lead over the mid september polls and then back to a 4 point average Labout lead that then stretched out to a 10 point and then 14 point Average Lab lead over the next sets of polls.
I'm rubbish at remembering stuff was their a significant event then that caused the poll swingage?
Ashcroft focus group on resistance to further austerity:
But discussion about the prospect of future cuts revealed some confusion about the need for austerity, and particularly the difference between the debt and the deficit: “They have said we need to cut deeper but the national debt has gone up, apparently. So why have their been cuts? I don’t mind cuts if the debt’s not going up, but…” And if things are so good, why are they so bad? “We’re supposed to be out of recession. I don’t understand why we’ve got so much debt. They don’t explain it properly. With the taxes we pay, you think, how much do they want to drain us?”
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
Yes - but that was exceptional wasn't it - petrol pump prices and blockade by tanker drivers?
It's hard to make a like for like comparison, as polling techniques were different.
IIRC, the Conservatives occasionally began to post leads in 2003 (fuel strike excepted).
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
It was a dramatic swing and then a fairly dramatic swing back - a 15 point Average LAbour Lead in the preceding 7 polls, a 3 point Average Con lead over the mid september polls and then back to a 4 point average Labout lead that then stretched out to a 10 point and then 14 point Average Lab lead over the next sets of polls.
I'm rubbish at remembering stuff was their a significant event then that caused the poll swingage?
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
It was a dramatic swing and then a fairly dramatic swing back - a 15 point Average LAbour Lead in the preceding 7 polls, a 3 point Average Con lead over the mid september polls and then back to a 4 point average Labout lead that then stretched out to a 10 point and then 14 point Average Lab lead over the next sets of polls.
I'm rubbish at remembering stuff was their a significant event then that caused the poll swingage?
How would you feel if you read this about the pilot of a plane you'd just got on?
'Andreas Lubitz, who deliberately crashed the Germanwings Airbus into the French Alps, was in therapy for suicidal tendencies before getting his pilot's licence, Germany's state prosecutor has said.'
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
No doubt the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 are all prepared to analyse the Good Lord's latest offering in depth.
The BBC have a dedicated poll analysis guy, who was at pains this morning to say that Labour drew level with the Tories 9 months after the election, while the Tories took 9 years after 1997
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
That's a lie.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
It was a dramatic swing and then a fairly dramatic swing back - a 15 point Average LAbour Lead in the preceding 7 polls, a 3 point Average Con lead over the mid september polls and then back to a 4 point average Labout lead that then stretched out to a 10 point and then 14 point Average Lab lead over the next sets of polls.
I'm rubbish at remembering stuff was their a significant event then that caused the poll swingage?
The fuel blockade
Ah, of course - that changed my daily newspaper preference from the Scotsman to the Herald. The Scotsmen had been going down the tubes since he Barclay Brother/Andrew Neil takeover and their fuel blockade reportage was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Meanwhile in France, ''French politics went from ding to dong on Sunday. One side, the dingers, was cock-a-hoop. The others, the dongers, swore they would be back next time. Both the conservative dingers and Socialist dongers agreed on one thing, though. Thank goodness they had once again kept out those nasty upstarts, the clangers of the National Front.''
At least the French see that 'ding dong' is better than 'ting tong'.
That obscure post is reporting the second round of the French local elections, which were interesting, because despite the refusal of the centre-right (Sarkozy) to agree a common front against the National Front, the voters did it anyway. The FN actually lost ground (by 3%) compared with the first round, winning only five councils out of 278 on a slightly higher turnout.
That appears to suggest a ceiling to the FN vote - they are able to get a quarter of the vote, but the other three quarters are generally hostile enough to vote for traditional rivals in order to keep them out.
I suppose that is one way to spin the FN's best ever result in local elections where their share of the vote rose sharply as did their number of councillors (2 to 90?).
Am I right in reading the Ashcroft poll shows only 1 voter in Scotland admitting the intention of voting LibDem?
Yes. He's the lighthouse keeper on Muckle Flugga north of Unst. Nobody's been able to communicate with him for six months due to the dark and the weather, but now the clocks have gone forward there's some hope he'll be brought up to speed and will come to his senses ;-)
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Wonderful!
Is she the woman who didn't pay her taxes?
Presumably, they're only things that the little people pay.
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Probably also tweeted "#proud #fuckthetaxsystem...."
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Hypocricy, hypocricy, hypocricy - it's what Labour does.
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Meanwhile in France, ''French politics went from ding to dong on Sunday. One side, the dingers, was cock-a-hoop. The others, the dongers, swore they would be back next time. Both the conservative dingers and Socialist dongers agreed on one thing, though. Thank goodness they had once again kept out those nasty upstarts, the clangers of the National Front.''
At least the French see that 'ding dong' is better than 'ting tong'.
That obscure post is reporting the second round of the French local elections, which were interesting, because despite the refusal of the centre-right (Sarkozy) to agree a common front against the National Front, the voters did it anyway. The FN actually lost ground (by 3%) compared with the first round, winning only five councils out of 278 on a slightly higher turnout.
That appears to suggest a ceiling to the FN vote - they are able to get a quarter of the vote, but the other three quarters are generally hostile enough to vote for traditional rivals in order to keep them out.
I suppose that is one way to spin the FN's best ever result in local elections where their share of the vote rose sharply.
Plenty of left wing French voters will vote UMP/UDI to keep out FN, but I don't think UMP/UDI voters are willing to vote Left to keep out FN to anything like the same extent.
FN won 62 seats, up from one last time, although that's still only 1.5% of the total. But, there were quite a lot of other victorious candidates who were pretty much on the same wavelength as FN, even if they aren't in the party, such as Jaques Bompard in Vaucleuse.
TSE skewered the YG at the weekend. 5% watched the debates but 20% of YG VI did. So YG on-liners are political activists. Treat with all due caution.
Pretty sure that was me. Having said that @ASJohnstone then made a good point that 100% do not vote so it was a higher percentage of the politically involved who watched the debates. Still a fairly significant over representation though.
The problem is that Mike made another good point today in that phone polls are reliant on landlines who are willing to answer a number they don't recognise. The risk factors for all pollsters are going up and up and they are all having to make ever more courageous assumptions about the similarities between those that are willing to speak to them and the rest of us.
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Wonderful!
Is she the lady who didn't pay her taxes?
That'd be the proverbial cherry on top.
Yep, she went bankrupt owing £120,000 to the taxman while her partner and father of her two kids has a £10m fortune.
Dan Hodges retweeted Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Didn't 2010 prove that celebrity endorsements for political parties is probably a net turn-off in the end?
I mean, who can forget Elvis coming out for El Gord....
I don't take this poll any more seriously than the YouGov on Saturday night.
The focus groups are fascinating, however, and hilarious.
That's the best bit about Lord A's polling.
Essentially like YouGov this indicates neck and neck.
Hmmmm probably but that's 3 polls in a row today with the Tories up 3% in each.
YouGov tonight could be informative....
I'm sensing a Con/Lab tie with YouGov but Con may be up 2-3% from Saturday, perhaps 35/35?
If it is that then the Sunday Times headline will be looking a bit sick. It would also mean that the attack by the crack 1930th Spending Scare Division was beaten back with heavy loss. If the defenders of 36 really are starving and reduced to drinking their own urine from discarded Labour campaign mugs, then we could see a 37 flag being waved by a yougov Forlorn Hope outlier
I can't believe I've reduced myself to such a level of geeky, autistic, obsessive, male dominated behaviour (which befits the vast majority of my comrades on pbCOM) but looking at the longer term trends of the polls shows the Tory doing significantly better using weekend samples.
Do these make these polls more accurate? I really don't know- perhaps Tories are more likely to be at home then, which sadly, means that perhaps they are more realistic than the weekly polls when Labour do better.
Comments
Hell yeah!
Dave is such a bloody asset to the Tory party.
Mr. Urquhart, no. Hatred, to paraphrase Darth Vader, is powerful. I don't think people who hate Cameron will change their mind. Those who are frustrated may. UKIP's support could decline, but it'll likely still remain high enough to secure a number of seats.
HOWEVER, at the same time, Ashcroft's focus group does report there's been an improvement in underlying attitudes towards Ed (including a Labour lead over the Tories on "reasonable and sensible", for those who still inexplicably think Labour's platform is extremist left-wing), so that does atleast give him something to build on.
In see from the Telegraph the LDs seem to be travelling the country in a yellow removal van. Marginally worse than a pink transit I think.
Meantime in more important news it also seems that leaders will be able to choose the heights of their podiums.
He neglected to mention the relative size of the majorities in each case.
Tories on 40 in England.
The Tories moved ahead in Sep 2000.
Some three years and a bit after Lab were elected.
The Labour house is in a terrace, with the front door leading straight onto the pavement. High-vis jackets hang in the hallway, and people in the living room are watching their 50-inch plasma TV, and eating cottage pie with chips and beer. “The furniture is nice, but it’s all on HP”.
The Conservative house has nice thick carpets and “one of those kitchen islands”. There are Hunter wellies in the hall and a “posh dog”, probably a chocolate Labrador. But “you can’t get to the door because there is an intercom at the gates” and once inside “you have to wipe your feet”.
The Lib Dem house is in a cul-de-sac. There are sandals by the door and solar panels on the roof. This house is also home to a dog (“a mongrel from the rescue centre”) that would be allowed to jump on the sofa. The décor is either plain and beige or “quite odd”, having been chosen by “trendy intellectuals”.
Must say that the Labour House does not appear to be the same as EdM's - his is more like the Conservative House.
For £10K a day, he could easily make a wizened old pork and beef banger, look like an Apollo moon rocket.
The focus groups are fascinating, however, and hilarious.
Do they make it "safe" for ex-Tories to vote UKIP again, push a few Scottish seats back to Labour, and motivate reluctant Red Libs to return back to Cleggy?
Or does a bandwagon effect take over for the Tories coupled with a "well I might as well vote how I think" effect on the left?
Nobody who went through the last 13th years of Labour Govt. would say there was anything "nice" about "there is no money left...."
A much litigated point, not unlike defamation cases on implied meanings. If you put "Vote Labour" at the bottom it's clearly open to interpretation. And it's clear from what the business leaders have said today that they felt the implication was there.
I don't mean to suggest that Labour are going to be sued over this. The point is the idea they are far from doing "anything wrong" is silly.
I am Nostradamus
However I am grateful to you for repeating what it and I said using quite different words. Such is the richness of the English Language.
Essentially like YouGov this indicates neck and neck.
'Andreas Lubitz, who deliberately crashed the Germanwings Airbus into the French Alps, was in therapy for suicidal tendencies before getting his pilot's licence, Germany's state prosecutor has said.'
http://bit.ly/1HWZ0UL
Other than that spot on post. You really do try to defend the indefensible sometimes
The final week of the campaign will involve Tory activists delivering blue nosepegs for polling day....
It was a dramatic swing and then a fairly dramatic swing back - a 15 point Average LAbour Lead in the preceding 7 polls, a 3 point Average Con lead over the mid september polls and then back to a 4 point average Labout lead that then stretched out to a 10 point and then 14 point Average Lab lead over the next sets of polls.
I'm rubbish at remembering stuff was their a significant event then that caused the poll swingage?
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/582186238930731009
IIRC, the Conservatives occasionally began to post leads in 2003 (fuel strike excepted).
Id be getting off the plane
It's like a teacher having treatment for wanting to have sex with children
Dan Hodges retweeted
Steve hawkes@steve_hawkes·10 mins10 minutes ago
Hollywood star Martin Freeman champions Labour's compassion and decency - partner Amanda Abbington tweets "#proud #fucktheTories ..."
Ladbrokes have UKIP @ 3.50 in the 5-10 % and @ 2.37 10-15%.
I want to even out my potential gain in the 5-15% band.
What ratio should I bet as between the two?
Presumably, they're only things that the little people pay.
OK, answered my own question (basically 40:60). Never mind.
But a return of 40% does seem like good value.
e.g. £20 @ 5/2 returns £70
£29.50 @ 11/8 returns £70.06
Total stake is £49.50 to win £20.50 i.e. just a fraction better than 2/5.
Hypocrisy*
FN won 62 seats, up from one last time, although that's still only 1.5% of the total. But, there were quite a lot of other victorious candidates who were pretty much on the same wavelength as FN, even if they aren't in the party, such as Jaques Bompard in Vaucleuse.
The problem is that Mike made another good point today in that phone polls are reliant on landlines who are willing to answer a number they don't recognise. The risk factors for all pollsters are going up and up and they are all having to make ever more courageous assumptions about the similarities between those that are willing to speak to them and the rest of us.
You vastly over-estimate by bets though! I'm placing a few small bets for entertainment on the night.
We're all in it together?
Not if you are hypocritical Socialist scumbag.
I mean, who can forget Elvis coming out for El Gord....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-uokKdI7Kc
Not so much "hell yeah" as "hells bells..."
Hell no! I mean Yes!
It would also mean that the attack by the crack 1930th Spending Scare Division was beaten back with heavy loss.
If the defenders of 36 really are starving and reduced to drinking their own urine from discarded Labour campaign mugs, then we could see a 37 flag being waved by a yougov Forlorn Hope outlier
Do these make these polls more accurate? I really don't know- perhaps Tories are more likely to be at home then, which sadly, means that perhaps they are more realistic than the weekly polls when Labour do better.