Another ex Tory, UKIP have done so much to detoxify the Tory party.
Yet Matthew Parris says the Conservatives "really piss people off" without understanding that his piece about Clacton is the sort of thing that pisses people off.
Camilla Long's piece in the Sunday Times about Thanet South seems to have enraged the Kippers too
Another ex Tory, UKIP have done so much to detoxify the Tory party.
Yet Matthew Parris says the Conservatives "really piss people off" without understanding that his piece about Clacton is the sort of thing that pisses people off.
I suspect Parris was merely revealing what he thought, and has always thought, of the sort of people who live in Clacton.
I remember on one of those Thatcher retrospective programs of a few years ago Parris recounted how, when working in Thatcher's office in the 1970s, he and his chums referred to Thatcher as 'Hilda' behind her back.
The reason being that they thought Hilda a more downmarket name than Margaret.
Parris famously wrote a letter to a woman making fun of her complaints about her council accommodation when he was Thatcher's secretary.
On the vote-swapping nonsense, in a supposed democracy it is every voter's right to seek to persuade, within reason, another voter to vote a different way.
So the absolute defence would seem to be "we persuaded each other it was the right thing to do"...
Another ex Tory, UKIP have done so much to detoxify the Tory party.
Yet Matthew Parris says the Conservatives "really piss people off" without understanding that his piece about Clacton is the sort of thing that pisses people off.
Camilla Long's piece in the Sunday Times about Thanet South seems to have enraged the Kippers too
On the vote-swapping nonsense, in a supposed democracy it is every voter's right to seek to persuade, within reason, another voter to vote a different way.
So the absolute defence would seem to be "we persuaded each other it was the right thing to do"...
On the vote-swapping nonsense, in a supposed democracy it is every voter's right to seek to persuade, within reason, another voter to vote a different way.
So the absolute defence would seem to be "we persuaded each other it was the right thing to do"...
If people want to come to an unofficial agreement you can hardly stop them. They should however be voting in private and not taking any photographic evidence. If they trust each other it's their choice.
This constant interfering in markets really concerns me about Ed ( housing rents, building land, energy et al). Sure the free market is not utterly perfect 100% of the time but it is the best option in many many circumstances and sticking an oar in can have worse consequences.
This is one. Aside from the accountancy field day this 5% cap will unleash as others have said, and the now possible excepting of drugs, what if a company invents a world beating health widget which is cheaper and better than anything before but insists it will only sell it at 20% profit (however defined by Ed), Is the NHS going to be deprived of it for ideological reasons alone, saddling patients and the taxpayer with inferior and dearer options whilst the company cheerfully sells the widget to everyone else worldwide?
Lol. Like the central plank of government policy for the last 5 years hasn't been interfering to keep the housing market fully inflated.
What's the ETA on YouGov? Are we expecting any other polls? Smelling salts on standby.
10.30pm
46 minutes
Just remember, after Easter, YouGov goes 7 days a week.
#megpollingdaily
It fills me with dread.
Why? Polls and debates about debates about debates about debates = #Election2015
I reckon this is the election when we're going to have too many polls.
Too much heat, not enough light.
Add in the fact Lord Ashcroft is reportedly going to be releasing weekly constituency polling and Scotland specific polling, we could be having 5 to 8 polling events some days.
What's the ETA on YouGov? Are we expecting any other polls? Smelling salts on standby.
10.30pm
46 minutes
Just remember, after Easter, YouGov goes 7 days a week.
#megpollingdaily
It fills me with dread.
Why? Polls and debates about debates about debates about debates = #Election2015
I reckon this is the election when we're going to have too many polls.
Too much heat, not enough light.
Add in the fact Lord Ashcroft is reportedly going to be releasing weekly constituency polling and Scotland specific polling, we could be having 5-8 polling events a day.
DavidL - If you honestly believe Cameron and Osborne are centrists then it's no wonder so many of your fellow countrymen are disillusioned with life in the Union! Let us not forget that they unveiled the most ridiculous anti-government scorched earth austerity programme in 2010 that was almost beyond parody in its anti-keynesian idiocy. Luckily for us George did a partial u-turn as borrowing refused to come down and he even embraced a bit of stimulus to the housing market (completely the wrong sector of the UK economy to be stimuating but you could argue something was better than nothing). All the worst kind of Tory thinking - get government out the way, don't interfere in the market, unless it's housing, in which case it's all fine.
Wut ? Keynes advocated heavy spending stimulus in a downturn and cutting back and saving in the good times. The sort of pissing money up the wall in the good times both parties have been doing in the last decade probably has him spinning in his grave!
If you think Osborne's feeble cutting back of less than 2% over a whole parliament is austerity, you have clearly lost touch with that well known right-wing monetarist Denis Healey who cut 4% from spending in one year in 1974, I realise him being Labour, and therefore making "cuddly cuts" is different.
According to the IMF the underlying deficit reduction in Britain has been 6.6% of GDP, with 3.5% still to go. The definition of a tight fiscal policy is to cut spending and or raise taxes. The IFS points out that over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP, slightly less than the 7.9% it originally planned. You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
This government has missed its borrowing targets by hundreds of billions.
You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
No it has not. The govt proposed to eliminate the structural deficit. Borrowing targets were based on the size of the structural deficit assumed at the time. This turned out to be much bigger. The IFS pointed out that estimates of the size of the structural budget deficit – that which is not dependent on the economic cycle – increased between 2010 and the end of 2012. - ie the destruction of productive capacity was greater. The govt could have cut more to meet the target and ruined the economy, it extended its target by 2 years to 2017. That meant 100 billion extra borrowing over that time. Labour talk of £200+ billion extra borrowing is rubbish (again as the IFS point out).
Two people will vote in the constituencies in which they live having decided how best to deploy their votes. as is their right in our democracy.
So you would be happy for the Conservative Party to start organising it in marginals where they are just behind Labour ?
Anyone planning to write a vote sharing app ? VotR maybe ?
The Conservative Party used to organise that overseas voters placed their vote in Tory marginals. An overseas voter only had to declare that they had some tenuous relationship with the constituency to be able to vote there, - like my mother used to shop there. I don't know whether this is still allowed.
I am voting from overseas. I used to live in the marginal Swindon South, now I am proxy voting in the rock steady Tory Hereford & South Herefordshire, not sure that went to plan
Why are you doing that!
Hereford used to be a Lib Dem seat, hence it is 'marginal'. But Jesse Norman seems safe.
When I looked up the rules on this I understood that you were supposed to register in the seat where you had last been registered as a resident. My best mate who has moved to Oz was previously resident in Sheffield Hallam you see....
What's the ETA on YouGov? Are we expecting any other polls? Smelling salts on standby.
10.30pm
46 minutes
Just remember, after Easter, YouGov goes 7 days a week.
#megpollingdaily
It fills me with dread.
Why? Polls and debates about debates about debates about debates = #Election2015
I reckon this is the election when we're going to have too many polls.
Too much heat, not enough light.
Add in the fact Lord Ashcroft is reportedly going to be releasing weekly constituency polling and Scotland specific polling, we could be having 5-8 polling events a day.
It does seem a little too much...
And you know, the one outlier gets the most prominence in the media.
Then you've also got the post debates/interview polling to deal with as well.
This constant interfering in markets really concerns me about Ed ( housing rents, building land, energy et al). Sure the free market is not utterly perfect 100% of the time but it is the best option in many many circumstances and sticking an oar in can have worse consequences.
This is one. Aside from the accountancy field day this 5% cap will unleash as others have said, and the now possible excepting of drugs, what if a company invents a world beating health widget which is cheaper and better than anything before but insists it will only sell it at 20% profit (however defined by Ed), Is the NHS going to be deprived of it for ideological reasons alone, saddling patients and the taxpayer with inferior and dearer options whilst the company cheerfully sells the widget to everyone else worldwide?
Lol. Like the central plank of government for the last 5 years hasn't been interfering to keep the housing market fully inflated.
No fair point. There has been some of that going on and it's not great either. It's just I get the vibe Ed can't pass a market stall without wanting to regulate the price by capping it. We don't improve living standards by declaring everything's cheaper by diktat. You just end up limiting the supply, but I'm not certain he wants to know.
SeanT On the eurozone as a whole you are right, but within the eurozone economies like those of Germany and the Netherlands and Luxembourg are still doing well even in global terms, and while the population fall in Germany may mean the UK overtakes it in gdp terms, in gdp per capita terms that is much less likely. Even if London remains ahead of Frankfurt in the financial sector, Germany will still remain well ahead on manufacturing too
Another ex Tory, UKIP have done so much to detoxify the Tory party.
Yet Matthew Parris says the Conservatives "really piss people off" without understanding that his piece about Clacton is the sort of thing that pisses people off.
Camilla Long's piece in the Sunday Times about Thanet South seems to have enraged the Kippers too
SeanT Germany has lower unemployment and a lower deficit than the US and UK, and a higher gdp per capita than the UK and Japan
In nominal terms, with the ongoing collapse of the euro, I'd be surprised if its GDP per capita remains higher than the UK's for long.
The UK also has considerably stronger growth than Germany (as does the US).
We can all cherry pick stats to make our point. My point (inarguable, I think) is that Germany only seems to be doing well because it is seen in comparison to the dire performance of peripheral eurozone nations.
Compare it to much of the rest of the world, and it has big big problems. Like all of Europe.
The long term (even the medium run) strength of Sterling shows absolutely no more resilience than the Euro does. Sure it's a little higher just now but the likelihood of that persisting is near zero.
The more lunatic fringe of Friedman disciples in the UK have been predicting the UK to overtake Germany for decades. Yet it's never looked remotely likely.
Wut ? Keynes advocated heavy spending stimulus in a downturn and cutting back and saving in the good times. The sort of pissing money up the wall in the good times both parties have been doing in the last decade probably has him spinning in his grave!
If you think Osborne's feeble cutting back of less than 2% over a whole parliament is austerity, you have clearly lost touch with that well known right-wing monetarist Denis Healey who cut 4% from spending in one year in 1974, I realise him being Labour, and therefore making "cuddly cuts" is different.
According to the IMF the underlying deficit reduction in Britain has been 6.6% of GDP, with 3.5% still to go. The definition of a tight fiscal policy is to cut spending and or raise taxes. The IFS points out that over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP, slightly less than the 7.9% it originally planned. You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
This government has missed its borrowing targets by hundreds of billions.
You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
No it has not. The govt proposed to eliminate the structural deficit. Borrowing targets were based on the size of the structural deficit assumed at the time. This turned out to be much bigger. The IFS pointed out that estimates of the size of the structural budget deficit – that which is not dependent on the economic cycle – increased between 2010 and the end of 2012. - ie the destruction of productive capacity was greater. The govt could have cut more to meet the target and ruined the economy, it extended its target by 2 years to 2017. That meant 100 billion extra borrowing over that time. Labour talk of £200+ billion extra borrowing is rubbish (again as the IFS point out).
Labours black hole was bigger.
Why are you telling such pointless lies.
Osborne's borrowing predictions are in his 2010 budget.
He will miss them by hundreds of billions.
Osborne's 2010 budget also gives predictions as to how much government debt will be as a percentage of GDP.
Compare his prediction then to his prediction in this months' budget.
Battersea and Finchley are not lost causes for Labour. They have a fighting chance....
Long shot - Wimbledon (Lib Dem collapse could allow Labour in) - Merton is a Labour council after all.
You sound like one of the London Tories of 2010, bigging up your chances in the most impossible of places.
For your information Labour elected a grand total of 6 councillors in Wimblendon constituency in 2014, compared to 20 Conservative. Labour control of Merton council comes not from Wimblendon but form Mitcham and Morden.
Wut ? Keynes advocated heavy spending stimulus in a downturn and cutting back and saving in the good times. The sort of pissing money up the wall in the good times both parties have been doing in the last decade probably has him spinning in his grave!
If you think Osborne's feeble cutting back of less than 2% over a whole parliament is austerity, you have clearly lost touch with that well known right-wing monetarist Denis Healey who cut 4% from spending in one year in 1974, I realise him being Labour, and therefore making "cuddly cuts" is different.
According to the IMF the underlying deficit reduction in Britain has been 6.6% of GDP, with 3.5% still to go. The definition of a tight fiscal policy is to cut spending and or raise taxes. The IFS points out that over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP, slightly less than the 7.9% it originally planned. You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
This government has missed its borrowing targets by hundreds of billions.
You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
No it has not. The govt proposed to eliminate the structural deficit. Borrowing targets were based on the size of the structural deficit assumed at the time. This turned out to be much bigger. The IFS pointed out that estimates of the size of the structural budget deficit – that which is not dependent on the economic cycle – increased between 2010 and the end of 2012. - ie the destruction of productive capacity was greater. The govt could have cut more to meet the target and ruined the economy, it extended its target by 2 years to 2017. That meant 100 billion extra borrowing over that time. Labour talk of £200+ billion extra borrowing is rubbish (again as the IFS point out).
Labours black hole was bigger.
Why are you telling such pointless lies.
Osborne's borrowing predictions are in his 2010 budget.
He will miss them by hundreds of billions.
Osborne's 2010 budget also gives predictions as to how much government debt will be as a percentage of GDP.
Compare his prediction then to his prediction in this months' budget.
Read what respected economists say. Are they lying? The facts are the structural deficit was bigger than predicted and so the task was bigger and the time taken longer.
SeanT On the eurozone as a whole you are right, but within the eurozone economies like those of Germany and the Netherlands and Luxembourg are still doing well even in global terms, and while the population fall in Germany may mean the UK overtakes it in gdp terms, in gdp per capita terms that is much less likely. Even if London remains ahead of Frankfurt in the financial sector, Germany will still remain well ahead on manufacturing too
This is just bollocks, sorry.
The UK had a higher GDP per capita than Germany in 2007. Currency fluctuations since then have altered this, not economic growth: the UK has grown FASTER than Germany since the 2008 Krunch.
"Britain’s recovery from the 2008 global recession has overtaken Germany and is now better than any other leading European nation, official figures show.
Britain’s recovery has now been better than in Germany, France or Italy, as well as Japan, and behind just Canada and the US in the G7."
Germany is in trouble. We're all in trouble. Britain might in the end do better than her neighbours.
Germany has the biggest trade sirplus in the world. Substantially bigger than China. Largely because of its very competitive (and incidentally well paid) commercial environment.
According to the IMF the underlying deficit reduction in Britain has been 6.6% of GDP, with 3.5% still to go. The definition of a tight fiscal policy is to cut spending and or raise taxes. The IFS points out that over the course of the parliament the coalition will have tightened by 7% of GDP, slightly less than the 7.9% it originally planned. You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
This government has missed its borrowing targets by hundreds of billions.
You may or may not like this but that's what's happened.
No it has not. The govt proposed to eliminate the structural deficit. Borrowing targets were based on the size of the structural deficit assumed at the time. This turned out to be much bigger. The IFS pointed out that estimates of the size of the structural budget deficit – that which is not dependent on the economic cycle – increased between 2010 and the end of 2012. - ie the destruction of productive capacity was greater. The govt could have cut more to meet the target and ruined the economy, it extended its target by 2 years to 2017. That meant 100 billion extra borrowing over that time. Labour talk of £200+ billion extra borrowing is rubbish (again as the IFS point out).
Labours black hole was bigger.
Why are you telling such pointless lies.
Osborne's borrowing predictions are in his 2010 budget.
He will miss them by hundreds of billions.
Osborne's 2010 budget also gives predictions as to how much government debt will be as a percentage of GDP.
Compare his prediction then to his prediction in this months' budget.
Read what respected economists say. Are they lying? The facts are the structural deficit was bigger than predicted and so the task was bigger and the time taken longer.
'respected economists'
LOL
You can find 'respected economists' to give any opinion you want.
Read what Osborne predicted in his 2010 budget and compare with what happened in reality and what he predicted in his 2015 budget.
Hundreds of billions of extra borrowing and much higher debt.
That you continue to deny FACTS and instead prefer OPINIONS shows how desperate you are.
Comments
http://static.parade.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/hamster-2.jpg
"Latest YouGov Doesn't Show 4% Lad Lead..."
So the absolute defence would seem to be "we persuaded each other it was the right thing to do"...
But it's not going to win them back if the Tories have any hope of a majority in 2015 or 2020
https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/582645618230820864
Too much heat, not enough light.
Add in the fact Lord Ashcroft is reportedly going to be releasing weekly constituency polling and Scotland specific polling, we could be having 5 to 8 polling events some days.
The govt proposed to eliminate the structural deficit. Borrowing targets were based on the size of the structural deficit assumed at the time. This turned out to be much bigger. The IFS pointed out that estimates of the size of the structural budget deficit – that which is not dependent on the economic cycle – increased between 2010 and the end of 2012.
- ie the destruction of productive capacity was greater.
The govt could have cut more to meet the target and ruined the economy, it extended its target by 2 years to 2017. That meant 100 billion extra borrowing over that time.
Labour talk of £200+ billion extra borrowing is rubbish (again as the IFS point out).
Labours black hole was bigger.
Then you've also got the post debates/interview polling to deal with as well.
Inevitably many people will insult/mock people different to themselves.
But its not a good idea for politicians to mock/insult people whose votes they need.
Though with politicians being drawn from an increasingly narrow background the groupthink this encourages we're seeing that happen.
The more lunatic fringe of Friedman disciples in the UK have been predicting the UK to overtake Germany for decades. Yet it's never looked remotely likely.
Battersea and Finchley are not lost causes for Labour. They have a fighting chance....
Long shot - Wimbledon (Lib Dem collapse could allow Labour in) - Merton is a Labour council after all.
Osborne's borrowing predictions are in his 2010 budget.
He will miss them by hundreds of billions.
Osborne's 2010 budget also gives predictions as to how much government debt will be as a percentage of GDP.
Compare his prediction then to his prediction in this months' budget.
http://news.sky.com/video/1455601/leaders-hit-high-notes-for-votes
For your information Labour elected a grand total of 6 councillors in Wimblendon constituency in 2014, compared to 20 Conservative. Labour control of Merton council comes not from Wimblendon but form Mitcham and Morden.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-09/germany-posting-record-surplus-gives-fodder-to-economy-s-critics
If only our economy could outperform a country with 12 times the population!
LOL
You can find 'respected economists' to give any opinion you want.
Read what Osborne predicted in his 2010 budget and compare with what happened in reality and what he predicted in his 2015 budget.
Hundreds of billions of extra borrowing and much higher debt.
That you continue to deny FACTS and instead prefer OPINIONS shows how desperate you are.